Who here "opposes" this simple Sanders' proposal?

[Iceweasel]

These are the same people who cry about the deficit while worshipping Reagan, a man who ran a deficit. The irony of this is, the deficit is largely connected to the "Reagan boom" that, you guessed it, vanished when the deficit was cut.

^^^^ ...speaking of pharmaceuticals, they got some goooooooood shit out there man.

 

[Iceweasel]

I am all for low prices. I am horrified at the price of milk, eggs and bread. I do not know how to lower any prices. I did not do even Economics 101

Who needs milk? Eggs and bread are dirt cheap.

 

[Iceweasel]

I am older----I pay for all my scripts. I like the idea of paying less------I would not buy meds from Canada

I don't know how Canada came into the conversation, but if you were to order meds online from a "Canadian pharmacy," they'd actually be coming from India, China, Sri Lanka, or a host of other countries.

That's where American drugs are made, regardless of how you, the consumer, end up with them. The big difference is in the pricing.

bull shit----------american drugs are LARGELY MADE IN AMERICA-----unless you are buying speed ON-LINE

Nope. The company HQ is probably somewhere in New Jersey, but the manufacturing has been outsourced.

==========
And now they have probably " merged " with some SOCIALIST company in a SOCIALIST COUNTRY and no longer pay American taxes even though they are still headquartered here.

Walgreens is gone too. Another tax dodging company. They want the U.S. Market but don't want to pay their share of maintaining the country they profit from.

Pay their share? Oh, you mean grabbing their ankles while you liberals fuck the life out of them.

 

[EriktheRed]

Would not Sanders simply nationalize all drug development and production?

Think about how well government does stuff while you're standing in line at the post office next.

Funny you should bring that up again Henry. You know, after the last time? When I described how the post office got me stuff from Maine and California in as little as six days (from China), while it took UPS three fucking weeks to bring my package from Kansas City, crying the blues about "oh dear, there's snow on the ground"?

So you want everything run by the government?

Thie king of strawmen strikes again.

 

[blackhawk]

How would you compel Medicare to do this? The how is where things tend to become a lot less simple.

To answer the above, you may have to "thank" both the GWB administration and congress who came up with Medicare Part D...better known as the "give-away to big pharma"

Part D costs about $80 billion a year and is on track to double by 2022 as benefits improve and Baby Boomers retire. For two reasons, a significant chunk of that money is wasted on overpayments to drug companies: When Part D began, millions of patients were shifted over from Medicaid, the state-federal program for low-income people that gets far lower drug prices than Medicare. Suddenly, the cost of providing drugs to the same people shot up. Congress barred Medicare from negotiating the way Medicaid and the Department of Veterans Affairs do with drug makers to get lower prices. Instead, lawmakers insisted the job be done by private insurance companies.”

Next time just say you don't know it gives one much more credibilty than going but Bush.

 

[Dovahkiin]

These are the same people who cry about the deficit while worshipping Reagan, a man who ran a deficit. The irony of this is, the deficit is largely connected to the "Reagan boom" that, you guessed it, vanished when the deficit was cut.

^^^^ ...speaking of pharmaceuticals, they got some goooooooood shit out there man.

Facts are facts.

 

[Arianrhod]

How would you compel Medicare to do this? The how is where things tend to become a lot less simple.

A POTUS who wasn't kowtowing to Big Pharma (which, as others have mentioned, is what happened in 2004), and who'd worked both sides of the aisle in Congress for 30+ years could be very persuasive.

 

[Iceweasel]

These are the same people who cry about the deficit while worshipping Reagan, a man who ran a deficit. The irony of this is, the deficit is largely connected to the "Reagan boom" that, you guessed it, vanished when the deficit was cut.

^^^^ ...speaking of pharmaceuticals, they got some goooooooood shit out there man.

Facts are facts.

True. But there are facts and there is stupid shit you pull out of your ass because you hate anything not liberal.

 

[Iceweasel]

How would you compel Medicare to do this? The how is where things tend to become a lot less simple.

A POTUS who wasn't kowtowing to Big Pharma (which, as others have mentioned, is what happened in 2004), and who'd worked both sides of the aisle in Congress for 30+ years could be very persuasive.

So W. Bush had nothing to do with big pharma?

 

[Dovahkiin]

These are the same people who cry about the deficit while worshipping Reagan, a man who ran a deficit. The irony of this is, the deficit is largely connected to the "Reagan boom" that, you guessed it, vanished when the deficit was cut.

^^^^ ...speaking of pharmaceuticals, they got some goooooooood shit out there man.

Facts are facts.

True. But there are facts and there is stupid shit you pull out of your ass because you hate anything not liberal.

Dude, I think Reagan was pretty good, he ran a deficit that helped the economy.

 

[flacaltenn]

I pretty sure that the insurers already beat the crap out of Pharma and the retailers for reductions.

If you're gonna "negotiate" --- that's gotta be for each drug individually. Because SOME drugs are only applicable to 10,000 patients or less. You start beating on THOSE drugs -- and folks are gonna die. Because NO pharma will bring a low-volume drug to the market. Another example of socialists not understanding how stuff really works.

It's always a fictional view of a perfectly simple world, where stuff just magically gets willed into existence and costs whatever "good folks with the best intentions" want them to cost.

The future is really in "custom drugs".. Targeted to characteristics of your genome. So this "negotiation" is gonna cost a trainload if it's done for 10 or 100 patients at a time..

 

[Arianrhod]

How would you compel Medicare to do this? The how is where things tend to become a lot less simple.

A POTUS who wasn't kowtowing to Big Pharma (which, as others have mentioned, is what happened in 2004), and who'd worked both sides of the aisle in Congress for 30+ years could be very persuasive.

So W. Bush had nothing to do with big pharma?

Who was POTUS on your planet in 2004?

 

[Iceweasel]

These are the same people who cry about the deficit while worshipping Reagan, a man who ran a deficit. The irony of this is, the deficit is largely connected to the "Reagan boom" that, you guessed it, vanished when the deficit was cut.

^^^^ ...speaking of pharmaceuticals, they got some goooooooood shit out there man.

Facts are facts.

True. But there are facts and there is stupid shit you pull out of your ass because you hate anything not liberal.

Dude, I think Reagan was pretty good, he ran a deficit that helped the economy.

The Democrats chipped in to a large extend but going in the hole is never good. In his case we had a Democrat president before hand that did what many of them do and cut the military.

 

[Iceweasel]

How would you compel Medicare to do this? The how is where things tend to become a lot less simple.

A POTUS who wasn't kowtowing to Big Pharma (which, as others have mentioned, is what happened in 2004), and who'd worked both sides of the aisle in Congress for 30+ years could be very persuasive.

So W. Bush had nothing to do with big pharma?

Who was POTUS on your planet in 2004?

The same guy libs hate. The same guy that gave them nearly everything they wanted. Go figure.

 

[Arianrhod]

How would you compel Medicare to do this? The how is where things tend to become a lot less simple.

A POTUS who wasn't kowtowing to Big Pharma (which, as others have mentioned, is what happened in 2004), and who'd worked both sides of the aisle in Congress for 30+ years could be very persuasive.

So W. Bush had nothing to do with big pharma?

Who was POTUS on your planet in 2004?

The same guy libs hate.

Afraid to post his name?

 

[Iceweasel]

How would you compel Medicare to do this? The how is where things tend to become a lot less simple.

A POTUS who wasn't kowtowing to Big Pharma (which, as others have mentioned, is what happened in 2004), and who'd worked both sides of the aisle in Congress for 30+ years could be very persuasive.

So W. Bush had nothing to do with big pharma?

Who was POTUS on your planet in 2004?

The same guy libs hate.

Afraid to post his name?

And make your brain explode?

 

[Arianrhod]

A POTUS who wasn't kowtowing to Big Pharma (which, as others have mentioned, is what happened in 2004), and who'd worked both sides of the aisle in Congress for 30+ years could be very persuasive.

So W. Bush had nothing to do with big pharma?

Who was POTUS on your planet in 2004?

The same guy libs hate.

Afraid to post his name?

And make your brain explode?

Make me smile benevolently at how you misread the date as "2014" and not "2004" and have no idea of Bush's actions RE: Medicare, even though they've been discussed upthread.

Anyway, I'm already smiling benevolently, so you just keep doing what you do.

 

[Avatar4321]

I have a problem with it. Why sh would we be empowering politicians to bully people or companies by force?

 

[Dovahkiin]

These are the same people who cry about the deficit while worshipping Reagan, a man who ran a deficit. The irony of this is, the deficit is largely connected to the "Reagan boom" that, you guessed it, vanished when the deficit was cut.

^^^^ ...speaking of pharmaceuticals, they got some goooooooood shit out there man.

Facts are facts.

True. But there are facts and there is stupid shit you pull out of your ass because you hate anything not liberal.

Dude, I think Reagan was pretty good, he ran a deficit that helped the economy.

The Democrats chipped in to a large extend but going in the hole is never good. In his case we had a Democrat president before hand that did what many of them do and cut the military.

The deficit helped the boom. Give Reagan more credit.

 

[Arianrhod]

I have a problem with it. Why sh would we be empowering politicians to bully people or companies by force?

Because you'd rather they kissed their asses? Because that horse has left the barn.

In what language does "negotiate" = "bully" or "force"?