By: Eddie Vince

Many are worried about the economy, not only in the States but everywhere. Some suggests fiscal conservatism and minimalist government intervention within the free market, while others suggest the government needs to step into unethical and destructive business practices preying on the people. Well, I think I’ve found a reasonable compromise.

My proposal is to eat old people. Now, I know you might be either thinking I’m just copying Jonathan Swift’s ‘A Modest Proposal’ or that I’m out of my mind, but just hang in there. Fiscal responsibility is an important quality that has been overlooked by every politician of the past century. More and more entitlement programs are eating away at our society from the inside out and we simply cannot support them. We’re not taxed enough, we’re just entitled too much. The dilemma rests at the fact that many of the entitlement programs actually help disenfranchised individuals, and so if we pull the rug on those programs that would mean millions of people would, more than likely, become homeless—or at least worse off than they are right now, which is pretty bad as it is.

The only practical thing to do, and I think you’ll agree, is to eat the most vulnerable group in society: old people. It’s survival of the fittest, Political Darwinism, eat or be eaten. When I say old people, I mean people within their sixties, that time in their life when they’ve become less productive and more withdrawn. At latest, for those of the more affluent geriatrics, possibly sixty-two or –three.

This will solve several gapping problems within the economy. For one, it will eliminate Social Security. Also, a provision would have to be made to allow people to still invest in a 401(k), but rather than actually getting the money after they retire, that money just gets refocused back into the free market, thus stimulating businesses after a worker has retired. So, essentially, it will be necessary to give the illusion that workers are striving for a nice retirement, but invariably never reaching it.

Then there are the entertainment possibilities for a renewed revenue stream within that particular sector. Reality shows can begin to show the life of a geriatric up until he is eaten. This might conflict with the covert delusion of workers striving for an illusionary retirement plan, but people are ultimately easily duped. If they are just convinced that it would never happen to them, that it’s just a transient policy, then they’ll still work just as long as they’re able to watch each night on the television as the previous generations gets cannibalized by thousands of starving children.

Another component that should be given some careful thought, is the idea of geriatric gladiators. It both effectively kills the old people along with entertaining millions in the process. It’s a win-win. If showcased to the globe, people would stop fighting their pointless wars and conflicts, and would rather bound in the spectacle of watching men and women that remind them of their grandfather-or-mother courageously and patriotically engage in battle. The distraction of geriatric gladiators would provide a necessary release that could potentially decompress the working class of their long-day stressors by watching those who are worse off than them.

But old people wouldn’t just feed starving children. As the Baby Boomers slowly reach retirement age, the amount of potential food sources become increasingly more abundant. And what food source would provide all the essential and necessary protein and vitamins we need in our day better than an actual human being? It’s actually quite ingenious if you think about it.

Of course the moralizers out there will object, and I can just see them right now. ‘We all have a right to live’ and ‘Cannibalism is morally wrong.’ My comment to you is that if it was so wrong, then why did it save some Uruguayan soccer players in the Andes? Cannibalism has saved countless of lives, and we are at a juncture in the history of man where it could save even more. At first, the idea of eating other people never sounds particularly appealing. But once we move pass that initial disgust, then we’ll be able to thrive as a society in the blood of our elders.

Countless experts have attested already to the nutritional and culinary value of indulging the desert of wrinkled flesh as not only nourishing but assuredly appetizing as well. A particular favorite geriatric dish has been roasted heart with a splash of red wine, served with a dab of horseradish-mixed liver puss.

But while this measure might save thousands of people without, it should not be forgotten who this is really helping: the old people themselves. You see it all the time, as human beings increase in age, their motor functions begin to fail, physical attributes sag, and the simple act of getting out of bed has become a hassle. They’re no longer able to remember what day it is or chew solid food or even procreate, much less have sex. Their lives are absolute misery, and the only humane thing to do is euthanasia—but since that might be too humane, we could still go with the geriatric gladiator idea.

Another potential benefit in this program would also be the motivational byproduct being transmitted to those watching. Others, particularly poor people, who also depend on entitlement programs would more than likely be compelled to find jobs and work even more so because they realize just how practical society can get when it comes to cutting the budget.