@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
livinglava wrote:How many pharmaceutical and other medical supply companies have been donating free drugs and supplies to save lives?
Are you saying that government's top priority should be to spend money on pharmaceuticals and medical supplies or that they should be commandeering those drugs and supplies at no cost because the situation warrants it?
I have no idea when and where I said such.
Besides that, I neither mentioned pharmaceutical nor other medical supply companies.
You implied saving lives should be government's top priority, so my questions to you are:
1) should saving lives be a priority to medical suppliers and pharmaceutical companies above revenue, i.e. so they donate needed drugs and supplies for free?
2) if government makes saving lives top priority, should they do so by paying top dollar for health care, supplies, and drugs; or should they do so by commandeering supplies, drugs, and other health care resources, i.e. by simply ordering them to work and paying them at a later time when the situation is conducive to doing so?
I personally don't like the idea of going into debt to save lives. Why should some people be making money while others drown in debt because there's a health crisis? Shouldn't everyone be contributing without money as a motive?
