[quote]lixy wrote:
Cool! Let’s bitch about the $48 billions that will actually be used to save lives.
The hundreds of billions to bomb and invade a foreign country that caused 4124 Americans along with a shitload of Iraqis to die are not to be discussed under any circumstance. Matter of fact, we don’t even know how much it did cost so far (or what it’ll cost in the next “hundred years”).
Ain’t life grand?[/quote]
Ah but the gov’t has the constitutional right to spend our tax dollars on war. Helping people with aids is a noble cause but it does not give gov’t the right to forcably take hard earnded money from its citizens and send it overseas. People have the right to, and should be encouraged to, give of themselves. And we do.
If the US withdrew the billions it spent on “foriegn aid” every year, that would just make us Racists. Or rather “More Racist-er”, not to mention Evil. I mean “More Evil-er”.
Personally, I could live with all that, but politicians can’t. And furthermore, they would just spend that money on dumbass social programs (like Universal Healthcare/Insurance/Whateveritscalledtoday) instead of cutting government spending and letting people spend their own damn money.
More money to .gov = more power to .gov. Them’s whatchoo call FACTS!
This rewards pharma companies for their research which would otherwise see their products bootleged by those too poor to afford them, preventing further research from helping Americans. (This could also be argued as being congress giving a handout to big pharma)
More of the disease in the wild subject to ineffective treatments increases the likelihood of more virulent strains forming which could affect the developed world.
The demographic destruction in many countries has set back not only economic development, but political development as well. Ultimately the concern is that one or more of these societies worst affected may collapse into civil war as disease destroys the ties that bring order. These conflicts may eventually affect our interests, particularly as the world is increasingly forced to turn to africa to meet its demand for many types of raw materials that have been depleted elsewhere.
Kliplemet will get aids if something isn’t done. Who then will we have to fight the indonesian or north african gangs in the streets of Antwerp?
[quote]lixy wrote:
Cool! Let’s bitch about the $48 billions that will actually be used to save lives.
The hundreds of billions to bomb and invade a foreign country that caused 4124 Americans along with a shitload of Iraqis to die are not to be discussed under any circumstance. Matter of fact, we don’t even know how much it did cost so far (or what it’ll cost in the next “hundred years”).
Ain’t life grand?[/quote]
No, Arabs caused Arabs to die, which they’ve been doing for quite some time. Every tribe cultivates its grudge against the other, and the honor killings have been going back and forth for thousands of years.
Then Mohammed came along and codified that behavior into the Qur’an, with a few twists and nuances. That’s why you Arabs are such a backward people, lixy.
[quote]etaco wrote:
Some practical arguments for this bill:
This rewards pharma companies for their research which would otherwise see their products bootleged by those too poor to afford them, preventing further research from helping Americans. (This could also be argued as being congress giving a handout to big pharma)[/quote]
First of all, most Africans can’t even afford the generics. I also don’t see how the US government handing out $48 billion in drugs is in any way superior to investing that money directly into medical research that would actually help Americans.
I don’t how much big pharma gives to your elected representatives, but your last point isn’t too far fetched.
I don’t really see how you came up to that conclusion. It’s not like they’re “curing” AIDS in Africa.
You could have a point if they were actually giving out condoms or something similar, but we all know what Dubya thinks about the issue.
[quote]3. The demographic destruction in many countries has set back not only economic development, but political development as well. Ultimately the concern is that one or more of these societies worst affected may collapse into civil war as disease destroys the ties that bring order.
These conflicts may eventually affect our interests, particularly as the world is increasingly forced to turn to africa to meet its demand for many types of raw materials that have been depleted elsewhere. [/quote]
I beg to differ.
Wars, famines and such are not caused by “demographic destruction”. Quite the opposite.
AIDS is nature’s way to control populations as well as weed out sexual aberrations. Bailing Africans out just means they’ll live longer and be able to breed more miserables.
Chances are that Klip is already infected. But regardless, how on earth is keeping HIV-positive people alive longer not increasing the chances of others catching it?
Actually that 48 billion isn’t going to do much. It will mostly go to food and medical treatment for Aids patients. If they really want to curb HIV in Africa, they would donate millions of condoms. Promiscuous sex and overpopulation will keep AIDS going in Africa for a long time.
I agree with the take care of your own first. Why do you suppose that the preflight instructions indicate that you should strap on your oxygen mask first and then help others around you? Common damn sense. There my be nothing more corrupt that charitable organizations.
[quote]etaco wrote:
Some practical arguments for this bill:
This rewards pharma companies for their research which would otherwise see their products bootleged by those too poor to afford them, preventing further research from helping Americans. (This could also be argued as being congress giving a handout to big pharma)
[/quote]
Handout
Maybe a reasonable argument if there is research to back this up.
This is a bit of a joke in my mind. We have other gov’t sponcered programs that only make this situation worse. Think farm bill and sending enourmous amounts of crop foods to poor countries. What do we think this is going to do the price of locally grown crop? How does one go about advancing an agrigarian industry when the US is sending unused stockpiles that it paid farmers to grow here.
[quote]
4. Kliplemet will get aids if something isn’t done. Who then will we have to fight the indonesian or north african gangs in the streets of Antwerp?[/quote]
Good one.
[quote]jawara wrote:
I’m sure this topic is gonna piss a few of you off but I have a problem with this. Lemme give you my reasons. A few years ago I had a girlfriend that was diagnosed with breast cancer. She had to get both breasts removed. After the surgery she lost her job and, her health benifits. She was getting unemployment but 80% went to paying bills.
That being said why are our tax dollars going to help people in other countries when we have people in AMERICA that have no healthcare at all? Shouldn’t we take care of the problems we have at home before we start trying to help out other countries??? If every American had some type of healthcare plan I could understand doing this but we dont.Oh, there are people with AIDS in the US too Mr. Bush. Why dont we get them fixed up first!!! [/quote]
Altruism is like that — only if you have absolutely nothing to gain from an action helping someone else can your action be construed as moral. Helping your gf is not moral because helping a fellow American is obviously viscious and selfish.
You also have to understand the nature of government. Gov’t wants power, but the only way to know if you have power over someone is if they are suffering. Only when they are doing something that makes them suffer can gov’t know for sure that the victim is obeying the gov’t’s will and not their own. Government enjoys suffering because they then know they have power.
[quote]Squash85 wrote:
Actually that 48 billion isn’t going to do much. It will mostly go to food and medical treatment for Aids patients. If they really want to curb HIV in Africa, they would donate millions of condoms. Promiscuous sex and overpopulation will keep AIDS going in Africa for a long time.[/quote]
I think the 48 billion will go to priapatic young men with Kalashnikovs.
I agree with the original idea that we shouldn’t be spending this kind of money on AIDS in Africa, but the notion that we should instead spend it on healthcare is just as bad if not worse. The US government does not have the money to keep up with these global welfare checks.
If we must spend this money on some sort of healthcare, why not spend it on research of a non-prevental disease like cancer, which is actually what I expected the OP to suggest after reading his first paragraph.
For all intents and purposes, AIDS is 100% preventable and could be extinguished in 50 years if people were just a bit more responsible. Meanwhile, we have kids dying everyday in places like St. Jude of sickening diseases like cancer. What sense does this make? Help the unresponsible, but ignore the truly unfortunate?
Of course, if taxes weren’t so high and increasing, we could afford to give donations of our choosing and this wouldn’t be an issue.
No, Arabs caused Arabs to die, which they’ve been doing for quite some time. Every tribe cultivates its grudge against the other, and the honor killings have been going back and forth for thousands of years.
Then Mohammed came along and codified that behavior into the Qur’an, with a few twists and nuances. That’s why you Arabs are such a backward people, lixy. [/quote]
Wow racist and wrong. The Arabs for thousands of years were an incredibly advanced culture way more advanced than the west. Now due to many factors including western interference and fanatic cults in their own culture they have fallen slightly but to call them backwards people when you live in a country where many have issues voting for a black man is pretty hypocritical.
[quote]GCF wrote:
Bottom line: that money is going to the poorest, most desperate, most exploited place on earth, to those with the most need. It’s going to do some good. That’s a good thing. I can think of a whole lot more negative things to get riled up about than this.[/quote]
Really? Your naive enough to think that the people in Africa who NEED help are getting it? That’s rich.
And at any rate, it is the responsibility of the Government to ensure the welfare of it’s citizens. Fuck other countries, if you have starving, dying, homeless people in your country - it’s on YOUR taxpayer funded Government to help them (or you).
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
No, Arabs caused Arabs to die, which they’ve been doing for quite some time. Every tribe cultivates its grudge against the other, and the honor killings have been going back and forth for thousands of years.
Then Mohammed came along and codified that behavior into the Qur’an, with a few twists and nuances. That’s why you Arabs are such a backward people, lixy. [/quote]
Arabs did cause Arabs to die, but the same could be said for Europeans. Don’t generalize, there are Arabs who have managed to integrate into society and become productive members.
I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m just say - be more specific.
You saying Arabs kill each other is like saying Blacks are unemployed bums. It’s a generalization, and an unfair one at that.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
No, Arabs caused Arabs to die, which they’ve been doing for quite some time. Every tribe cultivates its grudge against the other, and the honor killings have been going back and forth for thousands of years.
Then Mohammed came along and codified that behavior into the Qur’an, with a few twists and nuances. That’s why you Arabs are such a backward people, lixy.
Arabs did cause Arabs to die, but the same could be said for Europeans. Don’t generalize, there are Arabs who have managed to integrate into society and become productive members.
I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m just say - be more specific.
You saying Arabs kill each other is like saying Blacks are unemployed bums. It’s a generalization, and an unfair one at that.[/quote]
He is saying it because Lixy tried to hijack yet another thread…
[quote]jawara wrote:
I’m sure this topic is gonna piss a few of you off but I have a problem with this. Lemme give you my reasons. A few years ago I had a girlfriend that was diagnosed with breast cancer. She had to get both breasts removed. After the surgery she lost her job and, her health benifits. She was getting unemployment but 80% went to paying bills.
That being said why are our tax dollars going to help people in other countries when we have people in AMERICA that have no healthcare at all? Shouldn’t we take care of the problems we have at home before we start trying to help out other countries??? If every American had some type of healthcare plan I could understand doing this but we dont.Oh, there are people with AIDS in the US too Mr. Bush. Why dont we get them fixed up first!!! [/quote]
I think instead of bitching about the aid to Africa you should be asking your government why they don’t have a socialized(I know evil word) healthcare system.
[quote]mharmar wrote:
I think instead of bitching about the aid to Africa you should be asking your government why they don’t have a socialized(I know evil word) healthcare system. [/quote]
Double edged sword. Who do you give healthcare to? If I had it my way, smokers wouldn’t get healthcare over here for any health problems arising from smoking, but I know people would be up in arms over that.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Double edged sword. Who do you give healthcare to? If I had it my way, smokers wouldn’t get healthcare over here for any health problems arising from smoking, but I know people would be up in arms over that.
What with the discrimination and all.[/quote]
Why discriminate at all, raise taxes(another evil I know) and give it to everyone regardless, just don’t copy Canada’s system it is broken, copy France or Britain they have been doing it for a long time.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
No, Arabs caused Arabs to die, which they’ve been doing for quite some time. Every tribe cultivates its grudge against the other, and the honor killings have been going back and forth for thousands of years.
Then Mohammed came along and codified that behavior into the Qur’an, with a few twists and nuances. That’s why you Arabs are such a backward people, lixy.
Arabs did cause Arabs to die, but the same could be said for Europeans. Don’t generalize, there are Arabs who have managed to integrate into society and become productive members.
I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m just say - be more specific.
You saying Arabs kill each other is like saying Blacks are unemployed bums. It’s a generalization, and an unfair one at that.[/quote]
No, Arabs caused Arabs to die, which they’ve been doing for quite some time. Every tribe cultivates its grudge against the other, and the honor killings have been going back and forth for thousands of years.
Then Mohammed came along and codified that behavior into the Qur’an, with a few twists and nuances. That’s why you Arabs are such a backward people, lixy.
Wow racist and wrong. The Arabs for thousands of years were an incredibly advanced culture way more advanced than the west. Now due to many factors including western interference and fanatic cults in their own culture they have fallen slightly but to call them backwards people when you live in a country where many have issues voting for a black man is pretty hypocritical. [/quote]
Nobody has issues voting for a black man here, which is why Obama has the nomination. Are you an Arab?