Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"Socializing research for major diseases seams like a no-brainer to me since the end goal is so well-defined."

It's not as well-defined as you'd think in all aspects. I suppose you've read some of the comments in this thread about R&D costs? Care to suggest how much this new government agency should get per year? Oh, and don't forget, if you don't give it enough funding, then you're an "evil bastard and you want people to die". And if you don't give them enough extra every year, then you're also an "evil bastard and want sick children to die".

I don't really mean to say you're an evil bastard or anything. But that is exactly the sort of arguments and public discourse that will crop up if such an agency were ever to be founded. And because "cost" or "profit" is not there anymore to temper the investment vs payout, the agency will end up being a funding black hole of guilt.

Sure, giving everyone access to health life is a noble ideal. But as I've said before, illness and death never end and we're fighting a losing game if we intend on beating it with public money. But who knows, maybe if we devote all of society's resources to the problem, we could eventually grant everyone healthy immortality. But we have no idea if/when that might happen.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: