With the stock market option you can spend that money on research for other cures if you wish.

  • Death_Equity@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    7 months ago

    Stock market from the perspective of greater good and personal gain.

    With stock market money I can put money into cancer research and help accelerate the development of a cure that I feel is far closer than Alzheimer’s. I can also buy up apartment complexes and buildings and can then set the rent lower than market to help lower the cost of living for others. That would also pressure competition to lower rent and if they can’t compete, I buy them out when they fold; thereby gaining more leverage in the market. A lower cost of living also means money money in people’s pockets that can be spent elsewhere and stimulate the economy, a rising tide and all that.

    Alzheimer’s is primarily an affliction of the elderly who have lived a full life, cancer affects people of all ages. Weighing the number of children with cancer against the number of elderly people living with Alzheimer’s says to me that cancer is a greater problem that has more value to society to solve. It is tragic watching your grandparent decline due to Alzheimer’s, I have that life experience, but it does not compare to seeing a child suffer through what should be their greatest period of joy with cancer and the stress and obligation that weights on the parents. Cancer ruins lives, Alzheimer’s ruins holidays for a few last years.

    Let Grandpa forget who I am because people need a lower housing costs and kids should be careless children, also I want a GT3 RS.

  • Corroded
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    This almost seems like a monkeys paw question where I am going to immediately end up with Alzheimer’s if I choose the stock market option.

    I’d probably cure Alzheimer’s because it seems like a horror beyond compression.

  • glimse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    This is such an off-balance choice that anyone who picks the latter option is kind of a moron. Cancer is significantly more prevalent and it affects people of all ages and you’re more concerned with improving the twilight years of a smaller percentage of people? That’s dumb as hell.