I really don't know how many times in one thread I can restate that I'm not advocating for blowing the industry up. I think you're deliberately trying to wind me up at this point.
Stating that you want the entire industry to be socialized constitutes wanting to blow it up.
Please explain how then, since socializing would mean basically shutting down all the current for profit companies in exchange for being replaced by a government run organization.
His tight rhetoric and refusal to let outside forces sway his opinions have convinced me that he's the leader we need. I've agreed with Obama's policies, but I'm increasingly finding his leadership lacking.
I'd also like to add that even countries with socialized medicine, like the UK and Canada, still get the vast majority of their medications from for-profit, capitalist pharmaceutical corporations.
His tight rhetoric and refusal to let outside forces sway his opinions have convinced me that he's the leader we need. I've agreed with Obama's policies, but I'm increasingly finding his leadership lacking.
If science can't sway the man, he sure as hell won't take shit from anyone else.
What incentive is there for orphan drugs now except to expect the poor suffering bastards to pay through the nose for being part of a niche market? I think socialization is a BETTER solution for that.
The existing for profit companies would go through a pretty major re-org, I'll give you that.
Socialization doesn't mean less money for research as an implicit assumption. That's crap logic.
Do you know how many hundreds of billions are burned on pharma research every year? The government could never fund an operation like that. These companies privatized out of necessity; there's no other way to generate the funds necessary to keep researching new drugs. Even most major public research institutions don't study a lot of pharma; UIUC is pretty much limited to some experimental antibiotic research.
His tight rhetoric and refusal to let outside forces sway his opinions have convinced me that he's the leader we need. I've agreed with Obama's policies, but I'm increasingly finding his leadership lacking.
Only a little. "The government has not yet taken on a social project this expensive" is not the same as "the government could not possibly take on a social project this expensive."
His tight rhetoric and refusal to let outside forces sway his opinions have convinced me that he's the leader we need. I've agreed with Obama's policies, but I'm increasingly finding his leadership lacking.
The perfectly lubricated weather vane is not swayed by outside forces? Hil-a-ri-ous.
His tight rhetoric and refusal to let outside forces sway his opinions have convinced me that he's the leader we need. I've agreed with Obama's policies, but I'm increasingly finding his leadership lacking.
If science can't sway the man, he sure as hell won't take shit from anyone else.
Exactly. Meanwhile, the liberal mindset makes one prone to being swayed by arguments that at least seem reasonable. Leadership requires a degree of stubbornness that the Republicans exhibit far more frequently.
His tight rhetoric and refusal to let outside forces sway his opinions have convinced me that he's the leader we need. I've agreed with Obama's policies, but I'm increasingly finding his leadership lacking.
If science can't sway the man, he sure as hell won't take shit from anyone else.
Exactly. Meanwhile, the liberal mindset makes one prone to being swayed by arguments that at least seem reasonable. Leadership requires a degree of stubbornness that the Republicans exhibit far more frequently.
Definitely. I'm also pretty much of the mind that most women don't really know what's good for them, and Romney-Ryan promises to manage that issue handily.
Not to sound all one issuey but have you ever read about how Romney went from Pro-choice to Pro-life... It's freaking stupid. (at least in my opinion.)
Long story short, he says he was pro-choice because a close friend died of a illegal abortion but he was later converted to pro-life because of the stem-cell research debate because he realized that our pro-abortion ways made us not respect embryos...
Oh noes I'm not human!! :-P Actually I believe its a parasite (you know, depends on its host's body and causing negative effects, etc.) until some kind of mutual benefit can be agreed upon. The benefit would be the mom actually wanting a kid out of this nightmarish condition. If you don't want a kid though and it would ruin your life if you let it come to term... still a parasite. :-P
Hm. Oddly conveninet timing on the announcement of this lower unemployment rate. Kinda makes you wonder, y'know? Obama has a less than stellar debate performance, and then the BLS releases favorable numbers? Sounds like someone is helping him get into a better debate position. Sucking up to guarantee his appointment? Risky move - it'd be very transparent if that were the case.
Oh noes I'm not human!! :-P Actually I believe its a parasite (you know, depends on its host's body and causing negative effects, etc.) until some kind of mutual benefit can be agreed upon. The benefit would be the mom actually wanting a kid out of this nightmarish condition. If you don't want a kid though and it would ruin your life if you let it come to term... still a parasite. :-P
Yeah, I was just playing along with Pete. I really have no respect for blastocysts any more than a methanogen culture: a novel life form to be nurtured and studied, but not a person.
Hm. Oddly conveninet timing on the announcement of this lower unemployment rate. Kinda makes you wonder, y'know? Obama has a less than stellar debate performance, and then the BLS releases favorable numbers? Sounds like someone is helping him get into a better debate position. Sucking up to guarantee his appointment? Risky move - it'd be very transparent if that were the case.
Still, one has to wonder.
Isn't the initial number mostly an estimate and adjusted a few weeks later?
Oh noes I'm not human!! :-P Actually I believe its a parasite (you know, depends on its host's body and causing negative effects, etc.) until some kind of mutual benefit can be agreed upon. The benefit would be the mom actually wanting a kid out of this nightmarish condition. If you don't want a kid though and it would ruin your life if you let it come to term... still a parasite. :-P
Comments
Scientific, research-based industries are radically different in terms of their economic operation than most everything else.
The existing for profit companies would go through a pretty major re-org, I'll give you that.
Socialization doesn't mean less money for research as an implicit assumption. That's crap logic.
:-P
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_conversion/2012/02/mitt_romney_s_abortion_record_flip_flop_or_conversion_.single.html
Long story short, he says he was pro-choice because a close friend died of a illegal abortion but he was later converted to pro-life because of the stem-cell research debate because he realized that our pro-abortion ways made us not respect embryos...
You should read Octavia Butler - Bloodchild.
Hm. Oddly conveninet timing on the announcement of this lower unemployment rate. Kinda makes you wonder, y'know? Obama has a less than stellar debate performance, and then the BLS releases favorable numbers? Sounds like someone is helping him get into a better debate position. Sucking up to guarantee his appointment? Risky move - it'd be very transparent if that were the case.
Still, one has to wonder.
0/10
/Fark
Liberal math.