Text 14817, 108 rader
Skriven 2007-05-22 03:48:59 av Kurt Ullman (1230.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: unions
==================
In article <dqh453tb5han7mtkmabcgmodi1hu07s2i1@4ax.com>,
 Josh Hill <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 22 May 2007 00:50:56 GMT, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <vvb4531v0nj337c9opf7f258u3odijmi4e@4ax.com>,
> > Josh Hill <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> Slashing the death rate from cancer (no one knows how to "cure" it)
> > Small nit, but that isn't right.   Testicular cancers for the most part 
> >are cured (thanks to the boys at Indiana University, the 5-year cure 
> >rate runs about 90% or so. . Some of the forms of lukemia are cured. 
> >Most of the actual curing is being done by the private sector taking 
> >advantage of some of the basic research being done by the feds.
> 
> The process would be virtually nowhere without the basic research
> financed by the Federal Government.
   Yep. And basically nowhere without the development of actual 
medications by the private sector. 

> 
> >> Slashing the death rate from AIDS (again, no one knows how to cure it)
> >
> >  But again most of the heavy lifting has been done by private 
> >entitities after the feds did much of the basic stuff. 
> 
> In that case, yes. But again, the process would have gone nowhere
> without the basic research.
> 
     But what good is the basic research if the next step isn't taken? 
Both are needed. But the government research should be the really basic 
stuff.
       Even then there are interesting concerns. There are a number of 
studies (including of AIDS research and others) that show no correlation 
between NIH research funding and the impact of diseases as measured by 
numbers of individuals, cost to the country or other measures. Funding 
is a political process so funding goes to those making the most noise. 
Not a real pristine system. 
    For example:
# For every AIDS death, NIH allocated $43,206 in research -- for a total 
of $1.4 billion.

# Research into heart disease commanded only $1,160 per heart-disease 
related death -- at a total cost of $851.6 million.

# Yet 733,834 heart patients died in 1996, versus just 32,655 from AIDS.
     You see the same thing in cancers where much of the money is 
allocated to childhood cancers despite the fact that overall, they are 
relatively rare. 
     Some other examples at:
http://www.ncpa.org/health/pdh39.html



> >> Slashing our energy consumption below what it would otherwise have
> >> been
> >> 
> >> That last requires a bit of explanation. You point out, rightly, that
> >> the government didn't end our dependence on foreign oil. But you
> >> ignore the fact that that was in large measure because the
> >> anti-government, pro-business right, along with corrupt energy-funded
> >> politicians of every stripe blocked steps that would have moved us in
> >> the right direction. I think you'll admit that it's fairly silly to
> >> block government on the grounds that it's ineffectual and then say
> >> "See? Government is ineffectual." Yet that's what the anti-government
> >> right does all the time.
> >
> >    So, you are in favor of an emminently corruptable entity being in 
> >charge of pretty much everythgin. 
> 
> Where exactly did I say that, or anything like that? I'm in favor of
> the Government being in charge of whatever it's best at being in
> charge of, and opposed to knee-jerk ideological sound bites like
> "government is bad."
     YOU said above that the reason we don't have less dependence on 
foreign oil is because.. and I quote you personally: 
 But you
> >> ignore the fact that that was in large measure because the
> >> anti-government, pro-business right, along with corrupt energy-funded
> >> politicians of every stripe blocked steps that would have moved us in
> >> the right direction. 
      What else I am supposed to take from "corrupt energy-funded 
politicians of EVERY STRIPE (emphasis mine before you mention it)"?
>  
> >> >So, some predictions for what government could do if they got involved 
> >> >in the energy crisis business?  Sponsor Halliburton to build a massive 
> >> >hydrogen infrastructure across the US, including retrofitting pipelines, 
> >> >filling stations and massive electrolysis stations.  It would cost us 
> >> >billions, would feather the pork nests of 100s of congresscritters, and 
> >> >would leave us unable to move once we found out how much the cars and 
> >> >fuel would actually cost.
> 
> >      Yet you want these guys to take over and run things? Wussup with 
> >dat? 
> 
> That was Charlie's comment, not mine. In point of fact, the degree to
> which government money is spent wisely seems to be highly dependent on
> the administration and somewhat dependent on the political makeup of
> Congress.
       Oops. Mea culpa. 

      You have anything remotely resembling a fact to back this up or 
are just citing your personal biases again?
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)