I'll personally take what ever cures me without leaving me destitute.
So you reject cures that can only be had if they leave you destitute? You'd rather be
dead than poor?
Interesting. I'll grant you that. However, that should not affect my choice in the matter.
You speak good buzzward you really should watch the movie. It does a good job of debunking that stuff. Anyway most of the advances in medicine come from government funded research.
But not all. There's the delta, and why such a nation that relied purely on government research, and the "good will" of medicine, will lag further and further behind where they otherwise would be. Net effect: More dead than otherwise would be. Have you helped anyone?
...so where does the money come from for research? Our tax dollars. So how do you like them making insane amounts of profits off of what we already paid for in the first place.
Is someone stopping another business from starting production on the paid-for cure? Is this situation truly the main cause of the problem? I'm doubting it, given it's not generally a source of problems in other areas.
The whole issue isn't the quality of our medical care. Which, by the way is pretty bad. It's the insurance companies jacking the prices of healthcare to astronomical levels. Do you like living in a country where insurance executives might have eight mansions, five luxury boats and twelve automobiles, while people are financianally ruined everyday because of medical bills.
Removing their mansions would not make one percentage point difference in the costs, nor cover a tiny fraction of the financial ruinations.
And, again, the choice isn't between care-with-ruination and equal care-without-ruination. The choice is between care-with-ruination and much lousier care-without-ruination.
I speak as a person whose mother died when I was eighteen years old of lymphoma because Blue Cross refused to cover her for a bone marrow transplant saying it was "experimental".
Do socialized countries leap onto the bandwagon of paying for experimental procedures?
And here's the real question: Would that treatment be available quite as soon in a world of full socialist medicine? Or in a world with full profit medicine, perhaps it would long since have been declared standard, given other countries with medical profits would be driving development faster than it otherwise would be.
We love corporations and greedy profits when they're developing the latest video game console. Why? Because we know that "regulated video game console development" and 3D card development would leave us with some 1993-level crap.
How much more vital for something as core as medical technology?
