3 ms·
Except with the money spent they could have saved 50000 kids from dying from easily preventable diarrheal diseases with inexpensive vaccines.
by triviatise 8y ago
Except with the money spent they could have saved 50000 kids from dying from easily preventable diarrheal diseases with inexpensive vaccines.
- hospes 8y agoWe still can spend money and save 50000 kids, it is not an A OR B problem. There is plenty of money and resources out there to save all kids dying from easily preventable diarrheal diseases. There is no political will to do that.
- coryfklein 8y agoIt's not just the 12 kids. With the money spent Thailand is paying for a belief in the minds of its people: that the government would do the same for their kid. I'd argue that this kind of belief is extremely valuable for a country's economics as a whole. In order for the populace to be economically productive (and save 50000 kids from dying of diarrheal diseas) you need to create a safe, reliable, and predictable environment. Governments insuring against events like kids getting lost in caves is the way that they get that.
- shardinator 8y agoYep, same reason Private Ryan was saved (in the movie).
- balls187 8y agoThat's a false equivalency. Those two choices aren't mutually exclusive.
- dredmorbius 8y agoAt some point they are. My thinking is that we're a long way from that point -- there are numerous other, small, sacrifices that can be made.
- LyndsySimon 8y agoYour comment is fading, and I upvoted even though I don't really agree with your premise. I do have a respectful question though - are you, personally, acting to save those 50,000 kids? Is there an effective organization out there that accepts donations for this kind of thing, and if so, are you giving to them?