New Australian oil find

[Stark]

He just fails to realise that 'you can get awesome medical cared if you can pay for it out of your own pocket' describes literally every other country on the planet. This makes the only reasonable metric to compare the ability to get medical treatment you can't pay for out of your own pocket, and in this area the US sucks donkey balls.

Aha, but in some countries the finest medical care you pay for involves FLYING TO THE US. Thus, the US is the peak of medical care. They probably have a machine that goes bing better than ANY OTHER IN THE WORLD.

[Metahive]

No, the actual system is top of the line. Its just horrendously discriminatory and greed driven. Side effect of a heavily capitalist based society. Its just that people are getting tired of the negatives. Mostly because the positives are becoming less available to the populace.

"It's a great system except that it sucks, and it's only deemed bad because people call it bad, because they're, like, getting screwed by it. And those are a lot of people BTW"

At this point even the most skilled double-thinker of the Inner Party of Oceania is calling it quits and defers to your impregnable talent.

[Dominarch's Hope]

Personally, I find the price of not having UHC well worth the benefits of our economic system.

I mean really, find another nation with a pop over 100 million that approaches our standard of living, or even our availability of food. Its comparatively rare for someone to starve to death, even our poor have plenty access to food. Unlike somebplaces.


Now...really, bitch more. I find the price paid well worth the other benefits. Not to mention all the medical research that gets funded and done compared to everywhere else, except maybe Germany.

[Stark]

Did you just say that 'poor' people in America have greater access to food than 'poor' people in another western country? I'm speaking of the guys warming their hands over fire barrels all winter here.

Can you quantify the 'cost' and explain why you are 'paying' this 'price' of more money spent per person for less care to somehow boost your economic system? Can you explain how that economic system benefits the fire barrel guys?

[Dominarch's Hope]

Those arent 'poor', those are straight up fucking homeless people. Which literally every nation has.

You do realize that a fairly massive chunk of those firebarrle guys are deinstutionalized people from when the asylums started kicking people out, not to mention other mentally disabled people.

Quite frankly, there arent enough of those people for it to really matter. And there things called HUD, EBT, and Welfare/Disability.


But yeah, those people getting screwed over is in fact, the price itself. Worth it. I mean really, what do you think motivates most research in the medical field?


Altruism?


Or greed and pride? The desire for all the delicious money and your name being remembered forever. What do you think gets these projects funded to get started? Greed. Dollar signs.


Fucking money motivates people. Sheer greed. That has some problems, but Im okay with them.



However, while I disagree with EBT-Style errybody is paid for by Uncle Sam type Health system, its the right way to do the wrong thing.



Obama, however, has managed to do the wrong thing in the stupid way. And that offends me.

[PhilosopherOfSorts]

Personally, I find the price of not having UHC well worth the benefits of our economic system.

I mean really, find another nation with a pop over 100 million that approaches our standard of living, or even our availability of food. Its comparatively rare for someone to starve to death, even our poor have plenty access to food. Unlike somebplaces.


Now...really, bitch more. I find the price paid well worth the other benefits. Not to mention all the medical research that gets funded and done compared to everywhere else, except maybe Germany.

I've been one of Stark's fire barrel guys, its not nearly as much fun as it sounds.

You've never had to sleep under bridges and eat things you fished out of a dumpster, have you? Never had a chronic medical problem that you just had to deal with because you couldn't afford our "top of the line" medical system. No, you're snug and warm in your mom's basement spouting off bullshit on subjects about which you know nothing. The price paid for not having universal health care is measured in human lives, but hey, they're poor, so fuck 'em, right?

Cuba has a universal healthcare system. Cuba might not have our population, but they don't have anything close to our resources, either. Are you saying that the United States, allegedly the greatest nation on the planet, is incapable of doing something that a bonafide third world shithole pulled off decades ago?

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Personally, I find the price of not having UHC well worth the benefits of our economic system.

I mean really, find another nation with a pop over 100 million that approaches our standard of living, or even our availability of food. Its comparatively rare for someone to starve to death, even our poor have plenty access to food. Unlike somebplaces.

Japan?

Not to mention that the "over 100 million" requirement is entirely arbitrary and included just to exclude all the first world countries with 30-100 million who provide perfect examples of why you're wrong. You might as well have said "what other country named 'America' is as good as America? None? CHECKMATE!"

[Terralthra]

Personally, I find the price of not having UHC well worth the benefits of our economic system.

I mean really, find another nation with a pop over 100 million that approaches our standard of living, or even our availability of food. Its comparatively rare for someone to starve to death, even our poor have plenty access to food. Unlike somebplaces.

That would be Japan. And they also have universal health care, government-subsidized.

Also, per the USDA, in the US in 2010, 1% of families had children with "very low food security, in which meals were irregular and food intake was below levels considered adequate by caregivers". 4.1% of families had "very low food security, the food intake of some household members was reduced, and their normal eating patterns were disrupted because of the household’s food insecurity".

[Dominarch's Hope]

Ah. Japan. Give it twenty/thrity years. Theyll die off to an extent as to no longer qualify. Or maybe China will continue to get piasy with them and embargo resources against them, thus crashin a hefty chunk of the economy. And Japan is also very ethnically homogenous. Something that the USA and Russia doesnt enjoy. Neither does India. But its India.


Checkmate?lolno. No. Just no.


Although Japan also qualifies in the question of how well they handle drugs. The reason being is that the sheer level of port traffic is comparable.

Although the EU could count if you count it as a unified country. But then, that would mean that its economic policies have been even stupider for the last few years, what with the whole Greece fiasco.


In fact, thats what I will do. Anytime any "EU is better than America" shit is brought up, Ill just bring up Greece. Just Greece.

[Stark]

You can put the goalposts down, now.

[Dominarch's Hope]

No, they are mine! You cant haz them!


Because seriously, Japan will drop below that 100 milion mark in a few decades. Unless massive policy shift occurs. Its sad actually. But its not like they really have room for more people.


So about this oil find, how long wi it be until its economic to exploit?

[Stark]

My statement indicates that we're well aware of your constant shifting of the target and are not fooled. Amused, certainly.

Ps your clumsy attempt to back out by asking a question answered on the first page = lol.

[loomer]

No, they are mine! You cant haz them!


Because seriously, Japan will drop below that 100 milion mark in a few decades. Unless massive policy shift occurs. Its sad actually. But its not like they really have room for more people.


So about this oil find, how long wi it be until its economic to exploit?

So how fucking old are you?

[madd0ct0r]

It's like watching a concussed puppy.

For private amusement I had a brief look at the other 100million countries

- Indonesia will be starting universal healthcare next year: https://www.indiegogo.com/reports/pledg ... _id=270243
- Mexico has Universal healthcare already http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/37413 ... decade.htm
- Russia has universal coverage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Russia
- Brazil - Has universal healthcare already: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/13/opini ... ealth-care
- China has universal healthcare already. http://healthpolicy.stanford.edu/news/c ... t_20120502
- Bangaladesh - trying to keep up, but nothing concrete
- Nigeria - Nothing I'd count
- Pakistan - Nothing I'd count. Still 80% private
- India - Pushing hard, but nothing concrete for another 5 years

I wonder if any of these countries will get their healthcare standards up to current western level in the next two decades (the answer is yes)

oh and to cap it off, projections suggest that 2050 Japan will have a population of 103million - Dom, I think you failed here.

[Irbis]

But yeah, those people getting screwed over is in fact, the price itself. Worth it. I mean really, what do you think motivates most research in the medical field?

Altruism?

Yes you imbecile, normal first (and a large chunk of second) world nations have this little thing called 'public funding of fundamental/applied research'. In pretty much every field, from agriculture to urban planning to medicine to industry. And guess what, you moron, it's often far better than commercial, cut corners for profit research funded purely by corporations. Just ask anyone who compared commercial GMO seeds from USA to these produced by western research universities.

It's pretty much the same thing as US health care, huge corporation throwing jumbo jets filled with money at the problem gets first rate stuff, but small/medium company needing something basic done is much better off partnering research with good EU university.

[Stark]

Is he suggesting that 'what motivates medical research' is money from rich people? Nobody will be motivated by money from the government? NOT FOR A MILLION FILTHY TAX DOLLARS!!

[Questor]

DH, check this out... http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... or-science - and that's just Federal.

According to http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.asp ... eid=201550 (Got the cite from wiki, but checked the source) only 57% of the R&D spending of US Biotech research is from industry.

[tim31]

Money from rich people funds drugs that you need to take once a week for the rest of your life, not drugs that you take once a day for a month that cures your potentially life threatening ails

Jesus, and this was a thread about fantasy oil

[Metahive]

Personally, I find the price of not having UHC well worth the benefits of our economic system.

A, so poor people can fuck off and die so that rich assholes can funnel some more wealth out of the country and onto their swiss bank accounts, got it.

I mean really, find another nation with a pop over 100 million that approaches our standard of living, or even our availability of food. Its comparatively rare for someone to starve to death, even our poor have plenty access to food. Unlike somebplaces.

Or find a nation with four "e"s in its name that produces movies with as much average box-office intake as Hollywood. Arbitrary criteria? No wai!

Now...really, bitch more. I find the price paid well worth the other benefits. Not to mention all the medical research that gets funded and done compared to everywhere else, except maybe Germany.

Yes, you're a proud idiot and an asshole, we didn't need any further confirmation for that.

[Vendetta]

Money from rich people funds drugs that you need to take once a week for the rest of your life, not drugs that you take once a day for a month that cures your potentially life threatening ails

Jesus, and this was a thread about fantasy oil

No, money from rich people funds advertising for drugs that aren't proven to work better than the drugs that are already available, but are under patent so you can charge more for them than your old drug which is about to now go generic and is therefore rubbish for whatever is wrong with you.

Drug companies spend far more on advertising than actual R&D. (See: Bad Pharma by Dr. Ben Goldacre for more information about how broken and shit the pharmaceuticals industry is).

[Admiral Valdemar]

No, money from rich people funds advertising for drugs that aren't proven to work better than the drugs that are already available, but are under patent so you can charge more for them than your old drug which is about to now go generic and is therefore rubbish for whatever is wrong with you.

Drug companies spend far more on advertising than actual R&D. (See: Bad Pharma by Dr. Ben Goldacre for more information about how broken and shit the pharmaceuticals industry is).

A valid concern, especially in the US which targets such drugs at consumers directly. However, there is less cash incentive as it is to fund drugs we definitely will all need soon (antibiotics) because they're just nowhere near as profitable as anti-cancer or HIV or whatever-made-up-disorder they're peddling this week compounds they have out now. I can tell you now, the amount of cash they spend on advertising is going to vanish pretty damn quick when the Big Pharma guys have their whole portfolio go generic. And the stuff I'm seeing come down the pipeline at work is pretty fucking meagre too.

It would seem that even with American grade cash incentives, we're not coming up with the goods anyway.

[tim31]

Woah, Valds! Good to see you.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Oh hey, SOMEONE ACKNOWLEDGES ME. :V

And stuff. I'm mostly lurking here and enjoying this massive off-topic tangent. There was something about oil, but I can't get all doomer over it because we're on UHC. Tis a pity.

Following the same debates online elsewhere, I have formed the opinion that a lot of Americans treat the treating of poor people with treatments to be a bad thing as a matter of principle, along the lines of the staunch objections to gun control, teaching evolution and atheists. It's really quite fascinating, given this is one area with tried and tested examples proving such objections wrong on practical grounds, so it must be entirely an ideological standing for their objections. Libertarians, typically (though they're so diverse in their beliefs as it is, I'm thinking Randroids).

[Alferd Packer]

Drug companies spend far more on advertising than actual R&D. (See: Bad Pharma by Dr. Ben Goldacre for more information about how broken and shit the pharmaceuticals industry is).

Except for biologics. The average biologic is something like 500 million dollars from conception to market, and they're usually targeted to a very specific disease (usually a particular cancer or tumor type). That doesn't count, of course, the billions in research pissed away on biologics that don't wash out at some point in clinical trials. In fact, I can only recall seeing an advertisement for one biologic, and that's adalimumab (an arthritis drug, I think).

Of course, biologics are so expensive to produce that usually no generic is ever made after they come off patent, so maybe that's why they generally don't advertise for them.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Most of the biologics I've come across are immunoglobulins of some sort, typically IgG, though there are aptamers now and then. There are instances of a small company start up coming up with the goods, then some Big Pharma comes in and buys them up. Given the dearth of new molecular entities worth a damn, a lot of the smart money is going into biologics which, as you say, will cost a packet, but may be worth it in the long run.