jbooma Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Canada also doesn't allow 19 year old US kids to drink in canada anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by terpskins aRedskin's explanation is as simple and clear as it gets. And his point about patent infringement is also very true. Btw, I really liked your analogy about PT Cruiser's because that is sort of what's happening. Thats cool I have no real idea on whats going on other than feelings. They are kind-of a weak starting point.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by terpskins Out of curiosity, for those people that don't find fault with the current system: How many of you would be alright with a tax rate based on household income? That is, the more you make, the more your taxed. UMMM, isnt that what were doing now? I make more than my ex-wife so i pay her salary in taxes basically, she pays 20% of what she makes? Or was that question posed for the outside of the U.S. personnel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by chiefhogskin48 Die Hard, Would you agree that the US should impose its own price controls like the other Western nations in order to make everything "fair"? That way no one company would be subsidizing the others, right? We could have drugs "at cost", because who really cares about new research and development anyways? We can just stick with the drugs we have. As it is now, the United States market completely subsidizes the rest of the worlds' pharmaceuticals. We make up the difference from the losses and at cost transactions that the companies make in foreign markets. And you're right, it IS our doing. We tolerate this nonsense, and we shouldn't. It's time to force the issue, and if the world decides that it does indeed want new drug development, we can all pony up an equal share of cost. "Fair". Define "fair". Since when do Americans care about things being "fair"? That would be a socialist principle friend. Americans are about "the strongest will survive" and "the bottom line ($)". Is it fair that athletes make 10-30x the amount that the President of the United States does? The same with doctors, firefighters, officers, etc? When it comes to economics.... "fair" isn't a term that's in the vocubulary. To be sure, your stance and wisdom reeks of one thing... lack of business sense. Price for ANY product isn't fixed. It's exactly what the market will bear. Is it fair that AROD is making 3x the amount of the next highest baseball player? Is it fair that the Yankees have 3x the payroll than any other major league team? Do you really want a salary cap? Doesn't that reek of socialism? Do I get pissed because of the ticket prices which prohibit the average family from attending a professional sports event? Is it fair? NO. But I only get pissed at the friggin idiots who COMPLAIN about the salaries of these athletes and greediness of the owners... as they continue to purchase season's tickets, jerseys, etc. Americans are a victim of your own success. Your market is as such that it can afford to pay what it is paying. And it's only when consumers no longer can afford to pay the price that the price will come down. It's that simple. With the numbers these drug companies are throwing around in annual profits (we're talking about 100's of billions of dollars).... obviously they're doing something right. When these drug companies are offering their drugs to foreign nations at a reduced cost.... trust me... they aren't taking a loss. They simply aren't making as much money as they are with the US market.... and truthfully.... does that surprise anybody? For the people who want to talk about morality.... morality has no place in business. Do you honestly think that if the US instituted price controls that limited the profit margin on the pharmaceutical companies... it would limit research and development? Perhaps. Slightly. We're talking about a market that grosses $100 billion a year. They're not going to scatter like ****roaches into new fields of professions because you slash their profit margin in half. In fact, if you reduce the price of the drugs and make it more accessible to a larger portion of the market.... chances are they won't even notice a loss. Do you want the R&D to be cutting edge at the expense of making it inaffordable to the common man? Or do you want to make health care accessible to every US citizen? Who am I to answer. These are questions Americans have to ponder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpskins Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by Thiebear UMMM, isnt that what were doing now? I make more than my ex-wife so i pay her salary in taxes basically, she pays 20% of what she makes? Or was that question posed for the outside of the U.S. personnel? Sorry, I wasn't entirely clear. By current system, I wasn't refering to taxes. i was referring to the global drug acquisition system. My fault. It was an aside, and I didn't check carefully before I typed. Also, your right. Our tax system, in theory, is supposed to be progressive. I think the cap is at 35%. (Although, I guess TC4's thread about Teresa Heinz Kerry shows that it's not a hard and fast rule.) Thanks for pointing out the my mistake. So, my question is: are you in support of a purely progressive tax scheme? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.