Joeseph Stack's Suicide Letter

[Ikeren]

Evidence that you're wrong?

Canada (+the EU)---public healthcare. It's resoundingly obvious that private healthcare is more profitable (see: US insurance companies fighting tooth and nail to prevent public healthcare). If those with money had complete power, healthcare would be privatized in every nation with public healthcare.

In the US, Obama's health care reform. Admittedly, it didn't go so far as he wanted. But it did go somewhere; subsidizing those making poverty wages, expand eligibility for those with higher income, tax rebates to small businesses with healthcare, tax costs to employers without it, etc.

If people with money (in this case) drug companies (some of the righest corporations world wide) had all the power, why did they let this direct cut in their profits happen? Because they are nice (and benevolent)?


Also, I think there is a little bit of a misconception here about the burden of proof for alternative theory. People arguing the status quo have a much lower burden of proof, and while unfortunate, it's true: there is not much onus for a proponent of the status quo to prove his theory; because most people already believe it. On the other hand, the burden of proof for people supporting alternative theory is substantially higher; because its new material to more people. I don't necessarily think this is a good thing, but I am pretty sure it is a fact of coherence theories of knowledge that most of us follow.

Also, disproving negatives is substantially more difficult than proving positives (to the point that some say it is impossible). I can give examples where those with money aren't in control endlessly; and someone can always posit an extra idea on the negative proof; for example:
"Maybe the drug companies thought it would be more beneficial to long term profits."
I provide evidence that drug companies don't care about public perception.
"Maybe they changed their minds."
At which point, it is basically impossible to prove that a company has not changed their mind about public perception. It is also, however, difficult to prove that a company has positively changed their mind about public perception; which is a reason to doubt the hypothesis. So while I won't say "You can't prove a negative"; proving a negative is often far more difficult than proving a positive.