Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On May 13, 8:11 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message

...
On May 13, 1:24 pm, wrote:



On May 13, 12:01 pm, HK wrote:
Consider Alexander Fleming and his discovery of perhaps the world’s most
important medical advancement: Penicillin. By all accounts, Fleming was
a slob. He discovered Penicillin because he was so slovenly that some of
his Petri dishes had developed a fungus - like so many leftovers in a
bachelor’s refrigerator – and thanks to the idleness afforded him by
researching grants he was able to discern value in this. Of course he
couldn’t even manufacture a stable and useful strain of the bacteria.
Instead it was the U.S. and British governments that realized
this advancement. As a capitalist, Fleming was a failure.
Jonas Salk, another of the faces on the Mount Rushmore of medicine, was
an academic working at a university with government research money
readily available as a result of mass polio terror. He successfully
found a vaccine and promptly proceeded to refuse to patent his discovery
so that it would benefit society as thoroughly and widely as possible.
As a capitalist, he was no Andrew Carnegie.
Louis Pasteur, whose contributions to society’s health were as fearless
as they were extensive, might well have made a great capitalist. He was
bold, and precise. Had he chosen to make mousetraps I am quite sure it
would have brought mice to the brink of extinction. I would posit that
his choice not to put his formidable intellect to work amassing wealth
for himself speaks volumes about an intellectual’s relationship to
riches. It is not in society’s interest to compel every man to run the
rat race. To casually accept that only supply and demand – only greed –
can motivate the great evolutions in our history is to call Pasteur a
fool and a fraud.
Briefly, consider what market driven medicine has brought mankind: Snake
oil, heroin and The Purple Pill (ask your doctor about The Purple Pill).
Oh, and of course Ritalin and Xanax. Where would society be without the
off label uses of these capitalist ventures?
Ultimately, we must stop hailing successful capitalists as the
standard-bearers of human advancement. There are the Henry Fords and the
Bill Gateses, but there are also the Philip Morrises and the P.T.
Barnums. More importantly there are the pioneers whose lives paid little
or no heed to capitalizing and it is their names that have contributed
to the history of health care in such a way that we now consider it
reasonable to contemplate a society where patient X doesn’t necessarily
deserve to be treated for his sickness.
After all, it isn’t Polio, or Smallpox or Typhoid they can’t afford to
treat, is it?
From KOS
Give everything you own away, then talk about greed, asshole. Oops,
forgot, Karen has it all.
Lemme see, telephones, telegraph, the transistor, the printing press,
personal computers, lightbulbs, electrical generators, most anticancer
drugs, most new antibiotics, and on and on etc.

Now for govt funded research, Nerve gas, Mustard gas, Chlorine as a
weapon, Nuclear weapons, sterilization of minorities, harvesting of
organs from political prisoners, etc.

Seems to me that the table is slanted waaaaaaaay toward good advances
being made by capitalist inventors and BAD, bad, bad inventions made
by govt. Remember, capitalists have no interest in killing people and
govts do.

Hk is basically a doofus

------------------

Well done. And you are correct.

Eisboch

Ooops, I meant Langley, not Lilienthal


Wow...got you revved up, eh?

Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On May 13, 8:11 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message

...
On May 13, 1:24 pm, wrote:



On May 13, 12:01 pm, HK wrote:
Consider Alexander Fleming and his discovery of perhaps the world’s most
important medical advancement: Penicillin. By all accounts, Fleming was
a slob. He discovered Penicillin because he was so slovenly that some of
his Petri dishes had developed a fungus - like so many leftovers in a
bachelor’s refrigerator – and thanks to the idleness afforded him by
researching grants he was able to discern value in this. Of course he
couldn’t even manufacture a stable and useful strain of the bacteria.
Instead it was the U.S. and British governments that realized
this advancement. As a capitalist, Fleming was a failure.
Jonas Salk, another of the faces on the Mount Rushmore of medicine, was
an academic working at a university with government research money
readily available as a result of mass polio terror. He successfully
found a vaccine and promptly proceeded to refuse to patent his discovery
so that it would benefit society as thoroughly and widely as possible.
As a capitalist, he was no Andrew Carnegie.
Louis Pasteur, whose contributions to society’s health were as fearless
as they were extensive, might well have made a great capitalist. He was
bold, and precise. Had he chosen to make mousetraps I am quite sure it
would have brought mice to the brink of extinction. I would posit that
his choice not to put his formidable intellect to work amassing wealth
for himself speaks volumes about an intellectual’s relationship to
riches. It is not in society’s interest to compel every man to run the
rat race. To casually accept that only supply and demand – only greed –
can motivate the great evolutions in our history is to call Pasteur a
fool and a fraud.
Briefly, consider what market driven medicine has brought mankind: Snake
oil, heroin and The Purple Pill (ask your doctor about The Purple Pill).
Oh, and of course Ritalin and Xanax. Where would society be without the
off label uses of these capitalist ventures?
Ultimately, we must stop hailing successful capitalists as the
standard-bearers of human advancement. There are the Henry Fords and the
Bill Gateses, but there are also the Philip Morrises and the P.T.
Barnums. More importantly there are the pioneers whose lives paid little
or no heed to capitalizing and it is their names that have contributed
to the history of health care in such a way that we now consider it
reasonable to contemplate a society where patient X doesn’t necessarily
deserve to be treated for his sickness.
After all, it isn’t Polio, or Smallpox or Typhoid they can’t afford to
treat, is it?
From KOS
Give everything you own away, then talk about greed, asshole. Oops,
forgot, Karen has it all.
Lemme see, telephones, telegraph, the transistor, the printing press,
personal computers, lightbulbs, electrical generators, most anticancer
drugs, most new antibiotics, and on and on etc.

Now for govt funded research, Nerve gas, Mustard gas, Chlorine as a
weapon, Nuclear weapons, sterilization of minorities, harvesting of
organs from political prisoners, etc.

Seems to me that the table is slanted waaaaaaaay toward good advances
being made by capitalist inventors and BAD, bad, bad inventions made
by govt. Remember, capitalists have no interest in killing people and
govts do.

Hk is basically a doofus

------------------

Well done. And you are correct.

Eisboch

My own business is based on technology I used working for the govt for
nuclear weapons tests. My business is based on patents for commercial
products that were discouraged by world experts in x-ray optics who
were working at govt labs. The reality is that govt lab employees
have no idea of what is or isnt a good idea.


Uh-huh. And we can tell how good you are by the contraptions you build
that fall apart underneath you.

Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

On May 13, 9:10*pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On May 13, 8:11 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message

....
On May 13, 1:24 pm, wrote:

On May 13, 12:01 pm, HK wrote:
Consider Alexander Fleming and his discovery of perhaps the world’s most
important medical advancement: Penicillin. By all accounts, Fleming was
a slob. He discovered Penicillin because he was so slovenly that some of
his Petri dishes had developed a fungus - like so many leftovers in a
bachelor’s refrigerator – and thanks to the idleness afforded him by
researching grants he was able to discern value in this. Of course he
couldn’t even manufacture a stable and useful strain of the bacteria.
Instead it was the U.S. and British governments that realized
this advancement. As a capitalist, Fleming was a failure.
Jonas Salk, another of the faces on the Mount Rushmore of medicine, was
an academic working at a university with government research money
readily available as a result of mass polio terror. He successfully
found a vaccine and promptly proceeded to refuse to patent his discovery
so that it would benefit society as thoroughly and widely as possible.
As a capitalist, he was no Andrew Carnegie.
Louis Pasteur, whose contributions to society’s health were as fearless
as they were extensive, might well have made a great capitalist. He was
bold, and precise. Had he chosen to make mousetraps I am quite sure it
would have brought mice to the brink of extinction. I would posit that
his choice not to put his formidable intellect to work amassing wealth
for himself speaks volumes about an intellectual’s relationship to
riches. It is not in society’s interest to compel every man to run the
rat race. To casually accept that only supply and demand – only greed –
can motivate the great evolutions in our history is to call Pasteur a
fool and a fraud.
Briefly, consider what market driven medicine has brought mankind: Snake
oil, heroin and The Purple Pill (ask your doctor about The Purple Pill).
Oh, and of course Ritalin and Xanax. Where would society be without the
off label uses of these capitalist ventures?
Ultimately, we must stop hailing successful capitalists as the
standard-bearers of human advancement. There are the Henry Fords and the
Bill Gateses, but there are also the Philip Morrises and the P.T.
Barnums. More importantly there are the pioneers whose lives paid little
or no heed to capitalizing and it is their names that have contributed
to the history of health care in such a way that we now consider it
reasonable to contemplate a society where patient X doesn’t necessarily
deserve to be treated for his sickness.
After all, it isn’t Polio, or Smallpox or Typhoid they can’t afford to
treat, is it?
From KOS
Give everything you own away, then talk about greed, asshole. Oops,
forgot, Karen has it all.
Lemme see, telephones, telegraph, the transistor, the printing press,
personal computers, lightbulbs, electrical generators, most anticancer
drugs, most new antibiotics, and on and on etc.

Now for govt funded research, Nerve gas, Mustard gas, Chlorine as a
weapon, Nuclear weapons, sterilization of minorities, harvesting of
organs from political prisoners, etc.

Seems to me that the table is slanted waaaaaaaay toward good advances
being made by capitalist inventors and BAD, bad, bad inventions made
by govt. *Remember, capitalists have no interest in killing people and
govts do.

Hk is basically a doofus

------------------

Well done. * And you are correct.

Eisboch

My own business is based on technology I used working for the govt for
nuclear weapons tests. *My business is based on patents for commercial
products that were discouraged by world experts in x-ray optics who
were working at govt labs. *The reality is that govt lab employees
have no idea of what is or isnt a good idea.

Uh-huh. And we can tell how good you are by the contraptions you build
that fall apart underneath you.

Ignorance is HK

Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 17:01:44 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:


I'd have to say that private invention is very moral whereas govt
funded research tends to be focused on killing things.

Whoa. What about Tang?
Surely you know about Tang.

Tried it once or twice 40 years ago. I have no desire to ever try it again.

Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On May 13, 8:11 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message

...
On May 13, 1:24 pm, wrote:



On May 13, 12:01 pm, HK wrote:
Consider Alexander Fleming and his discovery of perhaps the world’s most
important medical advancement: Penicillin. By all accounts, Fleming was
a slob. He discovered Penicillin because he was so slovenly that some of
his Petri dishes had developed a fungus - like so many leftovers in a
bachelor’s refrigerator – and thanks to the idleness afforded him by
researching grants he was able to discern value in this. Of course he
couldn’t even manufacture a stable and useful strain of the bacteria.
Instead it was the U.S. and British governments that realized
this advancement. As a capitalist, Fleming was a failure.
Jonas Salk, another of the faces on the Mount Rushmore of medicine, was
an academic working at a university with government research money
readily available as a result of mass polio terror. He successfully
found a vaccine and promptly proceeded to refuse to patent his discovery
so that it would benefit society as thoroughly and widely as possible..
As a capitalist, he was no Andrew Carnegie.
Louis Pasteur, whose contributions to society’s health were as fearless
as they were extensive, might well have made a great capitalist. He was
bold, and precise. Had he chosen to make mousetraps I am quite sure it
would have brought mice to the brink of extinction. I would posit that
his choice not to put his formidable intellect to work amassing wealth
for himself speaks volumes about an intellectual’s relationship to
riches. It is not in society’s interest to compel every man to run the
rat race. To casually accept that only supply and demand – only greed –
can motivate the great evolutions in our history is to call Pasteur a
fool and a fraud.
Briefly, consider what market driven medicine has brought mankind: Snake
oil, heroin and The Purple Pill (ask your doctor about The Purple Pill).
Oh, and of course Ritalin and Xanax. Where would society be without the
off label uses of these capitalist ventures?
Ultimately, we must stop hailing successful capitalists as the
standard-bearers of human advancement. There are the Henry Fords and the
Bill Gateses, but there are also the Philip Morrises and the P.T.
Barnums. More importantly there are the pioneers whose lives paid little
or no heed to capitalizing and it is their names that have contributed
to the history of health care in such a way that we now consider it
reasonable to contemplate a society where patient X doesn’t necessarily
deserve to be treated for his sickness.
After all, it isn’t Polio, or Smallpox or Typhoid they can’t afford to
treat, is it?
From KOS
Give everything you own away, then talk about greed, asshole. Oops,
forgot, Karen has it all.
Lemme see, telephones, telegraph, the transistor, the printing press,
personal computers, lightbulbs, electrical generators, most anticancer
drugs, most new antibiotics, and on and on etc.

Now for govt funded research, Nerve gas, Mustard gas, Chlorine as a
weapon, Nuclear weapons, sterilization of minorities, harvesting of
organs from political prisoners, etc.

Seems to me that the table is slanted waaaaaaaay toward good advances
being made by capitalist inventors and BAD, bad, bad inventions made
by govt. Remember, capitalists have no interest in killing people and
govts do.

Hk is basically a doofus

------------------

Well done. And you are correct.

Eisboch

My own business is based on technology I used working for the govt for
nuclear weapons tests. My business is based on patents for commercial
products that were discouraged by world experts in x-ray optics who
were working at govt labs. The reality is that govt lab employees
have no idea of what is or isnt a good idea.

The best inventions solve problems. Inventing something and then
searching for a problem to apply it to, a la Government research, fails
miserably.

Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

On Thu, 14 May 2009 08:13:31 -0400, BAR wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 17:01:44 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:


I'd have to say that private invention is very moral whereas govt
funded research tends to be focused on killing things.

Whoa. What about Tang?
Surely you know about Tang.

Tried it once or twice 40 years ago. I have no desire to ever try it again.

I actually developed a taste for it in SEA. Tang and vodka.

Field Expedient Screwdriver. :)

Just to put this in perspective, I also developed a taste for standard
GI SOS and powdered eggs.

Go figure.

Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 08:13:31 -0400, BAR wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 17:01:44 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:


I'd have to say that private invention is very moral whereas govt
funded research tends to be focused on killing things.
Whoa. What about Tang?
Surely you know about Tang.
Tried it once or twice 40 years ago. I have no desire to ever try it again.

I actually developed a taste for it in SEA. Tang and vodka.

Field Expedient Screwdriver. :)

Just to put this in perspective, I also developed a taste for standard
GI SOS and powdered eggs.

Go figure.

A good old Navy breakfast. How about the milk?

Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

On Thu, 14 May 2009 08:13:31 -0400, BAR wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 17:01:44 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:


I'd have to say that private invention is very moral whereas govt
funded research tends to be focused on killing things.

Whoa. What about Tang?
Surely you know about Tang.

Tried it once or twice 40 years ago. I have no desire to ever try it again.

I thought it was terrible too. Kool-Ade did it better.

--Vic

Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 May 2009 08:13:31 -0400, BAR wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 17:01:44 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:


I'd have to say that private invention is very moral whereas govt
funded research tends to be focused on killing things.

Whoa. What about Tang?
Surely you know about Tang.

Tried it once or twice 40 years ago. I have no desire to ever try it
again.

I thought it was terrible too. Kool-Ade did it better.

--Vic


Bug juice.

Eisboch

Is Our Sort of Greedy Capitalism the Answer?
 

Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 08:13:31 -0400, BAR wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 17:01:44 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:


I'd have to say that private invention is very moral whereas govt
funded research tends to be focused on killing things.
Whoa. What about Tang?
Surely you know about Tang.
Tried it once or twice 40 years ago. I have no desire to ever try it again.

I thought it was terrible too. Kool-Ade did it better.

Good old bug juice.