# A woman with ovarian cancer robs a bank **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 23, 2014, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-woman-with-ovarian-cancer-robs-a-bank/702210 "2014-10-23T00:10:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![jsquire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce73a5/32.png) [@jsquire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsquire)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2014, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-woman-with-ovarian-cancer-robs-a-bank/702210/41 "2014-10-24T06:33:02Z")
I seem to remember spending five years following the story of someone who did terrible things because he couldn’t afford cancer treatment… ---
**Author:** ![Norse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a9adbd/32.png) [@Norse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Norse)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2014, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-woman-with-ovarian-cancer-robs-a-bank/702210/42 "2014-10-24T06:58:56Z")
> [@jsquire](#): > > I seem to remember spending five years following the story of someone who did terrible things because he couldn’t afford cancer treatment… [Why “Breaking Bad” would’ve never worked in Europe](http://twentytwowords.com/why-breaking-bad-wouldve-never-worked-in-europe/) ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2014, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-woman-with-ovarian-cancer-robs-a-bank/702210/43 "2014-10-24T07:24:13Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Because it’s an absolutely terrible way of deciding who deserves to live and who deserves to die, for one. And because it’s an argument in favor of people doing things like robbing banks to survive, or starting revolutions dedicated to killing the rich. It’s both an argument that justifies lethal selfishness, and one that sets the rich up as the enemy of everyone else. > > Really, the major reason why the sick get exploited so harshly is because they’re typically too ill to kill their oppressors. > > Why? Why is she obligated to go along with the rules of a society that has decided to condemn her to death in the name of selfishness? Why are the rich allowed to be selfish, but not her? Why should she go crawl into a corner and die quietly to make the people who have condemned her to death happy? Why can they kill her for profit, but she’s not allowed to do anything about it? For some reason you believe passive selfishness - not exerting themselves enough to actively aid other people - to be a crime that justifies somebody’s murder, while active selfishness - murdering and robbing innocent bystanders who did not create your predicament but have what you need - is not. You would have humanity reduce itself to the level of feral dogs, snapping and tearing at each other to feed themselves. _Nobody_ wins in such a scenario, not even you and your merry band of raiders. You’d probably be the first to die, because a belief in preying on innocent bystanders to preserve your own life makes you an active threat to everyone around you. Nobody wants you around if the only thing stopping you murdering them for their kidneys is that you don’t need one… yet. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2014, 9:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-woman-with-ovarian-cancer-robs-a-bank/702210/44 "2014-10-24T09:03:53Z")
> [@Norse](#): > > [Why “Breaking Bad” would’ve never worked in Europe](http://twentytwowords.com/why-breaking-bad-wouldve-never-worked-in-europe/) WW didn’t get into the meth business to pay for his treatment. He was terminal, and he was trying to make sure his family had enough to survive on after he died. So yeah, that’s a clever story as far as it goes… it just doesn’t go very far. ---
**Author:** ![Norse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a9adbd/32.png) [@Norse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Norse)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2014, 9:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-woman-with-ovarian-cancer-robs-a-bank/702210/45 "2014-10-24T09:34:14Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > WW didn’t get into the meth business to pay for his treatment. He was terminal, and he was trying to make sure his family had enough to survive on after he died. I know, but for us commies it’s still a funny dig at your health care system 🆒 However, it goes a little further than you’re implying. Did you read the comments? > [@](#): > > Can’t speak for the entire Europe, but as for Denmark this would be the end of the story 🙂 > Walt would get an invite from the closest hospital for starting appointments with specialists giving him life prolonging treatment. > Should he die before his wife, she would enherit all his assets including retirement savings. Should she still struggle financially she would eventually recieve money from our social welfare system. When the kids are to go to college or university savings aren’t needed either, as these are funded through taxes just like the medical system and as the social welfare system are. You can attend any education you like in Denmark as long as you meet the requirements in experience or prior education – and you will get paid to attend it (although its a quite low amount, so its advisable to have a study job next to the study to have a fair living standard). > If Walt was to go through all that agony of the show in Denmark, it was to reeeeaaally spoil his family OR solely to accomplish all the “I’m not that lame afterall”-ego-pleasing he seems to get all high on …. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2014, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-woman-with-ovarian-cancer-robs-a-bank/702210/46 "2014-10-24T11:25:55Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > For some reason you believe passive selfishness - not exerting themselves enough to actively aid other people - to be a crime that justifies somebody’s murder, while active selfishness - murdering and robbing innocent bystanders who did not create your predicament but have what you need - is not. A false distinction, since the so-called "passive selfish " people are not passive - they are at a the apex of a system designed to exploit others for their benefit. They don’t use violence much because they don’t need to. Personal violence is put in a special category not because it’s worse, but because it is the resort of the otherwise powerless. This is really classic libertarian thinking. The only real function they want the government to have is to stop is any attempt by the impoverished and disenfranchised to use the one thing they have left after everything else has been stripped away, violent uprising. Any other sort of ruthlessness and selfishness is fine, but not that because its the last resort of the desperate and might actually inconvenience the wealthy and powerful, who don’t need it. > [@Grumman](#): > > You would have humanity reduce itself to the level of feral dogs, snapping and tearing at each other to feed themselves. As opposed to your ideal of a society where the dogs on the bottom just lie there and let the feral dogs on top eat them alive? If the people on top don’t want the war of all against all, then they shouldn’t fire the first shot. A society that is killing someone for profit is a society that no longer deserves the loyalty or obedience of the person it is killing. It has unilaterally thrown out any social contract with that person at that point. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-woman-with-ovarian-cancer-robs-a-bank/702210.md?page=2)