Definitely cheaper as is. The economy doesn't need these people, and no one pays for the treatment, housing, training, etc. that they don't get. Maybe not cheaper in the long run, as some of these people would become productive. Also, there is something to be said for not trivializing the value and dignity of human life. Sometimes a Down's syndrome person can do more for your outlook than can a CEO.
Do you feel as though I am trivializing the value of these people? Or that a system I would propose would be one intended to minimize the economic impact of supporting someone rather than intending to boost their independent capability?
I can see how that can be interpreted from what I have said. It is not how I feel. In hearing this, though, I suspect there are 4 processes at play:
1. My frustration for wanting to help and inject self-efficacy in individuals without adequate resources to do so (adequate resources being as much financial/systemic as individual drive built-in from societal norms and institutional and family support for such a cause)
2. Projection of my feelings for individuals with mental health problems being cast away as different, dependent, not valuable, despite the ubiquity of the problem and realization that much of these feelings are borne out of defense from somehow identifying with being vulnerable and needing help when it is unacceptable to that person
3. My guilt for not being unwavering in this mission, sometimes just doing the best I could or simply the easy thing, being complicit or promoting a culture which pegs failures to help in this fashion on individuals or systemic problems without doing anything to intervene personally, or otherwise trying really hard and still not being good enough myself to have helped
4. Something to do with your feelings on the subject