The Federal Government drops almost half a trillion dollars a year on health spending programs. Of course, only some of that is just for research. The current research spending on septicemia is about 20 million a year. That's from this table, showing DHHS spending. I don't know what other Federal, state, and private groups spend every year.
All of the "if we only had this money to spend on (insert favorite cause here), we could do great things" theories seem to assume that nothing is now being spent, or has been spent on these things in the past. If Federal money was all it took to make problems go away, there would be a lot fewer of them.
The septicemia problem derives from many things, not least of which was irresponsible use of antibiotics in the past.
And the main legitimate function of the Federal government is defense.
Current Events » in reply to What I don't get
Spending
The whole thread (41 posts)
- What I don't get
- Probably not very many. Throwing money at a problem seldom works.
- Conservatives don't REALLY get upset over violent American deaths.
- My point is...
- Spending
- Because terrorism effects much more than just death counts
- Life has a 100% mortality rate. No one gets out of here alive.
- That is why statisticians are not running the world.
- I would think you would be right if.......
- You might want to read the link in Tom's post below...
- If we want to break up terror, Iraq is the current theatre of operations
- Well duh.
- Where would the theater of operations be otherwise?
- So Saddam was not a major player in terrorism prior to our invasion?
- Not only that
- Well duh.
- I would think you would be right if.......