Current Events > Would you cure cancer or get a fat paycheck annually(around 460 million a year)

(+) Yeah! (+)

Option A) No one knows you. No one knows you saved tons of lives. You are handed 10 crisp 20 dollar bills from the government and sent home.

Option B) No one knows you qre getting these cheques. People continue dying but you can feed your family. You can make the life you always wanted. And none of your immediate loved ones will ever get cancer.

What choose?
---

money pls
---

Knowing my luck picking option b will give me a 100% chance of contracting cancer so I pick option a.
---

I'm too selfish to cure cancer if it means no recognition

I'd cure cancer if I could get recognition but magically can't make money off it though
---

Cure cancer. Im not a dick and if I thought money towards ending cancer was a smart thing then Id pick the money. But I dont, so I pick cure cancer.
---

I'll take the money. Also, there are plenty of medical professionals, researchers, etc. that have spent their entire professional lives learning how to treat cancer or making products for people with cancer. It would wrong to just put them all out of work over night.
---

Take money, donate half of it every year to cancer research

boom
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

I'll take the money. Also, there are plenty of medical professionals, researchers, etc. that have spent their entire professional lives learning how to treat cancer or making products for people with cancer. It would wrong to just put them all out of work over night.

The point is to chip away at Big Pharmas cancer sales.
---

Paycheck

I'm sorry
---

money
---

I really want to pick option A but...there are more things to consider regarding it than simply, no more cancer.

The sudden increase to global population (or rather - the sudden reduction in the decrease) would probably be fucking chaotic. We already overtax the planet's resources as it is, and this would only worsen that. That's the major issue - I can't imagine how many other problems would arise from the rate of increase jumping so much.

Option A feels nicer but it could end up fucking everything up for the whole population and planet. I'd pick B and then sink almost all of it into things like alternative energy and such in order to do something that would unquestionably benefit the planet.
---

The money. Not sorry.

Probably finance some medical research anyway.
---

I think I'd also go with the money. It's an absolutely insane amount, and you could solve so many problems. I'd only keep about 100k a year, and focus the rest on solving everything.

Mutated cells be damned,

Ching ching
---

Would take the money, not worth curing anything big like cancer without recognition and getting chump change ontop of it.
---

Cancer, but almost entirely because I have cancer.
---

Seneca_Wallace_ posted...

Take money, donate half of it every year to cancer research

boom

I say this because of

LinksLiege posted...

I really want to pick option A but...there are more things to consider regarding it than simply, no more cancer.

The sudden increase to global population (or rather - the sudden reduction in the decrease) would probably be fucking chaotic. We already overtax the planet's resources as it is, and this would only worsen that. That's the major issue - I can't imagine how many other problems would arise from the rate of increase jumping so much.

Option A feels nicer but it could end up fucking everything up for the whole population and planet. I'd pick B and then sink almost all of it into things like alternative energy and such in order to do something that would unquestionably benefit the planet.

---

460 million a year? I could give 400 million to cancer research and treatment every year and be guilt free and rich.
---

End cancer
---

460 a year?! I could give 50% to cancer research and still be guilt free

Or even better yet make my full time job caring for cancer patients/families while still enjoying my wealth
---

Lol cancer is not something you can just throw money at and expect it to go away.

Option A easily. Remember that rich people are no happier than everyone else.
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Remember that rich people are no happier than everyone else.

"Money, if it does not bring you happiness, will at least help you be miserable in comfort."
---

@EndOfDiscOne

Money does not buy happiness, but you can buy things that make you happy.
---

Offworlder1 posted...

@EndOfDiscOne

Money does not buy happiness, but you can buy things that make you happy.

If you need to buy things to make you happy, there is not much hope for your sustained happiness.
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Lol cancer is not something you can just throw money at and expect it to go away.

Option A easily. Remember that rich people are no happier than everyone else.

I disagree

I can almost guarantee that a rich person is much happier then a poor person who can barely afford food, much less normal items.. There will ALWAYS be exceptions, but the majority of time, the rich person would be far happier.

Your way of thinking is simply altruistic but not logical.
---

@EndOfDiscOne

You really are missing the point, it can buy things to make you happy, does not mean you need to buy something to make you happy but you can as in it is an option.

Having a better quality life and lots of money means you can do so much more then if your poor or not well off money wise.
---

Dustin1280 posted...

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Lol cancer is not something you can just throw money at and expect it to go away.

Option A easily. Remember that rich people are no happier than everyone else.

I disagree

I can almost guarantee that a rich person is much happier then a poor person who can barely afford food, much less normal items.. There will ALWAYS be exceptions, but the majority of time, the rich person would be far happier.

Your way of thinking is simply altruistic but not logical.

By "everyone else" I mean the average, everyday person. There was a study that said that once your household income goes above $70k, you do not get any happier.
---

LinksLiege posted...

I really want to pick option A but...there are more things to consider regarding it than simply, no more cancer.

The sudden increase to global population (or rather - the sudden reduction in the decrease) would probably be fucking chaotic. We already overtax the planet's resources as it is, and this would only worsen that. That's the major issue - I can't imagine how many other problems would arise from the rate of increase jumping so much.

Option A feels nicer but it could end up fucking everything up for the whole population and planet. I'd pick B and then sink almost all of it into things like alternative energy and such in order to do something that would unquestionably benefit the planet.

^This. Plus there are already a host of medical professionals and scientist that are working on cancer treatment already.

I would donate a huge portion of the money to fund research to treat cancer, and into alternative energy as well as education.
---

Bestow me the money comrade
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Dustin1280 posted...

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Lol cancer is not something you can just throw money at and expect it to go away.

Option A easily. Remember that rich people are no happier than everyone else.

I disagree

I can almost guarantee that a rich person is much happier then a poor person who can barely afford food, much less normal items.. There will ALWAYS be exceptions, but the majority of time, the rich person would be far happier.

Your way of thinking is simply altruistic but not logical.

By "everyone else" I mean the average, everyday person. There was a study that said that once your household income goes above $70k, you do not get any happier.

https://www.vox.com/2015/6/20/8815813/orange-is-the-new-black-piper-chapman-happiness-study
---

Dustin1280 posted...

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Dustin1280 posted...

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Lol cancer is not something you can just throw money at and expect it to go away.

Option A easily. Remember that rich people are no happier than everyone else.

I disagree

I can almost guarantee that a rich person is much happier then a poor person who can barely afford food, much less normal items.. There will ALWAYS be exceptions, but the majority of time, the rich person would be far happier.

Your way of thinking is simply altruistic but not logical.

By "everyone else" I mean the average, everyday person. There was a study that said that once your household income goes above $70k, you do not get any happier.

https://www.vox.com/2015/6/20/8815813/orange-is-the-new-black-piper-chapman-happiness-study

Eh, honestly I think a person's mood over time is more indicative of their happiness than how they see their lives from an intellectual point of view. But I can understand the other position.
---

Cure cancer.
---

Money. Curing cancer is as simple as living a healthy lifestyle so...
---

Knowledge_King posted...

Money. Curing cancer is as simple as living a healthy lifestyle so...

More bait!
Money doesn't make you happy and healthy people don't get cancer!
Tell all those kids in the cancer ward to start lifting their cancer away.
---

End cancer. My decision isn't completely selfless though because I'm at high risk for several different types of cancer and it would be nice to not have to worry about it lol.
---

You could change option 2 to a buck fifty and I'd still take it.

cure cancer. If you picked the money, you're trash
---

As much as I would like to cure cancer flat out, recognition or no, it would cause so many bigger problems afterwards.

As mentioned above there would be problems with population increases, everyone working in cancer research would be out of work, all of the charities who work to collect for cancer research would shut down and be useless, putting more people out of work, pharmacies who deal with cancer medication would be hit severely, causing a larger loss of work for people, as well as less overall funding for things NOT related to cancer.

Or I could take the money, donate about 75% of it per year to cancer research and other charities, and work to make the world better in more than one aspect of it as opposed to getting rid of a single bad thing, I could help the world with many problems, and still have more than enough money to pay off every person i've ever met's debts, buy houses and cars for all of my friends, put all of my friends' kids through college, start my own business, and live comfortably with my wife and pets. And all of that in the first year.

Sorry, Taking option B.
---

cure cancer in a heartbeat.

a lot of you guys really are fucking insane