Really depends if turning these buildings green will eventually save around $6 billion in energy costs in the next 10 years. Otherwise, I would probably agree.
What exactly would this do?
I'm all for funneling shit loads of money into research/related matters, but that wouldn't stimulating to the economy i believe.
I'm not even sure... what this equates to...

They're wasteful because the country is in the middle of what is soon to be a depression and there are much more pressing issues than floods along the Mississippi. Although, I approve of the green stuff anyway, the US is the #2 polluter, recently surpassed by China. Now if the US signs the Kyoto Protocol.

Waste, they got themselves screwed in the first place, just don't have sex with 3 people a week.

My dad showed me our budget the other day, it was not pretty, and I live in a fairly well-off family, I don't know how other people are doing it.

It's this mentality that gave millions of people STDs in the first place. Millions of those who carry an STD are completely unaware they even had one in the first place because they were never check, so they continue to have sex. HIV can go unnoticed for a few years before the drop in T-Cells becomes noticeable.

What if you were born with STD/STI?

I somewhat agree with Falk there. (for once)

I don't see how that mentality has anything to do with what you just posted.

Tough. What if you were born in Zimbabwe? What if you were born with three arms? You can't solve every problem in the world, and your ability to solve those you can is affected by the economy, so the economy should be the #1 concern. There are better things to do with the money, and throwing money on the problem won't always help.

...

Zimbabwe is off topic (The best any American could do is supply them with food). Three arms are really rare, it does not spread as fast as disease. And besides, I don't think it is life threatening, and can be dealt with through surgery.

... Okay, three heads. Whatever. The point is that people will always be unlucky, and allocating a lot of money for that tiny percentage of the population that's born with HIV isn't worth it. Now, $400,000,000 isn't a lot of money, but if it was in the billions, I'd be firmly against it. Zimbabwe isn't off-topic, actually. You can provide with food, you can advise on economic issues, send doctors, etc. Admittedly, it'll cost more then $400 million, but it'll get more done.

Three heads? What are trying to argue with that? (Sounds like you want to add tension) I don't even think that actually exists for human beings, and two heads alone is already incredibly rare, especially comparing to "three arms". And that is not a disease, infection or virus (Prove me wrong).

Now you mentioned "HIV", not STI, which is a virus, not an infection. That is a different topic, and much more serious. And why would you be against that?

Zimbabwe IS off topic. I don't need to talk about it.

... If you can't guess what the three heads thing meant when I wrote it out in the next sentence, I'll just forget that, shall I? Same about Zimbabwe. I don't know how you don't get the connection, but I can win this one without using it .

Viruses are considered pathogens, and are thus fair game for STD/STI discussions. Most STD's excluding HIV are less-than-lethal or can be 'cured' by antibiotics (gonorrhea, syphilis). Thus, I assumed that the money would be primarily used for curing the one that does the most damage in society, and not the ones that faintly annoy you.

No, you just want to annoy me. Honestly, three arms and three heads? That is so not a disease/infection/virus and is completely rare (If not impossible), and really off topic. And if Zimbabwe is connected, then why did you specifically bring up Zimbabwe if its a discussion about disease/infection/virus? And why are you bringing up new topics?

Wouldn't the cure need the money?

I believe that suffering in the world happens for a reason and that no matter how much money you spend, you can never solve all the problems all the time. You can't kno what well-off is with out suffering.

Still don't get it. If you don't understand what I said when I explained it in the next sentence after stating it, drop it.

The amount of money thrown at this problem is pretty large as it is. No use in spending government money that should be spent on improving the economy on, as Falkoner said, people who could've avoided getting the disease in the first place.

You need to elaborate because you are bringing up nonsense. A rare growth in genes/birth defect does not match to something that spreads through blood as an infection, disease, or virus.

If you knew, it is speculated that HIV, a bisexual Canadian was the first to have it in North America. And again, how would that be possible to avoid? Like WoAHorde said, there are millions of people who don't know they have it. You can get STI/HIV/AIDS by reused injection, reused needles (Especially giving tattoos), and fighting (A cut on a fist reaching an open scar). Again, you can be born with it and no one in your family would know. Anything blood to blood contact, that includes donating blood (But they should be tested to be clean).

Thirdly, this topic is suppose to be about the stimulus package, not throwing nonsense to me.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Feb 4 2009, 3:25 pm by KrayZee.

Here:Read it, memorize it. If you don't get the freaking point that people born in Zimbabwe or with three arms or whatever are unlucky and that we can't go out of the way to cure every single unlucky person born, then I don't know what the hell you're on right now.
First of all, I don't know who speculated it. HIV is generally accepted to have originally been a monkey disease which adapted to a human and rapidly spread, possibly through eating a monkey or whatever. Most which met humans didn't adapt, one did and started the whole mess. After that, I'm fairly certain I read that it traveled to the US via Haiti (or was it Hawaii? probably Haiti). I'm not sure, I usually have better things to do than learn where weird viruses came from. However, I'm pretty damn sure it didn't come out of anywhere in Canada. Viruses don't spring out of thin air, you know?

Yes, millions of people don't know they have it. However, you can have sex with someone who has it and not get infected if you use protection. It's not that hard. Make sure you don't use reused needles, and fighting is a rare way to actually get HIV. And one that you're usually at fault for anyway. You get it? YOU CAN AVOID GETTING HIV!

As for being born with it, that's rare. Refer back to my Zimbabwe and three-hands examples.
Oh, dear. Then stop arguing?

Hell, I don't know why I'm arguing with someone who thinks that HIV came from Canada and that it's not an STI.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Feb 4 2009, 10:51 pm by Mini Moose 2707. Reason: Flaming

But they are absolutely different topics. Honestly, 'three arms' is so irrelevant, even if it is under the category of birth, it's not a disease like STI. People born in Zimbabwe is a different subject, and there is nothing we can do about it whether they have either a decent or bad life. Plus, you are bringing it to a whole new level. Disease, virus, infection are lethal at anytime, which is a world threat. People born in Zimbabwe are under fear and poverty. Plus they are not Americans, we should not worry about them, the best we could ever do is supply them or allow them to migrate. Three arms and three heads is so incredibly rare, what the hell are you trying to prove? Unlucky births? You are changing the damn subject and those 'similarities' are not the US government's problems. You are not proving a point with seemingly "off-related" issues.

No shit, Sherlock. And it is a mystery of origin into North America, but it is definitely speculated of a Canadian (It does not have begin in Canada, but both US and Canada do have it). And I know that viruses does not 'spring out of thin air', you are telling me the damn obvious.

If you knew, Viagra would not prevent it, neither if two condoms were used at once (That is, if you know what both types are...), and there are many ways. And tattoo parlors are likely to reuse needles. Of course anyone can avoid it, no shit. The problem is, sex and other situations will eventually happen to their life and a given disease/HIV/etc. are anonymous. People don't keep track, neither being superstitious about it. The thing is, anything that are blood to blood contact are likely to spread it. And also, it is STI/STD are subjects in the stimulus plan that GOP likes to reject, not HIV.

Here is an analogy. Thievery can be anonymous, and the robbed person will probably never know when they were robbed. The thief can be anyone, either visitor, friend, relative or stranger, and it will take a while to find out.

Stop arguing? I made this topic, and you are bringing up nearly to, and are irrelevant discussions.

...what do you not understand? I didn't say "the true origin of HIV began in Canada", I already know it was first in Africa and I didn't want to talk about because it is not related to the stimulus plan.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Feb 5 2009, 6:06 am by KrayZee. Reason: fix again »_«

Actually, yes, I think it might've been a Canadian, though I think it was directly to the US and not through Canada.
You also have to leave your front door open to the thief. Which is pretty stupid. Condoms would in most cases prevent STD transplant. Tattoo parlors are not only avoidable, but I imagine the more expensive and reputable ones wouldn't have this problem. If people don't be careful and ignore that it's a possibility that they get an STD, they could easily get it.

What does 'it is STI/STD are subjects in the stimulus plan that GOP likes to reject, not HIV' mean?

I think I'm over here. A lot of the points have been accounted for, and you seem to think that it's impossible to avoid getting an STD.

It's not just the front door, thieves can go through windows, chimneys, back doors, digging, etc. with access such as pick locking, duplicate keys, or breaking in.
Improper use of condoms and using two condoms will not prevent STD, which people seem to neglect the information. Tattoo parlors are generally not considered to be expensive, especially that it is rare to find any commercials and advertisements about it.

The GOP are considering "the cure of STI/STD are wasteful" in the stimulus plan. HIV is not listed.

No, I did not say it is impossible to avoid STD. Chances varies of who you are, the people around you, and location.