HOw Obama feels about the GOP - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

TheDoc · 04-16-2011, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Funny thread, I based it on that FACT that Barry said his health care law cost as much as Bush's prescription drug bill, when the whole time when he was trying to sell that piece of shit bill he said it would save money.
I'm going by what he said, but his supporters are coming up with all sorts of excuses, thats right EXCUSES!!

Everyone is saying we can't cut medicare or social security or medicaid, so how we going to afford one more entitlement?

Obama said
...today, health insurance reform is the law of the land all across America...

AT&T Inc. will take a $1 billion non-cash accounting charge in the first quarter because of the health care overhaul and may cut benefits it offers to current and retired workers...

Obama said
...over the last year, there's been a lot of misinformation spread about health care reform. There's been plenty of fear-mongering, plenty of overheated rhetoric...

AK Steel Corp... and Valero Energy announced [similar] accounting charges, saying the health care law that President Barack Obama signed Tuesday will raise their expenses.

Obama said
...You turn on the news, you'll see the same folks are still shouting about there's going to be an end of the world because this bill passed. (Laughter.) ...

On Friday, 3M Co. said it will also take a charge of $85 million to $90 million.

Obama said
...I'm not exaggerating. Leaders of the Republican Party, they called the passage of this bill "Armageddon." (Laughter.) Armageddon. "End of freedom as we know it" ...

Manufacturer John Deere announced Thursday that it expected the company's expenses to be about $150 million higher than last year...

Obama said
...So after I signed the bill, I looked around to see if there any -- (laughter) -- asteroids falling or -- (applause) -- some cracks opening up in the Earth. (Laughter.) It turned out it was a nice day. (Laughter.) ...

That came a day after Caterpillar predicted a new cost of $100 million..

Obama said
...Birds were chirping. Folks were strolling down the Mall. People still have their doctors...

Most of the new costs will come in a reduction in subsidies that about 1,400 companies receive for providing drug coverage to their retirees. In an effort to raise several billion dollars for implementing the health care package, the law makes those subsidies taxable, just like income...

Obama
From this day forward, all of the cynics, all the naysayers -- they're going to have to confront the reality of what this reform is and what it isn't... this isn't a government takeover of our health care system. They'll see that if Americans like their doctor, they'll be keeping their doctor. You like your plan? You'll be keeping your plan. No one is taking that away from you......

10 top companies, including Caterpillar, John Deere, Verizon, Xerox, Boeing and Met Life, warned Congress in December that over the long term, it would [hurt their bottom line] "Taxing the subsidy means that more companies will eliminate or reduce the coverage," they warned, "and more retirees will shift to Medicare ... which will create more cost for both the government and the retirees."

Your logic is so twisted it's rather sad.... Bush's plan cost as much as an entire healthcare bill with pills included in it. That means Obama's plan was far BETTER, not worse at any level or angle. Even comparing them, is silly - Obama basically kicked his ass in with the healthcare plan, all around.

You can't cut Medicare, not without something to replace it with - bingo! And if they would leave SS alone it would be fine.

None of that other trash makes a difference... get on the wagon to improve what we have rather than trying to revert back to a system that has already failed America. And for the love of god, stop trying to translate Obama's speeches into your own twisted meanings.

Bill8 · 04-16-2011, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Funny thread, I based it on that FACT that Barry said his health care law cost as much as Bush's prescription drug bill

no, he doesn't say that at all. You need to read it again, and comprehend what he is saying.

what he says is that medicare part b wasn't paid for in the bill that created it. I don't see any part in which he compares the costs.

your credibility suffers when you keep deliberately misprepresenting what the quoted lines are saying.

---

as for cutting entitlements, go ahead, do it. I'll never see any of that money, I don't care if you cut it. I think your side should do it, so do it.

I'm still waiting to see your side start to repeal the affordable care act.

nobody really knows wether the affordable care act will actually reduce medicare and medicaid, as obama and others claim. it might, there's no way to tell at this point, but anybody who believes it is doing so on faith, not because we understand how the bill will work in the real world.

Bill8 · 04-16-2011, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Bush's plan cost as much as an entire healthcare bill with pills included in it. That means Obama's plan was far BETTER, not worse at any level or angle.

do you have a source for a credible set of numbers comparing the two?

one hears this and one hears that - I was surprised when searching that I couldn't instantly find a website with good accounting and comparison.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill8

do you have a source for a credible set of numbers comparing the two?

one hears this and one hears that - I was surprised when searching that I couldn't instantly find a website with good accounting and comparison.

Wiki says 500b over 10 years - I remember reading up to 1 trillion with all costs adjusted. Either way, I don't really consider that too much... a bit much for just pills, but that wasn't the big cost.

The big cost was seniors back pockets. They had to cover more up front, more monthly, more of the pills, and when the gap part ended, a % of all pills was paid. Give or take fine details - and it was different for different regions/states... so it was confusing to old people as well.

I don't think we could ever know what it really cost America, trillionS (already, let alone the future costs) is a huge number to keep track of...

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 06:33 AM

Obamacare downshifts the costs to the states. Insurance and taxes are going to go up for the avg citizen but the "cost" for the federal government may appear to go down.

If "downshifting" is a new term to you I suggest you look it up.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

The way I understood it was if you like your current health care provider keep it and if you don't, change it.- Am I missing something?

Yes you are missing something. Millions of people will no longer be able to keep their insurance and will have to buy MORE EXPENSIVE insurance. As a matter of fact the whole state of Maine has been deemed exempt from the bill because it would skyrocket the cost.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

Obamacare downshifts the costs to the states. Insurance and taxes are going to go up for the avg citizen but the "cost" for the federal government may appear to go down.

If "downshifting" is a new term to you I suggest you look it up.

The healthcare plan down shifting the costs to the States is how all Gov healthcare plans work. Medicare doesn't appear lower in costs because they shift it to the States.

Insurance goes up ONLY when insurance companies increase the rates... covering more people lowers rates in every Country in the world, so if they increase it - they alone are fucking us over.

Well the average citizen already pays an extreme amount more than the next Countries citizen pays - so we have some room to work with on getting the costs down, but that's going to be the people doing something about it...

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Insurance goes up ONLY when insurance companies increase the rates... covering more people lowers rates in every Country in the world, so if they increase it - they alone are fucking us over.

Wrong. Insurance only goes up when the cost of business goes up. And when insurance companies work in a closed system the the hospitals can charge higher and higher rates in turn causing your insurance rates to go up. When your dollar goes down in value your insurance goes up. When more government regulation adds to the cost of the hospitals and insurance companies your cost goes up and so on.

I do not know if your ignorance is on purpose or if you just do not know how business works.

Health CARE costs are going up yet you all expect insurance rates to stay flat. It is actually pretty comical.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

This is a straight forward question out of pure interest-Millions of people will no longer be able to keep their insurance and will have to buy MORE EXPENSIVE insurance. Why can't they keep their current coverage and have to buy more expensive insurance? - I honestly don't understand?

Because Obamacare sets a minimum of what your insurance has to be. Millions do not meet the min standard. But are completely happy with their current insurance.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

Yes you are missing something. Millions of people will no longer be able to keep their insurance and will have to buy MORE EXPENSIVE insurance. As a matter of fact the whole state of Maine has been deemed exempt from the bill because it would skyrocket the cost.

That's not true... if you have insurance and you keep it, you will not have to change. Unless your corp changes, you change, etc - like always then it changes.

The Fed insurance is not more expensive, it never has been for anyone, ever... if WE covered 100% of Medicare out of our pockets, we would be paying a SHIIIITIITTITITTTT to more, trillions and trillions more.

Yep, Maine got it a partial waiver because the Insurance companies already pay X amount per dollar on 'everyone' in the State. The waiver doesn't exempt the state from Coverage - they still have to provide every State citizen with coverage.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

That's not true... if you have insurance and you keep it, you will not have to change. Unless your corp changes, you change, etc - like always then it changes.

The Fed insurance is not more expensive, it never has been for anyone, ever... if WE covered 100% of Medicare out of our pockets, we would be paying a SHIIIITIITTITITTTT to more, trillions and trillions more.

Yep, Maine got it a partial waiver because the Insurance companies already pay X amount per dollar on 'everyone' in the State. The waiver doesn't exempt the state from Coverage - they still have to provide every State citizen with coverage.

You are being dishonest again. Millions of people will have their insurance coverage changed because the feds are forcing companies to change their policies. Well unless you have Obama in your pocket then you get waivers. Which will make the cost of their business go up, which will make the product they produce to go up, which will lead to more out of pocket expense for the tax payer.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

Wrong. Insurance only goes up when the cost of business goes up. And when insurance companies work in a closed system the the hospitals can charge higher and higher rates in turn causing your insurance rates to go up. When your dollar goes down in value your insurance goes up. When more government regulation adds to the cost of the hospitals and insurance companies your cost goes up and so on.

I do not know if your ignorance is on purpose or if you just do not know how business works.

Health CARE costs are going up yet you all expect insurance rates to stay flat. It is actually pretty comical.

Insurance companies set the rates the Hospitals can charge... at that technology gets cheaper over time, in every business aspect in the world, other than American Healthcare. Our rates stay high because insurance companies keep EVERY cost high.

I've lived in a Socialized Country before, so your idea of how this can and does work, is greatly incorrect.

I never said insurance rates would remain flat, I said if they go up it's insurance companies 100% doing it, and that's a fact.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

You are being dishonest again. Millions of people will have their insurance coverage changed because the feds are forcing companies to change their policies. Well unless you have Obama in your pocket then you get waivers. Which will make the cost of their business go up, which will make the product they produce to go up, which will lead to more out of pocket expense for the tax payer.

Dishonest? How about we stick to actual facts you can backup rather than repeating talking point memos that have been debunked a 100 times over?

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

So then what you're saying is:

"Obama From this day forward, all of the cynics, all the naysayers -- they're going to have to confront the reality of what this reform is and what it isn't... this isn't a government takeover of our health care system. They'll see that if Americans like their doctor, they'll be keeping their doctor. You like your plan? You'll be keeping your plan. No one is taking that away from you......"

Is it a lie? ..or has he set a minimum already?

It is an outright lie. Because he is forcing companies to change their healthcare polices and in turn forcing people who liked their insurance to be changed. Their companies will either pass the extra expense to the worker or the buyer of their products.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Dishonest? How about we stick to actual facts you can backup rather than repeating talking point memos that have been debunked a 100 times over?

Debunked? Your opinion is no debunking. But basic economics 101 pretty much is fact.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

I've lived in a Socialized Country before, so your idea of how this can and does work, is greatly incorrect.

Yup working great

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11579979

Quote:

Mr Osborne ended his hour-long Commons statement by claiming the 19% average cuts to departmental budgets were less severe than expected. This is thanks to an extra £7bn in savings from the welfare budget and a £3.5bn increase in public sector employee pension contributions.

Quote:

Government departments facing major cuts to their budgets include the Home Office, on 6%, including a 20% cut in government funding for police over four years, the Foreign Office, facing 24% cuts, and the Cabinet Office, which will see its budget slashed by 35%.

Socialism it works really!

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

Yup working great

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11579979

Socialism it works really!

Does that prove it doesn't work? Not at all... it has actually worked GREAT! And it works great in most Countries with it.

Is it perfect? Hell no... is it cheaper than what we have, GREATLY!

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Does that prove it doesn't work? Nope..... it has actually worked GREAT! And it works great in most Countries with it.

Is it perfect? Hell no... is it cheaper than what we have, GREATLY!

Well it is not cheaper. Because to keep their current system they would need to increase their taxes another 40%+. Just raise taxes and everything would be ok right? It actually failed quite quickly.

Kiopa_Matt · 04-17-2011, 07:16 AM

The entire US healthcare debacle is/was a joke. In my mind, without a public option, that bill is somewhat useless. You either need to nationalize health care, or at the very least, allow the government to administer its own insurance plan within the free market. Why so much fear in allowing the government to compete with the free market? Other than the fact Republicans are busy sucking the cocks of their corporate masters, of course.

Medicare / Medicaid has a 3 - 4% overhead, whereas private insurers have a 30 - 35% overhead. Why not allow the government to compete in that market? Government can offer its own plan, probably at 20% discounted rates than others, forcing the competition to lower their own rates. Seems like a no-brainer to me, but nope, can't have that in the US.

I remember when the debate was going on, a survey was taken in Canada, asking if people like socialized health care, or would prefer the American privatized system. A resounding amount of Canadians, around 95%, said they were happy with the socialized health care, and didn't want a privatized system. I could be wrong, but I would imagine the same would go for Scandanvian and Western European countries as well.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

Debunked? Your opinion is no debunking. But basic economics 101 pretty much is fact.

No part of what you said is basic economics 101... it's all talking point trash.

The only close thing you got right was some companies paying more, yeah companies with over 100 staff, not covering people, will have to pay more.

And hey, if we're all playing on the same equal playing ground, doesn't that give the free market a better chance? Oh, snap!

You, me, and the majority of small companies in America, won't have to pay shit, we never qualify.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:21 AM

^You are talking about countries smaller than a lot of our STATES. Of course if you ask a child if it likes getting free candy or having to work for it they will pick the free candy. That is what children do.

For what it is worth I am not sticking up for insurance companies. I think insurance should be illegal so a real free market could be created. Not what we have now where you can only buy insurance from your state so there is a closed system, helping the costs to go up.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

Well it is not cheaper. Because to keep their current system they would need to increase their taxes another 40%+. Just raise taxes and everything would be ok right? It actually failed quite quickly.

That's false and made up from thin air....

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

And hey, if we're all playing on the same equal playing ground, doesn't that give the free market a better chance? Oh, snap!

Nope price controls have been prove to fail over and over again. Man you must have never taken any economic classes. Man you really are misinformed.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

That's false and made up from thin air....

From thin air?

If you are slashing the government by 40% how much would you need to increase taxes by? It is just using a little bit of quick logic. However, you may are right, the number is probably higher. Since they are not cutting taxes just spending.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

^You are talking about countries smaller than a lot of our STATES. Of course if you ask a child if it likes getting free candy or having to work for it they will pick the free candy. That is what children do.

For what it is worth I am not sticking up for insurance companies. I think insurance should be illegal so a real free market could be created. Not what we have now where you can only buy insurance from your state so there is a closed system, helping the costs to go up.

It makes no difference what the population is... that's simply more people paying and less people using, it always balances out.

The free market is a bogus ideal that doesn't really exist, anywhere... you know that right? Other than the ability to do business, but outside of that everything is locked up and has been for a 200+ years. If you want to start an insurance company, have at it... your % of success is the same if you opened an adult company, no market is truly free anymore and will never be again.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

Nope price controls have been prove to fail over and over again. Man you must have never taken any economic classes. Man you really are misinformed.

Looks like you failed economics 101 then.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

From thin air?

If you are slashing the government by 40% how much would you need to increase taxes by? It is just using a little bit of quick logic. However, you may are right, the number is probably higher. Since they are not cutting taxes just spending.

If the Gov slashes by 40% and reduces 60% saving 20% then effectively they've made up enough numbers out of thin air to confuse us all.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Looks like you failed economics 101 then.

You really think price controls work? Ok I'm done here because there is no hope of a debate is possible because the foundation is started with a distortion of reality.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PriceControls.html

Kiopa_Matt · 04-17-2011, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

^You are talking about countries smaller than a lot of our STATES.

Population # itself doesn't matter, but percentages do. Sure, the US has a much larger population, but also has a much larger GDP, and many more tax payers.

I'd say just move to nationalized health care, like the rest of the modern Western world. Obviously Medicare is working quite well, because nobody seems to complain about that. The only complaint you see is at Republican rallies where old ladies are holding up signs saying, "Government, keep your hands off my Medicare!"

So why not expand that to the entire US population? Everyone pays say $50/month, gets a health care card, and free access to all the health care they need. All of a sudden, everyone from say 16 - 54 years old is paying $50/month into system, which will drastically reduce the liquidity problems Medicare currently has. An average 21yo only needs medical attention once a year, if that.

But nah, fuck all that. The Republicans want to make teaches the scapegoats instead, and try to cut their salaries. I don't quite have the words to describe how moronic that is.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:34 AM

^Because the private sector (those who have insurance/paying cash) have been subsidizing the costs of medicare/aid thus distorting the savings of medicare/aid and helping inflate the price of insurance/cash buys.

edit: Because medicare/aid does not pay the hospital enough to even cover the COST

Kiopa_Matt · 04-17-2011, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

^Because the private sector (those who have insurance/paying cash) have been subsidizing the costs of medicare/aid thus distorting the savings of medicare/aid and helping inflate the price of insurance/cash buys.

Exactly. That's why you put the entire population into Medicare, and it helps balance things. The average 21 year old only needs to goto the doctor once a year to get stitches after he got too drunk one night, whereas the average 65 year old needs more care than that. They help balance each other out, although obviously, the baby-boomer generation is going into retirement right now which creates an uneven balance, but that's another debate all together.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

You really think price controls work? Ok I'm done here because there is no hope of a debate is possible because the foundation is started with a distortion of reality.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PriceControls.html

I never said they did or didn't work, I never said anything about them at all, you did..

An equal playing field, does not mean forced prices on an entire Industry that clearly can't happen when we have inflation alone.

But it's not like some regulation doesn't work... it clearly has, clearly does, and clearly can continue to improve things if WE the people keep doing our jobs. This isn't about economics... the market in this case is LONG gone.

IllTestYourGirls · 04-17-2011, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiopa_Matt

Exactly. That's why you put the entire population into Medicare, and it helps balance things. The average 21 year old only needs to goto the doctor once a year to get stitches after he got too drunk one night, whereas the average 65 year old needs more care than that. They help balance each other out, although obviously, the baby-boomer generation is going into retirement right now which creates an uneven balance, but that's another debate all together.

Well the flaw is that it would have to be price controlled. And as pointed out by Doc, they do not work. Another major issue yet to be addressed, in full, but pointed out, is that the US government is controlled by corporations, wall street and bankers. Do you really want them in control of your health care? I don't.

TheDoc · 04-17-2011, 08:14 AM

Some price controls work..... all over the place. We could force the price of pills, we could force the allowed % of re-investments, we could force a % of profits to cover costs vs. more research and hundreds of millions in marketing, if could hard set price control at donation levels, marketing, ads, allowable to push on doctors, research, etc freeing up hundreds of billions, allowing the prices to be locked - exactly like other Countries do - exactly why other Countries do it.

That doesn't mean force an entire Industry though.... just micro parts of it - bit by bit. Mostly the parts that screw us over, so in America, pretty much all of it.

Those changes happen because of Americans, not politicians. We make those laws, we vote them in, we push the messages forward. We've let them run the show far to long, and we can see what that has gotten us.

directfiesta · 04-17-2011, 08:20 AM

We need a Vendzilla post now to get this thing funny again ...

Kiopa_Matt · 04-17-2011, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

Well the flaw is that it would have to be price controlled.

I guess that's where we have a fundamental and idealogical difference. I view health care as a right, and not a privilege or luxury for only those with money. And I definetly don't view health care as a free market industry, where intelligent, greedy, and selfish businessmen should be allowed to make their bed.

In order to have a strong nation, you must have a healthy nation.
.

04-17-2011, 06:33 AM	#55
IllTestYourGirls Ah My Balls Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Under the gold leaf ICQ 388-454-421 Posts: 14,311	Obamacare downshifts the costs to the states. Insurance and taxes are going to go up for the avg citizen but the "cost" for the federal government may appear to go down. If "downshifting" is a new term to you I suggest you look it up. __________________

04-17-2011, 07:16 AM	#69
Kiopa_Matt Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,448	The entire US healthcare debacle is/was a joke. In my mind, without a public option, that bill is somewhat useless. You either need to nationalize health care, or at the very least, allow the government to administer its own insurance plan within the free market. Why so much fear in allowing the government to compete with the free market? Other than the fact Republicans are busy sucking the cocks of their corporate masters, of course. Medicare / Medicaid has a 3 - 4% overhead, whereas private insurers have a 30 - 35% overhead. Why not allow the government to compete in that market? Government can offer its own plan, probably at 20% discounted rates than others, forcing the competition to lower their own rates. Seems like a no-brainer to me, but nope, can't have that in the US. I remember when the debate was going on, a survey was taken in Canada, asking if people like socialized health care, or would prefer the American privatized system. A resounding amount of Canadians, around 95%, said they were happy with the socialized health care, and didn't want a privatized system. I could be wrong, but I would imagine the same would go for Scandanvian and Western European countries as well. __________________ xMarkPro -- Ultimate Blog Network Management Streamline your marketing operations. Centralize management of domains, pages, Wordpress blogs, sponsors, link codes, media items, sales and traffic statistics, plus more!

04-17-2011, 07:21 AM	#71
IllTestYourGirls Ah My Balls Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Under the gold leaf ICQ 388-454-421 Posts: 14,311	^You are talking about countries smaller than a lot of our STATES. Of course if you ask a child if it likes getting free candy or having to work for it they will pick the free candy. That is what children do. For what it is worth I am not sticking up for insurance companies. I think insurance should be illegal so a real free market could be created. Not what we have now where you can only buy insurance from your state so there is a closed system, helping the costs to go up. __________________

04-17-2011, 07:34 AM	#80
IllTestYourGirls Ah My Balls Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Under the gold leaf ICQ 388-454-421 Posts: 14,311	^Because the private sector (those who have insurance/paying cash) have been subsidizing the costs of medicare/aid thus distorting the savings of medicare/aid and helping inflate the price of insurance/cash buys. edit: Because medicare/aid does not pay the hospital enough to even cover the COST __________________ Last edited by IllTestYourGirls; 04-17-2011 at 07:43 AM..

04-17-2011, 08:14 AM	#84
TheDoc Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Currently Incognito Posts: 13,827	Some price controls work..... all over the place. We could force the price of pills, we could force the allowed % of re-investments, we could force a % of profits to cover costs vs. more research and hundreds of millions in marketing, if could hard set price control at donation levels, marketing, ads, allowable to push on doctors, research, etc freeing up hundreds of billions, allowing the prices to be locked - exactly like other Countries do - exactly why other Countries do it. That doesn't mean force an entire Industry though.... just micro parts of it - bit by bit. Mostly the parts that screw us over, so in America, pretty much all of it. Those changes happen because of Americans, not politicians. We make those laws, we vote them in, we push the messages forward. We've let them run the show far to long, and we can see what that has gotten us. __________________ ~TheDoc - ICQ7765825 It's all disambiguation Last edited by TheDoc; 04-17-2011 at 08:18 AM..

04-17-2011, 08:20 AM	#85
directfiesta Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Punta Cana, DR Posts: 29,593	We need a Vendzilla post now to get this thing funny again ... __________________ I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT ! But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....