bladerunner_35

bladerunner_35 t1_iuvfe42 wrote

You’re not tho.

I’ve given you several examples of healthcare inequalities if today.

You haven’t given a single example if why this technology would be different beyond that it would be cost-effective.

I’ll ask again. Why would this be universally provided when basic medicine and healthcare isn’t provided today?

Our current economical system isn’t cost-effective beyond the red line of a single corporation. Enormous resources are wasted because of this.

Come on now mate, you’re making us both look bad. You can do better. I am sure there is a point in there somewhere if you can only form it into a coherent thought.

1

bladerunner_35 t1_iutlcjs wrote

Only because you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge my many examples of present day inequalities.

You have yet to produce a single credible argument why a life prolonging technology wouldn’t benefit the ultra rich much greater and to the detriment of everyone else.

We know it is because there are no arguments - I just want to you to continue to imply it by your stumbling sputterings.

1

bladerunner_35 t1_ius22wv wrote

That is no the issue we are debating.

This technology will be researched until we have achieved immortality.

We are debating your silly notion that it will somehow be distributed evenly amongst rich and poor alike.

“The future has already arrived. It's just not evenly distributed yet.”

  • William Gibson

Cancer is a good example. With the right healthcare several cancers can already today be prevented or removed. In many cases the resources aren’t invested to help people.

1

bladerunner_35 t1_iuqkw7o wrote

You still haven’t answered my question why you think this technology will be universally distributed when we there’s still a lot of poor people dying from hunger, lack of clean water and preventable diseases?

Why is it that diabetics, in the US no less, are dying because they cannot pay for insulin?

Surely it pays more to have them pay for insulin over a lifetime rather than price gouging?

The world isn’t rational and you are deluded.

−1

bladerunner_35 t1_iuoet9s wrote

You are arguing against yourself.

First you say that everyone will benefit from a technology that increases life expectancy.

Now you say that healthcare is wasted on people based on their age.

Checkmate, mate.

Incidentally, how old are you? Just curious, don’t feel like you have to answer. It just seems as something a young person would say.

0

bladerunner_35 t1_iuo9ole wrote

The richest country in the world doesn’t have universal healthcare and the average life expectancy for the US hasn’t recovered from the decline during covid. Every other first world country have both universal healthcare and a (much) higher life expectancy.

US have one of the highest number of billionaires per capita in the world.

The simple facts are against you mate.

0