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

[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 “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.​

Obamacare is not socialized medicine.

You don't even know what socialized medicine is.

You are too ignorant to post about this topic.

Canada, Great Britain, and Sweden do have socialized medicine and they all have higher quality medical care than the U.S. according to the Journal of the American Medical Society--a group that is against socialized medicine.

Pure horseshit. Their cancer cure rates are significantly lower than for the United States, among other things.

 

[bripat9643]

Today I learned that adding more people on to private insurance plans is now considered socialized medicine.

So did the meaning of socialism change over the weekend and I didn't get an email about it?

Government control is socialism, and Obamacare is 80,000 pages of government control.

 

[Agit8r]

the profit motive is what brought these innovations into existence. Obamacare will put an end to it.

wrong.

Not wrong. When has innovation ever coincided with socialism?

When our government spends twice as much on medical research as the EU countries and European commission do.

 

[bripat9643]

Since this thread was DOA when it claimed Obamacare is socialized medicine, this list is overkill, but here's a list of medical inventions and their country of origin.

Adrenaline (epinephrine): Isolated and used to treat asthma by Jokichi Takamine (Japan)
Artificial heart: Paul Winchell (USA) holds the original patent for an implantable artificial heart. Oddly enough, he was also an accomplished ventriloquist who was the voice of Tigger in Disney’s Winnie the Pooh
Aspirin: Felix Hoffmann (Germany) – he also synthesized heroin
Beta blockers: Sir James Black (UK) made a number of contributions to understanding of cardiology for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1988. Among his inventions was the first of a class of beta blocker drugs which among other things offers cardioprotection after a heart attack and reduce high blood pressure.
Bone marrow compatibility test: Barbara Bain (Canada)
Cardiac pacemaker: The idea for the pacemaker came from J A McWilliam in 1889 (UK). The first external pacemaker was designed and built by John Hopps (Canada). Earl Bakken (USA) developed the first externally wearable pacemaker. The first implantable pacemaker was designed by Rune Elmqvist and Ake Senning (Sweden).
CAT scan: Godfrey Hounsfield (UK), Alban Cormac (USA, born in South Africa)
Clinical trials: Austin Bradford Hill (UK)
Contact lenses: Leonardo Da Vinci (Italy)
Electrocardiogram (ECG or EKG) – Justin Ho (UK). The first portable EKG was developed by Taro Takemi (Japan)
Fetal monitor: K. Hammacher (Germany), Hewlett-Packard Co (USA, Germany)
Heart lung machine: John Heysham Gibbon (USA)
Heart transplant: Christiaan Barnard (South Africa) successfully transplanted the first human heart from one person to another
Helicobacter pylori: Barry Marshall and Robin Warren (Australia) discovered this bacterium which causes stomach ulcers
Hepatitis B vaccine: Baruch Blumberg, Irving Millman (USA)
HIV: Luc Montagnier (France) is credited for discovering HIV as the cause for AIDS
In vitro fertilization: John Rock (USA) extracted the first intact fertilized human egg. Carl Wood (Australia) pioneered the use of frozen embryos. Patrick Steptoe and Robert Edwards (UK) carried out the first successful procedure resulting in the birth of a healthy infant, Louise Brown.
Insulin: Isolated by Frederick Banting, Charles Best, J.J.R. Macleod, James Collip (Canada). They also pioneered the process for using insulin to treat diabetes
Medical ultrasound: Karl Theodore Dussik (Austria), Ian Donald (Scotland)
Nuclear medicine: Taro Tekemi (Japan)
Pasteurization: Developed by Louis Pasteur (France) as a method to kill germs. Pasteur also developed the germ theory of infection
Penicillin: Alexander Fleming (Scotland)
Polio vaccine: Jonas Salk, Albert Sabin (USA)
Smallpox vaccine: Although Edward Jenner (UK) is credited with developing the vaccine, his work was based on an existing innoculation technique brought back from Turkey by Lady Mary Montague. It was Jenner, however, that invented the term “vaccination”
Spray-on-skin: Fiona Wood (Australia) developed this for burn victims
Structure of DNA: Rosalind Franklin (UK), Francis Crick (UK), James Watson (USA)
Surgery: Abu Al-Qasim al-Zahrawi (Andalusia) is considered the father of modern surgery
Tuberculosis vaccine: Albert Calmette, Charles Guerin (France)
Viagra: Ian Osterloh (UK) – OK, not that significant, but interesting
Xray: Wilhelm Konrad Roentgen (Germany)

What a numskull. Most of these innovations/discoveries occure long before any of these nations adopted socialized medicine. When do you imagine the small pox vaccine was invented? Penicillin? the Xray?

You are truly stupid.

 

[bripat9643]

Today I learned that adding more people on to private insurance plans is now considered socialized medicine.

So did the meaning of socialism change over the weekend and I didn't get an email about it?

Actually you left out the government mandated/forcing to buy private insurance via a government controlled web site.

Then again most of the far left Obama drones don't much beyond the far left programing anyways.

Ok.....and? Which part of that is socialism? Governments make laws. You are aware of that right? Just because you don't like a law, doesn't make it "socialism".

I know the answer to this already, but do you know what socialism means?

All laws regulating the conduct of business are a step in the direction of socialism. There is no fine line where you can say because of this law we are now socialist. Not unless government nationalizes industry.

 

[bripat9643]

The issue is the obscene profit motive limits the universal application of the benefit

The laws of nature limit the universal application of the benefit. The profit motive is what creates the benefit in the first place, moron.

 

[bripat9643]

P.S.
I donate every year 10% of my income to the ACLU ... you all should too ...

I would, but the government confiscated that 10 percent.

And then it confiscated 40% more.

 

[bripat9643]

Ok.....and? Which part of that is socialism? Governments make laws. You are aware of that right? Just because you don't like a law, doesn't make it "socialism".

I know the answer to this already, but do you know what socialism means?

And you just showed that the far left propaganda in you is to strong to be broken with facts.

This may help you:

Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy.[1] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[2] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[4]

Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Great. Now in your own words, which part of what you just quoted applies to our healthcare system? Which part of Obamacare is state ownership, citizen ownership or common ownership?

Control is what matters. Ownership doesn't mean a thing if the owners don't make the important decisions. Then it's faux ownership.

 

[bripat9643]

wrong.

Not wrong. When has innovation ever coincided with socialism?

When our government spends twice as much on medical research as the EU countries and European commission do.

SO what major innovations have come from government research?

 

[Agit8r]

Not wrong. When has innovation ever coincided with socialism?

When our government spends twice as much on medical research as the EU countries and European commission do.

SO what major innovations have come from government research?

Typically the research is not done by the government. The funds are dispensed through grants. The proportion of public to private dollars is roughly the same in the US as in Europe, so it seems likely that they are allocated as a partial matching grant.

 

[bripat9643]

When our government spends twice as much on medical research as the EU countries and European commission do.

SO what major innovations have come from government research?

Typically the research is not done by the government. The funds are dispensed through grants. The proportion of public to private dollars is roughly the same in the US as in Europe, so it seems likely that they are allocated as a partial matching grant.

You didn't answer the question.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

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.​

Don't think that's true. Pleanty of countries with free healthcare are also the ones making medical breakthroughs. American medicine seems to function via the adage, "A patient cured, is a customer lost." So rather than coming up with cures for things, we only come up with treatments for things. Why cure a condition outright, if you can make many times more money eliminating symptoms?

 

[Agit8r]

SO what major innovations have come from government research?

Typically the research is not done by the government. The funds are dispensed through grants. The proportion of public to private dollars is roughly the same in the US as in Europe, so it seems likely that they are allocated as a partial matching grant.

You didn't answer the question.

So... NOW subsidies ARE NOT socialism? We seem to have had a breakthrough here

 

[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 “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.​

Don't think that's true. Pleanty of countries with free healthcare are also the ones making medical breakthroughs. American medicine seems to function via the adage, "A patient cured, is a customer lost." So rather than coming up with cures for things, we only come up with treatments for things. Why cure a condition outright, if you can make many times more money eliminating symptoms?

Oh piuhleeze. The idea that corporations benefit by not curing people is too stupid for words. What innovations have come from socialized medicine? Please list 3 major innovations from socialized medicine.

 

[bripat9643]

Typically the research is not done by the government. The funds are dispensed through grants. The proportion of public to private dollars is roughly the same in the US as in Europe, so it seems likely that they are allocated as a partial matching grant.

You didn't answer the question.

So... NOW subsidies ARE NOT socialism? We seem to have had a breakthrough here

You still haven't answered the question.

 

[Agit8r]

You didn't answer the question.

So... NOW subsidies ARE NOT socialism? We seem to have had a breakthrough here

You still haven't answered the question.

I'll answer it when you can tell me what the last advance that came about without the aid of ANY public moneys.

 

[bripat9643]

So... NOW subsidies ARE NOT socialism? We seem to have had a breakthrough here

You still haven't answered the question.

I'll answer it when you can tell me what the last advance that came about without the aid of ANY public moneys.

That's obviously an admission that you can't list anything.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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?

It takes hundreds of millions of dollars of lab hours, fda cerfication, and finally marketing to make a successful cure.

Think about that.

Lefties tend to think that the charities with all the commercials asking for donations - and, of course, the government - are the only people funding any sort of research into those diseases. In fact, the biotechnology industry alone - only one of the medically-related industries researching cures and preventions for cancer - spends billions of dollars a year in research. The pharmaceutical industry does likewise. It is a fact that private companies (which make profits) spend the vast bulk of the research money going into cures for cancer.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Modern medical advances are supposed to be about saving lives, not making money.

Also, marijuana has shown signs of fighting cancer. Marijuana really doesn't cost anything more than putting a seed in the ground. So, no, it doesn't take millions of dollars to find cures.
Cannabis and Cannabinoids (PDQ®) - National Cancer Institute

Wrong. Medical advances - like all technological advances - are supposed to be about both. I would myself much rather depend on human self-interest to advance the quality of my life than human altruism. It's a hell of a lot more efficient and reliable.

 

[Agit8r]

You still haven't answered the question.

I'll answer it when you can tell me what the last advance that came about without the aid of ANY public moneys.

That's obviously an admission that you can't list anything.

Which is in turn an admission that you can't list anything