no tax return, no place on ballot

[Andylusion]

Yes when she runs for president she will be required to release her tax returns. Just like everyone else who runs for president.

Except of course, trump. Even though he said he would release his tax returns he has not and has fought to keep it secret.

It's as legitimate of a question to ask of everyone. This is why nothing gets done. Everyone is willing to overlook in their politician what they will not overlook in someone else's.

I don't think so.

What exactly do you think would get done, if Trump released his tax returns? Nothing. His tax returns would simply be a political football to kick around by the Democrats, and he knows that.

My reply was in discussion about why this would not apply to other politicians if people were wanting transparency. But since you said what you did, I will once again note that Trump said more than once he would release them. Why Lie?

Even more ironic, having that political football to kick around, would serve as a distraction from getting stuff done. People would be screaming back and fourth over his tax return, and accomplishing nothing.

He isn't getting stuff done.

And while you say it is a legitimate question to ask of everyone.... why? What business is it of yours? Are you suggesting that there is something illegal in his tax return, that magically the IRS which prosecutes people every single year on this, was giving him a free pass on? Do you have any evidence to warrant that accusation? If so, file it in court, to have his tax return made public.

But of course there is nothing to suggest that Trump has done anything wrong.

So why is someone's tax return your business? Why is someone who has done nothing wrong, and no evidence of doing anything wrong, to have his tax returns looked through?

Because he said he would.

Politicians lie all the time. All of them. Why did Hillary lie about classified information on a private email server? Why did she lie about a obscure video on the internet, causing a spontaneous riot the killed a US diplomat?

I refused to vote for her because she did lie all the time. Again, I supported Sanders. Can you show where he lies "all the time"?

I'll take Trump changing his mind on releasing a tax return, over bold faced lies about national security and the murdering of a diplomat, any day.

He lied. The reason he had no problem doing so is he knew that there would be plenty of those like yourself that would cover for them. That's why so many have no problem lying.

You are talking about Trump changing his mind on a tax return, over bold faced lies about very important issues, to... I don't want to release my tax return now.

No I am not. You are trying to spin it that way. Trump has lied about all kinds of things also. I consider health care a very important aspect also. I'm still waiting for the great plan he had that we all were going to love. I'm still waiting on Mexico paying for the wall.

That's not even really a lie. I wager at the time he said he would release his tax return, and then after realized the Democraps would use it as a political football, and decided not to.

Big deal. If you can prove wrong doing, then do so. Until then, people can change their minds on things. You have never said you would do X, and then later changed your mind? Why is that ok for you, but not Trump? Or do you expect me to believe you have never changed your mind on anything in your life?

Trump lies constantly. Even when it is shown to him that he said something he claims he never said he lies about it. Trump is very much like Hillary. They will lie even when the truth is a better answer.

I'm not entirely sure if Sanders lies or not. I think he does, because he says things that are clearly garbage, like we can get the rich to pay for all our free stuff. That has never worked in all human history, but he thinks his 'robinhood tax' is going to fix it all?

The real problem is, Bernie is even more dangerous if he actually believes his crap.

Being Truthful is a virtue, no doubt. But being truthful about evil, does not make the evil good. If I told you, I would kill your daughter, you wouldn't think that I was a guy to vote for because at least I'm being honest that I would kill your daughter.

Bernie is a socialist. He wants to turn this country into a socialist hell hole. Every single time they have tried socialism, it has failed.

Bernie being honest about his idiocy, is like Chavez being honest about his idiocy.... him being honest, hasn't stopped thousands from being on the brink of starvation in Venezuela.

He isn't getting stuff done.

Yes he is. Last I checked, the Corporate tax rate is much lower than when he got into office. You can say you disagree with what he's gotten done... but he has gotten stuff done. And I support the lower tax rate. In fact, I'd support eliminating the corporate tax altogether.

He lied. The reason he had no problem doing so is he knew that there would be plenty of those like yourself that would cover for them. That's why so many have no problem lying.

Prove he lied. Provide clear and total proof, that he had no intention AT THAT TIME of releasing his tax return.

Otherwise, you are just being a judgemental jerk.

No I am not. You are trying to spin it that way. Trump has lied about all kinds of things also. I consider health care a very important aspect also. I'm still waiting for the great plan he had that we all were going to love. I'm still waiting on Mexico paying for the wall.

I never believed that Mexico would pay for the wall. And even then, do you know for a fact that Trump knew Mexico wouldn't pay for the wall? Maybe he really thought we could negotiate for them to build that wall.

See over and over, you are just judging someone, without knowing anything about what they really thought. That makes you a judgement jerk. Stop that. Stop being a jerk. Didn't your parents teach you better?

See when Hillary lied, it was clear cut. We have memos to Hillary before the Ambassador Steven's funeral, saying that it was not a spontaneous protest, but an organized attack. But she went to the Funeral, and told the widows and family of the dead, that it was a protest over some obscure internet video.

That is a clear cut, undeniable, evidence based, example of lying. They knew the truth. We have proof they knew the truth. And they said something contrary to the truth.

What you have is Trump saying "We'll get Mexico to build the wall" and it didn't happen. Do you have a memo from Mexico to Trump before that statement saying "We'll never build the wall for you" or something?

Or is this, every time something doesn't happen, he must have known it wouldn't happen, and was lying about it?

Trump lies constantly. Even when it is shown to him that he said something he claims he never said he lies about it. Trump is very much like Hillary. They will lie even when the truth is a better answer.

Yeah, I agree. Trump spouts off all the time. I get that.

But see you actually damage your own position, because you make up lies that don't exist. When you say he 'lied about the wall', when you don't know what he was thinking at the time... that makes you the one lacking credibility.

 

[pknopp]

It's as legitimate of a question to ask of everyone. This is why nothing gets done. Everyone is willing to overlook in their politician what they will not overlook in someone else's.

I don't think so.

What exactly do you think would get done, if Trump released his tax returns? Nothing. His tax returns would simply be a political football to kick around by the Democrats, and he knows that.

My reply was in discussion about why this would not apply to other politicians if people were wanting transparency. But since you said what you did, I will once again note that Trump said more than once he would release them. Why Lie?

Even more ironic, having that political football to kick around, would serve as a distraction from getting stuff done. People would be screaming back and fourth over his tax return, and accomplishing nothing.

He isn't getting stuff done.

And while you say it is a legitimate question to ask of everyone.... why? What business is it of yours? Are you suggesting that there is something illegal in his tax return, that magically the IRS which prosecutes people every single year on this, was giving him a free pass on? Do you have any evidence to warrant that accusation? If so, file it in court, to have his tax return made public.

But of course there is nothing to suggest that Trump has done anything wrong.

So why is someone's tax return your business? Why is someone who has done nothing wrong, and no evidence of doing anything wrong, to have his tax returns looked through?

Because he said he would.

Politicians lie all the time. All of them. Why did Hillary lie about classified information on a private email server? Why did she lie about a obscure video on the internet, causing a spontaneous riot the killed a US diplomat?

I refused to vote for her because she did lie all the time. Again, I supported Sanders. Can you show where he lies "all the time"?

I'll take Trump changing his mind on releasing a tax return, over bold faced lies about national security and the murdering of a diplomat, any day.

He lied. The reason he had no problem doing so is he knew that there would be plenty of those like yourself that would cover for them. That's why so many have no problem lying.

You are talking about Trump changing his mind on a tax return, over bold faced lies about very important issues, to... I don't want to release my tax return now.

No I am not. You are trying to spin it that way. Trump has lied about all kinds of things also. I consider health care a very important aspect also. I'm still waiting for the great plan he had that we all were going to love. I'm still waiting on Mexico paying for the wall.

That's not even really a lie. I wager at the time he said he would release his tax return, and then after realized the Democraps would use it as a political football, and decided not to.

Big deal. If you can prove wrong doing, then do so. Until then, people can change their minds on things. You have never said you would do X, and then later changed your mind? Why is that ok for you, but not Trump? Or do you expect me to believe you have never changed your mind on anything in your life?

Trump lies constantly. Even when it is shown to him that he said something he claims he never said he lies about it. Trump is very much like Hillary. They will lie even when the truth is a better answer.

I'm not entirely sure if Sanders lies or not. I think he does, because he says things that are clearly garbage, like we can get the rich to pay for all our free stuff.

He never said that. That's an example of you lying.

 

[Weatherman2020]

I hope all Red States put requirements that all candidates must disclose all college records, if and whom their Campaign has been in contact with any non-Americans in the last 6 months, who on paid staff own firearms, personal loans obtained in the last 10 years, and what their quest is. And what’s their favorite color.

 

[Flopper]

See, what you don’t get is, 1st world countries in Europe have great socialist healthcare systems and there’s no critical shortage of doctors. You act as though our system is the best and when really it is the worst among developed nations. And I’ll tell you why it is worst and the most expensive: it’s a ridiculous for-profit system. People pay for prescription drugs at sky rocket rates. The same drugs in other countries cost a fraction of the same price. That shit is deliberate. Lobbyists made it illegal for Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices.

I don’t understand what point you’re making here. Regardless of the limitations at the time, rich people paid more in effective taxes and the middle class thrived.

I was not alive in the 50's, I was born in 1960, and let me tell you, nobody was thriving back then.

There is no critical shortage of doctors in socialized healthcare? Why don't you visit one country north where people wait forever to have serious medical issues addressed?

Being a truck driver in Cleveland, I often rub elbows with Canadian drivers. While waiting to get loaded or unloaded, we often talk.

I try to bring up the healthcare situation here and there. The younger drivers tell me they love their system. The older drivers tell me to keep what we have, or we will be sorry if in any way duplicate their system.

Show me one country where you think the healthcare system is perfect, and I'll provide several articles saying it's not so, because every country in the world has healthcare issues including the US. Ours may be different in the way of problems, but don't kid yourself thinking they don't have problems as well.

So you want government to control prescription prices? Great idea.

Hillary's Vaccine Shortage

Price controls are proven to be a really bad idea. We have a long history of price control policies going back to the 1930s. Every one of them ended in disaster. The fact that people still propose price controls demonstrates a horrible failure of our education system and a general ignorance of basic economics.

Only competition and efforts to increase the supply can control prices. Government regulation is a big log jam on supply.

.

What people don't understand is we are the innovator of many drugs in 70'sthe world. But it's a tedious task as well.

It takes anywhere form 5 to 10 years for a new drug to hit the American market thanks to the FDA and trial lawyers. When a company creates a new drug, it has to undergo all kinds of government testing. It's also hundreds of thousands pieces of paperwork that goes along with it.

But after (let's say) you spent the hundreds of millions of dollars for all this government testing. You invested 7 years of combatting red tape, and now the FDA simply says "No thanks, we will not approve it!" What do you do?

What you do is increase the price of the drugs you already have on the market. That's the problem.

But oh! other countries pay less for drugs than we do!!!! This is true, but other countries also never had to do the testing that our companies have to. So if the drug makes it to our market, they can charge much cheaper prices in other countries where the cost to market the drug is almost nothing because we paid for all the mandated research.

Then there is the liability issue no other country has. Somebody here dies because of a drug. The family can sue them right out of business. So the manufacture of the drugs needs to include a liability cost because somebody somewhere in the US is going to sue them, and we have to pay for that as well.

US citizens pay so the rest of the world can have cheap drugs? That's your preferred method?

The drugs are cheap in other countries because they have universal healthcare and their government REFUSES to pay the outrageous prices.

We don't have those same government protections because our system is based on profit. Billions and billions of our healthcare dollars do not go to healthcare. They go to insurance company and private healthcare profits. We even have to give up our access to the United States court system in order to receive treatment in many cases through forced arbitration agreements.

We fall further and further behind the rest of the first world.

No, it's called overhead. US companies make drugs in the US because we are their largest market. To produce those drugs here, it's a lot of overhead. They don't have that overhead in Canada or overseas. When they sell those countries our drugs, it's almost all profit, something that isn't reality in the US.

Not having socialized medicine is not why it's more expensive here, it's bureaucracies and trail lawyers. Bureaucracies are people that virtually guarantee a Democrat vote, and trial lawyers contribute big bucks to the DNC come election time. Republicans ignore the problem because most of our representatives are former lawyers. They are looking out for their own.

I think you have it wrong about the manufacture of pharmaceuticals.
Over half of them are manufactured abroad, mostly from India and China.

Since these drugs are mass produced for the whole world, there manufacturing costs are typically about 1 cent per pill or less. Most of those that are not manufactured abroad are manufactured without coating and packaging which is often done in the US. The typical manufacturing cost including packaging of brand name drugs are 8% to 12% of estimated retail cost. Generics vary from 25% to 50% of retail due to their low cost.

Drugs that are manufactured in the US are most typically specialty drugs which carry low demand and high prices.

Regardless of where drugs come from, when sold in the US most of the company revenue goes to research, marking, kickbacks to insurance companies, and profits. For large firms the averages are: Research cost which includes drug trials and other crap required by the FDA is only 17% of revenue. 40% goes to insurance companies as kickbacks for carrying their product in their formulary. 11% to 15% to manufacturing, and the remainder, about 13% is profits.

The major cost problem with drugs is the lack of any downward price pressure. Major drug companies recently raised prices an average of 6.3% across the board and that includes drugs that have been on the market 20 and 30 years so there is no research and development costs.

A starting point in lower drug prices is for Medicare, Medicaid, and VA to establish a formualary and submit them to bid. Then pharmacies could buy off the government contract or their negotiated contracts.

 

[karpenter]

Releasing of the tax returns is a condition of being placed on a state primary ballot. There is no state or federal requirement that a candidate's name appear on a primary ballot.

From What Thin Air Did You Just Make This Up

 

[TheGreatSatan]

Democrats be like... if you don't streak down 5th ave, you can't be on the ballot

lol. dear right wingers, we are referring to a public office not a private office. xoxo

Democrats are to dumb and brainwashed to see that this tax return BS is just the new chum Democrats are feeding the drones who follow them. They ran out of the russian chum.

lol. only the clueless and Causeless right wing believes that.

we merely need, follow the Capital under Any form of Capitalism; especially when foreign interference is suspected.

When Democrats say stupid things like foreign interference, they mean Facebook ads posted on the world wide web, that they want censored... like what china does.

Then they turn around and bribe foreign nationals to come and go unchecked and unregulated at will, with healthcare and welfare paid for by Americans, enable them to vote, then whine about foreign interference.

Don't take Democrats seriously or you will look just as retarded.

unfortunately for you, the right wing is even more frivolous.

SWEET!!! Triggered another NPC.

can't refute a thing I say, just tries to shout it down

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I was not alive in the 50's, I was born in 1960, and let me tell you, nobody was thriving back then.

There is no critical shortage of doctors in socialized healthcare? Why don't you visit one country north where people wait forever to have serious medical issues addressed?

Being a truck driver in Cleveland, I often rub elbows with Canadian drivers. While waiting to get loaded or unloaded, we often talk.

I try to bring up the healthcare situation here and there. The younger drivers tell me they love their system. The older drivers tell me to keep what we have, or we will be sorry if in any way duplicate their system.

Show me one country where you think the healthcare system is perfect, and I'll provide several articles saying it's not so, because every country in the world has healthcare issues including the US. Ours may be different in the way of problems, but don't kid yourself thinking they don't have problems as well.

So you want government to control prescription prices? Great idea.

Hillary's Vaccine Shortage

Price controls are proven to be a really bad idea. We have a long history of price control policies going back to the 1930s. Every one of them ended in disaster. The fact that people still propose price controls demonstrates a horrible failure of our education system and a general ignorance of basic economics.

Only competition and efforts to increase the supply can control prices. Government regulation is a big log jam on supply.

.

What people don't understand is we are the innovator of many drugs in 70'sthe world. But it's a tedious task as well.

It takes anywhere form 5 to 10 years for a new drug to hit the American market thanks to the FDA and trial lawyers. When a company creates a new drug, it has to undergo all kinds of government testing. It's also hundreds of thousands pieces of paperwork that goes along with it.

But after (let's say) you spent the hundreds of millions of dollars for all this government testing. You invested 7 years of combatting red tape, and now the FDA simply says "No thanks, we will not approve it!" What do you do?

What you do is increase the price of the drugs you already have on the market. That's the problem.

But oh! other countries pay less for drugs than we do!!!! This is true, but other countries also never had to do the testing that our companies have to. So if the drug makes it to our market, they can charge much cheaper prices in other countries where the cost to market the drug is almost nothing because we paid for all the mandated research.

Then there is the liability issue no other country has. Somebody here dies because of a drug. The family can sue them right out of business. So the manufacture of the drugs needs to include a liability cost because somebody somewhere in the US is going to sue them, and we have to pay for that as well.

US citizens pay so the rest of the world can have cheap drugs? That's your preferred method?

The drugs are cheap in other countries because they have universal healthcare and their government REFUSES to pay the outrageous prices.

We don't have those same government protections because our system is based on profit. Billions and billions of our healthcare dollars do not go to healthcare. They go to insurance company and private healthcare profits. We even have to give up our access to the United States court system in order to receive treatment in many cases through forced arbitration agreements.

We fall further and further behind the rest of the first world.

No, it's called overhead. US companies make drugs in the US because we are their largest market. To produce those drugs here, it's a lot of overhead. They don't have that overhead in Canada or overseas. When they sell those countries our drugs, it's almost all profit, something that isn't reality in the US.

Not having socialized medicine is not why it's more expensive here, it's bureaucracies and trail lawyers. Bureaucracies are people that virtually guarantee a Democrat vote, and trial lawyers contribute big bucks to the DNC come election time. Republicans ignore the problem because most of our representatives are former lawyers. They are looking out for their own.

I think you have it wrong about the manufacture of pharmaceuticals.
Over half of them are manufactured abroad, mostly from India and China.

Since these drugs are mass produced for the whole world, there manufacturing costs are typically about 1 cent per pill or less. Most of those that are not manufactured abroad are manufactured without coating and packaging which is often done in the US. The typical manufacturing cost including packaging of brand name drugs are 8% to 12% of estimated retail cost. Generics vary from 25% to 50% of retail due to their low cost.

Drugs that are manufactured in the US are most typically specialty drugs which carry low demand and high prices.

Regardless of where drugs come from, when sold in the US most of the company revenue goes to research, marking, kickbacks to insurance companies, and profits. For large firms the averages are: Research cost which includes drug trials and other crap required by the FDA is only 17% of revenue. 40% goes to insurance companies as kickbacks for carrying their product in their formulary. 11% to 15% to manufacturing, and the remainder, about 13% is profits.

The major cost problem with drugs is the lack of any downward price pressure. Major drug companies recently raised prices an average of 6.3% across the board and that includes drugs that have been on the market 20 and 30 years so there is no research and development costs.

A starting point in lower drug prices is for Medicare, Medicaid, and VA to establish a formualary and submit them to bid. Then pharmacies could buy off the government contract or their negotiated contracts.

As I pointed out earlier, when a drug company spends hundreds of millions of dollars, and the drug is rejected by the FDA, the way they recoup those losses is to increase prices on the drugs that they already have on the market. If they don't do that, the company goes out of business because many drugs never get FDA approval.

 

[danielpalos]

lol. dear right wingers, we are referring to a public office not a private office. xoxo

Democrats are to dumb and brainwashed to see that this tax return BS is just the new chum Democrats are feeding the drones who follow them. They ran out of the russian chum.

lol. only the clueless and Causeless right wing believes that.

we merely need, follow the Capital under Any form of Capitalism; especially when foreign interference is suspected.

When Democrats say stupid things like foreign interference, they mean Facebook ads posted on the world wide web, that they want censored... like what china does.

Then they turn around and bribe foreign nationals to come and go unchecked and unregulated at will, with healthcare and welfare paid for by Americans, enable them to vote, then whine about foreign interference.

Don't take Democrats seriously or you will look just as retarded.

unfortunately for you, the right wing is even more frivolous.

SWEET!!! Triggered another NPC.

can't refute a thing I say, just tries to shout it down

the right wing is worse.

 

[pknopp]

Price controls are proven to be a really bad idea. We have a long history of price control policies going back to the 1930s. Every one of them ended in disaster. The fact that people still propose price controls demonstrates a horrible failure of our education system and a general ignorance of basic economics.

Only competition and efforts to increase the supply can control prices. Government regulation is a big log jam on supply.

.

What people don't understand is we are the innovator of many drugs in 70'sthe world. But it's a tedious task as well.

It takes anywhere form 5 to 10 years for a new drug to hit the American market thanks to the FDA and trial lawyers. When a company creates a new drug, it has to undergo all kinds of government testing. It's also hundreds of thousands pieces of paperwork that goes along with it.

But after (let's say) you spent the hundreds of millions of dollars for all this government testing. You invested 7 years of combatting red tape, and now the FDA simply says "No thanks, we will not approve it!" What do you do?

What you do is increase the price of the drugs you already have on the market. That's the problem.

But oh! other countries pay less for drugs than we do!!!! This is true, but other countries also never had to do the testing that our companies have to. So if the drug makes it to our market, they can charge much cheaper prices in other countries where the cost to market the drug is almost nothing because we paid for all the mandated research.

Then there is the liability issue no other country has. Somebody here dies because of a drug. The family can sue them right out of business. So the manufacture of the drugs needs to include a liability cost because somebody somewhere in the US is going to sue them, and we have to pay for that as well.

US citizens pay so the rest of the world can have cheap drugs? That's your preferred method?

The drugs are cheap in other countries because they have universal healthcare and their government REFUSES to pay the outrageous prices.

We don't have those same government protections because our system is based on profit. Billions and billions of our healthcare dollars do not go to healthcare. They go to insurance company and private healthcare profits. We even have to give up our access to the United States court system in order to receive treatment in many cases through forced arbitration agreements.

We fall further and further behind the rest of the first world.

No, it's called overhead. US companies make drugs in the US because we are their largest market. To produce those drugs here, it's a lot of overhead. They don't have that overhead in Canada or overseas. When they sell those countries our drugs, it's almost all profit, something that isn't reality in the US.

Not having socialized medicine is not why it's more expensive here, it's bureaucracies and trail lawyers. Bureaucracies are people that virtually guarantee a Democrat vote, and trial lawyers contribute big bucks to the DNC come election time. Republicans ignore the problem because most of our representatives are former lawyers. They are looking out for their own.

I think you have it wrong about the manufacture of pharmaceuticals.
Over half of them are manufactured abroad, mostly from India and China.

Since these drugs are mass produced for the whole world, there manufacturing costs are typically about 1 cent per pill or less. Most of those that are not manufactured abroad are manufactured without coating and packaging which is often done in the US. The typical manufacturing cost including packaging of brand name drugs are 8% to 12% of estimated retail cost. Generics vary from 25% to 50% of retail due to their low cost.

Drugs that are manufactured in the US are most typically specialty drugs which carry low demand and high prices.

Regardless of where drugs come from, when sold in the US most of the company revenue goes to research, marking, kickbacks to insurance companies, and profits. For large firms the averages are: Research cost which includes drug trials and other crap required by the FDA is only 17% of revenue. 40% goes to insurance companies as kickbacks for carrying their product in their formulary. 11% to 15% to manufacturing, and the remainder, about 13% is profits.

The major cost problem with drugs is the lack of any downward price pressure. Major drug companies recently raised prices an average of 6.3% across the board and that includes drugs that have been on the market 20 and 30 years so there is no research and development costs.

A starting point in lower drug prices is for Medicare, Medicaid, and VA to establish a formualary and submit them to bid. Then pharmacies could buy off the government contract or their negotiated contracts.

As I pointed out earlier, when a drug company spends hundreds of millions of dollars, and the drug is rejected by the FDA, the way they recoup those losses is to increase prices on the drugs that they already have on the market. If they don't do that, the company goes out of business because many drugs never get FDA approval.

Those same drugs are less expensive elsewhere.

 

[Thinker101]

What people don't understand is we are the innovator of many drugs in 70'sthe world. But it's a tedious task as well.

It takes anywhere form 5 to 10 years for a new drug to hit the American market thanks to the FDA and trial lawyers. When a company creates a new drug, it has to undergo all kinds of government testing. It's also hundreds of thousands pieces of paperwork that goes along with it.

But after (let's say) you spent the hundreds of millions of dollars for all this government testing. You invested 7 years of combatting red tape, and now the FDA simply says "No thanks, we will not approve it!" What do you do?

What you do is increase the price of the drugs you already have on the market. That's the problem.

But oh! other countries pay less for drugs than we do!!!! This is true, but other countries also never had to do the testing that our companies have to. So if the drug makes it to our market, they can charge much cheaper prices in other countries where the cost to market the drug is almost nothing because we paid for all the mandated research.

Then there is the liability issue no other country has. Somebody here dies because of a drug. The family can sue them right out of business. So the manufacture of the drugs needs to include a liability cost because somebody somewhere in the US is going to sue them, and we have to pay for that as well.

US citizens pay so the rest of the world can have cheap drugs? That's your preferred method?

The drugs are cheap in other countries because they have universal healthcare and their government REFUSES to pay the outrageous prices.

We don't have those same government protections because our system is based on profit. Billions and billions of our healthcare dollars do not go to healthcare. They go to insurance company and private healthcare profits. We even have to give up our access to the United States court system in order to receive treatment in many cases through forced arbitration agreements.

We fall further and further behind the rest of the first world.

No, it's called overhead. US companies make drugs in the US because we are their largest market. To produce those drugs here, it's a lot of overhead. They don't have that overhead in Canada or overseas. When they sell those countries our drugs, it's almost all profit, something that isn't reality in the US.

Not having socialized medicine is not why it's more expensive here, it's bureaucracies and trail lawyers. Bureaucracies are people that virtually guarantee a Democrat vote, and trial lawyers contribute big bucks to the DNC come election time. Republicans ignore the problem because most of our representatives are former lawyers. They are looking out for their own.

I think you have it wrong about the manufacture of pharmaceuticals.
Over half of them are manufactured abroad, mostly from India and China.

Since these drugs are mass produced for the whole world, there manufacturing costs are typically about 1 cent per pill or less. Most of those that are not manufactured abroad are manufactured without coating and packaging which is often done in the US. The typical manufacturing cost including packaging of brand name drugs are 8% to 12% of estimated retail cost. Generics vary from 25% to 50% of retail due to their low cost.

Drugs that are manufactured in the US are most typically specialty drugs which carry low demand and high prices.

Regardless of where drugs come from, when sold in the US most of the company revenue goes to research, marking, kickbacks to insurance companies, and profits. For large firms the averages are: Research cost which includes drug trials and other crap required by the FDA is only 17% of revenue. 40% goes to insurance companies as kickbacks for carrying their product in their formulary. 11% to 15% to manufacturing, and the remainder, about 13% is profits.

The major cost problem with drugs is the lack of any downward price pressure. Major drug companies recently raised prices an average of 6.3% across the board and that includes drugs that have been on the market 20 and 30 years so there is no research and development costs.

A starting point in lower drug prices is for Medicare, Medicaid, and VA to establish a formualary and submit them to bid. Then pharmacies could buy off the government contract or their negotiated contracts.

As I pointed out earlier, when a drug company spends hundreds of millions of dollars, and the drug is rejected by the FDA, the way they recoup those losses is to increase prices on the drugs that they already have on the market. If they don't do that, the company goes out of business because many drugs never get FDA approval.

Those same drugs are less expensive elsewhere.

Terrific, be sure to send a post card.

 

[pknopp]

US citizens pay so the rest of the world can have cheap drugs? That's your preferred method?

The drugs are cheap in other countries because they have universal healthcare and their government REFUSES to pay the outrageous prices.

We don't have those same government protections because our system is based on profit. Billions and billions of our healthcare dollars do not go to healthcare. They go to insurance company and private healthcare profits. We even have to give up our access to the United States court system in order to receive treatment in many cases through forced arbitration agreements.

We fall further and further behind the rest of the first world.

No, it's called overhead. US companies make drugs in the US because we are their largest market. To produce those drugs here, it's a lot of overhead. They don't have that overhead in Canada or overseas. When they sell those countries our drugs, it's almost all profit, something that isn't reality in the US.

Not having socialized medicine is not why it's more expensive here, it's bureaucracies and trail lawyers. Bureaucracies are people that virtually guarantee a Democrat vote, and trial lawyers contribute big bucks to the DNC come election time. Republicans ignore the problem because most of our representatives are former lawyers. They are looking out for their own.

I think you have it wrong about the manufacture of pharmaceuticals.
Over half of them are manufactured abroad, mostly from India and China.

Since these drugs are mass produced for the whole world, there manufacturing costs are typically about 1 cent per pill or less. Most of those that are not manufactured abroad are manufactured without coating and packaging which is often done in the US. The typical manufacturing cost including packaging of brand name drugs are 8% to 12% of estimated retail cost. Generics vary from 25% to 50% of retail due to their low cost.

Drugs that are manufactured in the US are most typically specialty drugs which carry low demand and high prices.

Regardless of where drugs come from, when sold in the US most of the company revenue goes to research, marking, kickbacks to insurance companies, and profits. For large firms the averages are: Research cost which includes drug trials and other crap required by the FDA is only 17% of revenue. 40% goes to insurance companies as kickbacks for carrying their product in their formulary. 11% to 15% to manufacturing, and the remainder, about 13% is profits.

The major cost problem with drugs is the lack of any downward price pressure. Major drug companies recently raised prices an average of 6.3% across the board and that includes drugs that have been on the market 20 and 30 years so there is no research and development costs.

A starting point in lower drug prices is for Medicare, Medicaid, and VA to establish a formualary and submit them to bid. Then pharmacies could buy off the government contract or their negotiated contracts.

As I pointed out earlier, when a drug company spends hundreds of millions of dollars, and the drug is rejected by the FDA, the way they recoup those losses is to increase prices on the drugs that they already have on the market. If they don't do that, the company goes out of business because many drugs never get FDA approval.

Those same drugs are less expensive elsewhere.

Terrific, be sure to send a post card.

Internet works wonders.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I hope all Red States put requirements that all candidates must disclose all college records, if and whom their Campaign has been in contact with any non-Americans in the last 6 months, who on paid staff own firearms, personal loans obtained in the last 10 years, and what their quest is. And what’s their favorite color.

I say a requirement shroud be that they report any investments they made the prior 10 years. That way we can examine them to see how those investments were impacted by their vote in Congress.

 

[daveman]

If they aren't going to pay 70%, then his plan can't get funded now can it?

Currently Medicare costs us about 750 billion dollars per year, and only 15% of our population is on it. That means it would cost us over six times that amount every year for everybody to be covered. And as Congressman Delaney pointed out, many of the hospitals would close and many doctors would leave the industry.

What you don't understand is that the government only pays for part of the cost for care of their patients. My experience is about 80%. They make up the loss through private pay and insurance payments. This is why when you see facilities close up, it's usually in poorer neighborhoods where most of the patients are government clients. There is no way for them to recoup those government losses.

So with Bernie's plan for starters, it would cost us 4.5 trillion a year which is more than what we spend on everything now, and we're adding to the debt because of it. To keep those hospitals and doctors we currently have, it would cost us an extra 20%. That puts us well over 5 trillion a year, and we still need to fund all our other social programs and defense of this country.

Now tell me that's going to work.

It can get funded because he would close loopholes and deductions to make it work. Either way, the effective tax rate is the 50’s was higher and the world didn’t collapse did it?

Why would the doctors quit? Why would the hospitals close? Based on what? You also forget that we pay per capita more than any nation in the world on earth on healthcare. A socialized system would save us money.

Look, I know you're a socialist, and therefore completely disconnected from reality -- the only people further afield are Communists and anarcho-Communists -- but do you really want the government deciding whose healthcare is too expensive to pay for?

Proponents of socialized medicine claim it's only doctors who make those decisions. That, of course, is utter nonsense. The bean counters rule. And if the deem your treatment is too expensive, you will die. If you're lucky, maybe they'll give you painkillers to make your death less agonizing.

Agreed. So let's say they are able to give us government healthcare. Now there are no longer any private insurance companies to compete against them. The government will have you by the balls.

We all know there are good doctors and bad ones. We all know there are good hospitals and clinics and not so good ones. So if we all end up on government healthcare, we would all want the best doctors and surgeons, would't we?

So who and how do we decide who gets what? After all, the good doctors and facilities can't take care of the entire country!

As usual, Democrats would make politics out of it. For the most part, the people in lower income areas might be getting our doctors we working people have. The middle-class and upper middle-class where most of the Republicans are would end up with the metro places and crappy doctors.

If there is anything Democrats have made obvious, it's that they make politics out of anything, and they can't be trusted with anything yet alone our healthcare.

Hey, liberals -- remember the VA healthcare disaster?

Imagine that on a nationwide scale.

If socialized medicine still appeals to you, you're a moron.

You mean like Medicare?

You've never been treated by the VA, either.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What people don't understand is we are the innovator of many drugs in 70'sthe world. But it's a tedious task as well.

It takes anywhere form 5 to 10 years for a new drug to hit the American market thanks to the FDA and trial lawyers. When a company creates a new drug, it has to undergo all kinds of government testing. It's also hundreds of thousands pieces of paperwork that goes along with it.

But after (let's say) you spent the hundreds of millions of dollars for all this government testing. You invested 7 years of combatting red tape, and now the FDA simply says "No thanks, we will not approve it!" What do you do?

What you do is increase the price of the drugs you already have on the market. That's the problem.

But oh! other countries pay less for drugs than we do!!!! This is true, but other countries also never had to do the testing that our companies have to. So if the drug makes it to our market, they can charge much cheaper prices in other countries where the cost to market the drug is almost nothing because we paid for all the mandated research.

Then there is the liability issue no other country has. Somebody here dies because of a drug. The family can sue them right out of business. So the manufacture of the drugs needs to include a liability cost because somebody somewhere in the US is going to sue them, and we have to pay for that as well.

US citizens pay so the rest of the world can have cheap drugs? That's your preferred method?

The drugs are cheap in other countries because they have universal healthcare and their government REFUSES to pay the outrageous prices.

We don't have those same government protections because our system is based on profit. Billions and billions of our healthcare dollars do not go to healthcare. They go to insurance company and private healthcare profits. We even have to give up our access to the United States court system in order to receive treatment in many cases through forced arbitration agreements.

We fall further and further behind the rest of the first world.

No, it's called overhead. US companies make drugs in the US because we are their largest market. To produce those drugs here, it's a lot of overhead. They don't have that overhead in Canada or overseas. When they sell those countries our drugs, it's almost all profit, something that isn't reality in the US.

Not having socialized medicine is not why it's more expensive here, it's bureaucracies and trail lawyers. Bureaucracies are people that virtually guarantee a Democrat vote, and trial lawyers contribute big bucks to the DNC come election time. Republicans ignore the problem because most of our representatives are former lawyers. They are looking out for their own.

You really think they charge less overseas because they just don't desire the extra profit $$$??

If that's the case then wtf aren't they charging the exorbitant prices to those other countries and let their own fellow American citizens have the cheap prices? How un-fucking-American is that???

They don't have to use American citizens to re-coup these R&D costs.They can re-coup them anywhere.

Jeebus isn't that what Trump has been flailing about? Unfair trade? Is he okay with Americans getting screwed on RX prices while citizens of other countries get the good deals?

You don't make a lick of sense. Dementia has done set in on you pal. RX prices are high because Americans bend over for the rich. Every single time.

Prices are high here because the costs are high here. Why should a company screw another country because our cost to market a drug is so much higher here? It's only fair that countries that cost the manufacturers much less have lower prices, and the countries that cause the expense of their product pay more.

What the hell does fair have to do with it? America first. We get screwed on trade everyday by other countries.

You claim Americans should be gouged because the drug was developed in this country by our workers and with our resources, and we should sell it to other countries cheap because they didn't have to do anything except pay a small profit.

If we develop the best drugs in the world, we should be charging premium prices to other countries. Not nearly giving them away and making Americans pay for it all.

You are reaching. It's a bad look. It's a really stupid look.

That's because you don't know crap about business. The drugs are priced to recoup the investments they made, priced to cover liability which will happen at some time, and possibly advertising.

We have a crappy bureaucracy that's a huge part of the cost of the product, and ambulance chasing lawyers. While most lawsuits result in failure in medical, it costs a ton of money to defend yourself from them. That's why you so often hear of the accused just paying the complainant off; because it's cheaper than fighting and winning in court.

So until we elect officials to address these problems created by government, then it's the people of this government that should pay these costs. After all, we elected these clowns.

 

[daveman]

Look, I know you're a socialist, and therefore completely disconnected from reality -- the only people further afield are Communists and anarcho-Communists -- but do you really want the government deciding whose healthcare is too expensive to pay for?

Proponents of socialized medicine claim it's only doctors who make those decisions. That, of course, is utter nonsense. The bean counters rule. And if the deem your treatment is too expensive, you will die. If you're lucky, maybe they'll give you painkillers to make your death less agonizing.

Agreed. So let's say they are able to give us government healthcare. Now there are no longer any private insurance companies to compete against them. The government will have you by the balls.

We all know there are good doctors and bad ones. We all know there are good hospitals and clinics and not so good ones. So if we all end up on government healthcare, we would all want the best doctors and surgeons, would't we?

So who and how do we decide who gets what? After all, the good doctors and facilities can't take care of the entire country!

As usual, Democrats would make politics out of it. For the most part, the people in lower income areas might be getting our doctors we working people have. The middle-class and upper middle-class where most of the Republicans are would end up with the metro places and crappy doctors.

If there is anything Democrats have made obvious, it's that they make politics out of anything, and they can't be trusted with anything yet alone our healthcare.

Hey, liberals -- remember the VA healthcare disaster?

Imagine that on a nationwide scale.

If socialized medicine still appeals to you, you're a moron.

Try and take Medicare away.

Oh, you mean the Medicare that people are forced to pay for?

Did you have a point?

A piddling amount you are forced to pay. Not near enough to pay the medical bills for the shitload of entitled selfish boomers.

...says the kid who wants the government to pay for everything.

 

[daveman]

Nice special affect. But are you aware things look larger than they really are under water? Have a Democrat with an education explain that to you.

A Democrat with an education would claim the iceberg either has white privilege or is a Jew.

 

[daveman]

Hey, liberals -- remember the VA healthcare disaster?

Imagine that on a nationwide scale.

If socialized medicine still appeals to you, you're a moron.

Try and take Medicare away.

Oh, you mean the Medicare that people are forced to pay for?

Did you have a point?

I made it. Bernie is simply expanding on that.

At gunpoint. Right, Comrade?

Gets old. You live here and you do pay your taxes. Internet bravado is a waste of time.

This may come as a shock to you, but the government wastes billions every year. I can spend my money more wisely than the government can.

 

[daveman]

He hasn't paid for shit. He's never had to meet a payroll. He's been living on taxpayer money all his life. He's completely disconnected from the working class...yet thinks he can tell us how to live.

And you want to let him.

Most people can live their lives without being told what to do, without being taken care of.

Liberals project their own fear of freedom and responsibility on everyone else and insist the government should take care of everyone.

Liberals have no self-respect.

He isn't telling anyone how to live. He's trying to see that we catch up to the rest of the first world countries and see that everyone can afford health care.

Oh, so saying "You have to pay to take care of other people" isn't telling anyone else how they have to live?

It's going to happen. Just a matter of time. You can pretend it's still the 19th century if you wish.

And you can pretend unicorns will fart healthcare. What you want is a failure.

I can tell you've never been treated by the VA.

There are occasions an airplane falls from the sky. That does not mean airflight is a failure. We need to hold those who run the VA to a different standard than what we do. I will not argue otherwise but then again, there should be far fewer being treated.

There should be fewer being treated...but you want to put the whole country under the VA or similar government-run healthcare?

Bernie lied to you. And you just ate it up.

 

[daveman]

Trump needs to put out up his tax records, yes indeed I agree. So in the same spirit of clarity and optics and transparency : Umm... why haven't we the people been able to vote on say, something as simples as sanctuary cities? In that same sprit open mindedness and clarity. Trumps tax returns may yield a lot of questions, but why is my home town a sanctuary to illegals that was never on a ballot? Or inform us ahead of time or anything? Why haven't our leaders bother to ask US what We want? Instead they silently forbade laws enforcement following immigration law and forbade witto bittiy stuff that we didn't ask for or need. Democratically . But it really helps all those wealthy contractors with deep pockets , They outweigh the will of the plebeians.

Democrat leaders decide what the proles want. The proles don't get a say.

Democrats hate democracy, after all. This is undeniable.

 

[MAGAman]

It is still a requirement that is not in the Constitution.

As for Tx, who knows. We will have to see how the courts rule on this one. I suspect it will be shot down

The signature requirement does not disqualify a party's nominee. It's not a political act of desperation.

And any idiot that's read the Constitution knows it could only be upheld in a corrupt court.

The signature requirement disqualifies everyone that does not meet it. Where does the Constitution say the states can impose a signature requirement?

Please like the section of the Constitution you think this would violate.

We both know you're desperate because Democrats have nobody near Trump's stature.

But you're just being pitiful now.