AIDS Vaccine Being Delayed; Private Companies Not Interested

[Frank Hipper]

The implication that a pharmaceutical corporation would be forced to lay any person off because of doubts about the profit margin an AIDS vaccine would cause is shit-in-your-pants funny.

When the top two of them alone record profits in excess of seven billion dollars annually?

Ridiculous...

[Keevan_Colton]

They go on unemployment. What part of "Either someone makes less money or someone dies" do you not understand?

So its ok for them to lose most of their salary, pensions and benefits? Not to mention then it puts extra strain on other people who are gainfully employed who have to pay the taxes that go to people unemployed?

Why would you rather pay for the healthcare and unemployment of a person with AIDS rather than the healthcare and unemployment of a healthy person?

Ah, but the person with aids will be dead soon and thus reduce the strain on the system, people on medicaid/care dont have enough money to qualify for treatment plans...this guy is pure Ebeneezer Scrooge.

[LongVin]

They go on unemployment. What part of "Either someone makes less money or someone dies" do you not understand?

So its ok for them to lose most of their salary, pensions and benefits? Not to mention then it puts extra strain on other people who are gainfully employed who have to pay the taxes that go to people unemployed?

A chemist working at drug company will always, always find employment eventually due to the rarity of his skills (why do you think it costs so much money and time to become one?). An African peasant dying of AIDS can only die once.

Which one would you pick? The dying peasant or the college degree holder who has to search for a job?

The College Degree holder will put more into the economy and will contribute more of his talents for advancement in a few years if not shorter then the peasant could in his entire lifetime.

Also not everyone working at medical institutions are doctors are chemists. Like all businesses they require secretaries, janitors, people who work in the mail room. They would get laid off just as quickly as the Chemist would and they don't have a lock on getting a new job.

[Keevan_Colton]

The economically unviable should die...ever consider just shooting the disabled too?

[StarshipTitanic]

The College Degree holder will put more into the economy and will contribute more of his talents for advancement in a few years if not shorter then the peasant could in his entire lifetime.

Also not everyone working at medical institutions are doctors are chemists. Like all businesses they require secretaries, janitors, people who work in the mail room. They would get laid off just as quickly as the Chemist would and they don't have a lock on getting a new job.

What do you pick? A peasant dying or someone possibly getting inconvienanced for a few months of his life?

I like dumbasses.

[Surlethe]

The economically unviable should die...ever consider just shooting the disabled too?

Hell, while we're at it, let's shoot all the poor people, too. They don't contribute anything to the economy, and simply suck up taxpayers' money. Then, we can shoot college dropouts, and so on ...

Why didn't I think of this brilliant instrument of social change before? LongVin is the next Marx!

[LongVin]

The College Degree holder will put more into the economy and will contribute more of his talents for advancement in a few years if not shorter then the peasant could in his entire lifetime.

Also not everyone working at medical institutions are doctors are chemists. Like all businesses they require secretaries, janitors, people who work in the mail room. They would get laid off just as quickly as the Chemist would and they don't have a lock on getting a new job.

What do you pick? A peasant dying or someone possibly getting inconvienanced for a few months of his life?

I like dumbasses.

I already answered your question by talking about the economics of the matter.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

He'll pick the person being inconvenienced; because there's no 'investment' lost in a dead peasant, whilst the college-educated person (who can easily absorb the shock of finding a job) has a lot 'invested' into him.

The fact they're both living, breathing humans deserving of life, liberty, and happiness doesn't enter into the equation, which is where the corporate system breaks down.

[StarshipTitanic]

I wonder how much he contributes to the economy.

[LongVin]

The economically unviable should die...ever consider just shooting the disabled too?

Hell, while we're at it, let's shoot all the poor people, too. They don't contribute anything to the economy, and simply suck up taxpayers' money. Then, we can shoot college dropouts, and so on ...

Why didn't I think of this brilliant instrument of social change before? LongVin is the next Marx!

Actually poor people do contribute to the economy. There will always be the need for people to perform manual labor and the poor do spend money on products they need and products they don't need.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

I wonder how much he contributes to the economy.

Dunno, but I get the feeling he's an RThurmont clone.

[StarshipTitanic]

Dunno, but I get the feeling he's an RThurmont clone.

Heh, you mean a person whose position in the economy is entirely artificial and ultimately disposable?

[Surlethe]

The economically unviable should die...ever consider just shooting the disabled too?

Hell, while we're at it, let's shoot all the poor people, too. They don't contribute anything to the economy, and simply suck up taxpayers' money. Then, we can shoot college dropouts, and so on ...

Why didn't I think of this brilliant instrument of social change before? LongVin is the next Marx!

Actually poor people do contribute to the economy. There will always be the need for people to perform manual labor and the poor do spend money on products they need and products they don't need.

Apparently, sarcasm is not your strong point.

However, an impoverished person is more likely to be unhealthy, and, by your logic, since healthcare is a public good -- and hence, no strong individual incentive to develop a safety net -- there is no reason to allow a person whose net contribution to the economy is zero or negative to live; so, why not simply shoot impoverished people? After all, there will be an incentive to develop robots for the job, and a robot can certainly perform more consistently than a person, and doesn't get sick.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Dunno, but I get the feeling he's an RThurmont clone.

Heh, you mean a person whose position in the economy is entirely artificial and ultimately disposable?

Correct. Just like any and all persons in the MPAA and RIAA.

[LongVin]

Hell, while we're at it, let's shoot all the poor people, too. They don't contribute anything to the economy, and simply suck up taxpayers' money. Then, we can shoot college dropouts, and so on ...

Why didn't I think of this brilliant instrument of social change before? LongVin is the next Marx!

Actually poor people do contribute to the economy. There will always be the need for people to perform manual labor and the poor do spend money on products they need and products they don't need.

Apparently, sarcasm is not your strong point.

However, an impoverished person is more likely to be unhealthy, and, by your logic, since healthcare is a public good -- and hence, no strong individual incentive to develop a safety net -- there is no reason to allow a person whose net contribution to the economy is zero or negative to live; so, why not simply shoot impoverished people? After all, there will be an incentive to develop robots for the job, and a robot can certainly perform more consistently than a person, and doesn't get sick.

That depends on how you are using the term impoverished. If you are talking about the Impoverished in Africa or are you talking about the impoverished in America? After all those living below the poverty line in the states usually have numerous luxuries and are generally in ok health. The long term effects they will have on the economy(from probably 40+ years of work) will be in the positive. And since we have an established need for unskilled labor jobs such as janitors they provide to society by keeping it clean and operating at the lower levels allowing those at the higher levels to continue pushing society forward.

As for Robots though the incentive is there the technology is not and replacing a worker earning 20 grand a year with a first generation robot that will probably cost hundreds of thousands of dollars is not a good trade off unless the robot offers much better work efficiency and little to no upkeep.

[SirNitram]

And of those 40 million most of them are outside of the developed world. Also AIDs is a constantly overhyped virus. When you consider the population of the Eath at 6 billion people 40 million is a drop in the bucket.

.....

Wow. You are a completely and utterly immoral asshole. Better that forty million people die than we do anything to stop it. You, sir, are a disgusting cretin. And what do you base this decision that forty million should die on? Let's read on.

And while lives hang in the balance the economic worth of most of those lives is nill. They can not afford medications nor can the people in the country afford the vaccine. They're is no incentive to develop a vaccine for the vast majority of AIDs cases, when the medical establishment can make money by controlling the existing cases within the developed world.

Ah, yes. The decision to let people suffer and die horribly because they have no 'economic worth'. Disgusting little troll.

And you round it off by once again regurgitating my words. That there's no economic incentive in the free market to help these folks. The difference is, I can recignize that this is a failure of the free market system, not a good thing that forty million die.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

LongVin, you are now officially fucked. Once Sir Nitram joins a battle, the Troll's days are numbers in low double-digits at most...

[Surlethe]

That depends on how you are using the term impoverished. If you are talking about the Impoverished in Africa or are you talking about the impoverished in America? After all those living below the poverty line in the states usually have numerous luxuries and are generally in ok health. The long term effects they will have on the economy(from probably 40+ years of work) will be in the positive. And since we have an established need for unskilled labor jobs such as janitors they provide to society by keeping it clean and operating at the lower levels allowing those at the higher levels to continue pushing society forward. As for Robots though the incentive is there the technology is not and replacing a worker earning 20 grand a year with a first generation robot that will probably cost hundreds of thousands of dollars is not a good trade off unless the robot offers much better work efficiency and little to no upkeep.

Holy shit, you're actually taking the proposition seriously!

Tell me: if I could find an individual who had a negative impact on the economy, and would continue to have a negative impact, would you be willing to execute him?

[LongVin]

Holy shit, you're actually taking the proposition seriously!

Tell me: if I could find an individual who had a negative impact on the economy, and would continue to have a negative impact, would you be willing to execute him?

Entirely depends on the situation now before you start calling me a murderer read the situations I present.

Someone who is capable of working and providing even the most minimal for the economy can serve a purpose in the long run even if it is just freeing up someone to perform a better job.

However if we are to look at a case like Terri Schiavo(I know I just butchered her last name.) Who was in a constitent vegatative state though technically alive. Now she has no possibility of being a benefit to economy because the chances of her getting well were nearly no existant. Of course morally it is wrong to kill someone. However in a circumstance like this the economic needs(espicially since it was tax money and insurance money that kept her alive) state it would be for the best to let her go. She was taking up a hospital bed that could of been used for someone that could later on provide something to society as well as draining governmental money. So from a economic perspective it was ok to euthanise her.

Now if the family or an association of donors wished to privately fund the life support for the extent of her natural life that would of also been an acceptable and moral'y acceptable solution to the situation. However as the cost was being burdened by the tax payer and insurance company it becomes a waste of funds since that money could be used elsewhere.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Careful, Surlethe, conspiracy to commit murder could get you banned I'm not worried about this human waste, he's nothing more than a first-year economics major RANDroid.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Don't take his Schiavo Red Herring, BBS and Chewie. Let's talk about someone who's alive and interactive with fellow himans, not what is essentially a soulless blob of flesh kept artificially alive by machines. Someone who just happens to have, say, medical bills larger than he or she pays. Or any and all children below the age where they have jobs. Shall you propose killing them then?

[LongVin]

Don't take his Schiavo Red Herring, BBS and Chewie. Let's talk about someone who's alive and interactive with fellow himans, not what is essentially a soulless blob of flesh kept artificially alive by machines. Someone who just happens to have, say, medical bills larger than he or she pays. Or any and all children below the age where they have jobs. Shall you propose killing them then?

That completely defeats the purpose of having debt services and loan programs. As for Children you have an expected economic value they will bring into the marketplace as they come to age. Also you need to ensure the survival of the Human species.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Don't take his Schiavo Red Herring, BBS and Chewie. Let's talk about someone who's alive and interactive with fellow himans, not what is essentially a soulless blob of flesh kept artificially alive by machines. Someone who just happens to have, say, medical bills larger than he or she pays. Or any and all children below the age where they have jobs. Shall you propose killing them then?

That completely defeats the purpose of having debt services and loan programs. As for Children you have an expected economic value they will bring into the marketplace as they come to age. Also you need to ensure the survival of the Human species.

The human species survives with thirty genetically diverse breeding pairs, which can be found at any highschool in North America or Europe, so quit moving goalposts.

[SirNitram]

Don't take his Schiavo Red Herring, BBS and Chewie. Let's talk about someone who's alive and interactive with fellow himans, not what is essentially a soulless blob of flesh kept artificially alive by machines. Someone who just happens to have, say, medical bills larger than he or she pays. Or any and all children below the age where they have jobs. Shall you propose killing them then?

That completely defeats the purpose of having debt services and loan programs. As for Children you have an expected economic value they will bring into the marketplace as they come to age. Also you need to ensure the survival of the Human species.

Hilarious. You can't bring yourself to admit the inevitable conclusion of your philosophy, so you just whine that it can't happen. Sadly it does, and will continue to. As for 'survival of the human species'.. We're not the ones proposing a highly adaptive virus with a toehold in society across all levels and with at least one-third of it's victims unawares be ignored because it's not going to produce maximum profits.

What a lying, two faced sack of shit. Worse than merely being an outright sociopath, you're a lying one.

[LongVin]

But continued stable population growth helps to further increase the strenght of the economy. In the terms I presented before Children would be seen as "potential resources" that have not yet been utilized.