if healthcare is a human right then why is food not?

Post Reply New Topic

I think I see a logical reason why. It is much easier to get food for cheap/free. You can get food stamps and in many places there are food pantries and places that serve free meals. It's also easier to beg or ask a friend to give you a dollar to buy a hamburger or find food in dumpsters (look up "freegan") than it is to get free health care. At least it is in my country since we don't have free health care unless you are poor enough to get Medicaid without any spenddown. With food it's easier to scrounge up a few bucks and not starve that day but for medical stuff it can be really hard to afford even if you work. My mother can afford to buy food for the both of us but if she had to pay for my health care I wouldn't get any. We can't afford it.

And WW1 was the war to end all wars...........then along came WW2, followed by a lengthy cold war with the USSR waiting for any reason to go hot.


If this is what cutting our nose looks like then I have only this to say: HAND ME THE KNIFE!
[img][800:684]http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x126/ScotRanger/NorthropB-2StealthBomber-3.jpg[/img]

Raptor does have a point - military contracts make up the vast majority of technology research grants. The vast majority of technology that have worked to improve our lives were initially sought out by the military. Our quest to become the most advanced fighting force has lead directly to some pretty important scientific breakthroughs.

Don't give me that. Such breakthroughs don't automatically have to be the result of defence research. There are other ways of getting there.

If the world's developed powers spent the amount of money and scientific enquiry on peaceful applications that they do defence, say space exploration or medical research I guarantee we'd have a city on Mars or a cancer cure by now.

There are, but what the military provides is a real-world use case for this technology that would be hard to find elsewhere. The problems military units have are relatively unique, and it is those needs that drive practical innovation that end up benefiting all of us.

Take radar, for instance. When radar was invented, it was to solve the specific problem of military commanders not being able to track enemy aircraft movement. Perhaps when it was invented, some thought was put into potential civilian aviation applications - but I seriously doubt the inventors could have envisioned speed guns, or robotic distance sensors, or self-parking cars, or any of the 100 other things we use radar technology for.

Best not take that route with Tom, his worldview is contrived to a rather interesting degree. His view is that the US goes out proactively seeking new enemies, which is ridiculous. Chaps like him will criticize the US for doing nothing about something elsewhere in the world and in the very next breath, blame the US for being involved everywhere. You can't win, he has already reached the conclusion that you are to blame. I had this sort of a conversation with someone about Syria at a conference once, you get blamed for interfering with one side, picking the other side and doing nothing all at the same time. You can't win against a prejudice.