Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

Please tell me your opinion

Ashley17
Posts: 20
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 10:43:41 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
There was someone I was talking to about AIDS, and that person stated that the Government does have a cure for this disease but is keeping it secret from civilians because he wants to continue making money from the medicines that hospitals disturbute. He stated that, "if they give the cure than hospitals wouldn't make as much money, as soon as people got cured they wouldn't need to repeatly buy medicines from doctors". Instead. when people pay a plethora of money than they increasily make money without a limit contrary to giving out a cure. What is your opinion of this. I know their is a law to keep the Government from doing that, but is our government really that reliable. They do obscure some things from citizens views. They do keep some stuff top secret, this definetley has me intrigued, because it's possiable. I doubted at first but than again, the government is greedy for money. Let me verify when I state that, America makes a plethora of money on TOLLS and SUNPASS and they still charge us a lot of money for taxes. Do you know how much money they make off of tolls? An over abundance but they continously increase tax and gas. I can understand during the recession but even before that they were always making money off of us.
Ashley Bruneus
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 10:48:35 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Evidence. You need evidence when making such claims.

You suggest that the government has motive to keep the cure out of the general populace. That motive, according to you, is profit. The problem with that is that it is private companies who sell the product and make the profit. In fact, the government provides grants to people who are working on a cure. It is the private companies who are paying little or nothing for the research.

One could instead make the argument that it is the private drug companies blocking such a drug. However, I have not seen any evidence to support this claim. Have you?
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 10:50:58 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
You're going to get a bunch of people in here posting in another minute or two telling you how stupid this conspiracy theory is. For the most part I'd agree with them; however, it's not an all-together out there possibility. I doubt it's true, but it WOULD make sense. Hmm. I guess my final answer is that I just don't know enough about this issue to have an educated opinion. My gut says it's BS though :)
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 10:53:45 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
I agree with JBlake; however, suppose there WERE such a cure. Do you really think that the government would get away scott free? No, at some point, people would expect the government to PAY for this treatment/cure. Just imagine the incredibly high cost that these private companies would charge for such a thing. Now imagine the hullabaloo people would make about the government paying for it. It would become this whole political wedge issue where Liberals run around saying that it's the government's responsibility to help the poor people who can't afford the treatment. Then it would become the government's problem (expense).
President of DDO
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:01:25 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
It's obviously nonsensical. If you don't want a cure to come to market, you don't create it and then make its existence secret (Even the best classificaiton schemes frequently leave room for leaks in countries with free speech and a free press). You just don't invest money in making a cure, or, if you must do that for political reasons, you invest in utter incompetents who know how not to look like it to the ignorant.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:12:25 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:01:25 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
It's obviously nonsensical. If you don't want a cure to come to market, you don't create it and then make its existence secret (Even the best classificaiton schemes frequently leave room for leaks in countries with free speech and a free press). You just don't invest money in making a cure, or, if you must do that for political reasons, you invest in utter incompetents who know how not to look like it to the ignorant.

Exactly.

This seems to be exactly what is going on. As far as I am aware, the private companies are investing little to no money in a cure. It isn't that they have one and are keeping it a secret... As Ragnar correctly points out, if they didn't want the cure out there in the first place they wouldn't risk a leak and create it, only to keep it a secret.
Anyone doing research on it is being paid by the government to do so (in the form of research grants)

(I can't believe I am agreeing with Ragnar on something... Maybe I should change my opinion on the issue ;))
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:12:46 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
He was last on two days ago.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:13:04 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:10:45 AM, PoeJoe wrote:
What ever happened to Geo?

Stick around long enough and he'll sniff out the tin hat inherent in this discussion.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:26:20 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 10:43:41 AM, Ashley17 wrote:
There was someone I was talking to about AIDS, and that person stated that the Government does have a cure for this disease but is keeping it secret from civilians because he wants to continue making money from the medicines that hospitals disturbute. He stated that, "if they give the cure than hospitals wouldn't make as much money, as soon as people got cured they wouldn't need to repeatly buy medicines from doctors". Instead. when people pay a plethora of money than they increasily make money without a limit contrary to giving out a cure. What is your opinion of this. I know their is a law to keep the Government from doing that, but is our government really that reliable. They do obscure some things from citizens views. They do keep some stuff top secret, this definetley has me intrigued, because it's possiable. I doubted at first but than again, the government is greedy for money. Let me verify when I state that, America makes a plethora of money on TOLLS and SUNPASS and they still charge us a lot of money for taxes. Do you know how much money they make off of tolls? An over abundance but they continously increase tax and gas. I can understand during the recession but even before that they were always making money off of us.

Tolls aren't actually that profitable. Tolls are to pay for the maintenance and repair of bridges, which are actually very, VERY expensive. Taxes go to a variety of other programs, such as making sure that the middle class is punished for contributing to society, and rewarding poor people for being lazy, having 6 kids, not being educated, and perpetuating crime against the middle class.

There is no overabundance of anything in America, except blood pressure, blood sugar, and cholesterol.

The AIDS controversy has been going on for a while. I've heard stories that AIDS was actually engineered as a bio weapon. It's unlikely they have a cure though, simply because of the nature of the virus. I don't think it's possible to cure AIDS, especially since we don't really have a "cure" for any disease.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:28:40 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
This is one reason why I don't trust Healthcare with private companies and corporations. Private corporations care about profit. This is a bad ethos for saving people's lives. If there was a cheap, effective cure for cancer, as opposed to the current expensive procedures, they would obviously try to hide it, discredit it, or charge so much for it the average person wouldn't be able to purchase it.

Private health companies are responsible for people's livelihood. I don't know why a thing which strives for profits should control people's welfare.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:32:15 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:28:40 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
This is one reason why I don't trust Healthcare with private companies and corporations. Private corporations care about profit. This is a bad ethos for saving people's lives. If there was a cheap, effective cure for cancer, as opposed to the current expensive procedures, they would obviously try to hide it, discredit it, or charge so much for it the average person wouldn't be able to purchase it.
Group A has cure to AIDS. They sell at ridiculously high price.
Group B has cure to AIDS. They undercut A.
A undercuts B.
B undercuts A.
etc. until a market equilibrium is reached.

Happens even if there's monopoly or a cartel. Corporation A has set price for AIDS cure at X. Employee F sells at a little under X. Employee G sells at a little under F's price. Etc. until a market equilibrium is reached.

Private health companies are responsible for people's livelihood. I don't know why a thing which strives for profits should control people's welfare.
Then you support the socialization of toilets, water, air, food, and shelter as well I presume?
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?
Ashley17
Posts: 20
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:34:04 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 10:48:35 AM, JBlake wrote:
Evidence. You need evidence when making such claims.

You suggest that the government has motive to keep the cure out of the general populace. That motive, according to you, is profit. The problem with that is that it is private companies who sell the product and make the profit. In fact, the government provides grants to people who are working on a cure. It is the private companies who are paying little or nothing for the research.

One could instead make the argument that it is the private drug companies blocking such a drug. However, I have not seen any evidence to support this claim. Have you?

As I stated earlier am not the one saying this, the person that I was talking to said this, the point of this forum is to see your opinion, it has nothing to do with a debate, please READ carefully before making accusations
Ashley Bruneus
Ashley17
Posts: 20
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:35:49 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 10:53:45 AM, theLwerd wrote:
I agree with JBlake; however, suppose there WERE such a cure. Do you really think that the government would get away scott free? No, at some point, people would expect the government to PAY for this treatment/cure. Just imagine the incredibly high cost that these private companies would charge for such a thing. Now imagine the hullabaloo people would make about the government paying for it. It would become this whole political wedge issue where Liberals run around saying that it's the government's responsibility to help the poor people who can't afford the treatment. Then it would become the government's problem (expense).

However people don't STOP and think, maybe they have discovered the cure(am not saying they have) ALOTT of money has been put into this, yet no results(at least not what everyone is waiting for)
Ashley Bruneus
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:37:07 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:28:40 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
This is one reason why I don't trust Healthcare with private companies and corporations. Private corporations care about profit. This is a bad ethos for saving people's lives. If there was a cheap, effective cure for cancer, as opposed to the current expensive procedures, they would obviously try to hide it, discredit it, or charge so much for it the average person wouldn't be able to purchase it.

Private health companies are responsible for people's livelihood. I don't know why a thing which strives for profits should control people's welfare.

The very mechanisms by which cancer and AIDS operates, already cuts out the possibility for an easy cure. We've studied these topics in class down to the very molecular reactions, and from what I've learned, any sort of therapy currently used for cancer already reflects a substantial amount of genius.

I personally don't believe that anything should be socialized. It's just another word for bottom-feeding. Healthcare is expensive, and it isn't right that we have to parcel our resources equally, especially when there are people who really don't deserve it as much as others.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:37:14 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:32:15 AM, Rezzealaux wrote:
At 9/19/2009 11:28:40 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
This is one reason why I don't trust Healthcare with private companies and corporations. Private corporations care about profit. This is a bad ethos for saving people's lives. If there was a cheap, effective cure for cancer, as opposed to the current expensive procedures, they would obviously try to hide it, discredit it, or charge so much for it the average person wouldn't be able to purchase it.
Group A has cure to AIDS. They sell at ridiculously high price.
Group B has cure to AIDS. They undercut A.
A undercuts B.
B undercuts A.
etc. until a market equilibrium is reached.

Happens even if there's monopoly or a cartel. Corporation A has set price for AIDS cure at X. Employee F sells at a little under X. Employee G sells at a little under F's price. Etc. until a market equilibrium is reached.

Private health companies are responsible for people's livelihood. I don't know why a thing which strives for profits should control people's welfare.
Then you support the socialization of toilets, water, air, food, and shelter as well I presume?

Toilets? A privilege.
Air? Can't be socialised.
Water? Yes, but only water that is drinkable
Food? No. Collectivisation of farms is fail to start with.
Shelter? No.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:39:41 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:35:49 AM, Ashley17 wrote:
However people don't STOP and think, maybe they have discovered the cure(am not saying they have) ALOTT of money has been put into this, yet no results(at least not what everyone is waiting for)

That's because people are stupid. I'm waiting to hit the lotto, yet, no results. Whose fault is it?

You want to know what cures AIDS? Alcohol. Bleach. Hydrochloric Acid. There are millions of things which kill AIDS. It's not easy to come up with a cure, especially because the virus mutates so rapidly.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:40:17 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:37:14 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Water? Yes, but only water that is drinkable
Food? No. Collectivisation of farms is fail to start with.
That's interesting, you are against profit "controlling" people's welfare and you are for profit "controlling" people's welfare simultaneously....
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:41:48 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Food? No. Collectivisation of farms is fail to start with.
Food is MORE important to welfare than any doctor. What makes one fail and one not?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ashley17
Posts: 20
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:44:37 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:26:20 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 9/19/2009 10:43:41 AM, Ashley17 wrote:
There was someone I was talking to about AIDS, and that person stated that the Government does have a cure for this disease but is keeping it secret from civilians because he wants to continue making money from the medicines that hospitals disturbute. He stated that, "if they give the cure than hospitals wouldn't make as much money, as soon as people got cured they wouldn't need to repeatly buy medicines from doctors". Instead. when people pay a plethora of money than they increasily make money without a limit contrary to giving out a cure. What is your opinion of this. I know their is a law to keep the Government from doing that, but is our government really that reliable. They do obscure some things from citizens views. They do keep some stuff top secret, this definetley has me intrigued, because it's possiable. I doubted at first but than again, the government is greedy for money. Let me verify when I state that, America makes a plethora of money on TOLLS and SUNPASS and they still charge us a lot of money for taxes. Do you know how much money they make off of tolls? An over abundance but they continously increase tax and gas. I can understand during the recession but even before that they were always making money off of us.

Tolls aren't actually that profitable. Tolls are to pay for the maintenance and repair of bridges, which are actually very, VERY expensive. Taxes go to a variety of other programs, such as making sure that the middle class is punished for contributing to society, and rewarding poor people for being lazy, having 6 kids, not being educated, and perpetuating crime against the middle class.

There is no overabundance of anything in America, except blood pressure, blood sugar, and cholesterol.

The AIDS controversy has been going on for a while. I've heard stories that AIDS was actually engineered as a bio weapon. It's unlikely they have a cure though, simply because of the nature of the virus. I don't think it's possible to cure AIDS, especially since we don't really have a "cure" for any disease.

I know what tolls go for, but how are you so sure that's not what they want you to think? It doesn't take that much money for roads, they make thousands or probably millions EVERYDAY. Your going to tell me that there using all that on TOLLS only. Yeah right, am not saying their not, am just saying it doesn't take that much money, the rest has to go somewhere.
Ashley Bruneus
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 11:57:43 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:41:48 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Food? No. Collectivisation of farms is fail to start with.
Food is MORE important to welfare than any doctor. What makes one fail and one not?

Soviet Russia 1928. Stalin begins to collectivise farms. When this happens, farmers don't work (as they're payed nothing) and only grow enough for themselves.

Modern day Europe. Many countries have successful state run healthcare.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 12:02:01 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:57:43 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/19/2009 11:41:48 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Food? No. Collectivisation of farms is fail to start with.
Food is MORE important to welfare than any doctor. What makes one fail and one not?

Soviet Russia 1928. Stalin begins to collectivise farms. When this happens, farmers don't work (as they're payed nothing) and only grow enough for themselves.

Modern day Europe. Many countries have successful state run healthcare.
Modern day Europe. They all permit various degrees of personal or in some cases even corporate profit (France has many semi-private health care companies, about as private as those in the US. Both are mixed markets). (and the success, by the way, is only compared to other forms of state run health care :).

The main difference is that the state has less influence on the European health care system than it did on Stalin's farms.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 2:56:32 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 11:26:20 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 9/19/2009 10:43:41 AM, Ashley17 wrote:
There was someone I was talking to about AIDS, and that person stated that the Government does have a cure for this disease but is keeping it secret from civilians because he wants to continue making money from the medicines that hospitals disturbute. He stated that, "if they give the cure than hospitals wouldn't make as much money, as soon as people got cured they wouldn't need to repeatly buy medicines from doctors". Instead. when people pay a plethora of money than they increasily make money without a limit contrary to giving out a cure. What is your opinion of this. I know their is a law to keep the Government from doing that, but is our government really that reliable. They do obscure some things from citizens views. They do keep some stuff top secret, this definetley has me intrigued, because it's possiable. I doubted at first but than again, the government is greedy for money. Let me verify when I state that, America makes a plethora of money on TOLLS and SUNPASS and they still charge us a lot of money for taxes. Do you know how much money they make off of tolls? An over abundance but they continously increase tax and gas. I can understand during the recession but even before that they were always making money off of us.

Tolls aren't actually that profitable. Tolls are to pay for the maintenance and repair of bridges, which are actually very, VERY expensive. Taxes go to a variety of other programs, such as making sure that the middle class is punished for contributing to society, and rewarding poor people for being lazy, having 6 kids, not being educated, and perpetuating crime against the middle class.

There is no overabundance of anything in America, except blood pressure, blood sugar, and cholesterol.

The AIDS controversy has been going on for a while. I've heard stories that AIDS was actually engineered as a bio weapon. It's unlikely they have a cure though, simply because of the nature of the virus. I don't think it's possible to cure AIDS, especially since we don't really have a "cure" for any disease.

lmao I love this.

Anyway, I highly doubt it, Ashley. As has been said before in this thread, AIDs is a highly complex virus that mutates and changes far too rapidly for any "cure." (Treatment is the right word here). I have a friend, though, who's father works for X medical research company, and they have a around 80% working treatment for Leukemia that should be coming out in the next 2 years : )

Though Magic Johnson is still alive and he contracted HIV in the early 90's hahah, almost 20 years, so that might help the legitimacy of your friend's claim, Ashley :p
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 3:11:29 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 12:02:01 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/19/2009 11:57:43 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/19/2009 11:41:48 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Food? No. Collectivisation of farms is fail to start with.
Food is MORE important to welfare than any doctor. What makes one fail and one not?

Soviet Russia 1928. Stalin begins to collectivise farms. When this happens, farmers don't work (as they're payed nothing) and only grow enough for themselves.

Modern day Europe. Many countries have successful state run healthcare.
Modern day Europe. They all permit various degrees of personal or in some cases even corporate profit (France has many semi-private health care companies, about as private as those in the US. Both are mixed markets). (and the success, by the way, is only compared to other forms of state run health care :).

The main difference is that the state has less influence on the European health care system than it did on Stalin's farms.

I never advocated 100% state control. Regulation and state oversight is required. A mixed market is acceptable with the aforementioned conditions
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 3:33:33 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 3:11:29 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
I never advocated 100% state control. Regulation and state oversight is required. A mixed market is acceptable with the aforementioned conditions

At 9/19/2009 11:28:40 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Private health companies are responsible for people's livelihood. I don't know why a thing which strives for profits should control people's welfare.
Sounds like 100% state control to me.
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 5:09:53 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 10:43:41 AM, Ashley17 wrote:
There was someone I was talking to about AIDS, and that person stated that the Government does have a cure for this disease but is keeping it secret from civilians because he wants to continue making money from the medicines that hospitals disturbute. He stated that, "if they give the cure than hospitals wouldn't make as much money, as soon as people got cured they wouldn't need to repeatly buy medicines from doctors". Instead. when people pay a plethora of money than they increasily make money without a limit contrary to giving out a cure. What is your opinion of this. I know their is a law to keep the Government from doing that, but is our government really that reliable. They do obscure some things from citizens views. They do keep some stuff top secret, this definetley has me intrigued, because it's possiable. I doubted at first but than again, the government is greedy for money. Let me verify when I state that, America makes a plethora of money on TOLLS and SUNPASS and they still charge us a lot of money for taxes. Do you know how much money they make off of tolls? An over abundance but they continously increase tax and gas. I can understand during the recession but even before that they were always making money off of us.

Ah, yes, the Sun Pass...only in Florida. My cousin lives in St. Pete Beach and it costs me 50 cents to drive over the bridge to visit her but I don't mind because I know the money is ring-fenced for AIDS research! Really, the fees from Sun Pass tolls just go to repay the investment on the (very impressive) road infrastructure in Florida.

The only reason I can think that anyone would discover and then not reveal a cure for AIDS would be if he were some sort of rabid homophobe (since AIDS disproportionately affects gay men) but I think this is highly unlikely.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 5:52:11 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 3:11:29 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/19/2009 12:02:01 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/19/2009 11:57:43 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/19/2009 11:41:48 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Food? No. Collectivisation of farms is fail to start with.
Food is MORE important to welfare than any doctor. What makes one fail and one not?

Soviet Russia 1928. Stalin begins to collectivise farms. When this happens, farmers don't work (as they're payed nothing) and only grow enough for themselves.

Modern day Europe. Many countries have successful state run healthcare.
Modern day Europe. They all permit various degrees of personal or in some cases even corporate profit (France has many semi-private health care companies, about as private as those in the US. Both are mixed markets). (and the success, by the way, is only compared to other forms of state run health care :).

The main difference is that the state has less influence on the European health care system than it did on Stalin's farms.

I never advocated 100% state control. Regulation and state oversight is required. A mixed market is acceptable with the aforementioned conditions

Well, that's still trusting greed. Just inconsistently :).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2009 2:28:59 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/19/2009 5:52:11 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/19/2009 3:11:29 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/19/2009 12:02:01 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/19/2009 11:57:43 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/19/2009 11:41:48 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Food? No. Collectivisation of farms is fail to start with.
Food is MORE important to welfare than any doctor. What makes one fail and one not?

Soviet Russia 1928. Stalin begins to collectivise farms. When this happens, farmers don't work (as they're payed nothing) and only grow enough for themselves.

Modern day Europe. Many countries have successful state run healthcare.
Modern day Europe. They all permit various degrees of personal or in some cases even corporate profit (France has many semi-private health care companies, about as private as those in the US. Both are mixed markets). (and the success, by the way, is only compared to other forms of state run health care :).

The main difference is that the state has less influence on the European health care system than it did on Stalin's farms.

I never advocated 100% state control. Regulation and state oversight is required. A mixed market is acceptable with the aforementioned conditions

Well, that's still trusting greed. Just inconsistently :).

No, it's putting a gun to greeds back and making it kind.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2009 3:37:57 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
I know what you're thinking. Can I get the health care industry to be kind with a threat? Will it work? Well, to tell you the truth I'm not in that industry. But being as part of what you pay them to do is put you under general anesthesia when they judge it a good idea, stick you full of drugs you know very little about, sometimes even cut holes in you, you've got to ask yourself one question. Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya punk?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.