I'd have to agree with ALPHA on this one. Why is it right to force other people to work so that more people can live?
And if we are forcing other people to work so that more people can live, where do we draw the line on life or death? If it costs $10 to keep a person alive, do we force people to do it? What about $10,000? What about for $10,000,000? At some point, we will have enslaved ourselves entirely to the diminishing returns of saving people's lives. But shouldn't saving lives be optional in the first place? And if not, who decides who lives and who dies? It's a scary place to be when the government is dictating those choices for us.
These questions require some effort and cost/benefit analysis, which is hard. Therefore, we should just let them all die.
In libertarian crazy world, the only thing worse than a government taking lives is a government saving lives.
I'm open to suggestions. I don't think it should be up to a government panel though. I think it should be up to individuals what lives they want to save.