Why again do left wingers believe taxing corporations more is helpful to the middle class?

[Camp]

"For profit" for medical care. It should not be a "for profit" industry, by definition. Profiting off of suffering is anathema to being human, and civilized.

Horse manure. Should farmers make a profit? The profit off of people starving otherwise. Should clothing manufacturers make a profit? Housing manufacturers?

All profits are made off of fulfilling human wants and needs. The theory that medical treatment is some special category is so stupid that only snowflakes would swallow it.

Ask them about evil pharmaceutical companies. Ask them how much money those companies invest in researching new drugs for dreaded diseases. Now, ask them whether or not the profit motive plays any part in the BILLIONS those companies spend. Ask them how many useful drugs have been invented in countries without the profit motive. Watch them as they squirm in their bullshit.

Most of the standard drugs that people depend upon on a daily basis were developed long ago in government funded labs or universities and then offered to private companies to commercialize.

Bullshit. Private companies develop most drugs. Furthermore, drugs that have been on the market for more than 7 years are no longer covered by a patent, so they are generally quite cheap.

Bullshit. Look up Enbrel and the shenanigans Pfizer pulled off to extend their patent. It's a life-saving medication for some people and it costs $1200 per month. They got WAY more than their R&D returned on investment and now they're padding their yachts.

I get eye drops that cost my insurance company $135 for $15 in Europe. Produced under US license and I don't need to see the doctor for a prescription. Just walk info the pharmacy and ask for it. It works fine as my eye pressure tests show.

 

[GaryDog]

The ******* post I just told you about, you illiterate douche. It was his post immediately following the patent office remark.

And yes, you're of inferior intellect, and you know it. That's why you keep desperately pining for my attention.

So you think "Let's cut to the chase . Everyone complains that the gov is ruining healthcare . Picking on the poor drug companies . Well fine . Let the drug companies fend for themselves" is proof he was being sarcastic? lol If anything, it proves the opposite.

The only one who is acting desperate here is you. You are desperately trying to save face (or regain it). All I am doing is responding to a thread in which I have been a participant. Somehow you think that makes it all about you? lol Yeah, that sure shows your intellectual superiority. (now that last sentence is what sarcasm looks like)

But run along, junior. You might be able to find someone who will let you make spurious comments without calling you on them.

He was lampooning the idea that republicans want the government out of healthcare, yet are fine with giving corporate welfare and patent protection to big pharma. Jesus, is this really THAT hard for you to understand?

Are you saying you oppose our patent laws?

Holy ******* shit. Do you morons clone each other?

Apparently you are the only one to assume Timmy meant it sarcastically. If Timmy answered my very simple question, it would solve the question.

Also, Bripat asked for clarification as well. You know, as opposed to assuming it was sarcasm.

I am not the only one to assume he meant it sarcastically. Most people with a working frontal lobe could grasp the tone and tenor of his message, in response to the constant drumbeat of people here demanding we get government "out of healthcare", hence his sarcastic response. Obviously, inventions need patent protection. That being said, many (if not most) of the greatest healthcare leaps were spearheaded by government funding and provided to the people for the good of humankind.

'Course we all know Republicans hate that shit.

 

[GaryDog]

Horse manure. Should farmers make a profit? The profit off of people starving otherwise. Should clothing manufacturers make a profit? Housing manufacturers?

All profits are made off of fulfilling human wants and needs. The theory that medical treatment is some special category is so stupid that only snowflakes would swallow it.

Ask them about evil pharmaceutical companies. Ask them how much money those companies invest in researching new drugs for dreaded diseases. Now, ask them whether or not the profit motive plays any part in the BILLIONS those companies spend. Ask them how many useful drugs have been invented in countries without the profit motive. Watch them as they squirm in their bullshit.

Most of the standard drugs that people depend upon on a daily basis were developed long ago in government funded labs or universities and then offered to private companies to commercialize.

Bullshit. Private companies develop most drugs. Furthermore, drugs that have been on the market for more than 7 years are no longer covered by a patent, so they are generally quite cheap.

Bullshit. Look up Enbrel and the shenanigans Pfizer pulled off to extend their patent. It's a life-saving medication for some people and it costs $1200 per month. They got WAY more than their R&D returned on investment and now they're padding their yachts.

Exactly what shenanigans did Pfizer pull off? They applied for, and received, a 2nd patent that continued the exclusivity for another 16 years.

But please, tell us what shenanigans Pfizer pulled off. And also, tell us whether there was much probability that a generic version would have become available.

Oh, and please tell us what was spent on R&D for this drug, and how much profit was made in the first 14 years it was on the market.

Jesus, you really doubt that after 14 years they didn't recoup their investment? BWAHHAAAHAHA!!!!

 

[WinterBorn]

Ask them about evil pharmaceutical companies. Ask them how much money those companies invest in researching new drugs for dreaded diseases. Now, ask them whether or not the profit motive plays any part in the BILLIONS those companies spend. Ask them how many useful drugs have been invented in countries without the profit motive. Watch them as they squirm in their bullshit.

Most of the standard drugs that people depend upon on a daily basis were developed long ago in government funded labs or universities and then offered to private companies to commercialize.

Bullshit. Private companies develop most drugs. Furthermore, drugs that have been on the market for more than 7 years are no longer covered by a patent, so they are generally quite cheap.

Bullshit. Look up Enbrel and the shenanigans Pfizer pulled off to extend their patent. It's a life-saving medication for some people and it costs $1200 per month. They got WAY more than their R&D returned on investment and now they're padding their yachts.

Exactly what shenanigans did Pfizer pull off? They applied for, and received, a 2nd patent that continued the exclusivity for another 16 years.

But please, tell us what shenanigans Pfizer pulled off. And also, tell us whether there was much probability that a generic version would have become available.

Oh, and please tell us what was spent on R&D for this drug, and how much profit was made in the first 14 years it was on the market.

Jesus, you really doubt that after 14 years they didn't recoup their investment? BWAHHAAAHAHA!!!!

That is not what I said. You really have trouble with the whole issue of someone asking a question, don't you? You made the statement as if you knew it for a fact. Obviously you don't.

And I see you chose not to explain what "shenanigans" Pfizer pulled off.

 

[GaryDog]

Most of the standard drugs that people depend upon on a daily basis were developed long ago in government funded labs or universities and then offered to private companies to commercialize.

Bullshit. Private companies develop most drugs. Furthermore, drugs that have been on the market for more than 7 years are no longer covered by a patent, so they are generally quite cheap.

Bullshit. Look up Enbrel and the shenanigans Pfizer pulled off to extend their patent. It's a life-saving medication for some people and it costs $1200 per month. They got WAY more than their R&D returned on investment and now they're padding their yachts.

Exactly what shenanigans did Pfizer pull off? They applied for, and received, a 2nd patent that continued the exclusivity for another 16 years.

But please, tell us what shenanigans Pfizer pulled off. And also, tell us whether there was much probability that a generic version would have become available.

Oh, and please tell us what was spent on R&D for this drug, and how much profit was made in the first 14 years it was on the market.

Jesus, you really doubt that after 14 years they didn't recoup their investment? BWAHHAAAHAHA!!!!

That is not what I said. You really have trouble with the whole issue of someone asking a question, don't you? You made the statement as if you knew it for a fact. Obviously you don't.

And I see you chose not to explain what "shenanigans" Pfizer pulled off.

It's called collusion and price-fixing. Teddy Roosevelt would've kicked their asses:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/16/...g-patents-to-delay-generic-versions.html?_r=0
The best-selling drugs Humira and Enbrel have a lot in common. They both use biotechnology to treat rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and other autoimmune diseases. And they come with giant price tags approaching $50,000 a year.

Now the two companies behind the competing drugs have found common ground in keeping those prices so high: They are deploying new patents to prevent patients and insurers from getting two essentially generic versions of the drugs for less money.

 

[WinterBorn]

So you think "Let's cut to the chase . Everyone complains that the gov is ruining healthcare . Picking on the poor drug companies . Well fine . Let the drug companies fend for themselves" is proof he was being sarcastic? lol If anything, it proves the opposite.

The only one who is acting desperate here is you. You are desperately trying to save face (or regain it). All I am doing is responding to a thread in which I have been a participant. Somehow you think that makes it all about you? lol Yeah, that sure shows your intellectual superiority. (now that last sentence is what sarcasm looks like)

But run along, junior. You might be able to find someone who will let you make spurious comments without calling you on them.

He was lampooning the idea that republicans want the government out of healthcare, yet are fine with giving corporate welfare and patent protection to big pharma. Jesus, is this really THAT hard for you to understand?

Are you saying you oppose our patent laws?

Holy ******* shit. Do you morons clone each other?

Apparently you are the only one to assume Timmy meant it sarcastically. If Timmy answered my very simple question, it would solve the question.

Also, Bripat asked for clarification as well. You know, as opposed to assuming it was sarcasm.

I am not the only one to assume he meant it sarcastically. Most people with a working frontal lobe could grasp the tone and tenor of his message, in response to the constant drumbeat of people here demanding we get government "out of healthcare", hence his sarcastic response. Obviously, inventions need patent protection. That being said, many (if not most) of the greatest healthcare leaps were spearheaded by government funding and provided to the people for the good of humankind.

'Course we all know Republicans hate that shit.

And both Bripat and I asked a question to clarify what he meant. Youdon't seem to understand the concept of asking a question or what the "?" at the end of the sentence means. You assume a lot, don't you.

But do try to stay on topic. M'kay? Otherwise you are just trolling or being an ass.

 

[rightwinger]

Taxing corporations contributes to our overall revenue base and relieves the tax burden on the middle class

It also helps to pay for programs like national defense, security, infrastructure, education, a legal system, economic stability....ALL of which corporations exploit more than the general public

 

[GaryDog]

And both Bripat and I asked a question to clarify what he meant. Youdon't seem to understand the concept of asking a question or what the "?" at the end of the sentence means. You assume a lot, don't you.

But do try to stay on topic. M'kay? Otherwise you are just trolling or being an ass.

Because both of you are ******* retarded. M'kay?

 

[WinterBorn]

Bullshit. Private companies develop most drugs. Furthermore, drugs that have been on the market for more than 7 years are no longer covered by a patent, so they are generally quite cheap.

Bullshit. Look up Enbrel and the shenanigans Pfizer pulled off to extend their patent. It's a life-saving medication for some people and it costs $1200 per month. They got WAY more than their R&D returned on investment and now they're padding their yachts.

Exactly what shenanigans did Pfizer pull off? They applied for, and received, a 2nd patent that continued the exclusivity for another 16 years.

But please, tell us what shenanigans Pfizer pulled off. And also, tell us whether there was much probability that a generic version would have become available.

Oh, and please tell us what was spent on R&D for this drug, and how much profit was made in the first 14 years it was on the market.

Jesus, you really doubt that after 14 years they didn't recoup their investment? BWAHHAAAHAHA!!!!

That is not what I said. You really have trouble with the whole issue of someone asking a question, don't you? You made the statement as if you knew it for a fact. Obviously you don't.

And I see you chose not to explain what "shenanigans" Pfizer pulled off.

It's called collusion and price-fixing. Teddy Roosevelt would've kicked their asses:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/16/...g-patents-to-delay-generic-versions.html?_r=0
The best-selling drugs Humira and Enbrel have a lot in common. They both use biotechnology to treat rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and other autoimmune diseases. And they come with giant price tags approaching $50,000 a year.

Now the two companies behind the competing drugs have found common ground in keeping those prices so high: They are deploying new patents to prevent patients and insurers from getting two essentially generic versions of the drugs for less money.

You forgot to malign Wyeth too. They sell the same drug outside the US. In Switzerland it sells for over $1,000.00 a month. I guess it is not just a US thing. It sells for over $1,500 a month in Canada.

The extension of a patent is not a rare thing, especially for biologics. Enbrel is also not the only treatment for the 5 versions of arthritis that the FDA has approved Engen to be used for.

 

[WinterBorn]

And both Bripat and I asked a question to clarify what he meant. Youdon't seem to understand the concept of asking a question or what the "?" at the end of the sentence means. You assume a lot, don't you.

But do try to stay on topic. M'kay? Otherwise you are just trolling or being an ass.

Because both of you are ******* retarded. M'kay?

At least I knew that we have, in fact, made inroads in treatments of cancer. And I knew that no one spent billions developing a drug to make Trump's dick hard.

But I see you have littleto offer in the discussion. That is why you resort to name-calling and attempts at insults.

Stick with the topic junior.

 

[boilermaker55]

And again, the rich, ultra rich and corporations will never want transparency to hide their monies.
Nice try but it will never work. Not until the working class is the ones that make the rules.

You must be insane to believe that theory will work.
The lobbyists will put in alternate tax deductions to allow the wealthy and corporations to get more tax credits.
If a flat tax would benefit them now, don't you think it would have passed decades ago. Yes it would.

To quote "the peemesiter" , the system is rigged. Having thousands if not tens of thousands of lobbyists to help write corporate tax laws, gives them the ability to slant the situation.
If you cannot see the flaw in that you are not very astute.

You should talk about anyone hiding their taxes, after you elected Rump

Why do you imply wrongdoing? They have the best lawyers money can pay for.

It's all legit, and all part of the game. Taxes for thee and not for me.

Then go with a flat tax and be done with it.

There will always be taxes, the idea is to make the process as transparent and simple as possible.

 

[GaryDog]

And both Bripat and I asked a question to clarify what he meant. Youdon't seem to understand the concept of asking a question or what the "?" at the end of the sentence means. You assume a lot, don't you.

But do try to stay on topic. M'kay? Otherwise you are just trolling or being an ass.

Because both of you are ******* retarded. M'kay?

At least I knew that we have, in fact, made inroads in treatments of cancer. And I knew that no one spent billions developing a drug to make Trump's dick hard.

But I see you have littleto offer in the discussion. That is why you resort to name-calling and attempts at insults.

Stick with the topic junior.

I didn't say we didn't make inroads. I said the profit motive gives incentive to cure boner droops over cancer cures. And I'm right. LEARN. TO. *******. READ. ASSHOLE.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Trying, always trying to figure this out. Trust me, they won't have an answer that makes any sense. They follow the same cliches that they need to "tax the rich" and "feed the poor."

Taxing corporations large amounts somehow is good for the middle class?

Do they know that when corporations are taxed less that it leads to more jobs, more jobs lead to more money stimulating the economy and more economic growth.

Do they have any other cliche or something original rather than this notion that trickle down does not work? They believe Reaganomics was bad for this country?

They actually use the notion "trickle up." Someone ought to tell them things don't trickle up. It is literally impossible and they should maybe get their own term and stop using phrases that make zero sense.

So, get ready for complete bullshit from them and more left wing marxist talking points. Nothing original.

/---- Lib policies prove they can't run a Kool Aid stand without adult supervision

 

[rightwinger]

What does raising taxes on corporations do for the middle class?

1. Shifts tax burden from the workers to the corporations
2. Provides money for schools, infrastructure, healthcare, parks.....all of which help the middle class

 

[rightwinger]

If corporations are people....why shouldn't they be taxed like people?

 

[WinterBorn]

And both Bripat and I asked a question to clarify what he meant. Youdon't seem to understand the concept of asking a question or what the "?" at the end of the sentence means. You assume a lot, don't you.

But do try to stay on topic. M'kay? Otherwise you are just trolling or being an ass.

Because both of you are ******* retarded. M'kay?

At least I knew that we have, in fact, made inroads in treatments of cancer. And I knew that no one spent billions developing a drug to make Trump's dick hard.

But I see you have littleto offer in the discussion. That is why you resort to name-calling and attempts at insults.

Stick with the topic junior.

I didn't say we didn't make inroads. I said the profit motive gives incentive to cure boner droops over cancer cures. And I'm right. LEARN. TO. *******. READ. ASSHOLE.

"Yeah, the profit motive has been TERRRRific. Billions going into curing Donald Trump's limp dick, yet we can't make inroads on cancer."

Once again, billions were NOT spent to make boner pills. And in the last couple of decades there have been major advances in cancer treatment, with survival rates being much higher. So you can try and spin it however you want. But you are wrong. Calling me an asshole doesn't change that.

 

[WinterBorn]

What does raising taxes on corporations do for the middle class?

1. Shifts tax burden from the workers to the corporations
2. Provides money for schools, infrastructure, healthcare, parks.....all of which help the middle class

Except the corporations add their taxes into the cost of doing business. In other words, those taxes are passed on to their customers in the form of higher taxes.

 

[JoeNormal]

What does raising taxes on corporations do for the middle class?

1. Shifts tax burden from the workers to the corporations
2. Provides money for schools, infrastructure, healthcare, parks.....all of which help the middle class

Except the corporations add their taxes into the cost of doing business. In other words, those taxes are passed on to their customers in the form of higher taxes.

Ok, so their customers pay higher taxes rather than the general population.

 

[rightwinger]

What does raising taxes on corporations do for the middle class?

1. Shifts tax burden from the workers to the corporations
2. Provides money for schools, infrastructure, healthcare, parks.....all of which help the middle class

Except the corporations add their taxes into the cost of doing business. In other words, those taxes are passed on to their customers in the form of higher taxes.

Idealistically, yes

But it assumes American businesses actually produce anything. The financial sector is the largest business sector in the country. They do not actually produce anything of value but make profit moving money from point A to point B. For that, they get to pay a reduced tax rate

How about we apply a tax to every stock transaction?

 

[WinterBorn]

What does raising taxes on corporations do for the middle class?

1. Shifts tax burden from the workers to the corporations
2. Provides money for schools, infrastructure, healthcare, parks.....all of which help the middle class

Except the corporations add their taxes into the cost of doing business. In other words, those taxes are passed on to their customers in the form of higher taxes.

Idealistically, yes

But it assumes American businesses actually produce anything. The financial sector is the largest business sector in the country. They do not actually produce anything of value but make profit moving money from point A to point B. For that, they get to pay a reduced tax rate

How about we apply a tax to every stock transaction?

And the financial institutions will raise their prices for trades to cover it. Do you think stock traders will pay higher taxes without passing that on to their clients?