CreateDebate


Debate Info

6
12
We'd save a BUNDLE We'd be LOSERS
Debate Score:18
Arguments:14
Total Votes:19
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 We'd save a BUNDLE (4)
 
 We'd be LOSERS (9)

Debate Creator

excon(18261) pic



If we spent a LOT to cure cancer NOW, how much would we SAVE later??

Hello:

In other words, does an INVESTMENT in CURING illness PAY off?

excon

We'd save a BUNDLE

Side Score: 6
VS.

We'd be LOSERS

Side Score: 12
1 point

There already are natural cures for cancer, but have not been widely spread and talked about. Like anything else in this country Cancer is a business, pharma companies make billions of dollars a year treating cancer patients. There is no money to be made in curing cancer, and that's why it won't happen in this country. But if we genuinely wanted to cance cancer we could. The human species is the smartest in the world. If we put our minds to doing good and helping others there's no limit to what we could do. But instead we're spending our money and best minds into research for new ways to kill people, new ways to cause devastation. Greed is why the cure for cancer hasn't been 'found'.

Side: We'd save a BUNDLE
2 points

The unimaginable amount of money that has been donated to curing Cancer has been wasted. Think about it, with millions of dollars, what are they doing? Sure, they're trying to cure Cancer, but what do they need millions if not billions for? I mean, sure investments may go into equipment and supplies needed to research, but surely this wouldn't cost billions.

In other words, investing all of the money now would just give them more money to gradually spend on things that aren't curing cancer, which unfortunately is the sad truth. I'm sure they already have a cure, to be honest, but why sell the cure when they could get billions more out of you for treatment that may or may not save your life. I guess that's just how the government's thoughts work, though.

Side: We'd be LOSERS

The person with Cancer would be the winner, but in the end we all die from something.

They say the most expensive healthcare costs are for the elderly so therefore if we keep people alive who would have died decades earlier from cancer, we are increasing the cost of healthcare.

It's no different than if we quickly executed murderers(when there is no doubt of guilt) instead of life without parole. We would be saving billions from not having to support those murderers in prison for decades.

This is not rocket science.

People will say we are saving the costs of cancer treatment for years. No, we are merely POSTPONING the inevitable higher costs of long term old age care.

Of course we would all love to see a cure for the sake of those with cancer. But the question was if a cure would save us money. I say in the long term it would cost us much more money.

Side: We'd be LOSERS
Atrag(5666) Disputed
3 points

Hear the love of a Christian people: kill murders to save money and don't keep people alive for longer because its only postponing death - better to save the money.

I sincerely hope you are a troll. If not you are a disgusting human being.

yeah yeah yeah yeah I know democrats are disgusting too. SAVE IT!

Side: We'd save a BUNDLE
FromWithin(8241) Disputed
2 points

You mindless fool. I said we all want to see a cure. I was answering the question about would it save us more.

But this is what Liberals do. TWIST, DISTORT WHATEVER A CONSERVATIVE SAYS TO TRY AND DEMONIZE HIM.

Let me repeat, you fool!

Side: We'd be LOSERS
outlaw60(15368) Clarified
1 point

The question is for you to answer Arag why hasn't Saint Judes cured cancer ?

Side: We'd save a BUNDLE
excon(18261) Disputed
1 point

Hello From:

To ME, keeping people alive for 20 more years of PRODUCTIVE life would be a BOON to our economy - NOT a drain on it..

excon

Side: We'd save a BUNDLE
FromWithin(8241) Disputed
2 points

Wait a minute, I thought the Left was so concerned about population growth and one of their many mindless excuses for abortion.

So using your rationale, if we once again gave our unborn the right to life, we would have a boon to our economy? How is dieing from cancer or an abortion any different in your logic?

Side: We'd be LOSERS
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

Keeping people alive for 20 more years would be a BOON to the economy ? WHAT ?

Side: We'd be LOSERS
1 point

From what I understand, cancer has no definitive, general cure because the illness itself is as diverse as its victims; in other words, there are as many kinds of cancer as people who suffer from it. Throwing more money at the problem (on top of the $5.4 billion already budgeted to it) is rarely an effective solution, especially when the government (which has demonstrated no regard for either efficiency or accountability) is involved.

Side: We'd be LOSERS
1 point

Billions upon billions are already spent on cancer research, let alone the incredible cost of all the treatments. Even if we decided to increase the money dedicated to cancer, it likely wouldn't do much as many treatments still lead to uncertain outcomes. We would also lose money we could dedicate elsewhere, such as heart disease. (i.e It's a bad idea)

Side: We'd be LOSERS
1 point

Why didn't Obiecare and Joe Biden cure cancer excon LMMFAO !

Side: We'd be LOSERS