Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Definitely, then those pharma companies wouldn't have to deal with those silly "regulations". They could just distribute all their experimental drugs among the general population without all those pesky "drug trials".
Not to mention all the farmers that wouldn't have to sell us healthy food anymore.
That would definitely bring down health care costs.
Wow ... you are an idealist aren't you?
Have you been paying attention to how well the FDA has been protecting us? The only thing they have managed to do right is keep e coli outbreaks down. Most of the meds they okay, the really expensive ones, have been killing people, while cheaper and more tested meds which have had very little ill effect in large areas over long periods of time are not allowed because they can't afford the "filing fees" (bribes in reality) the FDA collects ... wake up sometime and see what's really happening.
Soooo....
You find problems with the regulatory agency, and your answer is to do away with the regulatory agency?
Were you going to replace it with another regulatory agency?
Because, as has been made VERY clear to everyone by the recent financial crisis, corporations are sure as hell not going to police themselves.
No one referred to an absence of a "mixed system." What was referred to was the reality of that respective economic structure not being a "mixture" of capitalism and socialism, but instead of market exchange and government provisions, as both are utilized as means of resource allocation. Central governmental planning is and will remain a necessary component of capitalism, but it's fallacious to assume that it constitutes an insertion of a "socialist" element into the capitalist economy. In fact, considering the role of state programs in maintaining macroeconomic stabilization and sustaining the physical efficiency of the working class, this has the consequence of upholding stability in the capitalist economy and thereby also upholding the private ownership of the means of production. Such government influence is thus opposed to socialism.
What?!
Wow ... you are an idealist aren't you?
Have you been paying attention to how well the FDA has been protecting us? The only thing they have managed to do right is keep e coli outbreaks down. Most of the meds they okay, the really expensive ones, have been killing people, while cheaper and more tested meds which have had very little ill effect in large areas over long periods of time are not allowed because they can't afford the "filing fees" (bribes in reality) the FDA collects ... wake up sometime and see what's really happening.
Soooo....
You find problems with the regulatory agency, and your answer is to do away with the regulatory agency?
Were you going to replace it with another regulatory agency?
Because, as has been made VERY clear to everyone by the recent financial crisis, corporations are sure as hell not going to police themselves.
The financial crisis is because of the middle class spending money they don't have (ie credit cards) and not paying it back, the government "regulatory" groups forced the credit card companies to allow it to happen, not the other way around.
So then tell me, do you just buy what the TV tells you?
Hate to say it, but you're a bit off. Yes, "each according to his contribution" is part of the basis for socialism, to be sure. This is a move towards meritocracy. You get what you deserve based on community standards, enforced by a centralized planing system. (Of course the ideas of "who makes the standards" is a HUGE discussion)
No aspect of socialism necessitates centralized planning, and indeed, considering the failure of socialism to manifest itself in the authoritarian and centrally planned economies of the Soviet bloc, China, et al., centralized planning seems to inhibit the effective implementation of socialism. Support for central planning boards as cornerstones of a socialist economy is thus scarce among socialists (and has always been so among some sects of socialists, such as anarchists), the majority of whom now support either markets or decentralized planning.
So to say that there's no mixed system when we obviously have centrally-planned, equality based regulation for progressive re-distribution while at the same time we have private, for profit market competition is flat wrong. It's not just a shade of captialism, its both.
No one referred to an absence of a "mixed system." What was referred to was the reality of that respective economic structure not being a "mixture" of capitalism and socialism, but instead of market exchange and government provisions, as both are utilized as means of resource allocation. Central governmental planning is and will remain a necessary component of capitalism, but it's fallacious to assume that it constitutes an insertion of a "socialist" element into the capitalist economy. In fact, considering the role of state programs in maintaining macroeconomic stabilization and sustaining the physical efficiency of the working class, this has the consequence of upholding stability in the capitalist economy and thereby also upholding the private ownership of the means of production. Such government influence is thus opposed to socialism.
Soooo....
You find problems with the regulatory agency, and your answer is to do away with the regulatory agency?
Were you going to replace it with another regulatory agency?
Because, as has been made VERY clear to everyone by the recent financial crisis, corporations are sure as hell not going to police themselves.
The financial crisis is because of the middle class spending money they don't have (ie credit cards) and not paying it back, the government "regulatory" groups forced the credit card companies to allow it to happen, not the other way around.
So then tell me, do you just buy what the TV tells you?
This is so not true, I don't even know where to begin. Nobody forced anything except Biden et al, to rearrange the order of liens so the credit card companies would move up the line and supercede collateralized instruments. For which, I'd like to slap the assholes that did same, including Biden.
You're the one who said that capitalism had a sliding scale that included the elements of socialism we're seeing today.
What?!
Something that keeps capitalism strong isn't socialism.
You're the one who said that capitalism had a sliding scale that included the elements of socialism we're seeing today.
No, I didn't. You've just fallen into the all-too-common "government=socialism" fallacy.
The financial crisis is because of the middle class spending money they don't have (ie credit cards) and not paying it back, the government "regulatory" groups forced the credit card companies to allow it to happen, not the other way around.
So then tell me, do you just buy what the TV tells you?
This is so not true, I don't even know where to begin. Nobody forced anything except Biden et al, to rearrange the order of liens so the credit card companies would move up the line and supercede collateralized instruments. For which, I'd like to slap the assholes that did same, including Biden.
Wow ... short sighted still.
This is so not true, I don't even know where to begin. Nobody forced anything except Biden et al, to rearrange the order of liens so the credit card companies would move up the line and supercede collateralized instruments. For which, I'd like to slap the assholes that did same, including Biden.
Wow ... short sighted still.
I need more eyes because you went from FDA being bad juju to consumers being forced to default on credit cards. Pick a card, any card.
WTF?
Because, as has been made VERY clear to everyone by the recent financial crisis, corporations are sure as hell not going to police themselves.
The financial crisis is because of the middle class spending money they don't have (ie credit cards) and not paying it back, the government "regulatory" groups forced the credit card companies to allow it to happen, not the other way around.
So then tell me, do you just buy what the TV tells you?
Wow ... short sighted still.
I need more eyes because you went from FDA being bad juju to consumers being forced to default on credit cards. Pick a card, any card.
No, you went there but didn't notice it, or forgot it. The FDA is bad, it's a mob boss using the law to stay in power, and nothing more. Every country where healthcare is affordable has no such group in power.
WTF?
Are you on crack? I said that our presently existing economic structure was a "mixed economy" in the sense of being a combination of market and governmental influence. I also said that the bit about "socialism" was nonsense. No contradiction there.
Apparently you're the one with the pipe. I'm wasting kilocalories even responding.
I take issue with the statement that only the rich have access to health care. Give me a break. I have access to health care. I pay for it, and I am very grateful for the privelege to work and make a responsible choice to spend my money on health care. I am NOT rich, by any stretch of the imagination. I am a working-class American who has made health insurance a priority. Period.
I take issue with the statement that only the rich have access to health care. Give me a break. I have access to health care. I pay for it, and I am very grateful for the privelege to work and make a responsible choice to spend my money on health care. I am NOT rich, by any stretch of the imagination. I am a working-class American who has made health insurance a priority. Period.
Is this part of the argument that Obama needs to address to get his message across?
