|
|
Post by bladefd on Jan 11, 2018 21:46:29 GMT
I hope you are not trying to tell me big pharma doesn't set the prices for drugs? Stop it. With the exception of medicare/medicaid, the feds don't negotiate costs for various things including prescription drugs. That's a fact. The only ultimate goal of these folks at big pharma is to maximize profit. Period. That's a fact. You have absolutely no uderstanding of markets if you think companies just set prices. At least read this shit en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demandAnd if you post more shit about price negotiation or big pharma price setting you havent understood it, so go back and read it again. The only time this model doesnt apply to health markets for drugs are government intervention and market failures. The latter has no application here. Magnax, you really think I don't know supply and demand? Funny guy. I implore you to do some research on how drug prices are set. The reason why you see cancer drugs and hepatitis drugs costing 300,000 or 200,000 is simply because they can. They determine the cost of research & development that it took to get that drug on the market. They also approximate how much people will pay for something lifesaving - people will pay much much more, say an EpiPen for asthma attacks and meds for breast cancer, than say codeine cough syrup to stop severe cough. Pharma companies estimate how much can they make and how much insurance companies are willing to shell out because insurance companies are the middleman, of course, negotiating on the behalf of their clients - the consumers. They also have to maximize profit so they are making strides for their shareholders to stay and to attract more investors into the mix. The money factor - the bottom line - is huge primary factor like it is for any corporation, especially if they are on the stock market (most probably are). Government is involved as well not only through regulations and determining subsidies but also involved negotiating for medicare/medicaid patients so those prices come into play when big pharma is trying to negotiate on their end - profit from medicare is usually less than from private insurances so that all plays into the mix. There are also legal and administrative fees. There is also some politics involved. All of this goes into the equation of setting drug prices. In the end, it's about making money in a for-profit healthcare system. Everyone makes money down the ladder - big pharma, insurance companies, researchers, hospitals, doctors, nurses, lab technicians, health provider companies/facilities, lawyers, lobbyists, politicians, etc. Take all of this into account, and you have exorbitant costs. What are you even arguing at this point? That those things I mentioned above have no bearing on cost for say a breast cancer medicine? There is so much involved in the process including the market, but in the end big pharma company have control over what they want their drug to cost. They might offer rebates, coupons, savings, whatever. It's up to the respective big pharma company.  , the government is involved and so is the market, but lets not act like big pharma has absolutely nothing to do with pricing and has nothing to do with driving up the costs for everyone. I am not saying the government had nothing to do with it because they did as well. Don't misconstrue this as a government vs corporations argument because it isn't. |
|
|
|
|
Post by OutRosez on Jan 11, 2018 21:59:25 GMT
You have absolutely no uderstanding of markets if you think companies just set prices. At least read this shit en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demandAnd if you post more shit about price negotiation or big pharma price setting you havent understood it, so go back and read it again. The only time this model doesnt apply to health markets for drugs are government intervention and market failures. The latter has no application here. Magnax, you really think I don't know supply and demand? Funny guy. I implore you to do some research on how drug prices are set. The reason why you see cancer drugs and hepatitis drugs costing 300,000 or 200,000 is simply because they can. They determine the cost of research & development that it took to get that drug on the market. They also approximate how much people will pay for something lifesaving - people will pay much much more, say an EpiPen for asthma attacks and meds for breast cancer, than say codeine cough syrup to stop severe cough. Pharma companies estimate how much can they make and how much insurance companies are willing to shell out because insurance companies are the middleman, of course, negotiating on the behalf of their clients - the consumers. They also have to maximize profit so they are making strides for their shareholders to stay and to attract more investors into the mix. The money factor - the bottom line - is huge primary factor like it is for any corporation, especially if they are on the stock market (most probably are). Government is involved as well not only through regulations and determining subsidies but also involved negotiating for medicare/medicaid patients so those prices come into play when big pharma is trying to negotiate on their end - profit from medicare is usually less than from private insurances so that all plays into the mix. There are also legal and administrative fees. There is also some politics involved. All of this goes into the equation of setting drug prices. In the end, it's about making money in a for-profit healthcare system. Everyone makes money down the ladder - big pharma, insurance companies, researchers, hospitals, doctors, nurses, lab technicians, health provider companies/facilities, lawyers, lobbyists, politicians, etc. Take all of this into account, and you have exorbitant costs. What are you even arguing at this point? That those things I mentioned above have no bearing on cost for say a breast cancer medicine? There is so much involved in the process including the market, but in the end big pharma company have control over what they want their drug to cost. They might offer rebates, coupons, savings, whatever. It's up to the respective big pharma company. , the government is involved and so is the market, but lets not act like big pharma has absolutely nothing to do with pricing and has nothing to do with driving up the costs for everyone. I am not saying the government had nothing to do with it because they did as well. Don't misconstrue this as a government vs corporations argument because it isn't. Exactly the first pill costs 5 million and every pill after that costs 5 cents. |
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 11, 2018 22:05:44 GMT
Magnax, you really think I don't know supply and demand? Funny guy. I implore you to do some research on how drug prices are set. The reason why you see cancer drugs and hepatitis drugs costing 300,000 or 200,000 is simply because they can. They determine the cost of research & development that it took to get that drug on the market. They also approximate how much people will pay for something lifesaving - people will pay much much more, say an EpiPen for asthma attacks and meds for breast cancer, than say codeine cough syrup to stop severe cough. Pharma companies estimate how much can they make and how much insurance companies are willing to shell out because insurance companies are the middleman, of course, negotiating on the behalf of their clients - the consumers. They also have to maximize profit so they are making strides for their shareholders to stay and to attract more investors into the mix. The money factor - the bottom line - is huge primary factor like it is for any corporation, especially if they are on the stock market (most probably are). Government is involved as well not only through regulations and determining subsidies but also involved negotiating for medicare/medicaid patients so those prices come into play when big pharma is trying to negotiate on their end - profit from medicare is usually less than from private insurances so that all plays into the mix. There are also legal and administrative fees. There is also some politics involved. All of this goes into the equation of setting drug prices. In the end, it's about making money in a for-profit healthcare system. Everyone makes money down the ladder - big pharma, insurance companies, researchers, hospitals, doctors, nurses, lab technicians, health provider companies/facilities, lawyers, lobbyists, politicians, etc. Take all of this into account, and you have exorbitant costs. What are you even arguing at this point? That those things I mentioned above have no bearing on cost for say a breast cancer medicine? There is so much involved in the process including the market, but in the end big pharma company have control over what they want their drug to cost. They might offer rebates, coupons, savings, whatever. It's up to the respective big pharma company. , the government is involved and so is the market, but lets not act like big pharma has absolutely nothing to do with pricing and has nothing to do with driving up the costs for everyone. I am not saying the government had nothing to do with it because they did as well. Don't misconstrue this as a government vs corporations argument because it isn't. Exactly the first pill costs 5 million and every pill after that costs 5 cents. >tfw memethew unironically thinks that RnD isnt a real cost after the first pill. |
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 11, 2018 22:10:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
Post by bladefd on Jan 11, 2018 22:27:10 GMT
For a long time, Epipen was the only thing on the market. They ripped off and exploited so many people in that time. Patented drugs are where money is to be made. Just a few patented drugs costing something insane can drive up insurance costs for everyone because health insurance pays out of a pool of everyone's premiums. |
|
|
|
|
Post by OutRosez on Jan 11, 2018 22:41:38 GMT
Exactly, mormon didn't even mention how after the EpiPen price jacking, like five viable cheap alternatives came to market mostly thanks to kids or college students
You can't do that with cancer pills.
|
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 12, 2018 1:06:27 GMT
Exactly, mormon didn't even mention how after the EpiPen price jacking, like five viable cheap alternatives came to market mostly thanks to kids or college students You can't do that with cancer pills. You're proving my point and you don't even know it. And there is no reason you can't do that with cancer pills, unless they're patented. |
|
|
|
|
Post by bladefd on Jan 13, 2018 8:16:12 GMT
New scandal brewing. Trump banged the hoe Stormy Daniels and paid her off while married to Melania:  She is hot, but now and forever tainted by the disgusting creep Trump. Imagine the things he must have done to her, probably left scars on her for life.. Burrr.. Do NOT jerk off to her, folks. Seriously don't. |
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 16, 2018 3:41:42 GMT
This vid>>>
|
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 17, 2018 3:23:30 GMT
 OutRosezFINALLY A VOICE OF REASON IN THIS DARK DESOLATE WORLD |
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 17, 2018 3:24:43 GMT
>In the coming days, politicians will try to convince you that what happened on the West Side Highway in Manhattan this week was an issue of terrorism, immigration, or religion. But just like the plague of mass shootings is a gun problem, the thousands of people killed by cars as they walk our streets every year is a car problem.
Lmao, so fucking gold. I love this.
|
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 17, 2018 3:26:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
Post by OutRosez on Jan 17, 2018 3:57:18 GMT
OutRosezFINALLY A VOICE OF REASON IN THIS DARK DESOLATE WORLD I agree. Long term it saves the planet by giving us mass transit. And short term people don't drive from drunk drivers |
|
|
|
|
Post by gabi on Jan 17, 2018 11:07:50 GMT
So a car ban in the city does that apply to heavy trucks doing deliveries?
|
|
|
|
|
Post by OutRosez on Jan 18, 2018 21:08:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
Post by bladefd on Jan 20, 2018 7:35:01 GMT
Well boys, the government has been officially shutdown. R.I.P. Unfortunately, the filthy politicians still get paid, and we still have to pay taxes =[
It should be so that during a shutdown, politicians don't get paid and we don't have to pay sales taxes for as long as the government is shutdown. Seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 21, 2018 22:25:29 GMT
Well boys, the government has been officially shutdown. R.I.P. Unfortunately, the filthy politicians still get paid, and we still have to pay taxes =[ It should be so that during a shutdown, politicians don't get paid and we don't have to pay sales taxes for as long as the government is shutdown. Seriously. sales tax is local... |
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 21, 2018 22:32:10 GMT
Can we eat poor children instead? |
|
|
|
|
Post by bladefd on Jan 21, 2018 23:45:13 GMT
Well boys, the government has been officially shutdown. R.I.P. Unfortunately, the filthy politicians still get paid, and we still have to pay taxes =[ It should be so that during a shutdown, politicians don't get paid and we don't have to pay sales taxes for as long as the government is shutdown. Seriously. sales tax is local... Any and all taxes, jerk. |
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 22, 2018 0:45:34 GMT
its....a federal shutdown though.... |
|
|
|
|
Post by bladefd on Jan 22, 2018 1:07:29 GMT
its....a federal shutdown though.... Hey jerk, stick it where the sun don't shine  |
|
|
|
|
Post by bladefd on Jan 22, 2018 23:24:46 GMT
OutRosezDo you think it's smart at all for Democrats to be making such a big deal out of DACA and putting it front and center? I think it's a huuuuuuuge mistake, and it will backfire. It doesn't impact enough people if the goal is to get votes in November or even 2020. I think it's a trap that GOP can flip right back onto the Democrats if Democrats continue to push DACA down our throats as a central issue when it simply isn't. There are much bigger central issues that the Democrats can do some serious damage with to the Republicans. I posted this elsewhere, but Democrats need something bigger to unite behind than DACA. They are fighting over scraps that don't impact most of America. If you really want to take the fight to the Republicans for November midterms, make the fight about something much bigger, such as Healthcare or climate. You can really do some damage to Trump and the Republicans in the eyes of the public if you make the fight over something big that impacts everyone. Don't fight over petty stuff, that's what the Republicans are known for in recent couple decades. Don't be petty and shortsighted like the Republicans. That's something the Democrats need to learn and very soon. For instance, think about the case the Democrats can make concerning climate change, and you can actually make it into a science plea if you design it properly politically (draw it for what it is - an attack on science by GOP). I'm very much against using science for political gain, but that's exactly what Republicans have done. They have falsely tried to draw climate science as this voodoo doll without understanding the science behind it so you flip that script onto the Republicans. You can do some serious damage to Trump, Mitch the Turtle, Ryan and others in that party who denounce climate change and attempt to make a joke out of it. Both parties need to win over the independents, and an issue like this surely does impact everybody. Focus on issues that impact everyone, otherwise you are fighting an uphill battle as a party if you just focus on one issue that effects a few million at most (most of them can't even vote presently).
|
|
|
|
|
Post by OutRosez on Jan 22, 2018 23:44:04 GMT
OutRosez Do you think it's smart at all for Democrats to be making such a big deal out of DACA and putting it front and center? I think it's a huuuuuuuge mistake, and it will backfire. It doesn't impact enough people if the goal is to get votes in November or even 2020. I think it's a trap that GOP can flip right back onto the Democrats if Democrats continue to push DACA down our throats as a central issue when it simply isn't. There are much bigger central issues that the Democrats can do some serious damage with to the Republicans. I posted this elsewhere, but Democrats need something bigger to unite behind than DACA. They are fighting over scraps that don't impact most of America. If you really want to take the fight to the Republicans for November midterms, make the fight about something much bigger, such as Healthcare or climate. You can really do some damage to Trump and the Republicans in the eyes of the public if you make the fight over something big that impacts everyone. Don't fight over petty stuff, that's what the Republicans are known for in recent couple decades. Don't be petty and shortsighted like the Republicans. That's something the Democrats need to learn and very soon. For instance, think about the case the Democrats can make concerning climate change, and you can actually make it into a science plea if you design it properly politically (draw it for what it is - an attack on science by GOP). I'm very much against using science for political gain, but that's exactly what Republicans have done. They have falsely tried to draw climate science as this voodoo doll without understanding the science behind it so you flip that script onto the Republicans. You can do some serious damage to Trump, Mitch the Turtle, Ryan and others in that party who denounce climate change and attempt to make a joke out of it. Both parties need to win over the independents, and an issue like this surely does impact everybody. Focus on issues that impact everyone, otherwise you are fighting an uphill battle as a party if you just focus on one issue that effects a few million at most (most of them can't even vote presently). There's absolutely zero reason for them not to have pushed for DACA. None, there's no reason for them to have caved in so hard Chilean miners are escaping from it. It's not about getting votes in 2018/2020, or even playing politics. It's about fighting to not deport a whole generation of immigrants. There's no sane reason to deport a million Americans who speak English, pay taxes, are in the military, are doctors, firefighters, cops, teachers, students, etc. The only thing that separates them from me, is that instead of being born somewhere else and moving when I was 3 to America I was born here. That's it. They do every single thing in their life the same that you and I do, they just don't have American citizens but in every way, shape, or form they're Americans. They were raised in our culture, they grew up doing the same things we did, they idolize the same people, they live where we do, everything. Can't fight climate change when Republicans won't/don't believe in it. At least the ones in charge. There's a negligible chance that would pass the House and there's an even smaller chance Trump would do something about it. Same with healthcare, They have 51 votes right now (49 dems+plus Alexander+Collins) signed, sealed, and delivered ready to give it a thumbs up and patch healthcare. But Mitch won't bring it to the floor, and for whatever reason Dems won't sign up enough cosponsors for it. You need 30 iirc to guarantee a bill comes to floor and it doesn't have that. They say (and it probably is true, I just don't know to what extent) that repealing the mandate means that the bill has to be reworked, to cover for those that are dropping out because they don't want to pay for insurance, those that got kicked automatically, etc. The problem is the establishment Democrats don't want to fight, don't care to fight, and won't fight unless they absolutely are forced to by the progressives. They're fine with status quo, and being the minority party because they know that whoever they put up in 2020 has a strong chance to beat Trump and they can almost assuredly get the Senate that year, and the House if more states have their maps broken up. As for independents, there's no moderate anymore. There's no independents. Either you want to be corporate slaves, or you want to fight for people or at least pretend that's your goal. Partisanship is at an all time high. A bill was just passed that gave jet plane owners a tax break, are you fucking kidding me? For the entirety of 2018 there's one singular goal the establishment Democrats should have regardless of what anyone thinks: Making sure you keep that momentum up for a wave election. You don't fuck with it, you don't fight against it, you make sure that your party stays energized all year long. You keep them up, because when you don't you lose. You won healthcare because of liberal activism, you lost tax reform because you didn't bring the heat. It's not a sexy issue. It's hard work to get people amped up to fight tax reform. Republicans saw that and were like fuck yeah let's fuck over the ACA now! And by the time Dems got the base re-energized for that fight, it was over. McCain decided to take 30 million to the grave with him, Collins decided that a "sure thing" from McConnell was enough, and Murkowski decided oil drilling in Alaska was more important than the healthcare of their citizens. Progressives saw what was happening and got hyped the fuck out and almost flipped the Virginia house of delegates a task thought impossible, and not even covered in the media. They won special elections in New Hampshire and all over the country in November. They blew out Republicans in the governors races even when polls were supposedly tightening. I mean for fucks sakes progressives beat an NRA endorsed rich white guy in rural Virginia with a goddamned transvestite for fucks sake. That's where the momentum is. You want to win in 2018 and get the House or even the Senate back? You keep those people energized. There's a reason why the media reaction today is all about how progressives are mad about the Dems caving in. Even Ezra Levin said he's not sure what to do now. If you lose indivisible, which is responsible for all the November elections, you've fucked up big time. You'll get the environment and health care done in 2020, when you're in power. For now it's all about fighting every single time, especially those ones you can win. |
|
|
|
|
Post by OutRosez on Jan 22, 2018 23:52:12 GMT
Millions of people marched this weekend over DACA, and it got little to no coverage.
There's 56 votes ready to sign Graham-Durbin. You just need a couple of things to push it over. That's easy. It's not just about optics of the big issues, it's about getting the wins when everything lines up. Graham and McCain are pretty progressive on immigration reform and they love the idea of military spending. That's two easy votes, a lot of Republicans are for DACA in some way it's about getting the right things to make everyone happy for it. You had absolutely nothing to lose in fighting for DACA. They don't have the votes to keep the government open in the House for long with democrat votes. They can't keep it open in the Senate without dems anyway since it requires 60. This is the time to get everything. DACA, CHIP, healthcare stabilization, etc. This is the ONLY time you have this sort of leverage in 2018, and maybe not until 2020 to pass whatever you want because they HAVE TO be bipartisan in this. They can't open the government without it and all the Dems walked away with AGAIN! (for the FOURTH! time) was another fight in a month and they got CHIP.
No healthcare stabilization, no DACA, no troops coming home hell they're even sending more now apparently, no fixing the infrastructure, just....CHIP. And they didn't even get the verison of CHIP that costs literally nothing. Instead now taxpayers have to pay for it. If they made it for 10 years it pays for itself. Instead it's 6 years. Punted conveinently enough to whenever some Democrat will be having to run for reelection.
|
|
|
|
|
Post by bladefd on Jan 23, 2018 0:47:22 GMT
OutRosez Do you think it's smart at all for Democrats to be making such a big deal out of DACA and putting it front and center? I think it's a huuuuuuuge mistake, and it will backfire. It doesn't impact enough people if the goal is to get votes in November or even 2020. I think it's a trap that GOP can flip right back onto the Democrats if Democrats continue to push DACA down our throats as a central issue when it simply isn't. There are much bigger central issues that the Democrats can do some serious damage with to the Republicans. I posted this elsewhere, but Democrats need something bigger to unite behind than DACA. They are fighting over scraps that don't impact most of America. If you really want to take the fight to the Republicans for November midterms, make the fight about something much bigger, such as Healthcare or climate. You can really do some damage to Trump and the Republicans in the eyes of the public if you make the fight over something big that impacts everyone. Don't fight over petty stuff, that's what the Republicans are known for in recent couple decades. Don't be petty and shortsighted like the Republicans. That's something the Democrats need to learn and very soon. For instance, think about the case the Democrats can make concerning climate change, and you can actually make it into a science plea if you design it properly politically (draw it for what it is - an attack on science by GOP). I'm very much against using science for political gain, but that's exactly what Republicans have done. They have falsely tried to draw climate science as this voodoo doll without understanding the science behind it so you flip that script onto the Republicans. You can do some serious damage to Trump, Mitch the Turtle, Ryan and others in that party who denounce climate change and attempt to make a joke out of it. Both parties need to win over the independents, and an issue like this surely does impact everybody. Focus on issues that impact everyone, otherwise you are fighting an uphill battle as a party if you just focus on one issue that effects a few million at most (most of them can't even vote presently). There's absolutely zero reason for them not to have pushed for DACA. None, there's no reason for them to have caved in so hard Chilean miners are escaping from it. It's not about getting votes in 2018/2020, or even playing politics. It's about fighting to not deport a whole generation of immigrants. There's no sane reason to deport a million Americans who speak English, pay taxes, are in the military, are doctors, firefighters, cops, teachers, students, etc. The only thing that separates them from me, is that instead of being born somewhere else and moving when I was 3 to America I was born here. That's it. They do every single thing in their life the same that you and I do, they just don't have American citizens but in every way, shape, or form they're Americans. They were raised in our culture, they grew up doing the same things we did, they idolize the same people, they live where we do, everything. Of course, you are right it matters, but is it enough on its own to merit government shutdown? That's what it essentially boils down to because that was the point holding up government funding from Democrat side and still might in 3 weeks. For each day the government stays shutdown, you are talking about over a billion dollar loss per day. Is the impact of DACA worth that on its own? I know I am putting a price tag on an issue that impacts the livelihood of around 900,000 kids essentially, which I really don't want to do, but we are in a situation that I don't know how else to properly put it into perspective. And while we are talking about deporting that many people, think about the logistics involved. They would have to do street-by-street search and think about the cost of paperwork to deport those many kids along with the actual deportation. It would be downright impossible for Trump administration to push for street-by-street search for illegals across the nation. First the monetary costs, and I don't even know if it's lawful to do such a wide-span search. Trump is all tough talk, but I don't think he has the balls to push for something like that. The courts would surely push back if Trump were to attempt such a move. I believe the ones who would fall under DACA should be safe in many states, especially the more liberal ones. There are several states that are openly defiant to Trump and his views on immigrants  |
|
|
|
|
Post by OutRosez on Jan 23, 2018 2:47:20 GMT
There's absolutely zero reason for them not to have pushed for DACA. None, there's no reason for them to have caved in so hard Chilean miners are escaping from it. It's not about getting votes in 2018/2020, or even playing politics. It's about fighting to not deport a whole generation of immigrants. There's no sane reason to deport a million Americans who speak English, pay taxes, are in the military, are doctors, firefighters, cops, teachers, students, etc. The only thing that separates them from me, is that instead of being born somewhere else and moving when I was 3 to America I was born here. That's it. They do every single thing in their life the same that you and I do, they just don't have American citizens but in every way, shape, or form they're Americans. They were raised in our culture, they grew up doing the same things we did, they idolize the same people, they live where we do, everything. Of course, you are right it matters, but is it enough on its own to merit government shutdown? That's what it essentially boils down to because that was the point holding up government funding from Democrat side and still might in 3 weeks. For each day the government stays shutdown, you are talking about over a billion dollar loss per day. Is the impact of DACA worth that on its own? I know I am putting a price tag on an issue that impacts the livelihood of around 900,000 kids essentially, which I really don't want to do, but we are in a situation that I don't know how else to properly put it into perspective. And while we are talking about deporting that many people, think about the logistics involved. They would have to do street-by-street search and think about the cost of paperwork to deport those many kids along with the actual deportation. It would be downright impossible for Trump administration to push for street-by-street search for illegals across the nation. First the monetary costs, and I don't even know if it's lawful to do such a wide-span search. Trump is all tough talk, but I don't think he has the balls to push for something like that. The courts would surely push back if Trump were to attempt such a move. I believe the ones who would fall under DACA should be safe in many states, especially the more liberal ones. There are several states that are openly defiant to Trump and his views on immigrants Shutting down the government really doesn't matter. Parks close after a while, and non-essential employees don't work but that's it. Just everyone makes a big deal out of nothing. It's the debt ceiling that's a no go, don't touch it at all costs. Which is dumb because it's stupid as fuck that it exists, but if you go against that you're screwing. ICE already does that. Read about the 7/11 sweeps, the random doctor deportations, kids in hospitals getting entered into the system. |
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 23, 2018 18:54:43 GMT
Of course, you are right it matters, but is it enough on its own to merit government shutdown? That's what it essentially boils down to because that was the point holding up government funding from Democrat side and still might in 3 weeks. For each day the government stays shutdown, you are talking about over a billion dollar loss per day. Is the impact of DACA worth that on its own? I know I am putting a price tag on an issue that impacts the livelihood of around 900,000 kids essentially, which I really don't want to do, but we are in a situation that I don't know how else to properly put it into perspective. And while we are talking about deporting that many people, think about the logistics involved. They would have to do street-by-street search and think about the cost of paperwork to deport those many kids along with the actual deportation. It would be downright impossible for Trump administration to push for street-by-street search for illegals across the nation. First the monetary costs, and I don't even know if it's lawful to do such a wide-span search. Trump is all tough talk, but I don't think he has the balls to push for something like that. The courts would surely push back if Trump were to attempt such a move. I believe the ones who would fall under DACA should be safe in many states, especially the more liberal ones. There are several states that are openly defiant to Trump and his views on immigrants Shutting down the government really doesn't matter. Parks close after a while, and non-essential employees don't work but that's it. Just everyone makes a big deal out of nothing. It's the debt ceiling that's a no go, don't touch it at all costs. Which is dumb because it's stupid as fuck that it exists, but if you go against that you're screwing. ICE already does that. Read about the 7/11 sweeps, the random doctor deportations, kids in hospitals getting entered into the system. It does have an impact because it forces these stupid one month deal that fucks over every agency in the government, especially the military, and our military is already shit lately. |
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 23, 2018 18:55:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
Post by gabi on Jan 23, 2018 20:58:53 GMT
Trump dominating at presidancy
|
|
|
|
|
Post by R.I.P. uncle Teddy on Jan 23, 2018 22:32:58 GMT
trump is da poopoo. Doesn't even like globalization. Idk why OutRosez doesn't love him tbh. |
|
|
, the government is involved and so is the market, but lets not act like big pharma has absolutely nothing to do with pricing and has nothing to do with driving up the costs for everyone. I am not saying the government had nothing to do with it because they did as well. Don't misconstrue this as a government vs corporations argument because it isn't.
