Author Topic: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats  (Read 534877 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2950 on: September 17, 2019, 08:39:29 PM »
And can we stop comparing everything to the vestiges of this country's Original Sin? Immediately shuts off rational debate. But again, I suspect we agree about many needed healthcare reforms. I just disagree with legislators vilifying companies for following the law. On the other hand, it appears to be quite effective.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2951 on: September 17, 2019, 08:56:47 PM »
Also, I'm mostly just testing arguments, anyway.

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20444
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2952 on: September 17, 2019, 08:57:23 PM »
I just disagree with legislators vilifying companies for following the law. On the other hand, it appears to be quite effective.

Lmao! Yeah no crap.

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53674
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2953 on: September 17, 2019, 09:04:01 PM »


Listen guys, I never said you couldn't hold your own personal views, but rather that it's rich that Senator Sanders is vilifying companies who (a) are simply abiding by the legal framework established by Congress and regulators, and (b) Congress has the power to act, but has not. Bernie is a member of Congress. I will concede that I'm inclined to think of these issues more like a judge and less like a Bernie Bro. Carry on.

I mean, Sanders has tried to regulate them  through legislation. I didn't spend much time researching but this came up pretty quick:

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sweeping-plan-to-lower-drug-prices-introduced-in-senate-and-house

I don't really understand why you take such great issue with Sanders criticizing companies who are taking advantage of what he thinks is a shitty legal framework and he is on some level trying to change. Just seems like some weird nitpicking

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2954 on: September 17, 2019, 09:08:53 PM »


Listen guys, I never said you couldn't hold your own personal views, but rather that it's rich that Senator Sanders is vilifying companies who (a) are simply abiding by the legal framework established by Congress and regulators, and (b) Congress has the power to act, but has not. Bernie is a member of Congress. I will concede that I'm inclined to think of these issues more like a judge and less like a Bernie Bro. Carry on.

I mean, Sanders has tried to regulate them  through legislation. I didn't spend much time researching but this came up pretty quick:

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sweeping-plan-to-lower-drug-prices-introduced-in-senate-and-house

I don't really understand why you take such great issue with Sanders criticizing companies who are taking advantage of what he thinks is a shitty legal framework and he is on some level trying to change. Just seems like some weird nitpicking
Thank you for your feedback.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2955 on: September 17, 2019, 10:04:32 PM »
i can't believe i agree with the bernie bros on this one.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Online wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30235
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2956 on: September 17, 2019, 10:36:29 PM »
Spracne couldn’t even get America’s original sin right SMDH.
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline DaBigTrain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 11635
  • stuxnet, meltdown, spectre, Bitcoin, ffChamp
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2957 on: September 17, 2019, 10:50:30 PM »


Listen guys, I never said you couldn't hold your own personal views, but rather that it's rich that Senator Sanders is vilifying companies who (a) are simply abiding by the legal framework established by Congress and regulators, and (b) Congress has the power to act, but has not. Bernie is a member of Congress. I will concede that I'm inclined to think of these issues more like a judge and less like a Bernie Bro. Carry on.

I mean, Sanders has tried to regulate them  through legislation. I didn't spend much time researching but this came up pretty quick:

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sweeping-plan-to-lower-drug-prices-introduced-in-senate-and-house

I don't really understand why you take such great issue with Sanders criticizing companies who are taking advantage of what he thinks is a shitty legal framework and he is on some level trying to change. Just seems like some weird nitpicking

What do you expect from closet Trump minions?  Spracs can try and be an unbiased third party but the results have been in for a while, and he's not.
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

https://blockstream.info/block/000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2958 on: September 17, 2019, 11:25:22 PM »
MAGA! Yes, huge Trump supporter, here. Thanks for the mooting, all. Very glad this is not a jury matter, based on the lay feedback.

I guess I should ask, in the face of negative press regarding (non-opioid) pharmaceutical companies, are there any arguments or angles that you find persuasive? Any aspects in which you're at all inclined to sympathize with their interests? Any inclination at all to see things from their point of view rather than viewing them as greedy profitmongers?

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53674
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2959 on: September 17, 2019, 11:55:00 PM »
I guess I should ask, in the face of negative press regarding (non-opioid) pharmaceutical companies, are there any arguments or angles that you find persuasive? Any aspects in which you're at all inclined to sympathize with their interests? Any inclination at all to see things from their point of view rather than viewing them as greedy profitmongers?

there sure haven't been any arguments presented in this thread that counter what Bernie said here:

Quote
Sanders asserted that he disagreed with Biden, saying the companies are "greedy, corrupt and engaged in price fixing," in a statement obtained by The Hill.

"At a time when their behavior is literally killing people every day, America needs a president who isn't going to appease and compliment drug companies - we need a president who will take on the pharmaceutical industry - whether they like it or not. When we defeat Donald Trump, that's exactly what we are going to do," the statement said.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2960 on: September 18, 2019, 12:00:44 AM »
So long as these private companies are responsible for all R&D investment, though, wouldn't it seem unfair for anyone to step in and limit their ability to capitalize on their investments and successes?

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 41955
  • Pfizer PLUS Moderna and now Pfizer Bivalent
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2961 on: September 18, 2019, 12:03:05 AM »
I guess I should ask, in the face of negative press regarding (non-opioid) pharmaceutical companies, are there any arguments or angles that you find persuasive? Any aspects in which you're at all inclined to sympathize with their interests? Any inclination at all to see things from their point of view rather than viewing them as greedy profitmongers?

there sure haven't been any arguments presented in this thread that counter what Bernie said here:

Quote
Sanders asserted that he disagreed with Biden, saying the companies are "greedy, corrupt and engaged in price fixing," in a statement obtained by The Hill.

"At a time when their behavior is literally killing people every day, America needs a president who isn't going to appease and compliment drug companies - we need a president who will take on the pharmaceutical industry - whether they like it or not. When we defeat Donald Trump, that's exactly what we are going to do," the statement said.

How about this?

"Their behavior - developing new medicine - is literally saving people's lives every day.  America needs a president that will work to implement laws and regulations that will allow for these pharmaceutical industry members to be properly compensated and rewarded for their tremendous contributions while allowing such contributions to be accessible by all in need." 

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53674
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2962 on: September 18, 2019, 12:26:16 AM »
So long as these private companies are responsible for all R&D investment, though, wouldn't it seem unfair for anyone to step in and limit their ability to capitalize on their investments and successes?

are these private companies responsible for 100% of R&D investment?

anyway, in some cases, it's absolutely fair to limit their ability to capitalize on their investments. An example of a fair way to limit their ability to capitalize might be a lawsuit alleging price fixing (assuming the price fixing actually happened). Another would be requiring more thorough clinical trials for risky treatments. In big, general terms, assuming that a reduction in profits leads to a reduction in deaths, there should be some happy middle ground where people still die and companies still turn profits. so like, yeah it would be unfair to the pharma companies to reduce their return on investment but it's also unfair to people who die because they are overcharged for treatments.

also I mainly took issue with the bizarro "you can't criticize any business if they're following the law" take rather than anything specifically pharma related
« Last Edit: September 18, 2019, 12:53:36 AM by michigancat »

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2963 on: September 18, 2019, 12:54:15 AM »


So long as these private companies are responsible for all R&D investment, though, wouldn't it seem unfair for anyone to step in and limit their ability to capitalize on their investments and successes?

are these private companies responsible for 100% of R&D investment?

anyway, in some cases, it's absolutely fair to limit their ability to capitalize on their investments. An example of a fair way to limit their ability to capitalize might be a lawsuit alleging price fixing (assuming the price fixing actually happened). Another would be requiring more thorough clinical trials for risky treatments. In big, general terms, assuming that a reduction in profits leads to a reduction in deaths, there should be some happy middle ground where people still die and companies still turn profits. so like, yeah it would be unfair to the pharma companies to reduce their return on investment but it's also unfair to people who die because they are overcharged for treatments.

also I mainly took issue with the bizarro "you can't criticize any business if they're following the law" take than anything specifically pharma related

Assume all of the R&D costs are 100% borne by the company.

And btw, I did not intend to imply you as a private citizen should not be free to lodge any criticism you wanted  to about this or anything else, for that matter.

Assume also that all actions were in compliance with applicable law and overseen/approved by the designated regulatory oversight authority, e.g., the FDA (I'm generalizing to avoid disclosing confidential information, but at the very least the FDA would need to approve).

Further assuming no deceit in terms of marketing either to doctors or consumers is at issue--what possible legal basis exists to hold such a company liable? None occurs to me in law, but does any occur in terms of "rough justice" based on a non-technical analysis? Would a lay jury be amenable to (eventually) ignoring what I regard as legal principles just to stick it to pharma companies perceived as greedy despite taking all the risks to develop and market  life-saving drugs? Assume further that all development and marketing activites complied with existing laws and regulations.

eff 'em anyway, just 'cause?

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53674
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2964 on: September 18, 2019, 01:11:09 AM »




So long as these private companies are responsible for all R&D investment, though, wouldn't it seem unfair for anyone to step in and limit their ability to capitalize on their investments and successes?

are these private companies responsible for 100% of R&D investment?

anyway, in some cases, it's absolutely fair to limit their ability to capitalize on their investments. An example of a fair way to limit their ability to capitalize might be a lawsuit alleging price fixing (assuming the price fixing actually happened). Another would be requiring more thorough clinical trials for risky treatments. In big, general terms, assuming that a reduction in profits leads to a reduction in deaths, there should be some happy middle ground where people still die and companies still turn profits. so like, yeah it would be unfair to the pharma companies to reduce their return on investment but it's also unfair to people who die because they are overcharged for treatments.

also I mainly took issue with the bizarro "you can't criticize any business if they're following the law" take than anything specifically pharma related

Assume all of the R&D costs are 100% borne by the company.

And btw, I did not intend to imply you as a private citizen should not be free to lodge any criticism you wanted  to about this or anything else, for that matter.

Assume also that all actions were in compliance with applicable law and overseen/approved by the designated regulatory oversight authority, e.g., the FDA (I'm generalizing to avoid disclosing confidential information, but at the very least the FDA would need to approve).

Further assuming no deceit in terms of marketing either to doctors or consumers is at issue--what possible legal basis exists to hold such a company liable? None occurs to me in law, but does any occur in terms of "rough justice" based on a non-technical analysis? Would a lay jury be amenable to (eventually) ignoring what I regard as legal principles just to stick it to pharma companies perceived as greedy despite taking all the risks to develop and market  life-saving drugs? Assume further that all development and marketing activites complied with existing laws and regulations.

eff 'em anyway, just 'cause?

Hold them liable for what?

Also:

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1027-mazzucato-big-pharma-prices-20151027-story.html

Offline 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19129
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2965 on: September 18, 2019, 06:04:40 AM »
I don’t think it follows at all that by limiting profits you will reduce deaths.
:adios:

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85174
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2966 on: September 18, 2019, 06:25:07 AM »
Bernie and Joe are fading fast (joke works a couple ways because their poll numbers are dropping and they're literally dying of old age guys). It's going to be the Liz show as foretold.

Online chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21893
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2967 on: September 18, 2019, 06:35:45 AM »
It would be rather poetic for Warren to lose the general election as a result of too many voters unwilling to vote for a mentally inferior woman when her biggest rivals from either party are clearly senile.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85174
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2968 on: September 18, 2019, 07:45:41 AM »
Yeah, there is a pretty reasonable chance of that irl happening


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52956
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2969 on: September 18, 2019, 08:04:42 AM »
As a charter member of the "I wish Trump wouldn't run in 2020" aka Haley 2020, I have to say that that once again the Dems are offering up one of the least inspiring and unimpressive list of potential candidates from a party that self proclaims itself to be the party for "smart people" that I have ever seen.

You let the Clinton's buy the party in 2016, and now you're rolling out piss pants BetoDork, Can't even run South Bend Indiana Pete, Bread Line Bernie,  Tulsi Gabbard who is on some weird bent about Trump attacking Iran when the President has pretty much said he really doesn't want to attack Iran . . . but admittedly he still might, we'll see.   Liz Warren who is the essential definition of a super Lib grandma who records Rachel Maddow on on her DVR when she can't watch live . . .

SMDH, sad.




Offline Institutional Control

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 14933
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2970 on: September 18, 2019, 08:08:27 AM »
I was hoping for Kamala and Corey Booker nicknames in that post.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63767
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2971 on: September 18, 2019, 08:35:14 AM »
Dax, we all know you're going to vote for trump again
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53674
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2972 on: September 18, 2019, 08:46:15 AM »
I don’t think it follows at all that by limiting profits you will reduce deaths.

we don't know the full context of Bernie's quote, and there's a lot of wiggle room in the number of deaths and amount of profit, but IMO this logic could make sense (given M4A is a top platform for Bernie):

1) Medicare for All would reduce deaths
2) Medicare for All would reduce pharmaceutical company profits
3) Pharmaceutical companies will fight Medicare for All to protect profits
4) Bernie says drug companies are greedy price fixers and therefore won't "appease and compliment" them when it comes to health policy

:dunno:

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52956
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2973 on: September 18, 2019, 08:51:05 AM »
Dax, we all know you're going to vote for trump again

If your party would offer up anybody but racist war mongers (2016) and ultra left wing whack-a-doo's I'd likely strongly consider voting (D) in 2020, adding the presidency vote to my usual very strong list of (D) votes on the same ballot (and ballots in other elections)




Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63767
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #2974 on: September 18, 2019, 08:54:49 AM »
No you wouldn't
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite