I think John Kerry's speech may have just cost him the election

[Mill]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Who cares if the drug industry votes for Kerry? It's one of the most inefficient industries in America compared to the resources it consumes. One of the most honorable of the lot (BristolMyersSquibb) is trying its best to hold on while arguably the most irreputable (Pfizer) has never been stronger. BMS gives Lance several million a year to talk about products 99% of Americans will never use. Pfizer drops $12million EACH YEAR on Roush/Mark Martin's NASCAR Viagra mobile . . . all tax deductible.

On a related note, the US Army spent $16m on their NASCAR ride with the hope of garnering 1200 new recruits . . . I wonder how much body armor that would have purchased?

It makes perfect sense for the world's largest purchaser of medication (Medicare) to negotiate prices with manufacturers. The complaint with importation/reimportation from Canada isn't that Big Pharma cannot make money. The complaint is they cannot make as much money. I can solve that problem. If industry ended ALL DTA it would save billions. It's not like MDs would stop prescribing b/c the Levitra guy has gone MIA.

Do they not have a duty to shareholders to make as much money as they can? Do they not pour so much money into R&D do make these new drugs? Sure, Medicare and any other company should be able to negotiate, and if they don't they are suckers. Saying that we have a duty to minimize drug company's profits is a bit absurd.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
If you want to save/develop US-based R&D and production facilities then advocate for full credit for such activities (including catastrophic healthcare costs) while giving no tax benefit for marketing. Somebody is going to lose but it's up to lawmakers to decide if it's going to be the people discovering/producing the drug or the people trying to convince you to buy it.

Bali, I know in the case of the company which I work for they are one in the same and I assume it is like that for alot of the other big name pharma's...and I know at least in my company if you punish one half of the house then the other will feel it, so either way using your scenerio the company and more importantly the workers will lose. Basically if Kerry follows through with this he will not only be killing white collar US jobs, we will also be relying on foreign exports, and he will be giving his home state, the state which he represents the shaft as their econ is heavily supported by the Biotech/Pharma industry....

Genzyme, Astra, Novartis, Johnson Mathey and many others in this area alone will "feel the pain" so to speak and it could end up seriously hurting the Mass economy...but again that is dependant on if he a. gets into office and b. follows through with it.

 

[jyates]

Talk and doing is 2 different things. All candiates need to learn that.

 

[imported_tss4]

Seems odd that, in the days of free trade I can buy a car or just about anything else from overseas but I can't buy prescription drugs from reputable sources overseas.

I'm all for protecting our R&D here in the US. Its one of the strengths of our economy, but drug companies are one of the most profitable sectors of the economy. A little competition could do them good. We do believe in capitolism after all.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: tss4
Seems odd that, in the days of free trade I can buy a car or just about anything else from overseas but I can't buy prescription drugs from reputable sources overseas.

I'm all for protecting our R&D here in the US. Its one of the strengths of our economy, but drug companies are one of the most profitable sectors of the economy. A little competition could do them good. We do believe in capitolism after all.

again I can only speak for the company where I am currently working but I know that they are already under a budget crunch now and making things ever harder will only mean that jobs will be lost.

Also using your car analogy, look at what this has done to the american automotive industry....due to labor laws and such we cannot compete with other counties which is why in a price war we always lose.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Some parts of the speech I have a problem with...

And when I'm President, America will stop being the only advanced nation in the world which fails to understand that health care is not a privilege for the wealthy, the connected, and the elected - it is a right for all Americans.

How many of you who have health care would consider yourselves wealthy, connected, or elected?

Our health care plan for a stronger America cracks down on the waste, greed, and abuse in our health care system and will save families up to $1,000 a year on their premiums.

I would love to save $1,000 a year on my premium. Oh, that says 'up to' $1,000. Damn.

And as President, I am determined that we stop being a nation content to spend $50,000 a year to keep a young person in prison for the rest of their life - when we could invest $10,000 to give them Head Start, Early Start, Smart Start, the best possible start in life.

This is just a lot of wind imho. If someone is sent to prison for the rest of their life, and they are young, then they did something really really bad. We're not talking about a guy who sold some crack rock or stole a car.

All in all I thought it was a good speech. I just hope that eventually more specifics about his plans will surface. What is going to change about the health care system that will net families up to $1,000? How are you going to add 40,000 troops that wouldn't have joined in the first place? How are you going to make sure that my grandparents don't have to cut their pills in half? And then of course there's the economic plan that he was set to describe but really just gave us his goals. I want the meat of the plan!

I guess I knew before the speech that I wasn't going to get all of that information in that particular speech.

 

[imported_tss4]

Well, hopefully your company will do fine. Job losses due to free trade are a big problem with it. I just think that we've put our faith in free trade for this long and overall its given us a very strong robust economy that has weathered recessions far better than other countries have been able to. Its interesting that all htough they're is opposition to free trade, it is one topic that the Republicans and Democrats seem fairly close on.

 

[Lazy8s]

Yeah, my dad is in pharma and my internship is in pharma as well. The consensus is that no matter what the changes are coming and it will hurt. The problem is no one will know. The companies will cope, the difference will be that in 30years whenyou have some rare type of cancer you;ll die from it when, if the pharma sector stayed the same, you could have taken a pill for a few days and been cured, but if no one knows I guess it won't make a difference.

I hope it hasn't been pointed out before but the announcer yesterday evening on NBC (dunno his name) put it pretty well imho. John Kerry won't be loved, and he certainly won't be elected because everyone enamored by his charm. Kerry's selling point is an alternative to Pres. Bush. If he's elected it will be, for the most part, because people like the way he's going better than the way Bush is going, not because they like Kerry.

 

[digitalsm]

His speech was long on rhetroic short on substance. Vague general ideas. Like repealing taxes for the top 2% and reducing the defecit while increased spending? Yeah got news for you his vague general plans dont add up economically. Hes not going to reduce the defecit while increasing spending with just the tax hike on the rich.

 

[imported_tss4]

Actually, if the top 1% pays 30% of the taxes then a tax hike on the top 2% could go a long ways toward reducing the deficit and leaving some for spending. Oh, and if we reduce our involvement in Iraq we'd save quite a bundle too.

Honestly, it doesn't quite add up, but its not as far off as it firsts sounds. Its certainly more reasonable than bush's spend more, pay less taxes, let the next generation pay for it approach.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: tss4
Actually, if the top 1% pays 30% of the taxes then a tax hike on the top 2% could go a long ways toward reducing the deficit and leaving some for spending. Oh, and if we reduce our involvement in Iraq we'd save quite a bundle too.

Honestly, it doesn't quite add up, but its not as far off as it firsts sounds. Its certainly more reasonable than bush's spend more, pay less taxes, let the next generation pay for it approach.

I've never heard of a country taxing itself to greatness. At some point, overtaxing the top income earners will stifle economic growth and decrease revenues.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: digitalsm
His speech was long on rhetroic short on substance. Vague general ideas. Like repealing taxes for the top 2% and reducing the defecit while increased spending? Yeah got news for you his vague general plans dont add up economically. Hes not going to reduce the defecit while increasing spending with just the tax hike on the rich.

Yea yea, we know and all Neocons say that there was never a surplus under Clinton either... :roll:

 

[imported_tss4]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: tss4
Actually, if the top 1% pays 30% of the taxes then a tax hike on the top 2% could go a long ways toward reducing the deficit and leaving some for spending. Oh, and if we reduce our involvement in Iraq we'd save quite a bundle too.

Honestly, it doesn't quite add up, but its not as far off as it firsts sounds. Its certainly more reasonable than bush's spend more, pay less taxes, let the next generation pay for it approach.

I've never heard of a country taxing itself to greatness. At some point, overtaxing the top income earners will stifle economic growth and decrease revenues.

That wasn't what I said and you know it. Don't start twisting the truth. I said that a small increase for the top 2% can net a lot more money than a modest increase for the middle class.

I can't talk to people that twist words to suite they're own arguement. Saying that a tax increase on the rich nets more short term money is not saying that that taxing the rich into oblivion will make the country a great place.

Next time comment on what I said.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: digitalsm
His speech was long on rhetroic short on substance. Vague general ideas. Like repealing taxes for the top 2% and reducing the defecit while increased spending? Yeah got news for you his vague general plans dont add up economically. Hes not going to reduce the defecit while increasing spending with just the tax hike on the rich.

Yea yea, we know and all Neocons say that there was never a surplus under Clinton either... :roll:

It's too bad that the surpluses were based largely on the stock market bubble.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: tss4

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: tss4
Actually, if the top 1% pays 30% of the taxes then a tax hike on the top 2% could go a long ways toward reducing the deficit and leaving some for spending. Oh, and if we reduce our involvement in Iraq we'd save quite a bundle too.

Honestly, it doesn't quite add up, but its not as far off as it firsts sounds. Its certainly more reasonable than bush's spend more, pay less taxes, let the next generation pay for it approach.

I've never heard of a country taxing itself to greatness. At some point, overtaxing the top income earners will stifle economic growth and decrease revenues.

I can't talk to people that twist words to suite they're own arguement.

Unfortunately that is how people argue here.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: tss4

Next time comment on what I said.

That will never happen, better get to used to them in here, they've been well Brainwashed by Rush, Hannity, Fearless Liar and his minions and the CADmeister & Co in here very well.

Heck, another guy even took on a similar Avatar name to CAD and calls himself CADmaster. Seems to be a lot of that going on, I've seen another one modeling himself after Crimmy.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: tss4

Next time comment on what I said.

That will never happen, better get to used to them in here, they've been well Brainwashed by Rush, Hannity, Fearless Liar and his minions and the CADmeister & Co in here very well.

Heck, another guy even took on a similar Avatar name to CAD and calls himself CADmaster. Seems to be a lot of that going on, I've seen another one modeling himself after Crimmy.

But who is the more brainwashed? The person who thinks that anyone with a different opinion is brainwashed? Or the person who thinks that everything he says is correct?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: tss4

Next time comment on what I said.

That will never happen, better get to used to them in here, they've been well Brainwashed by Rush, Hannity, Fearless Liar and his minions and the CADmeister & Co in here very well.

Heck, another guy even took on a similar Avatar name to CAD and calls himself CADmaster. Seems to be a lot of that going on, I've seen another one modeling himself after Crimmy.

But who is the more brainwashed? The person who thinks that anyone with a different opinion is brainwashed? Or the person who thinks that everything he says is correct?

Neither, those that that take Reality, facts and Figures and twist them around to make it look like something either never happened or make something that did never happen look like it did happen.

Brainwashing

Intensive, forcible indoctrination, usually political or religious, aimed at destroying a person's basic convictions and attitudes and replacing them with an alternative set of fixed beliefs.

The application of a concentrated means of persuasion, such as an advertising campaign or repeated suggestion, in order to develop a specific belief or motivation.

a forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up basic political, social, or religious beliefs and attitudes and to accept contrasting regimented ideas
===================================
Pretty much sums up the NeoCons and followers of Rush, Hannity, the Fearless Liar and CAD & Co in here alright.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: tss4

Next time comment on what I said.

That will never happen, better get to used to them in here, they've been well Brainwashed by Rush, Hannity, Fearless Liar and his minions and the CADmeister & Co in here very well.

Heck, another guy even took on a similar Avatar name to CAD and calls himself CADmaster. Seems to be a lot of that going on, I've seen another one modeling himself after Crimmy.

But who is the more brainwashed? The person who thinks that anyone with a different opinion is brainwashed? Or the person who thinks that everything he says is correct?

Neither, those that that take Reality, facts and Figures and twist them around to make it look like something either never happened or make something that did never happen look like it did happen.

Brainwashing

Intensive, forcible indoctrination, usually political or religious, aimed at destroying a person's basic convictions and attitudes and replacing them with an alternative set of fixed beliefs.

The application of a concentrated means of persuasion, such as an advertising campaign or repeated suggestion, in order to develop a specific belief or motivation.

a forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up basic political, social, or religious beliefs and attitudes and to accept contrasting regimented ideas
===================================
Pretty much sums up the NeoCons and followers of Rush, Hannity, the Fearless Liar and CAD & Co in here alright.

Actually, I would think that those

that take Reality, facts and Figures and twist them around to make it look like something either never happened or make something that did never happen look like it did happen.

are the ones who are doing the brainwashing and not the ones who are brainwashed.

 

[Thump553]

Back on topic (somewhat), I missed nearly all of the speech so I can't comment on that particular one. I will observe that nearly all modern conventions, every speech is pretty irrelevant to all except political junkies. Back when we had contested conventions, there were great speeches attempting to persuade to support one candidate or the other. The '68 Dem Convention in Chicago was full of memorable speeches. I still recall Abe Ribicoff (Long term Dem. Senator from Connecticut, moderate, former govenor, a true gentleman) who gave a spontaneous, heartfelt speech blasting Chicago's Democratic mayor for his mishandling of the demonstrations. That would never happen today, in either party, not in a million years-and we are worse off for it. I listened to about half of this Dem convention, and frankly 90% of it was tedium. I don't expect anything different for the GOP.

The national Dem and GOP conventions are really product placement sessions. They could be selling toothpaste or cars just as well. Intellectual discussion, platform debate, the free flow of ideas, are non-existent.

About W's upcoming speech, I think many people sell his speaking ability short. He has a very sincere air about him and always manages to convey he truly believes what he is saying. To me, that is 90% of the battle. Also, all of the "experts" rag on his speaking ability so often and so consistently, its treated as a major victory if he can complete a single sentence properly. I don't support W at all, and personally detest many of his positions, but I personally think he is an extremely effective speaker. He's not a classical orator, but he is an effective speaker in his own way.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Thump, there's a transcript on Drudge if you want to read it.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Brainwashing

Intensive, forcible indoctrination, usually political or religious, aimed at destroying a person's basic convictions and attitudes and replacing them with an alternative set of fixed beliefs.

The application of a concentrated means of persuasion, such as an advertising campaign or repeated suggestion, in order to develop a specific belief or motivation.

a forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up basic political, social, or religious beliefs and attitudes and to accept contrasting regimented ideas
===================================
Pretty much sums up the NeoCons and followers of Rush, Hannity, the Fearless Liar and CAD & Co in here alright.

Actually, I would think that those

that take Reality, facts and Figures and twist them around to make it look like something either never happened or make something that did never happen look like it did happen.

are the ones who are doing the brainwashing and not the ones who are brainwashed.[/quote]

Oh and trained so well by Rush, Hannity, the Fearless Liar and CAD & Co, don't even know or realize when they have been brainwashed, excellent example right above :thumbsup:

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Brainwashing

Intensive, forcible indoctrination, usually political or religious, aimed at destroying a person's basic convictions and attitudes and replacing them with an alternative set of fixed beliefs.

The application of a concentrated means of persuasion, such as an advertising campaign or repeated suggestion, in order to develop a specific belief or motivation.

a forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up basic political, social, or religious beliefs and attitudes and to accept contrasting regimented ideas
===================================
Pretty much sums up the NeoCons and followers of Rush, Hannity, the Fearless Liar and CAD & Co in here alright.

Actually, I would think that those

that take Reality, facts and Figures and twist them around to make it look like something either never happened or make something that did never happen look like it did happen.

are the ones who are doing the brainwashing and not the ones who are brainwashed.

Oh and trained so well by Rush, Hannity, the Fearless Liar and CAD & Co, don't even know or realize when they have been brainwashed, excellent example right above :thumbsup:[/quote]

Dave, you are the type of person that disgusts me when it comes to political discussion. You think that there is a line and you are either all the way on one side or the other. It's really sad that you feel that I am some right wing extremist when I'm actually standing smack dab in the middle. I lean left on some issues. I lean right on others. But for the most part I sit in the middle and I think that's just too much for your small mind to comprehend.

 

[Beattie]

Originally posted by: glenn1

What about it that turned you off?

Look dumbass, no one wants to hear about your plans for minutiae like inspecting shipping containers. That's why we hire a President, to look after trivia like that for us.

lol.

I'm sorry, I thought for a minute he WAS running for President.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: sandorski


they gave conditions,

That is just an *if* conjurism. No conditions in the joint resolution... :|