Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
Lista posturilor afişate
Nu eşti autorizat sã scrii pe acest panou.Pentru a putea adãuga mesaje trebuie sã ai nivelul de (0)
> To me it is relevant that chemists are not living in the real world.
This is very true, not just of chemists, but many scientists in other disciplines. Modern science is now 200-300 years old. For most of that time scientists were unwilling to accept the consequences of their actions. Scientists locked themselves away in laboratories and research facilities. They developed good and bad things, like medicines and weapons. Science was able to both save and destroy humanity.
Scientists never took a stand on important issues until it was too late. Scientists saw weapons of mass destruction become a reality and they did not say anything about it until bombs were detonated over thousands of people. The environment was destroyed and scientists stood by marvelling at how clever they thought they were. They saw science turn into big business and they turned a blind eye out of ignorance and greed. Now scientists are trapped in world were money is more important than knowledge or the common benefit of all humanity.
I blame universities for this. When I was a university student we had no courses on ethics or economics. We learned chemistry, mathematics, physics and biology. We became clever scientists with no sense of what was right or wrong, and no sense of how people in the real world have to deal with real problems. Things such as pollution were never taught. There was nobody telling us that weapons were wrong, or that certain forms of research should never be done. Issues such as poverty and human exploitation were considered alien to science.
The result was a lot of very clever, self-centered scientists who cared only about research and money. We became clever in science, and useless at everything else. We knew quantum mechanics, but we couldn't fix a leaky tap or plant a potato if our lives depended on it. We had no idea of what getting a real job was, and how hard people have to work to make a living. If other people around the world suffered, we did not care. People like me were considered odd, because we cared about something other than our own skin. Sadly, some of the most intelligent people I have known are also some of the most arrogant and dumb.
Übergeek 바둑이: science for science sake... I can't though say that most scientists don't give a damn, considering those who work to find cures and all. But.. I never understood those who developed the likes of biological weapons. What was the point? The nukes virtually would sterilise the Earth of intelligent life... did the boffins and their bosses want to make this a dead world?
I think though it was considered science could fix everything and as you said.. money talked.
Übergeek 바둑이: Sorry I was not around to help clean up what I started earlier....
My point was not that the US has all the good chemists, it was about the companies, and even you admitted that it was a US company that develops a majority of drugs You claim they make billions in profits, maybe so... but explain why then, if a government like Canada can make socialized medicine a part of their way, why doesnt the same government spend the money and time to develope their own drugs?????
Also, the question about health care being a right, my point was also missed..... we can have rights like the right to free speach, or the right to unlawful search or seasure etc, but how can we have rights to a service like health care?
Lets just say for instance that we are given health care as a right, like the right to free speach.... but now assume that nobody wants to go to school to pursue the medical field anymore so now you have a right to medical care, but nobody to give you that care.... does the government force people to study to become a doctor? What about an MRI, do I also have a right to an MRI? What if the MRI isnt invented yet?
Point is, its not possible to bestow any rights to services or material objects, because there is no way for any government to guarantee those services will be available