The GOP turned toward racism with the Southern strategy back in the 50s-60s in the face of the civil rights movement. Now, in the face of "Trumpism" and "Wokeism" or whatever they want to call it, the GOP has made another major turn. A turn toward pro-government suppression of speech, pro-big federal power, anti-capitalism, and worse of all, anti-democracy.
Hitler and the Nazis had found the simple slogan they repeated again and again to discredit reporters: “Lügenpresse.” Today the extreme right in Germany has revived this term, which in English is “fake news.” As Hitler himself put it in “Mein Kampf,” “The correct use of propaganda is a true art.” Sound familiar? Hitler deceived Germans into the cause they were fighting, which ended up with an estimated 5.3 million dead Germans. They were fighting a cause they believed to be true, and the instigator was as evil as they come. Propaganda, repeated simple catchy phrases, lies and deceit is the same style of leadership and tactics the Trump party uses. It's a dangerous and deadly game. Look how many died believing Covid was a hoax. Why would Trump have them sign waivers at his no mask rallies if he thought Covid was a hoax? Look at all those people who went too far by storming the Capitol believing Trump would walk with them, and that he was the cheated winner of the election. They believed in him. Suppressing and discrediting people from telling the truth without fear of reparations is not OK. We need to wake up as a nation and learn from the past, before it is too late. Trump will stop at nothing to get what he wants, and if his party backs that notion by doing his dirty work then they are just as bad.
More nuttery from Gretchen Weiner’s dumber and bigoted little sister Lauren Boebert argues people should have to wait until age 21 to come out as LGBT+ I’d be willing to consider this if (1) cisgendered people must also wait until 21 to be open about the sexuality and (2) all members of Congress and the Senate must be tested for both IQ and ASPD, with certain results meaning immediate disqualification.
Funny the "gays" are indoctrinating children, but people get all giddy gets up in a church and proclaim their love for Jesus.
Then you would get the very advantage you are seeking, but not have to participate in price controls. Of course, what this really means is that US patients are subsidizing everyone elses insulin costs (just like we do with the military, medical research generally, etc.) I don't get to control what other countries do. In addition to having access to markets with price controls though, you would also have access to markets where medical regulations are different, so someone can have a less onerous approval process. Sure, although Medicare should not exist. All prices should be negotiable. Wal-Mart, for example, has negotiated a cheaper brand partnership for insulin (under their ReliOn label). From what I can find they are selling for 50-75% discounts compared to name brands, even though they are sourcing from NovoNordisk. It shouldn't be to tough to simply have another company that wasn't paid off follow the same path. Eventually it will be more costly to keep paying off potential competitors than to simply have a competitive price. In fact, there are at least a couple of startups trying to enter the market. Perhaps you would care to invest in Biologx - Help Us Save Lives with Affordable Insulin Evergreening doesn't save the old patent, it patents a new formula. The old human insulin patents are expired and anyone can make them. There is a market preference for the newer versions. Patents are themselves a government regulation of course, so any form of patent reform is just changing existing regulations. I am all for it. I would suggest that we change the amount of novelty required for a new patent, such that minor tweaks cannot be patented at all. As long as there is government, there will be those willing to pay to influence government. The more power you give to the government, the more power the influencer control. Smaller government with less effect on our lives will drastically reduce the power of lobbyists. The same is true of food, water, air, etc. Health care is far more regulated than food, and far more expensive. When a freer market exists, competition lowers prices (see WalMart example above). There are more than three insulin producers. Wockhardt? Biotin?
As a low-thirties "millenial" who hates millenial politics, I am of the opinion that my generation is just waiting for the Republican party to die and be replaced by a pragmatic moderate party that is opposed to rabid progressivism for progressivim's sake that the Democrat party is morphing into. It's pretty bad when Bill Clinton was the best conservative president of your lifetime. The modern Democrat version of progressive politics is only serving to create misery, division and distract from actual collaborative policies to create a harmonious, innovative, growth-minded society. That being said, would I vote Republican? The Republican party is really a populist party since the 90s, probably since Reagan. It doesn't stand for fiscal conservatism, domestic improvements, consistent morality as it's billed. Instead, it stands for every self-parodying self-destructive warped version of those ideas as a result of its incessant need to pander to aging Boomer voters desperate to stop change in any form. It's a party for men with jacked up trucks and small penises and the women who are inexplicably attracted to or influenced by those men. Its top candidates are consistently embarrassing, from Trump to Cruz to Rubio to Huckabee to Palin. These are not the class of people that can and should be rising to the top of a nation of 300 million people as leaders. Burn it down. Let's host a new convention and start a new Republican party. Let's hammer out a charter and framework of a new fiscally rational, socially moderate party that's based on logos instead of pathos, sustainability instead of luddites, collaboration instead of gridlock, and interest in learning from and remembering the past without worshipping it.
What about Canada? They have the same 3 companies and they pay one tenth of the prices that are paid.
Yes, they are subsidized by US customers. If there was a global free market, prices would be the same all over (with possible shipping costs). Like oil is traded on the free market and there is a global price of crude oil, while gasoline has to be purchased locally so you have regional pricing with variable regulation and tax rates. Also, I said people should be allowed to buy in Canada (or any other country, even the ones were there are other suppliers and where insulin is available at much lower prices, like Bolivia or Indonesia or India).
The party of "law and order"... He is referring to ex-congressman fortenberry, convicted of a felony of lying to the FBI about illegal campaign donations he received... https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nebraska-jeff-fortenberry-resigns-conviction
That's what companies accused of having monopoly say, But your simplistic solution... just shop otherwise. despite the fact the insulin monopoly has been in place since the 1920s.
