Mar 26 2013: Your assertion that "the banks, defence contractors, big pharma, oil extractors and miners have ripped off so many people and wreck[ed] the environment" goes way beyond the topic at issue, and suggests that you have an agenda that does too.
Perhaps an upcoming TED talk will focus on your broader issue.
Mar 25 2013: Hmm. Well, I suppose you could just as well say that there are "stupendously wealthy people" who need to donate money to ameliorate poverty, fund the arts, endow professor chairs, etc etc etc.
Er, I mean more than they do already.
Rich people -- especially the ones in America -- are incredibly generous. They pay the lion's share of taxes and make nearly all charitable donations.
I think your issue is not that they don't give enough, but that even after they do they still have more than you think they should. In short, you have an acute and probably contagious case of old fashioned envy.
Mar 25 2013: I don't know much about Canadian health care, but I do know a thing or two about nutrition and drugs. I'm in excellent physical condition, but have an in-born defect in my blood clotting metabolism. If not for blood thinners (which cost only $4 a month even without insurance) I'd be dead.
Mar 25 2013: Interestingly, Dr. Collins is not only one of the foremost molecular biologists in the world, but is also a devout Christian who has written a book on his beliefs.
Mar 25 2013: I suppose you could say about each and every one of the world's problems, that the wealthy people (who already give a majority of tax money and charity money) should give more.
That complaint doesn't really offer a solution, however. It's just, to put it kindly, a complaint.
Mar 4 2013: Your point is valid, as is Shawn's above. It's complicated. On balance, I think it works better to let business, not government, do this.
But my main point is not to debate that comlicated question in the limited context of the Comments. But rather to urge TED to present the opposoing viewpoint in another talk.
Mar 4 2013: Here's a politician who thinks that political scientists are scientists, and thinks the way to generate more jobs is for a lousy govenrment to get bigger by spending more money (which is characterized as "investment") as if the government is better at than investors are.
OK, that's one viewpoint, and I have no problem with TED giving a forum to that viewpoint, even though I think it is mistaken.
I'll eagerly await the opposing view, that the best way tor the government to generate jobs is to get out of the way of business. Jobs are generated by business seeking profit. Yes, that dirty word -- profit.
Feb 19 2013: Yeah, and the fact that she'd didn't (and just hinted at some things instead) was quite interesting.
Especially since that exact question was presented as being the subject of her talk.
I'm speculating, of course, and perhaps unfairly, buet I wonder if there's a self-esteem issue. I remember that at the outset she made a point of listing some career accomplshments that were not directly relevant.
Saying it's a self-esteem issue, however, even if accurate, doesn't really solve the riddle. It just characterizes it.
I'm not trying to criticize her, just trying to understand.
TEDCred score: +1.00 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Talk: Francis Collins: We need better drugs -- now
Perhaps an upcoming TED talk will focus on your broader issue.
A comment on Talk: Francis Collins: We need better drugs -- now
Er, I mean more than they do already.
Rich people -- especially the ones in America -- are incredibly generous. They pay the lion's share of taxes and make nearly all charitable donations.
I think your issue is not that they don't give enough, but that even after they do they still have more than you think they should. In short, you have an acute and probably contagious case of old fashioned envy.
A comment on Talk: Francis Collins: We need better drugs -- now
A comment on Talk: Francis Collins: We need better drugs -- now
A reply on Talk: Francis Collins: We need better drugs -- now
That complaint doesn't really offer a solution, however. It's just, to put it kindly, a complaint.
A comment on Talk: David Anderson: Your brain is more than a bag of chemicals
I'd be interested in the speaker's view talk therapy for treating emotional illness.
TED is best when it avoids politics.
A comment on Talk: Ian Goldin: Navigating our global future
Yeah, collectivism worked out so well in the 20th century when it killed 100 million people.
A reply on Talk: Jennifer Granholm: A clean energy proposal -- race to the top!
But my main point is not to debate that comlicated question in the limited context of the Comments. But rather to urge TED to present the opposoing viewpoint in another talk.
A comment on Talk: Jennifer Granholm: A clean energy proposal -- race to the top!
OK, that's one viewpoint, and I have no problem with TED giving a forum to that viewpoint, even though I think it is mistaken.
I'll eagerly await the opposing view, that the best way tor the government to generate jobs is to get out of the way of business. Jobs are generated by business seeking profit. Yes, that dirty word -- profit.
A comment on Talk: Leslie Morgan Steiner: Why domestic violence victims don't leave
Especially since that exact question was presented as being the subject of her talk.
I'm speculating, of course, and perhaps unfairly, buet I wonder if there's a self-esteem issue. I remember that at the outset she made a point of listing some career accomplshments that were not directly relevant.
Saying it's a self-esteem issue, however, even if accurate, doesn't really solve the riddle. It just characterizes it.
I'm not trying to criticize her, just trying to understand.