|
The Washington Times I know, but this op-ed was just....bonkers in how much it hates Ocasio and Socialism. It goes as far as saying that the Constitution "forbids" socialists being elected reps which earned a hearty guffaw from me. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/nov/20/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-heres-why-youre-wrong/
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:40 |
|
|
Chilichimp posted:How the gently caress did Ohio reelect Sherod Brown and fail to elect the Democrat on the ticket to the governors mansion? Blue-collar voters in northern Ohio that are otherwise straight-ticket-racist still like Brown. This is exactly why he's being floated as a presidential candidate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:35
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:The Democrats need to run women everywhere possible Didn’t save us in Missouri or North Dakota 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
Isn't the Washington times owned by actual insane cult people?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
TulliusCicero posted:Isn't the Washington times owned by actual insane cult people? If they allow this psycho to write op-eds? Probably. She equates the English Monarchy with socialism lol I just saw it posted on Ocasio's Twitter and my curiosity got the best of me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:37
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ann_arcana/status/1064074140599140352 abolish pharma also capitalism
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:She didn't know about that, because she was too busy being delicious.  
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:43
|
|
|
friendbot2000 posted:If they allow this psycho to write op-eds? Probably. She equates the English Monarchy with socialism lol I don't think that lady is well in the head: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/nov/17/time-to-tighten-absentee-mail-in-and-early-voting-/ quote:“[One] question surrounding [Voting By Mail] is whether it increases voter fraud,” MIT’s Election Lab wrote. “There are two major features of VBM that raise these concerns. First, the ballot is cast outside the public eye, and thus the opportunities for coercion and voter impersonation are greater. Second, the transmission path for VBM ballots is not as secure as traditional in-person ballots. These concerns relate both to ballots being intercepted and ballots being requested without the voter’s permission.” quote:Let’s remember: Voting is a citizen’s right — but it’s also a privilege. It’s not something to be taken lightly: it’s not supposed to be something that’s simply done as a matter of convenience to the voter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:48
|
|
|
Condiv posted:https://twitter.com/ann_arcana/status/1064074140599140352
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:55
|
|
|
What makes no sense to me, is that they're making $-0- now. The money's been spent; the cost to produce the drug can't be all that high. One would think that some money would be better than none at all. This is why I'll never be rich; I just don't think like that. To me, the solution to this problem is to have government finance, or at least help offset, the cost of research in exchange for setting a price based on actual production costs. It depresses me to think that they could come up with CRISPR cures for most cancers in my lifetime, but we'll never see them because of this type of price-setting bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 14:59
|
|
|
If someone started illegally creating that drug and handing it out for free just imagine the opeds screaching about the lack of respect for the law and how the repricussions would be DIRE.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
BadOptics posted:I don't think that lady is well in the head: Seriously, VBM fraud is a thing, but it's a miniscule percentage of votes and really only of consequence in the kind of local elections where turnout is crazy low. That said, gently caress all the snowbirds down here voting twice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:06
|
|
|
TulliusCicero posted:Isn't the Washington times owned by actual insane cult people?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:06
|
|
|
Radish posted:If someone started illegally creating that drug and handing it out for free just imagine the opeds screaching about the lack of respect for the law and how the repricussions would be DIRE. We need more people to do this. Who gives a poo poo abut laws if they never apply to the rich? This medicine could save thousands of lives, and because some wealthy sociopath can't get payed it isn't being distributed Eat the Rich
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:08
|
|
|
With the judge putting a hold on asylum rules that Trump enacted, I wonder how reddit is handling itquote:OBAMA CRONY bars US from enforcing Trump asylum ban 👹 MARXIST GLOBALIST STRIKES AGAINST USA SOVEREIGNTY 💩
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:08
|
|
|
Condiv posted:https://twitter.com/ann_arcana/status/1064074140599140352 It may be $1 million, but the alternatives are $300k/year in perpetuity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:08
|
|
|
Condiv posted:https://twitter.com/ann_arcana/status/1064074140599140352  Who wants to fund my John Wick/Tarantino inspired movie about a guy taking revenge on big pharma board members after his wife dies of a disease that could've been cured by a drug they priced at 500k.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:11
|
|
|
PainterofCrap posted:What makes no sense to me, is that they're making $-0- now. Assuming sales were very low (at a $mil per dose, maybe literally zero), they were probably losing money. Manufacturing, delivery, marketing, accountancy, etc., all are not free. So, from a capitalist standpoint where making a profit is a goal above helping the sick, their choice makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
Koalas Massacre posted:
I think this is almost what John Q was about, wasn't it? Except it was the guy's son instead of his wife.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:16
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:fuckin' Y I K E S. This is some cyberpunk dystopian poo poo. "Yes we can cure your ALS with one injection but it will cost $2 million dollars. You can pay or you can agree to be our indentured servant for 25 years until you work your debt off." 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:16
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:I’ll maybe change my mind if they can get a human-certified launch vehicle, but that’s probably five years out at minimum. Is there any material scientific purpose to sending human beings into space at this point versus exploration drones? I was under the impression human spaceflight was mostly a PR/political thing and we could do just fine with robots. Koalas Massacre posted:Who wants to fund my John Wick/Tarantino inspired movie about a guy taking revenge on big pharma board members after his wife dies of a disease that could've been cured by a drug they priced at 500k. John Q still exists and is actually a reasonably decent film even if the plot is a little thin/silly, Denzel Washington pulls a good performance. Also that 9/11 comic is still absolutely devastating today imo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
I think part of the problem is that a lot of these treatments are actually incredibly difficult and expensive to produce. It's not as clear cut as poo poo like EpiPens, insulin, and that thing that that pharmabro fuckboy was jacking the price on. There still needs to be some way to ensure these treatments are produced and used, but it will require a serious rethinking of the systems put into place to produce drugs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:19
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:It may be $1 million, but the alternatives are $300k/year in perpetuity. so? this is a cure for a terrible disease, that is only unavailable cause capitalists can't turn the profit on it that they want
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:19
|
|
|
Condiv posted:so? The government ought to be able to sieze it and distribute that poo poo. Communism now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:21
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I think part of the problem is that a lot of these treatments are actually incredibly difficult and expensive to produce. It's not as clear cut as poo poo like EpiPens, insulin, and that thing that that pharmabro fuckboy was jacking the price on. Yeah huge amounts of public funds into R&D with the requirement that the pricing is overseen by NIH or whoever. Something needs to change for sure.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
I'm shocked. This is my shocked face. https://twitter.com/RonBrownstein/status/1064705526452252672
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
Chimp_On_Stilts posted:Assuming sales were very low (at a $mil per dose, maybe literally zero), they were probably losing money. Nope, reading is your friend, they asked a company exec what's up with the price and he said quote:The decision to price Glybera at $1 million was based on a business calculation, according to van Deventer. It wasn't about breaking even on per-unit production costs. The price was set by comparing it to the cost of 10 years of existing treatments, in other words "because we can" E:: PT6A posted:I think part of the problem is that a lot of these treatments are actually incredibly difficult and expensive to produce. It's not as clear cut as poo poo like EpiPens, insulin, and that thing that that pharmabro fuckboy was jacking the price on.  The pharma company itself said the opposite
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:24
|
|
|
Your Taint posted:I'm shocked. This is my shocked face. It's almost like Susan Collins is a huge liar 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
Your Taint posted:The government ought to be able to sieze it and distribute that poo poo. Communism now. From the Healthcare thread, it seems that one of the problems with that is that it's very expensive to produce and has a very limited shelf-life. Apparently the company distributed its final stock for 1 euro per dose. The government would need to seize and then maintain the means of production, which I'm not saying would be bad or impossible, but it's not the same as companies price-gouging on poo poo like insulin, which is comparatively simple and cheap to produce.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
And it's a rare generic disease! Curing rare genetic diseases should be loving free! How much does it cost to produce the dosage for one person? Let's say you have to grind up a loving giant diamond and infuse it with panda blood and put it in a centrifuge with uranium-20 to produce it. Ok what's that cost? $500,000 dollars? Wow that's insane! I can see why you might have to charge a lot! How many people have this disease? 3,000? So we could cure everyone of this painful disease for $1.5 billion. Ok, loving DO IT. That amount of money is loving nothing! Make one less F-35
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:26
|
|
|
AhhYes posted:Yeah huge amounts of public funds into R&D with the requirement that the pricing is overseen by NIH or whoever. Something needs to change for sure. A lot of the R&D was done by a publicly-funded university in Canada, actually. Maintaining stock and production of these treatments is, evidently, a much bigger issue than coming up with them in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:27
|
|
|
PT6A posted:From the Healthcare thread, it seems that one of the problems with that is that it's very expensive to produce and has a very limited shelf-life. Apparently the company distributed its final stock for 1 euro per dose. The government would need to seize and then maintain the means of production, which I'm not saying would be bad or impossible, but it's not the same as companies price-gouging on poo poo like insulin, which is comparatively simple and cheap to produce. Literally, the author interviewed the company and the per-unit cost of production was not the driver of the price, the price was set by comparing it to how much the inferior currently available treatment costs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:27
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:(i dont know much lawyer speak, im only familiar with bird law) Sarcastr0 fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Nov 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:27
|
|
|
PT6A posted:From the Healthcare thread, it seems that one of the problems with that is that it's very expensive to produce and has a very limited shelf-life. Apparently the company distributed its final stock for 1 euro per dose. The government would need to seize and then maintain the means of production, which I'm not saying would be bad or impossible, but it's not the same as companies price-gouging on poo poo like insulin, which is comparatively simple and cheap to produce. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_drug We have a framework for discussing this kind of thing -- it's called the "orphan drug problem." The answer is, as you say, government development and provision.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
PainterofCrap posted:What makes no sense to me, is that they're making $-0- now. The production cost is probably actually very high on a per-patient-cured basis. The disease is so rare that there is basically zero economy of scale effects, and once you get past the initial round of curing already diagnosed individuals most of any production would go to replacing previous doses that expire. Which is not a good reason not to cure people and yet another example of why it shouldn't be left to the private market to produce these sorts of lifesaving medications.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:
Yes, I realize that. I fully believe they could easily maintain production and turn a profit at a lower price, and they're assholes for not doing so. At the same time, it would not necessarily be easy or inexpensive for the government to use public funds to accomplish the same thing. It should be done, but it will require a significant structural change to the role of government in pharmaceutical production.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yes, I realize that. I fully believe they could easily maintain production and turn a profit at a lower price, and they're assholes for not doing so. At the same time, it would not necessarily be easy or inexpensive for the government to use public funds to accomplish the same thing. It should be done, but it will require a significant structural change to the role of government in pharmaceutical production. Why not
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:32
|
|
|
Condiv posted:https://twitter.com/ann_arcana/status/1064074140599140352 No, nationalize pharma. The scientists aren't to blame here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:33
|
|
|
This should give Donny plenty of fuel to rant about brown people. https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1064889319758938113
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:40 |
|
|
PT6A posted:Yes, I realize that. I fully believe they could easily maintain production and turn a profit at a lower price, and they're assholes for not doing so. At the same time, it would not necessarily be easy or inexpensive for the government to use public funds to accomplish the same thing. It should be done, but it will require a significant structural change to the role of government in pharmaceutical production. Even if it cost the government twice as much per treatment to produce it as it takes our industrial supermen, it would probably still be cheaper than what the pharma company wants people to pay to get it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 15:34
|
|