[eigenvector]

Considering that the USA spent $1.9 trillion on the Iraq war, something that was quite literally not needed by anyone, I wouldn't be so sure that money couldn't be found to provide lifesaving treatment and research technological advancements to bring its cost down in the long term.

[CobrastanJorji]

In this scenario, that $2 trillion would prevent about a quarter of the deaths from cancer in one year, except that spending was over a decade, so assuming that we could spend at that same rate perpetually, replacing Iraq War spending with million dollar cancer cures would prevent about 2% of cancer deaths.

[ShorsHammer]

Do you have a source for that $2 trillion/ quarter of all deaths figure? I understand healthcare in the US costs far more than in the rest of the developed world, but those calculations seem quite wrong.

http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.661...

> In the EU in 2012 the estimated cancer incidence was 2.6 million cases. The estimated cancer mortality was 1.3 million deaths, accounting for 26% of all deaths. DHCC (direct health cost of cancer) in the whole EU increased from €79 to €86 billion during 2005-2014 (in 2014 prices)

The population of the EU is over 500 million people. The annual taxation needed to afford this level of care ranges from 50-270 euros per person across the region.