In the News II

Quote: SOOPOO

I’m in no bubble, that I can assure you. I don’t care exactly which municipality/toll/tax/fee the money came from. The money could be better spent. Or not ‘collected’ in the first place. I don’t actually remember where I read it. But I ‘think’ it was that right wing bastion, CNN. The article was very positive about the nets, mainly focusing on a suicide attempt survivor. Nice try, ams, but as usual, FAIL!

What would you have done to reduce suicide attempts off the Golden Gate?

Quote: rxwine

Reminds me, I heard Israeli tanks have a projectile defense system. No doubt our Abrams have them also, but that certainly didn't seem to be in use in Iraq. Or if it was it was more limited.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Fu3AQLirZhg

Quote: SOOPOO

I’m in no bubble, that I can assure you. I don’t care exactly which municipality/toll/tax/fee the money came from. The money could be better spent. Or not ‘collected’ in the first place. I don’t actually remember where I read it. But I ‘think’ it was that right wing bastion, CNN. The article was very positive about the nets, mainly focusing on a suicide attempt survivor. Nice try, ams, but as usual, FAIL!

What capitol improvement project on the Golden Gate bridge is more critical?

Quote: GenoDRPh

What would you have done to reduce suicide attempts off the Golden Gate?

Well, maybe we need sensible bridge control?

You cannot go on the bridge without a permit. If you want to go on the bridge there has to be a three day waiting period and a background check. You should have to buy "bridge insurance" to cover the costs if you do try to commit suicide.

These are reasonable things for the average person are they not? I am tired of bridge nuts saying there is no problem.

Quote: AZDuffman

Well, maybe we need sensible bridge control?

You cannot go on the bridge without a permit. If you want to go on the bridge there has to be a three day waiting period and a background check. You should have to buy "bridge insurance" to cover the costs if you do try to commit suicide.

These are reasonable things for the average person are they not? I am tired of bridge nuts saying there is no problem.

You can really feel the effort he put into this post.

If only he was half as clever or funny as he thinks he is.

Quote: GenoDRPh

What would you have done to reduce suicide attempts off the Golden Gate?

Are you saying that the reason people kill themselves is because the Golden Gate Bridge doesn’t have suicide prevention nets? People will kill themselves if for whatever reason they want to kill themselves. If the nets were free, I’d be all for them. I just think that the $$$$$$$$$ spent on them could be better used, or not collected in the first place. I’ll let you decide. Spend the money on
1. Shelters for the homeless
2. COVID research
3. Wind turbines
4. AEDs for public gathering spots.
5. Contract extension for Brock Purdy
6. More free needles for drug addicts

My point is of course that every public expenditure should be analyzed on a cost/benefit concept. To me the ratio on this expenditure FAR exceeds 1.

An easy analogy is ‘cancer research’. No one thinks cancer research is a bad concept. But if someone said…. We presently spend $50 billion a year on it, but we will now be spending $2 trillion a year, since it will save lives……

Why DON’T you want to spend that much? It will certainly save some lives?

If someone wants to kill themself by jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge, I say let them!

No cleanup necessary!

Quote:

A dog that was found emaciated next to the body of her owner who died from hypothermia has regained her weight and has even began hiking again.
Searchers found the body of Rich Moore, 71, on Oct. 30, more than two months after he was reported missing Aug. 19 while hiking in southwest Colorado.

Quote: SOOPOO

Are you saying that the reason people kill themselves is because the Golden Gate Bridge doesn’t have suicide prevention nets? People will kill themselves if for whatever reason they want to kill themselves. If the nets were free, I’d be all for them. I just think that the $$$$$$$$$ spent on them could be better used, or not collected in the first place. I’ll let you decide. Spend the money on
1. Shelters for the homeless
2. COVID research
3. Wind turbines
4. AEDs for public gathering spots.
5. Contract extension for Brock Purdy
6. More free needles for drug addicts

My point is of course that every public expenditure should be analyzed on a cost/benefit concept. To me the ratio on this expenditure FAR exceeds 1.

An easy analogy is ‘cancer research’. No one thinks cancer research is a bad concept. But if someone said…. We presently spend $50 billion a year on it, but we will now be spending $2 trillion a year, since it will save lives……

Why DON’T you want to spend that much? It will certainly save some lives?

Spoken like someone who knows nothing of healthcare, disease and injury prevention and public health.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Spoken like someone who knows nothing of healthcare, disease and injury prevention and public health.

(SOOPOO is a retired doctor)