Do Tax Breaks for the Rich create Jobs what is your opinion
Joker
Veteran
Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)
06 Oct 2011, 12:18 pm
Joker wrote:
JWC wrote:
pandabear wrote:
The Post Office seems to be doing pretty well with so many people buying and selling things through EBay.
How do you reconcile "doing pretty well" with "9 billion in debt"?
Thats a very good question JWC
Apparently, it was such a good question that the one who it was directed at (pandabear) is avoiding the issue of providing an answer.
06 Oct 2011, 12:48 pm
Joker wrote:
When we dont make a profit off of them we dont get any money from China for sending ours jobs to them.
China is buying U.S. T-bills. One does not bite the hand that lends one money. China is keeping the U.S. afloat in spite of the gross fiscal and monetary mismanagement of the U.S. government.
They lend us money, we keep buying their stuff and hiring their people and the pot is kept boiling. It is a sweet deal for China. On the other hand if the Chinese did not buy our no-good paper then tax rates would have go sky high in order to pay back loans. The Chinese are enabling our addiction to borrowed money. Think of it as the opium war in reverse.
ruveyn
06 Oct 2011, 1:33 pm
ruveyn wrote:
Joker wrote:
When we dont make a profit off of them we dont get any money from China for sending ours jobs to them.
China is buying U.S. T-bills. One does not bite the hand that lends one money. China is keeping the U.S. afloat in spite of the gross fiscal and monetary mismanagement of the U.S. government.
ruveyn
Proposition: China is America's banker. America cannot anger its banker
'In fact, China is more like a depositor. It deposits money in U.S. Treasurys because its economy does not allow investors to put money elsewhere. There is nothing else it can do with its surpluses unless it changes its financial system radically (see above). It makes a pittance on its deposits. If the United States starts to bring down its debts and deficits, China will have even fewer options. China is desperate for U.S. investment, U.S. Treasurys, and the U.S. market. The balance of leverage leans toward the United States.'
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... ina_policy
_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.
06 Oct 2011, 2:18 pm
91 wrote:
Proposition: China is America's banker. America cannot anger its banker
'In fact, China is more like a depositor. It deposits money in U.S. Treasurys because its economy does not allow investors to put money elsewhere. There is nothing else it can do with its surpluses unless it changes its financial system radically (see above). It makes a pittance on its deposits. If the United States starts to bring down its debts and deficits, China will have even fewer options. China is desperate for U.S. investment, U.S. Treasurys, and the U.S. market. The balance of leverage leans toward the United States.'
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... ina_policy
'In fact, China is more like a depositor. It deposits money in U.S. Treasurys because its economy does not allow investors to put money elsewhere. There is nothing else it can do with its surpluses unless it changes its financial system radically (see above). It makes a pittance on its deposits. If the United States starts to bring down its debts and deficits, China will have even fewer options. China is desperate for U.S. investment, U.S. Treasurys, and the U.S. market. The balance of leverage leans toward the United States.'
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... ina_policy
Depositors are still creditors. Further, the argument presupposes that there are not, and will not be other places for China to put its money. While certainly the US dollar is, by a long stretch, the largest reserve currency in circulation, that balance will shift over time. The only reason, frankly, that it hasn't to date is that the ECB has the PIGS to deal with, first, and the People's Bank of China has yet to persuade the powers that be in zhongnanhai to float the RMB.
_________________
--James
Joker
Veteran
Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)
06 Oct 2011, 4:33 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
06 Oct 2011, 5:34 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
I'd be surprised if reporting on this didn't get the state of Oregon to move to helping her now. You have to ask, though, how many people would die without government intervention in their healthcare.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
06 Oct 2011, 5:40 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
I'd be surprised if reporting on this didn't get the state of Oregon to move to helping her now. You have to ask, though, how many people would die without government intervention in their healthcare.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Actually it didn't help her one bit and the State of Oregon didn't provide her help. It was the Drug Company that actually made the medication to fight the cancer that came to her aid. They provided her the medication free of charge, unfortunately the situation had dragged out too long and she ended up dieing despite the medication.
You get that, one of the drug companies that you often villify, was the one that tried to save her life, providing her medication at their own expense, while the State Health Plan just wanted her to kill herself.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
06 Oct 2011, 5:48 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
I'd be surprised if reporting on this didn't get the state of Oregon to move to helping her now. You have to ask, though, how many people would die without government intervention in their healthcare.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Actually it didn't help her one bit and the State of Oregon didn't provide her help. It was the Drug Company that actually made the medication to fight the cancer that came to her aid. They provided her the medication free of charge, unfortunately the situation had dragged out too long and she ended up dieing despite the medication.
You get that, one of the drug companies that you often villify, was the one that tried to save her life, providing her medication at their own expense, while the State Health Plan just wanted her to kill herself.
Then why don't drug companies help everyone in need? I applaud them for helping this poor woman in her time of need (particularly since she bore a strong resemblance to my late mother), but the fact remains, their prices are way out of reach for most Americans. And they and the insurance companies have constantly hindered any government attempt to fix the healthcare system for the sake of greed.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
06 Oct 2011, 5:52 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
I'd be surprised if reporting on this didn't get the state of Oregon to move to helping her now. You have to ask, though, how many people would die without government intervention in their healthcare.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Actually it didn't help her one bit and the State of Oregon didn't provide her help. It was the Drug Company that actually made the medication to fight the cancer that came to her aid. They provided her the medication free of charge, unfortunately the situation had dragged out too long and she ended up dieing despite the medication.
You get that, one of the drug companies that you often villify, was the one that tried to save her life, providing her medication at their own expense, while the State Health Plan just wanted her to kill herself.
Then why don't drug companies help everyone in need? I applaud them for helping this poor woman in her time of need (particularly since she bore a strong resemblance to my late mother), but the fact remains, their prices are way out of reach for most Americans. And they and the insurance companies have constantly hindered any government attempt to fix the healthcare system for the sake of greed.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Drug Companies like any other company have to make a profit in order to stay in business and to do research to create new life-saving medicines. If a company continues to operate by spending more than they take in, they go out of business.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
06 Oct 2011, 5:57 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
I'd be surprised if reporting on this didn't get the state of Oregon to move to helping her now. You have to ask, though, how many people would die without government intervention in their healthcare.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Actually it didn't help her one bit and the State of Oregon didn't provide her help. It was the Drug Company that actually made the medication to fight the cancer that came to her aid. They provided her the medication free of charge, unfortunately the situation had dragged out too long and she ended up dieing despite the medication.
You get that, one of the drug companies that you often villify, was the one that tried to save her life, providing her medication at their own expense, while the State Health Plan just wanted her to kill herself.
Then why don't drug companies help everyone in need? I applaud them for helping this poor woman in her time of need (particularly since she bore a strong resemblance to my late mother), but the fact remains, their prices are way out of reach for most Americans. And they and the insurance companies have constantly hindered any government attempt to fix the healthcare system for the sake of greed.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Drug Companies like any other company have to make a profit in order to stay in business and to do research to create new life-saving medicines. If a company continues to operate by spending more than they take in, they go out of business.
They could still offer their products at an affordable price, and still make a profit.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
06 Oct 2011, 6:01 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
I'd be surprised if reporting on this didn't get the state of Oregon to move to helping her now. You have to ask, though, how many people would die without government intervention in their healthcare.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Actually it didn't help her one bit and the State of Oregon didn't provide her help. It was the Drug Company that actually made the medication to fight the cancer that came to her aid. They provided her the medication free of charge, unfortunately the situation had dragged out too long and she ended up dieing despite the medication.
You get that, one of the drug companies that you often villify, was the one that tried to save her life, providing her medication at their own expense, while the State Health Plan just wanted her to kill herself.
Then why don't drug companies help everyone in need? I applaud them for helping this poor woman in her time of need (particularly since she bore a strong resemblance to my late mother), but the fact remains, their prices are way out of reach for most Americans. And they and the insurance companies have constantly hindered any government attempt to fix the healthcare system for the sake of greed.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Drug Companies like any other company have to make a profit in order to stay in business and to do research to create new life-saving medicines. If a company continues to operate by spending more than they take in, they go out of business.
They could still offer their products at an affordable price, and still make a profit.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
The profits they make is to cover the amount of money they had to spend to develop the medication (which they had to spend millions on R&D or even billions).
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
06 Oct 2011, 6:06 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
I'd be surprised if reporting on this didn't get the state of Oregon to move to helping her now. You have to ask, though, how many people would die without government intervention in their healthcare.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Actually it didn't help her one bit and the State of Oregon didn't provide her help. It was the Drug Company that actually made the medication to fight the cancer that came to her aid. They provided her the medication free of charge, unfortunately the situation had dragged out too long and she ended up dieing despite the medication.
You get that, one of the drug companies that you often villify, was the one that tried to save her life, providing her medication at their own expense, while the State Health Plan just wanted her to kill herself.
Then why don't drug companies help everyone in need? I applaud them for helping this poor woman in her time of need (particularly since she bore a strong resemblance to my late mother), but the fact remains, their prices are way out of reach for most Americans. And they and the insurance companies have constantly hindered any government attempt to fix the healthcare system for the sake of greed.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Drug Companies like any other company have to make a profit in order to stay in business and to do research to create new life-saving medicines. If a company continues to operate by spending more than they take in, they go out of business.
They could still offer their products at an affordable price, and still make a profit.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
The profits they make is to cover the amount of money they had to spend to develop the medication (which they had to spend millions on R&D or even billions).
All the more reason why there should be government intervention, in order to make sure that every American can benefit from the drug companies' products.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
06 Oct 2011, 6:10 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
I'd be surprised if reporting on this didn't get the state of Oregon to move to helping her now. You have to ask, though, how many people would die without government intervention in their healthcare.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Actually it didn't help her one bit and the State of Oregon didn't provide her help. It was the Drug Company that actually made the medication to fight the cancer that came to her aid. They provided her the medication free of charge, unfortunately the situation had dragged out too long and she ended up dieing despite the medication.
You get that, one of the drug companies that you often villify, was the one that tried to save her life, providing her medication at their own expense, while the State Health Plan just wanted her to kill herself.
Then why don't drug companies help everyone in need? I applaud them for helping this poor woman in her time of need (particularly since she bore a strong resemblance to my late mother), but the fact remains, their prices are way out of reach for most Americans. And they and the insurance companies have constantly hindered any government attempt to fix the healthcare system for the sake of greed.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Drug Companies like any other company have to make a profit in order to stay in business and to do research to create new life-saving medicines. If a company continues to operate by spending more than they take in, they go out of business.
They could still offer their products at an affordable price, and still make a profit.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
The profits they make is to cover the amount of money they had to spend to develop the medication (which they had to spend millions on R&D or even billions).
All the more reason why there should be government intervention, in order to make sure that every American can benefit from the drug companies' products.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
So you're saying there should be government intervention to force prescription drug companies to operate at a loss so that Americans can benefit. The drug companies could no longer research new cures and/or would cease to exist, and suddenly unless the government starts manufacturing medications we have no medications.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
06 Oct 2011, 6:35 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
t. I'd say half of MRI's are a pointless waste of money as well, but Americans demand them. The people with expensive insurance policies waste resources, while the people stuck with sh***y insurance get the shaft on treatments they absolutely need.
And you think the government of the United States can fix that? Dream on!
ruveyn
This is the same Federal Government that forced a man to see an eye doctor to see if his vision had improved when he had quite literally lost his eyes in an accident, because they wanted to kick him off disability. An insurance company wouldn't have done something that stupid, and quite obviously a waste of money.
The infamous antics of private insurance companies are well known. Plenty of people who had in good faith paid their monthly fees have been left out to dry (or in this case, die) when they needed their insurers the most.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
You mean like a State Government telling a woman that they would pay for the pill to commit suicide but not pay for cancer treatment?
Seriously, when and where did that happen?
And it still doesn't make insurance companies deserting their customers anymore acceptable.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I've posted about this before
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5517492&page=1
Read the article this time.
@ visagrunt
The post got messed up, and moved what I said up into the quotations, here is the fixed version.
I'd be surprised if reporting on this didn't get the state of Oregon to move to helping her now. You have to ask, though, how many people would die without government intervention in their healthcare.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Actually it didn't help her one bit and the State of Oregon didn't provide her help. It was the Drug Company that actually made the medication to fight the cancer that came to her aid. They provided her the medication free of charge, unfortunately the situation had dragged out too long and she ended up dieing despite the medication.
You get that, one of the drug companies that you often villify, was the one that tried to save her life, providing her medication at their own expense, while the State Health Plan just wanted her to kill herself.
Then why don't drug companies help everyone in need? I applaud them for helping this poor woman in her time of need (particularly since she bore a strong resemblance to my late mother), but the fact remains, their prices are way out of reach for most Americans. And they and the insurance companies have constantly hindered any government attempt to fix the healthcare system for the sake of greed.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Drug Companies like any other company have to make a profit in order to stay in business and to do research to create new life-saving medicines. If a company continues to operate by spending more than they take in, they go out of business.
They could still offer their products at an affordable price, and still make a profit.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
The profits they make is to cover the amount of money they had to spend to develop the medication (which they had to spend millions on R&D or even billions).
All the more reason why there should be government intervention, in order to make sure that every American can benefit from the drug companies' products.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
So you're saying there should be government intervention to force prescription drug companies to operate at a loss so that Americans can benefit. The drug companies could no longer research new cures and/or would cease to exist, and suddenly unless the government starts manufacturing medications we have no medications.
Plenty of pharmaceutical executives get rich while using that excuse.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Mullvad Breaks Silence on Founder’s Political Donation |
25 Jul 2026, 9:12 am |
| What´s your opinion on Love On The Specttrum? |
07 Aug 2026, 5:24 pm |
| What´s your opinion on Love On The Specttrum? |
31 Dec 1969, 7:00 pm Guest
|
| What´s your opinion on Love On The Specttrum? |
31 Dec 1969, 7:00 pm Guest
|
