Camilla Flintermann wrote, re: meeting with Congressman
>got the lecture re: "so many good things we can't do--of course
>it's cost effective, but we have to balance the budget..." Cost
was definitely
>the main focus for them.
"Of course it's cost effective, but we have to balance
the budget." This is the typical short-sighted idiocy
we have come to expect from our government; save
$100 million today (by not doing Parkinson's research)
and spend billions tomorrow (Medicare, Social Security
Disability Insurance, people with PD not being able to
work and pay taxes). This is the same "quarterly bottom
line" stupidity that has destroyed many U.S. businesses.
Believable? Yes- a couple of years ago, engineers in
Chicago wanted to spend under a million dollars
to reinforce or repair a water system- it had something
to do with the Chicago River, as I recall. The Mayor,
Richard Daley Jr., delayed the repairs because he wanted
to look for the "best price." He delayed too long; the
structures in question collapsed and let the river in,
causing BILLIONS in damage. Then he fired the city's
chief engineer! The voters should fire HIM.
If we have figures on the annual costs of PD (especially
Social Security and Medicare), we need to throw these
in the faces of any politician who says curing it isn't
"cost effective," and do it PUBLICLY, via Letters to
the Editor where the politician's constituents will see them.
-Bill
