Stimulate Me...

The United States government in the last six months has spent somewhere near 1.5 trillion on stimulus packages to defribrillate the flat-lined economy. And we aren't talking about Russian rubles. That's grade-A American minted dollars. I really don't even mind the inclusion of pork or earmarks in the bills. they want to toss a billions of dollars at big businesses and banks that mismanaged themselves and have no accountability for it, all the while sneaking in money for parks, environment preservation, etc., that's fine by me. I do not even take issue with adding money to pay people to hand out birth control or to fund anti-smoking campaigns. Do it. I don't care. Maybe it will help to stimulate the economy. Every financial advisor and economist agrees that the best way to stimulate the economy is for people to feel comfortable enough to start to spend. The disagreement is to what is the best means to acheiving the level of comfortability necessary to loosen the pockets, but people are the backbone of capitalism.

So this makes me question why federal medical research funding has increasingly been cut. Billions of dollars spent to line the pockets of millionaires, and less money left to help keep more people around. I congratulate Barack Obama for trying to issue health care to more people. It's a tragedy that so many people are walking around without the ability to go see a doctor or a dentist. These people delay needed procedures because they cannot afford medical insurance or they are unable to be accepted for medical insurance. And the largest population without medical insurance is under the age of 40. Good, extend insurance. But, uh, Mr. President, maybe you could also try and help some people live a little bit longer by putting a little pit of that pork spending into medical research. If people spending money will help stimulate the economy, then I can only rationally conclude that more people spending more money will help stimulate the economy more quickly. Admittedly, I'm not an economist nor a mathematician nor a politician, but, the government has a de facto responsibility to help it's citizens since they are elected officials, and perhaps keeping those citizens alive in order that they may be helped is more important than nationalizing banks so that corporate executives do not have to travel coach rather than first class.

So, what am I trying to get at? The National Cancer Institute (NCI) is a federal funded entity that has a wide range of responsibilities, such as researching new and innovative drugs, therapies, and theories for all types of cancer. In 2007, the NCI spent a total of $4.80 billion dollars on cancer research of the major cancers. Stomach cancer, globally recognized as one of the deadliest forms of cancer, and categorized by it's little varied issuance of poor prognoses, received $12.0 MILLION of the reported $4.80 BILLION made available by the government. Not to mention, the $12 million dollars is down from the $13.4 million distributed in 2003. This is to contrast with the recipient who received the largest portion of the government offerings, Breast cancer research, at $572.4 million dollars.

Breast Cancer - 12% of government funding
Stomach Cancer - 0.25% of government funding

Keep in mind that even the total amount funded by the government of $4.80 billion is only 0.60% of the total money that was just passed out in the last stimulus bill (0.32% is you count Bush's last stimulus bill as well). Forget it. Even Breast cancer, which received the most funding has only 0.07% of all the monies given out in just President Obama's stimulus package. I don't even want to do the math for stomach cancer. Let's put the pink ribbons on our cars and participate in the March of Dimes and all of the wonderful charities, but do not think that breast cancer, testicular cancer, lymphoma, leukemia, and lung cancer are the only cancers that exist.

My point is that if you aren't going to spend the cheese to try and keep people alive for the long haul, then what exactly are we doign here? I'm going to die eventually that's fine and so are you. But how many more people after us are going to die unnecessarily because of our irresponsible spending today. Why can't we get all the types of cancer AT LEAST to the level of breast cancer? If you don't want me alive, then don't tell me that you want to fund smoking cessation programs and build parks to preserve this "Great Nation of Ours", because my mind can't comprehend that hypocritic, non-sensical, flat out insulting, equivocating bullshit.

(We do have a fundraiser going right now and if you would like more information on how you can help contact me at amsamuel6@gmail.com)

"All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a functions of power and not truth." - Friedrich Nietzsche