Swine Flu Outbreak

#77
#77
IPorange said:
I am surprised no one has mentioned this, but watch for things to get bad along our southern border if this swine flu thing gets big (or even just the scare of it gets big). We won't be able to hold back hundreds of thousands of people running for their lives across the border if this turns into a panic down there.
Click to expand...


Hadn't thought of that. But, yes, if you start seeing a thousand dead down there, it could be mass exodus time.
 
#78
#78
vols4sure said:
But do you believe that he should be using the swine flu as a way of criticizing Bush and republicans for a lack of funding?

I agree that govt has a place in some scientific research funding (how much is debatable), but I don't think you can try to push fault onto Bush for the ability to respond to the virus.
Click to expand...

First, look at who is audience was, the NAS. After reading the article, it looks as though the only thing he was saying was stressing the importance of incressing scientific research. Second...and at least what is said in the article...he is not blaming bush for anything regarding swine flu or the ability to fight it. All he said is that funding has been decreased due to ideological concerns, and this episode reminds us how important it is to keep funding at levels able to effectively combat emerging threats like this. Important to note as well, he was not pointing out Bush as the sole problem, but every administration dating back to Reagan.

Notably, Obama did say this:

“We know that a nation’s potential for scientific discovery is defined by the tools it makes available to its researchers,” Obama said and then added, “But the renewed commitment of our nation will not be driven by government investment alone. It is a commitment that extends from the laboratory to the marketplace. That is why my budget makes the research and experimentation tax credit permanent.”
Click to expand...

and...

Obama also announced his funding for the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy to do “high-risk, high-reward” research and the appointment of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology to advise his administration about strategies to “nurture and sustain a culture of scientific innovation.”
Click to expand...

Sounds about right to me.
 
#82
#82
BigPapaVol said:
sounds about like political garbage speak to me. The gov't is not the driver of innovation in this country. The financial system is.
Click to expand...


Tremendously oversimplified and dangerous view of the world.

The reality is that some eventualities cannot be profitably planned or prepared for by private enterprise.

No one invests in technology to combat an asteroid plummeting towards the Earth because you could wait a billion years to get your money back. Yet, none of us has a real problem with the government spending some money to watch out for NEOs.

Similarly, most investors don't have a window they are willing to wait for that would reward them for investing in the possible eventual human transmissibility of avian or swine flu. Yet if sick we will all be demanding vaccination or treatment.

There are countless examples of scenarios where science, funded by the government, yields some greater good that people are not willing to invest in until either the technology goes in a different direction or the sudden urgent need for it arrives.
 
#83
#83
lawgator1 said:
No one invests in technology to combat an asteroid plummeting towards the Earth because you could wait a billion years to get your money back. Yet, none of us has a real problem with the government spending some money to watch out for NEOs.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anyone defend that bailout crap on here. I could be wrong, though.
 
#84
#84
IPorange said:
I haven't seen anyone defend that bailout crap on here. I could be wrong, though.
Click to expand...


Talk to me if you are alive that eventual fateful day in 2478, or thereabouts, when Thank God we've been keeping an eye out.

Wonder how many people right now are investing their 401k money in the technology to deal with that? Oh, I know. Zero.
 
#85
#85
Ok... So what sort of technology would that be? Probably something similar to the Star Wars program and the missile shield program.... Which Obama is cutting/decreasing funding for and essentially moth balling. So guess you like some defense spending, after all?

I am not trying to be a dick here (it just comes natural), but it just seems a little inconsistent.

EDIT: And I think we are due for a close one in 2012 and again in 2030-something, the second one being really really close.
 
#88
#88
IPorange said:
Ok... So what sort of technology would that be? Probably something similar to the Star Wars program and the missile shield program.... Which Obama is cutting/decreasing funding for and essentially moth balling. So guess you like some defense spending, after all?
Click to expand...


The internet and wireless communications technologies were started and funded by the government, specifically as defense projects. How many people were investing in that 30 years ago? Those two examples alone have generated tremendous wealth and innovation in the private sector. Any number of NASA technologies also fit this category that would have never been started by private industry because the pay off was too far out....despite the jokes made by OE.

Investing in science and technology is one of the best investments a government can make.
 
Last edited:
#89
#89
lawgator1 said:
No, just poking the bear.



Who is saying that? You say you keep "hearing" it. What does that mean?





LOL @ you, allvol. Driving in, I was listening to the conservative radio hosts and, to a one, they are using this to talk about border security with Mexico. Talk about not letting a crisis go to waste.

And if its science getting better funding versus the lunatic fringe getting their gingoistic jollies off while people actually die, well, I guess you can count me a liberal.
Click to expand...

I like how you continually equate conservative talk radio hosts to the democrat in the White House.
 
#90
#90
lawgator1 said:
Tremendously oversimplified and dangerous view of the world.

The reality is that some eventualities cannot be profitably planned or prepared for by private enterprise.

No one invests in technology to combat an asteroid plummeting towards the Earth because you could wait a billion years to get your money back. Yet, none of us has a real problem with the government spending some money to watch out for NEOs.

Similarly, most investors don't have a window they are willing to wait for that would reward them for investing in the possible eventual human transmissibility of avian or swine flu. Yet if sick we will all be demanding vaccination or treatment.

There are countless examples of scenarios where science, funded by the government, yields some greater good that people are not willing to invest in until either the technology goes in a different direction or the sudden urgent need for it arrives.
Click to expand...

And your view is a naive view of the world. You're telling me that these 'eventualities' are better handled through government planning? Keep in mind that the military and defense research is the same comparison. Were they technologically prepared for Iraq or Afghanistan? Or 9/11 - after one hit to the WTO was NYC prepared? The US government? Katrina?

You see, research in the hands of the government is a typical bureacratic process. The whole joke about paperwork in triplicate? Research is doubled that. There is nothing to spur a timetable whatsoever. When it comes to a health issue like pandemics, epidemics, etc. private firms compete with each other to develop vaccines. They compete with each other to win government contracts or the purchase from the consumer. It's like the AIDS research - try following the work the government has done with that. Private researchers have come much further for a fraction of the cost compared to government research through the NIH and CDC.

If the government wants to focus on asteroids, so be it. But when it comes to sources of problems we typically face each year, I'd feel much better relying on the private sector than government.
 
#92
#92
So the EU is saying to postpone trips to the US and Mex. but Mr. Obama says Swine flu outbreak not cause a alarm....Does anyone know what the hell is going on? This is crazy.
 
#93
#93
myrobbins7 said:
So the EU is saying to postpone trips to the US and Mex. but Mr. Obama says Swine flu outbreak not cause a alarm....Does anyone know what the hell is going on? This is crazy.
Click to expand...


Someone is either overreacting or underreacting.
 
#97
#97
overseasorange2 said:
Not sure, but I picked a hell of a time to get transfered to Houston....Suppose to be there May 11th. :eek:hmy: Maybe I will stay here ahwile longer..
Click to expand...

I thought there had been outbreaks of H1N1 virus in Vietnam??

Did you think any of the UN WHO operations were a bit high handed?
 
#98
#98
lawgator1 said:
How long until gsvol or Hannity suggests that the Mexican government is doing this intentionally? Probably in conjunction with the Muslim pirates of Somalia.
Click to expand...

About as long as it takes Leftists to accuse Rumsfeld of this, as he's on the BoD of Gilead Sciences (who owns the rights to Tamiflu).


It works both ways.
 
#99
#99
Tamiflu is one of the few drugs that actually works with this flu. I think every country is stockpiling it right now for good reason.
 
#100
#100
here's something scary. i read where mexico still has not given any flu vaccines to the families of people who died of the flu. it's odd because mexico has nationalized healthcare, i thought that was so much better than what we have.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top