Why do conservatives think reducing government would fix our nation's problems?

[Billy000]

Wrong.

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

Oh that's a fantastic idea. Let's get rid of any oversight on the drugs being produced. Let's let any drug companies put in any ingredients they like and we'll just ignore any harmful side effects.

It's amazing you don't think these things through.

If drug companies sell dangerous drugs, they get sued for billions of dollars. The FDA is counter productive since it lets them get away with selling drugs that harm people.

How many have to die before a good lawsuit can even be put together ? Do you realize how difficult that is?

How many people died from taking phentermine after the FDA approved it? How many people died because of FDA imposed delays in approving life saving drugs?

Many more would die with no FDA oversight at all. How can the FDA possibly predict the perfect outcome of these drugs when we have 10s of thousands of chemicals produced in the market that have not been scientifically tested? That lack of oversight has caused the FDA's shortcomings.

 

[bripat9643]

It's simple: government has caused all our nation's problems that are humanly solvable. Solution: get rid of the problem.

Wrong.

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

Oh that's a fantastic idea. Let's get rid of any oversight on the drugs being produced. Let's let any drug companies put in any ingredients they like and we'll just ignore any harmful side effects.

It's amazing you don't think these things through.

If drug companies sell dangerous drugs, they get sued for billions of dollars. The FDA is counter productive since it lets them get away with selling drugs that harm people.

Oh right because never mind those cases would take years to build AND without any government oversight, the powerful corporate lawyers could easily argue they didn't break any laws. People could die and become ill well in the meantime

You mean like all the people who died of heart attacks who were taking FDA approved phentermine?

 

[deltex1]

How would reducing government fix our crumbling infrastructure system that ranks one of the worst in the developed world?

How would reducing government lower medical costs such as prescription drug costs?

How would reducing government raise wages in the lower classes and keep all income gains from going to the top earners?

How would reducing government fix our public school system which for decades is one of the worst in the developed world?

How would reducing government keep environmental crises like Flint crisis from happening elsewhere?

How would reducing government stop Wall Street corruption?

How did increasing the size of government solve all these problems? Uh oh....

 

[Timmy]

Wrong.

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths! Curse you gubment and your safety regs !

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths!

How about increases in CAFE standards killing people?

How are they killing people? Other than lowering oil dependence and dropping gas prices .

Wait a minute ?! Cheap gas means more road trips! Meaning more road death!! Damn you CAFE!!

How are they killing people?

How do they increase MPG? Give me the top 5 ways you think.

Power cars with:

Human blood
Human souls
Human babies
Humans on gerbil wheels
Human kidneys

There! That's 5!

 

[Timmy]

Wrong.

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths! Curse you gubment and your safety regs !

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths!

How about increases in CAFE standards killing people?

How are they killing people? Other than lowering oil dependence and dropping gas prices .

Wait a minute ?! Cheap gas means more road trips! Meaning more road death!! Damn you CAFE!!

One way manufacturers meet CAFE standards is to reduce the weight of their cars. Lighter cars mean less crash worthy cars which translates into more highway deaths.

Except highway deaths keep decreasing even as CAFE standards increase !

Care to explain the paradox ?

 

[Billy000]

Wrong.

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

Oh that's a fantastic idea. Let's get rid of any oversight on the drugs being produced. Let's let any drug companies put in any ingredients they like and we'll just ignore any harmful side effects.

It's amazing you don't think these things through.

If drug companies sell dangerous drugs, they get sued for billions of dollars. The FDA is counter productive since it lets them get away with selling drugs that harm people.

Oh right because never mind those cases would take years to build AND without any government oversight, the powerful corporate lawyers could easily argue they didn't break any laws. People could die and become ill well in the meantime

You mean like all the people who died of heart attacks who were taking FDA approved phentermine?

Don't you see the stupidity in this fallacious thinking of yours? The FDA makes a mistake so your logic is that whole agency must go? What about all the other drugs they have banned because of their harm? Obviously they would go back on the market if the FDA were dissolved.

 

[bripat9643]

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

Oh that's a fantastic idea. Let's get rid of any oversight on the drugs being produced. Let's let any drug companies put in any ingredients they like and we'll just ignore any harmful side effects.

It's amazing you don't think these things through.

If drug companies sell dangerous drugs, they get sued for billions of dollars. The FDA is counter productive since it lets them get away with selling drugs that harm people.

How many have to die before a good lawsuit can even be put together ? Do you realize how difficult that is?

How many people died from taking phentermine after the FDA approved it? How many people died because of FDA imposed delays in approving life saving drugs?

Many more would die with no FDA oversight at all. How can the FDA possibly predict the perfect outcome of these drugs when we have 10s of thousands of chemicals produced in the market that have not been scientifically tested? That lack of oversight has caused the FDA's shortcomings.

ROFL! I suppose you have some kind of evidence that more people would die? Obviously not. Tens of thousands of people have died because the FDA delayed the approval of life saving drugs for people that were terminally ill.

Apparently you are whining that the FDA is ineffective. So why do you insist it's necessary in the same paragraph?

The logic for the existence of the FDA is totally non-existent. Drug companies have to spend billions of dollars testing drugs to meet FDA regulations. Most of this testing is totally redundant and useless.If a drug has been in use in Europe for a decade, the company that owns it still has to put it through the usual FDA testing regime if it wants to market the drug in the United States. That is pure stupidity.

The FDA is the reason the price of drugs is so high. So what's the liberal solution? Impose price controls on drugs and remove any incentive for a company to develop new drugs. By by medical progress.

Government is the cause of all of our countries problems, and therefor liberals are the cause because they're the ones who always propose the government solution.

 

[bripat9643]

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths! Curse you gubment and your safety regs !

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths!

How about increases in CAFE standards killing people?

How are they killing people? Other than lowering oil dependence and dropping gas prices .

Wait a minute ?! Cheap gas means more road trips! Meaning more road death!! Damn you CAFE!!

One way manufacturers meet CAFE standards is to reduce the weight of their cars. Lighter cars mean less crash worthy cars which translates into more highway deaths.

Except highway deaths keep decreasing even as CAFE standards increase !

Care to explain the paradox ?

Highway deaths have been steadily decreasing ever since the invention of the highway.

 

[bripat9643]

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

Oh that's a fantastic idea. Let's get rid of any oversight on the drugs being produced. Let's let any drug companies put in any ingredients they like and we'll just ignore any harmful side effects.

It's amazing you don't think these things through.

If drug companies sell dangerous drugs, they get sued for billions of dollars. The FDA is counter productive since it lets them get away with selling drugs that harm people.

Oh right because never mind those cases would take years to build AND without any government oversight, the powerful corporate lawyers could easily argue they didn't break any laws. People could die and become ill well in the meantime

You mean like all the people who died of heart attacks who were taking FDA approved phentermine?

Don't you see the stupidity in this fallacious thinking of yours? The FDA makes a mistake so your logic is that whole agency must go? What about all the other drugs they have banned because of their harm? Obviously they would go back on the market if the FDA were dissolved.

The stupidity is all on the part of people who defend fascist government agencies like the FDA.

You theory is that if a single drug company makes a mistake we have to impose a huge regulatory burden that drives up the price of drugs into the stratosphere. Drug companies can be sued for drugs that harm people. They aren't going to put drugs known to be harmful on the market.

 

[Timmy]

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths! Curse you gubment and your safety regs !

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths!

How about increases in CAFE standards killing people?

How are they killing people? Other than lowering oil dependence and dropping gas prices .

Wait a minute ?! Cheap gas means more road trips! Meaning more road death!! Damn you CAFE!!

One way manufacturers meet CAFE standards is to reduce the weight of their cars. Lighter cars mean less crash worthy cars which translates into more highway deaths.

Except highway deaths keep decreasing even as CAFE standards increase !

Care to explain the paradox ?

Highway deaths have been steadily decreasing ever since the invention of the highway.

Ummm no. Do you seriously think that highway deaths peaked at the dawn of highways !?

Lol! There are more highways and drivers than ever . Yet the deaths are dropping .

You'll never admit it but it's gov safety regs that are saving those lives .

 

[Arianrhod]

It's simple: government has caused all our nation's problems that are humanly solvable. Solution: get rid of the problem.

Wrong.

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

Oh that's a fantastic idea. Let's get rid of any oversight on the drugs being produced. Let's let any drug companies put in any ingredients they like and we'll just ignore any harmful side effects.

It's amazing you don't think these things through.

Oh, come on now. Everyone knows that new drugs don't need to be developed or tested or refined. There's no scientific process involved at all.

Drugs actually grow on trees, and if it wasn't for the Mean Ol' Gubmint, anyone could just drive to the local orchard and pick as many drugs for as many illnesses as they needed.

Only a leftwing idiot like you believes corporations think killing their customers is a good way to make money. Do you really think a multi billion dollar corporation will put a product on the market unless they are dead certain it won't harm people?

Why don't you describe for us the process that goes into developing a new drug? We both know you can't, so you'll just jump up and down and scream obscenities, but it'll be fun to watch.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths! Curse you gubment and your safety regs !

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths!

How about increases in CAFE standards killing people?

How are they killing people? Other than lowering oil dependence and dropping gas prices .

Wait a minute ?! Cheap gas means more road trips! Meaning more road death!! Damn you CAFE!!

How are they killing people?

How do they increase MPG? Give me the top 5 ways you think.

Power cars with:

Human blood
Human souls
Human babies
Humans on gerbil wheels
Human kidneys

There! That's 5!

That's what I get for asking you to think.
Do I need to call 911? Did you hurt yourself?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How would reducing government fix our crumbling infrastructure system that ranks one of the worst in the developed world?

If we reduced stupid, wasteful government, we'd have money to fix infrastructure.

No if we got rid of all the tax loopholes and stopped rich people from taking advantage of cash havens, we would have a lot more revenue to spend.

Which loopholes do we need to get rid of? Be specific.

All of the ones that allow some corporations to pay a zero percent effective federal tax rate. That in combination with havens, cost 100 billion per year in revenue.

All of the ones that allow some corporations to pay a zero percent effective federal tax rate.

Yeah, that sounds awful. So be specific. Which ones?

Why would it matter to you that I single them out? I wont do that because the facts already state tax loopholes as a collective inhibit revenue. i know you think you are tripping me up by refusal to single them out, but we both know it doesn't matter since I can easily provide proof of their collective effect.

Why would it matter to you that I single them out?

How can we eliminate a loophole if you don't single it out?
Unless you're just ignorant and don't know what a loophole is?

 

[The Rabbi]

How would reducing government fix our crumbling infrastructure system that ranks one of the worst in the developed world?

How would reducing government lower medical costs such as prescription drug costs?

How would reducing government raise wages in the lower classes and keep all income gains from going to the top earners?

How would reducing government fix our public school system which for decades is one of the worst in the developed world?

How would reducing government keep environmental crises like Flint crisis from happening elsewhere?

How would reducing government stop Wall Street corruption?

Its another Triple Fail thread from the most failed poster on here.
Hey, Billy. High health care costs are directly the result of the 3rd party payer system we have now. Get rid of it and let the market sort it out and everyone will be better off.

 

[bripat9643]

How about the problem of dramatic decreases in automobile deaths!

How about increases in CAFE standards killing people?

How are they killing people? Other than lowering oil dependence and dropping gas prices .

Wait a minute ?! Cheap gas means more road trips! Meaning more road death!! Damn you CAFE!!

One way manufacturers meet CAFE standards is to reduce the weight of their cars. Lighter cars mean less crash worthy cars which translates into more highway deaths.

Except highway deaths keep decreasing even as CAFE standards increase !

Care to explain the paradox ?

Highway deaths have been steadily decreasing ever since the invention of the highway.

Ummm no. Do you seriously think that highway deaths peaked at the dawn of highways !?

Lol! There are more highways and drivers than ever . Yet the deaths are dropping .

You'll never admit it but it's gov safety regs that are saving those lives .

Deaths per passenger mile have been dropping ever since the invention of the motor car. You are a clueless boob if you don't know that.

 

[bripat9643]

Wrong.

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

Oh that's a fantastic idea. Let's get rid of any oversight on the drugs being produced. Let's let any drug companies put in any ingredients they like and we'll just ignore any harmful side effects.

It's amazing you don't think these things through.

Oh, come on now. Everyone knows that new drugs don't need to be developed or tested or refined. There's no scientific process involved at all.

Drugs actually grow on trees, and if it wasn't for the Mean Ol' Gubmint, anyone could just drive to the local orchard and pick as many drugs for as many illnesses as they needed.

Only a leftwing idiot like you believes corporations think killing their customers is a good way to make money. Do you really think a multi billion dollar corporation will put a product on the market unless they are dead certain it won't harm people?

Why don't you describe for us the process that goes into developing a new drug? We both know you can't, so you'll just jump up and down and scream obscenities, but it'll be fun to watch.

I've been involved in drug testing, so I know something about the process. regardless, how would my knowledge of the process or lack of it prove the FDA is justified?

 

[Arianrhod]

No, it's actually 100% correct. If you look at any of the problems this country has, at bottom the government is the cause. Just take the price of new drugs, for instance. It costs about $5 billion to bring a new drug to market. The FDA is almost entirely the cause of this incomprehensible expense. Get rid of the FDA and the price of developing new drugs would drop to something like $1 million.

Oh that's a fantastic idea. Let's get rid of any oversight on the drugs being produced. Let's let any drug companies put in any ingredients they like and we'll just ignore any harmful side effects.

It's amazing you don't think these things through.

Oh, come on now. Everyone knows that new drugs don't need to be developed or tested or refined. There's no scientific process involved at all.

Drugs actually grow on trees, and if it wasn't for the Mean Ol' Gubmint, anyone could just drive to the local orchard and pick as many drugs for as many illnesses as they needed.

Only a leftwing idiot like you believes corporations think killing their customers is a good way to make money. Do you really think a multi billion dollar corporation will put a product on the market unless they are dead certain it won't harm people?

Why don't you describe for us the process that goes into developing a new drug? We both know you can't, so you'll just jump up and down and scream obscenities, but it'll be fun to watch.

I've been involved in drug testing, so I know something about the process. regardless, how would my knowledge of the process or lack of it prove the FDA is justified?

So far you've given no indication that you understand why there's a need for oversight on the scientific process involved before the "ask your doctor if X is right for you" commercials hit the airwaves. I'm inviting you to prove otherwise.

 

[Desperado]

Because something is seriously wrong when you have more people working for the government that you have working for private companies. Then to add insult to injury they are making more money than the people in private industries,

 

[blackhawk]

It wouldn't fix all the nations problems but to pretend that having a government constantly running in the red and having to keep raising the debt ceiling and borrowing money to keep it operating is not a real problem is denial of the highest order. While we are at it despite what the left seems to think simply raising taxes on the rich will not fix the nations problems either if you are really serious about fixing the nations problems your going to need a combination of serious tax increases and not just on the rich along with equally serious spending cuts. As long as both sides think you can fix everything with either tax hikes on the rich or spending cuts alone we are going to stay right where we are going nowhere fast.

 

[bripat9643]

Oh that's a fantastic idea. Let's get rid of any oversight on the drugs being produced. Let's let any drug companies put in any ingredients they like and we'll just ignore any harmful side effects.

It's amazing you don't think these things through.

Oh, come on now. Everyone knows that new drugs don't need to be developed or tested or refined. There's no scientific process involved at all.

Drugs actually grow on trees, and if it wasn't for the Mean Ol' Gubmint, anyone could just drive to the local orchard and pick as many drugs for as many illnesses as they needed.

Only a leftwing idiot like you believes corporations think killing their customers is a good way to make money. Do you really think a multi billion dollar corporation will put a product on the market unless they are dead certain it won't harm people?

Why don't you describe for us the process that goes into developing a new drug? We both know you can't, so you'll just jump up and down and scream obscenities, but it'll be fun to watch.

I've been involved in drug testing, so I know something about the process. regardless, how would my knowledge of the process or lack of it prove the FDA is justified?

So far you've given no indication that you understand why there's a need for oversight on the scientific process involved before the "ask your doctor if X is right for you" commercials hit the airwaves. I'm inviting you to prove otherwise.

You mean I'm not a sucker who swallows government claims without question.

Your theory that the government is competent to "oversee" science isn't born out by the empirical evidence. The AGW scam is the irrefutable proof of that.

If the FDA didn't exist there would be plenty of private companies that would evaluate the claims of drug makers about their products. No government agencies enforces safety standards for electrical products. A private organization called Underwriters Laboratory does that. When was the last time you heard of a defective electrical device killing someone?