Kill The Profit Motive And You Kill Modern Medical Advances And Prosperity

[RDD_1210]

So quote one of these books you read. Or do you really expect us to take your word for it?

"Salk never patented the vaccine, nor did he earn any money from his discovery, preferring to see it distributed as widely as possible."

Salk Institute - About Salk - History of Salk - About Jonas Salk

Let me guess, because it's a website and not a "book" you're going to pretend like it's not true.

Salk had no right to patent the vaccine, so your claims are irrelevant.

"....nor did he earn any money from his discovery, preferring to see it distributed as widely as possible."

Weird how you ignored that part.

You lose....again.

 

[bripat9643]

Not horseshit.

Here are the facts: JAMA Network | JAMA | Is US Health Really the Best in the World?

The article is horseshit. None of the statistics mentioned measure the quality of healthcare. They measure the health of Americans, who are the fattest people in the world. Diabetes in America is endemic because we are so overweight. That alone will result in a drastic decrease in health. Heart disease is also a result of being overweight.

All the other measures have to do with infant mortality, and the way we measure it doesn't compare with the way European countries measure it. The main factors affecting early infant survival are birth weight and prematurity. The way that these factors are reported — and how such babies are treated statistically — tells a different story than what the numbers reveal.

Low birth weight infants are not counted against the “live birth” statistics for many countries reporting low infant mortality rates.

According to the way statistics are calculated in Canada, Germany, and Austria, a premature baby weighing <500g is not considered a living child.

But in the U.S., such very low birth weight babies are considered live births. The mortality rate of such babies &#8212; considered &#8220;unsalvageable&#8221; outside of the U.S. and therefore never alive &#8212; is extraordinarily high; up to 869 per 1,000 in the first month of life alone. This skews U.S. infant mortality statistics.

JAMA is a decidedly left-wing journal. It has an agenda to push. It doesn't care about the fact.

The health of Americans doesn't = the health care they receive.

That's your rebuttal? Are you kidding?

No, I'm dead serious. I already explained to you why that's the case.

Life expectency is included in the statistics. Life expectency is the most important measure of the quality of health care. The U.S. lags far behind other countries.

Wrong, because the quality of healthcare you receive isn't the most significant factor in your life expectancy. Habits like smoking can seriously impair your life expectancy, and being a fat slob will also seriously degrade it.

According to the way statistics are calculated in Canada, Germany, and Austria, a premature baby weighing <500g is not considered a living child

Link the above statement or I call horseshit.

PJ Media » The Doctor Is In: Infant Mortality Comparisons a Statistical Miscarriage

 

[RDD_1210]

What he wrote was "laws that regulate industry are a form of socialism."
You wrote that they are socialism.
Lots of things are forms of socialism without being socialism. The fact that the US Post Office is a government entity is a form of socialism. But it does not make the US socialist. Just because somethig shares some characteristics with something else does not make it identical to the something else.
I realize that was an explanation for an adult. I predict you will dismiss it as being "semantics", which is your term for "I dont really understand it therefore it can't be important."

Just like I said.......you've missed the point completely. He's claiming that Obamacare is Socialism and then says laws that regulate industry are a form of socialism which means that our healthcare system had "socialist" elements well before Obamacare ever was created. So to act like Obama is ushering in a socialist system is ridiculous as pointed out by him and now you.

Good job fool.

Prior to Obamacare, our healthcare system was at least 50% socialist. Governments spends half of all the money spent on healthcare. With Obamacare, healthcare is now 90% socialist.

Link to your where your percentages came from?

Oh, that's right you can't link to your ass.

 

[bripat9643]

"Salk never patented the vaccine, nor did he earn any money from his discovery, preferring to see it distributed as widely as possible."

Salk Institute - About Salk - History of Salk - About Jonas Salk

Let me guess, because it's a website and not a "book" you're going to pretend like it's not true.

Salk had no right to patent the vaccine, so your claims are irrelevant.

"....nor did he earn any money from his discovery, preferring to see it distributed as widely as possible."

Weird how you ignored that part.

You lose....again.

It's bullshit. The March of Dimes funded his research, and therefore they owned the patent rights. They chose not to patent it because they are a charity.

 

[bripat9643]

Just like I said.......you've missed the point completely. He's claiming that Obamacare is Socialism and then says laws that regulate industry are a form of socialism which means that our healthcare system had "socialist" elements well before Obamacare ever was created. So to act like Obama is ushering in a socialist system is ridiculous as pointed out by him and now you.

Good job fool.

Prior to Obamacare, our healthcare system was at least 50% socialist. Governments spends half of all the money spent on healthcare. With Obamacare, healthcare is now 90% socialist.

Link to your where your percentages came from?

Oh, that's right you can't link to your ass.

You can get the percentage of money spent by the government on healthcare simply by adding up money for Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIF and all the other money government spends on medicine. The 90% number is just a ballpark figure off the top of my head. With Obamacare, government effectively runs the entire healthcare system.

 

[RDD_1210]

Salk had no right to patent the vaccine, so your claims are irrelevant.

"....nor did he earn any money from his discovery, preferring to see it distributed as widely as possible."

Weird how you ignored that part.

You lose....again.

It's bullshit. The March of Dimes funded his research, and therefore they owned the patent rights. They chose not to patent it because they are a charity.

I'm sure you and your made up, unsupported, non-linked "facts" are more credible than salk.edu.

But please continue, it's hilarious to watch you squirm.

 

[RDD_1210]

Prior to Obamacare, our healthcare system was at least 50% socialist. Governments spends half of all the money spent on healthcare. With Obamacare, healthcare is now 90% socialist.

Link to your where your percentages came from?

Oh, that's right you can't link to your ass.

You can get the percentage of money spent by the government on healthcare simply by adding up money for Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIF and all the other money government spends on medicine. The 90% number is just a ballpark figure off the top of my head. With Obamacare, government effectively runs the entire healthcare system.

ie. You made it up on the spot. Thanks for confirming.

And this all goes back to the point that just because the government makes laws or regulations for something, that doesn't make it a socialist system. You're fucking hilarious though as your ridiculous point continues to whittle away to nothing.

 

[bripat9643]

"....nor did he earn any money from his discovery, preferring to see it distributed as widely as possible."

Weird how you ignored that part.

You lose....again.

It's bullshit. The March of Dimes funded his research, and therefore they owned the patent rights. They chose not to patent it because they are a charity.

I'm sure you and your made up, unsupported, non-linked "facts" are more credible than salk.edu.

But please continue, it's hilarious to watch you squirm.

Well, salk.edu couldn't possibly have a bias, now could it?

 

[The Rabbi]

LOL, EXACTLY like I said you would do. You would do everything you could to not explain the "difference" in what was said.

Why? Because there is none and you're an an insane asshole who is as predictable as they come. And you wonder why you get annihilated in every debate we engage in.

What he wrote was "laws that regulate industry are a form of socialism."
You wrote that they are socialism.
Lots of things are forms of socialism without being socialism. The fact that the US Post Office is a government entity is a form of socialism. But it does not make the US socialist. Just because somethig shares some characteristics with something else does not make it identical to the something else.
I realize that was an explanation for an adult. I predict you will dismiss it as being "semantics", which is your term for "I dont really understand it therefore it can't be important."

Just like I said.......you've missed the point completely. He's claiming that Obamacare is Socialism and then says laws that regulate industry are a form of socialism which means that our healthcare system had "socialist" elements well before Obamacare ever was created. So to act like Obama is ushering in a socialist system is ridiculous as pointed out by him and now you.

Good job fool.

And what do we have here? Why, it's Deflection! What a shock. Unable to respond to the post.

And you further beclown yourself by failing to distinguish degrees in things. Just because something already had socialist elements does not mean that nothing changes once it goes full socialist.
So it's a twofer for sure.

Frankly I am surprised someone who has been so thoroughly pwned in this discussion would come back for more. But that's part of your abject stupidity, I suppose.

 

[The Rabbi]

"Salk never patented the vaccine, nor did he earn any money from his discovery, preferring to see it distributed as widely as possible."

Salk Institute - About Salk - History of Salk - About Jonas Salk

Let me guess, because it's a website and not a "book" you're going to pretend like it's not true.

Salk had no right to patent the vaccine, so your claims are irrelevant.

"....nor did he earn any money from his discovery, preferring to see it distributed as widely as possible."

Weird how you ignored that part.

You lose....again.

So the fact he ended up with his own foundation and reseach facility indicates his motives were pure as driven snow?
Again, you beclown yourself.

 

[bripat9643]

Link to your where your percentages came from?

Oh, that's right you can't link to your ass.

You can get the percentage of money spent by the government on healthcare simply by adding up money for Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIF and all the other money government spends on medicine. The 90% number is just a ballpark figure off the top of my head. With Obamacare, government effectively runs the entire healthcare system.

ie. You made it up on the spot. Thanks for confirming.

And this all goes back to the point that just because the government makes laws or regulations for something, that doesn't make it socialist. You're fucking hilarious though as your ridiculous point continues to whittle away to nothing.

Like I said, to the degree that regulations control the business decisions of the industry, that is the degree to which it is socialist. I realize you want to pretend that government can make all the decisions and still call it capitalism, but that's not how economists look at it.

When government sets all the prices and determines what products will be sold and sets the wages of employees, it has become the de facto owner of a business. That's socialism of the NAZI variety. The describes Obamacare to a 'T.'

I know you don't want to admit it, because you like to imagine you aren't a socialist. Unfortunately facts are facts. Regulating business to the Nth degree is the same as running the business. There's no practical difference.

 

[bripat9643]

Link to your where your percentages came from?

Oh, that's right you can't link to your ass.

You can get the percentage of money spent by the government on healthcare simply by adding up money for Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIF and all the other money government spends on medicine. The 90% number is just a ballpark figure off the top of my head. With Obamacare, government effectively runs the entire healthcare system.

ie. You made it up on the spot. Thanks for confirming.

And this all goes back to the point that just because the government makes laws or regulations for something, that doesn't make it a socialist system. You're fucking hilarious though as your ridiculous point continues to whittle away to nothing.

I told you how I got the 50% figure. I know you can't do anything than ignore obvious facts.

 

[RDD_1210]

It's bullshit. The March of Dimes funded his research, and therefore they owned the patent rights. They chose not to patent it because they are a charity.

I'm sure you and your made up, unsupported, non-linked "facts" are more credible than salk.edu.

But please continue, it's hilarious to watch you squirm.

Well, salk.edu couldn't possibly have a bias, now could it?

Who would know more about Salk and his life, you or Salk.edu?

Face it, your entire thread has been debunked and blown completely out of the water.

 

[beagle9]

Here's what worries me the most about Obamacare. Socialized medicine means the end of all new wonder drugs and miracle medical treatments. No more breakthroughs like artificial joints, MRI machines, artificial hearts, artificial livers, Leukemia cures, etc.. The profit motive is what brought these innovations into existence. Obamacare will put an end to it.

Redirector

One of the hallmarks of socialism is its hostility toward and targeting for elimination of the “bourgeoisie”–the prosperous middle class, who pose an existential threat to the socialists/statists, in large part due to their relative economic autonomy. The fact that they are mostly capable of self-sufficiency and of running their own lives means they neither need nor want big-government central-planners micromanaging their every decision, and therefore the middle class must be decimated by the likes of Obama–even while Obama and his Democrat fellow-travelers hypocritically, falsely speak of “protecting the middle class,” “fighting for the middle class,” and “growing the middle class” in their cynical ploy to get middle class people to vote for more doomed Democrat policies.

Fortunately, some of the biggest lies of Obama and his party have now been realized by millions to be what they are–outright lies.

What is yet unfortunate is that the socialists have still largely succeeded in convincing so many that it is the profit motive of capitalism which is to blame for the alleged awfulness of income inequality, and the alleged awfulness of various other disparate outcomes upon which envy and class-conflict are based, that they think it is a viable campaign strategy for the upcoming mid-term elections.

And so, it is the same old badmouthing and attempt to eliminate the profit motive, which Obama and his fellow travelers have deployed in their destruction of our health care system–the abject economic horror known as Obamacare.

Yet that same profit motive is what has given modern medicine and pharmacology such marvelous breakthroughs over the last several decades, which is and has been in Obama’s cross hairs all along.

Socialized medicine regimes only barely limp along in other Western, developed economies such as Canada, Sweden, and Great Britain, with just enough marginally-satisfied customers to keep their populations from revolt (not to mention that numerous dead and dying recipients of inferior medical care delivery really can’t make much of a political peep, can they now?) only because the profit motive has still been somewhat alive in America in order to drive the innovations enjoyed by patients in the more socialist countries–countries which ride along on the coattails of our advances and revolutionary medical developments!

It is mainly due to the existence of the remnants of capitalism, and the research, development, and marketing activities of extremely competitive, profit-seeking enterprises (mostly here in the United States and wherever making a profit is still allowed), which have produced the miracle drugs and the space-age, mind-boggling medical technologies enjoyed by citizens throughout not only the developed world, but increasingly throughout the emerging economies and the third-world, even more and more.​

Profit or extreme profits are the only thing that makes people work to save other peoples lives in this life or world as we now know it ? Hmmm!

 

[RDD_1210]

Salk had no right to patent the vaccine, so your claims are irrelevant.

"....nor did he earn any money from his discovery, preferring to see it distributed as widely as possible."

Weird how you ignored that part.

You lose....again.

So the fact he ended up with his own foundation and reseach facility indicates his motives were pure as driven snow?
Again, you beclown yourself.

You just hate the idea that someone could do something for the betterment of humanity and not the fattening of their bank account.

It's a foreign concept to someone like you, who has never had an idea worth a shit and certainly doesn't give a shit about anyone but himself.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm sure you and your made up, unsupported, non-linked "facts" are more credible than salk.edu.

But please continue, it's hilarious to watch you squirm.

Well, salk.edu couldn't possibly have a bias, now could it?

Who would know more about Salk and his life, you or Salk.edu?

Face it, your entire thread has been debunked and blown completely out of the water.

ROLF! Yeah, so who would know more about Romney than Romney ? I guess that means we should only believe what Romney says about himself rather than what his critics said about him, right?

 

[RDD_1210]

You can get the percentage of money spent by the government on healthcare simply by adding up money for Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIF and all the other money government spends on medicine. The 90% number is just a ballpark figure off the top of my head. With Obamacare, government effectively runs the entire healthcare system.

ie. You made it up on the spot. Thanks for confirming.

And this all goes back to the point that just because the government makes laws or regulations for something, that doesn't make it socialist. You're fucking hilarious though as your ridiculous point continues to whittle away to nothing.

Like I said, to the degree that regulations control the business decisions of the industry, that is the degree to which it is socialist. I realize you want to pretend that government can make all the decisions and still call it capitalism, but that's not how economists look at it.

When government sets all the prices and determines what products will be sold and sets the wages of employees, it has become the de facto owner of a business. That's socialism of the NAZI variety. The describes Obamacare to a 'T.'

I know you don't want to admit it, because you like to imagine you aren't a socialist. Unfortunately facts are facts. Regulating business to the Nth degree is the same as running the business. There's no practical difference.

Let me see if I have all of your facts straight:

• Government is setting the price of all insurance plans under Obamacare
• Government is setting the wages of all doctors, nurses and healthcare professionals
• Obamacare = Nazism

Is that what you're saying? Do I have that correct? I just want to be sure I understand exactly what you're saying, so that there is no confusion later on. Please correct which parts you feel are not indicative of your position.

 

[RDD_1210]

You can get the percentage of money spent by the government on healthcare simply by adding up money for Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIF and all the other money government spends on medicine. The 90% number is just a ballpark figure off the top of my head. With Obamacare, government effectively runs the entire healthcare system.

ie. You made it up on the spot. Thanks for confirming.

And this all goes back to the point that just because the government makes laws or regulations for something, that doesn't make it a socialist system. You're fucking hilarious though as your ridiculous point continues to whittle away to nothing.

I told you how I got the 50% figure. I know you can't do anything than ignore obvious facts.

I know, you made it up straight out of your ass. Just like I said.

 

[bripat9643]

Here's what worries me the most about Obamacare. Socialized medicine means the end of all new wonder drugs and miracle medical treatments. No more breakthroughs like artificial joints, MRI machines, artificial hearts, artificial livers, Leukemia cures, etc.. The profit motive is what brought these innovations into existence. Obamacare will put an end to it.

Redirector

One of the hallmarks of socialism is its hostility toward and targeting for elimination of the &#8220;bourgeoisie&#8221;&#8211;the prosperous middle class, who pose an existential threat to the socialists/statists, in large part due to their relative economic autonomy. The fact that they are mostly capable of self-sufficiency and of running their own lives means they neither need nor want big-government central-planners micromanaging their every decision, and therefore the middle class must be decimated by the likes of Obama&#8211;even while Obama and his Democrat fellow-travelers hypocritically, falsely speak of &#8220;protecting the middle class,&#8221; &#8220;fighting for the middle class,&#8221; and &#8220;growing the middle class&#8221; in their cynical ploy to get middle class people to vote for more doomed Democrat policies.

Fortunately, some of the biggest lies of Obama and his party have now been realized by millions to be what they are&#8211;outright lies.

What is yet unfortunate is that the socialists have still largely succeeded in convincing so many that it is the profit motive of capitalism which is to blame for the alleged awfulness of income inequality, and the alleged awfulness of various other disparate outcomes upon which envy and class-conflict are based, that they think it is a viable campaign strategy for the upcoming mid-term elections.

And so, it is the same old badmouthing and attempt to eliminate the profit motive, which Obama and his fellow travelers have deployed in their destruction of our health care system&#8211;the abject economic horror known as Obamacare.

Yet that same profit motive is what has given modern medicine and pharmacology such marvelous breakthroughs over the last several decades, which is and has been in Obama&#8217;s cross hairs all along.

Socialized medicine regimes only barely limp along in other Western, developed economies such as Canada, Sweden, and Great Britain, with just enough marginally-satisfied customers to keep their populations from revolt (not to mention that numerous dead and dying recipients of inferior medical care delivery really can&#8217;t make much of a political peep, can they now?) only because the profit motive has still been somewhat alive in America in order to drive the innovations enjoyed by patients in the more socialist countries&#8211;countries which ride along on the coattails of our advances and revolutionary medical developments!

It is mainly due to the existence of the remnants of capitalism, and the research, development, and marketing activities of extremely competitive, profit-seeking enterprises (mostly here in the United States and wherever making a profit is still allowed), which have produced the miracle drugs and the space-age, mind-boggling medical technologies enjoyed by citizens throughout not only the developed world, but increasingly throughout the emerging economies and the third-world, even more and more.​

Profit or extreme profits are the only thing that makes people work to save other peoples lives in this life or world as we now know it ? Hmmm!

It's not the only reason, but it is the reason in 99% of all cases where someone did something beneficial for mankind. I wouldn't have much faith in a system that relies on altruistic motives to produce a desired result. Any such system is doomed to failure.

 

[ItsOnlyMe]

Really? Do you think those who support breast cancer (or any kind of cancer cure for that matter) are motivated by greed?

I personally think (and maybe it's me being a Pollyanna), that those who are on the cutting edges of medical science are there because they want to better understand, or help their fellow human beings.

However.....................those who are motivated by greed are easy to see. How much does Cialis or Viagra do for humankind?

even better said ...

Yes, people who research want to help people. But it costs money. Why do you think we give money to cancer research. Plus, if everyone is paid the same and mediocrity is accepted, what's the incentive to excel at something? There is no competition. the idiots who spout "greed!" have likely never owned a business. Aren't business owners allowed to make a living? They have bills to pay. I never hear "greed!" in reference to baseball players and their 240 million dollar contracts or Hollywood or any rich Democrats. why is that? Cialis and Viagra are wanted by some, it is supplying a demand. Just because YOU may not use it doesn't mean somebody wants to. How does marijuana smoking on a daily basis and being stoned all the time help humankind.