Single-payer is designed to limit choice to ONE provider the GOVERNMENT and it’s used as a tool to keep progressive-minded politicians in power.
The derp is strong with you.
How is this limiting choice?
It’s more a reference to your original comment: “Further proof that your side isn’t interested in what it espouses, only profit at any cost.” Emphasis on profit at any cost.
Promoting high price, low result products with elaborate webinars and infomercials is leveraging the authority and “expertise” of the company’s figurehead in order to prey on consumers who are desperate to find a solution to their problem.
To be fair, maybe it’s not so much about them limiting choice so one can keep up their power and profits. It’s more about them exploiting an unethical advantage in order to rank higher in the marketplace so one can keep up their power and profits. Is that an acceptable business practice?
And please reply to my other question about the work-from-home advice.
1 Like
Yes, I agree the government is shitty but why? Corporate influence to gain power and profit. The country is run for their benefit at the expense of the populace. Mo money…Mo Money…Mo MONEY!!! Yeah! And who is more corrupt and drains more money from the public government OR corporations?
Total, willful ignorance.
And of course you can’t answer because you can’t be truthful.
So am I to understand you don’t deny this OR are you just making a stupid point?
Depends on how you look at it. A look at the total number yields a different conclusion.
Another non-answer. As the deflection is clear to anyone who reads your brainwashed posts.
And this is done for whom? If it wasn’t for the public the pharma industry would, most likely, have succeeded in keeping medical cannabis illegal. Leading to suffering and even death. Who cares as long as there is another buck to be made.
I’m assuming you are talking about stem cells? Clinics are popping up everywhere dealing mostly with joint issues. Is this a result of low quality evidence? No it is because of the results that have been attained. Results matter above all else. What is the harm in giving the public a choice of treatment especially when all drug routes have been exhausted?
No. But is that what is going on? Pharma stands to lose billions in profits along with the power that the money gives you. It is something they are fighting as there is a lot on the line. Once stem cell therapy reaches a tipping point, much like medicinal MJ, pharma will take a big hit and questions about their reason for existing will be asked. Further complicating their survival. Do you not think that is something they will fight for?
It’s done for the people. Because letting Utilities run rampant in a true free market sounds terrifying. But it’s still 100% limiting choice, right?
Ahhhh you know my weakness. Gotta agree with you here.
Wrong. The government and community agitant groups like Acorn brought lawsuits if the banks didn’t lend enough in so called “red line” areas under the CRA. That’s an incentive like a gun in the face is an “incentive” to hand over your wallet. Government was the catalyst.
Relevance… we were talking about the catalyst to the subprime mortgage crisis. Catalyst was your word. It was the CRA passed by CONGRESS.
The corruption of government is the result of the humans working there. I can waive a million dollars at you all day to get you to vote my way, you aren’t corrupt until you take it. If you want big business out of government, you should want less government as well.
1 Like
Wrong. It can be shitty because government IS power.
Nonsense.
You should be thankful companies make mo money mo money mo money because it pays for literally everything you get.
Government hands down without question.
Story of your life.
Some emphasis on SOME corporation might seek “monopoly power” (really stupid on their part), but government HAS “monopoly power”.
It’s not a “non-answer” you fuckwit. I don’t believe ALL PROFIT IS THE SAME, which I’ve told you before making your response fucking dumb and fucking wrong.
1 Like
Government interference is done for the benefit of the corporations. To bring up medicinal cannabis again, if it were up to the government and the pharma industry it wouldn’t be allowed. There is no way the pharma industry wants something on the market that works better, with fewer side effects and cannot be patent. So they donate(bribe) politicians to be in their corner. What do you think all of those contributions and lobbyists are for?
It’s also done for the benefit of the corrupt politicians that are the lynchpin of all govt corruption. Without corrupt politicians, corrupt business cannot take advantage.
I have no doubt that’s some of what they’re for. But let’s be clear. That does not mean every big pharma effort is equally guilty of the same crime.
For example, big pharma spends a lot of money pushing vaccinations. Vaccinations provide a public good far in excess of their price. Vaccinations have thousands of TIMES more research and studying than Stem Cells on their best day.
Does that mean pushing vaccinations is evil simply because big pharma is the one doing it? Are we supposed to ignore the hundreds of MILLIONS of positive results?
A child-like view of politics.
And who waves the million dollars and why?
How cute. You actually believe this was the cause of the 2008 economic meltdown.
The financial crisis was primarily caused by deregulation in the financial industry. That permitted banks to engage in hedge fund trading with derivatives. Banks then demanded more mortgages to support the profitable sale of these derivatives. They created interest-only loans that became affordable to subprime borrowers.
Who created interest-only loans and why?
On balance, the evidence runs counter to the contention that the CRA lies at the root of the current mortgage crisis.
Food for thought.
Unfortunately, criminally lax oversight by management, regulators and credit rating firms, allowed some mortgage-backed securities to be sold, repackaged and sold again. The result was that some securities were leveraged 70:1. That’s right: $70 of credit for $1 of real value. Again, unmitigated – and illegal –greed.
Your mistake is believing the corporate media and that the 700B TARP fund was it.
Yes, it was trillions not billions and the banks are now larger and still too big to fail. But it isn’t just the government bailout money that tells the story of the bailout. This is a story about lies, cheating, and a multi-faceted corruption which was often criminal.
Did you really just link to the Fed to form your argument? The Fed is owned and chaired by the big investment banks. Do you have any idea how dubious the Fed’s opinion on the causes of the 2008 financial meltdown is?
It was indeed multifactorial. But subprime MBS don’t happen without subprime mortgages in the first place. Government was the catalyst. Do I need to define catalyst for you?
Right. It’s so immature to want to limit government power. It’s not like powerful governments kill people and enrich the politicians or anything.
I should be more like you and demand everything I want be taken from others by force and handed to me.
2 Likes
In Zeps defense, he doesn’t want it to be taken from you. He wants you to be equally indoctrinated in alt left swill so you voluntarily GIVE it to him
2 Likes
I quote the Treasury Department. You quote Forbes a part of the Corporate Media.
Just smh
Government was certainly involved but at the behest of the big banks. The big banks and they’re lackeys in politics were the reason this happened. And now those too big to fail banks are even bigger. A great set up for another meltdown. The big banks need to be broken up!
No it’s immature of you to think that unregulated capitalism is the way to go. Less than 10 years after the nullification of Glass-Stegal, done at the behest of private companies, the Great Recession took place. And powerful governments do enrich politicians but enrich private companies much more. All the more reason to get money out of politics.
Such as?
Occasionally but rarely truth is spoken in the corporate media.
Is quoting the Treasury Dept. proof that the 700B in TARP funds were the be-all end-all of the bank bailout?
Yes. It is. The same way quoting an article about a hamster study is proof the study was run on hamsters.
You’re absurdly out of your depth. Even for you.
2 Likes