martin wrote:ramtour420 wrote:martin wrote:ramtour420 wrote:martin wrote:ramtour420 wrote:martin wrote:ramtour420 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:
Those are great. Wonderful even. They make excellent platforms to run on. What happens when a candidate wins? Lol, take those promises and stick them. Student loans seem to be a big reason why so many people are struggling. Biden said he would do something about it. How did that promise work out? Yeah. It's all bs. A topic for discussion. Blackrock and Vanguard will still make sure their lobby will achieve the results that THEY need. Everyone will pay their taxes and the next war the US sponsored is just around the corner. Does that drive a large part of the economy? You bet your sweet ass it does
Ramtour, you live in Russia, right? Where do you get your information from and how thoroughly do you pay attention to the topics you are commenting on?
Cause to me it’s like you are walking around with your pants around your ankles wondering why you can’t take long strides and just starting to notice it’s a bit breezy out but can’t quite put your finger on what’s up
My good man, not sure how much I can say before I am banned from this thread like I was from the COVID one. Nonetheless, yea I live in Russia. Your metaphors are lost on me. Pants and all. Here I. Russia we have two sexes, male and female. Everyone else goes to a psychiatrist. Things are simple, You either start wars or you fight to finish them. Ukraine confrontation started in 2014 with their government overthrown illegally. People said no way man, we are separating. Like in Niger right now. But somehow everything is reversed. Double standards. When it's against the Western agenda it's no good. I don't subscribe to the illusion of democracy. It's pretty straight forward over here. One man to rule us all. In the US it's not even a man. It's a bunch of corporations to rule everything. F that. Sure looks like the another war lost for the US. Someone sure does have their pants around their ankles. How does it feel to have your tax money start global conflicts around the world since WW2? That's about 78+ years of history. Look it up brother. You are so into politics, as you say. Cambodia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Vietnam you want more? Venezuela, Cuba, Haiti ? More? Afghanistan. How does it feel to have your tax money have people killed all over the world? You tell me. Ukraine. I don't even know what to tell you man. It's bleak.
How about this, I’ll distill it for you: you are not well informed about what is actually happening regarding student loans in America, in fact, you are dead wrong so maybe stop writing about things that you not up to speed on.
My own godson's loan is about 120K. One of my friends actually came to Russia to finish off her Bachelor's in veterinary science for peanuts only to come back to the US and to take the national exam, whatever it's called. With savings like you could not even imagine. Yes, if I wasn't informed I could not say stuff.Not the case
What does this have to do with the claim you made above that I bolded?
Here it what you wrote: “ Student loans seem to be a big reason why so many people are struggling. Biden said he would do something about it. How did that promise work out? Yeah. It's all bs. A topic for discussion.”
A quick Google search comes up with info backing up what I said. For example the following article breaks it down nicely:
https://money.com/biden-student-loan-for...
ramtour, stop being a dipshit.
That article was written exactly 1 year into Biden’s presidency, January 2022. Today is late August 2023. You might recall the good old USA had some priorities that may have been prioritized during that first year. We were going thru some things.
Google this phrase: “Biden student loan forgiveness” and scrape together some details.
It’s one thing to be passionate about something you really think will make this country and this world a better place - and I applaud you for that - but you can’t do that at the pace and level and attention to what is actually happening in the world around you; you are missing far too much and you end up spewing nonsense.
I can’t tell what you can and cannot see from your Internet connection in Russia, that’s why I asked you about that.
I can give you a pic of what my above suggestion looks like and you may be astounded to see, if in fact that is the case of your proximity and look from your country.
Thank you for pointing out that the article is outdated, I missed that. Apparently, upon conducting some additional research, Biden has provided a certain degree of relief. I was wrong. It's far from what he promised, and on October 1 there will be interest that will start accruing... but I definitely was off when I said that he has done nothing.
martin wrote:Alpha1971 wrote:martin wrote:He’s got a punchable face
He is non serious. Not running for the office but to promote himself to a right wing base and profit from it.
It is unfortunate but running for office - even in situations of certainty of failure - is done as a lucrative business in and of itself.
Martin for POTUS. Run you got my vote.
ramtour420 wrote:Thank you for pointing out that the article is outdated, I missed that. Apparently, upon conducting some additional research, Biden has provided a certain degree of relief. I was wrong. It's far from what he promised, and on October 1 there will be interest that will start accruing... but I definitely was off when I said that he has done nothing.
Bro you were not just wrong but also you failed at the simple task of using google effectively for like 2 seconds. Even though you tried multiple times.
You don’t even pay attention to what you are reading when you take the time to actually do that.
Do better man. Like by a lot. And when you find yourself in the wrong, just say it and move on cause the excuse-making you just wrote makes it worse.
martin wrote:ramtour420 wrote:Thank you for pointing out that the article is outdated, I missed that. Apparently, upon conducting some additional research, Biden has provided a certain degree of relief. I was wrong. It's far from what he promised, and on October 1 there will be interest that will start accruing... but I definitely was off when I said that he has done nothing.
Bro you were not just wrong but also you failed at the simple task of using google effectively for like 2 seconds. Even though you tried multiple times.
You don’t even pay attention to what you are reading when you take the time to actually do that.
Do better man. Like by a lot.
I admitted to both. But thank you for kindly rubbing it in my face afterwards. Classy
The hedge fund bro is hunting the fossil fuel campaign donation money so bad it hurts my eyes.
Even the oil companies are like “this guy trying too hard”.
ramtour420 wrote:martin wrote:ramtour420 wrote:Thank you for pointing out that the article is outdated, I missed that. Apparently, upon conducting some additional research, Biden has provided a certain degree of relief. I was wrong. It's far from what he promised, and on October 1 there will be interest that will start accruing... but I definitely was off when I said that he has done nothing.
Bro you were not just wrong but also you failed at the simple task of using google effectively for like 2 seconds. Even though you tried multiple times.
You don’t even pay attention to what you are reading when you take the time to actually do that.
Do better man. Like by a lot.
I admitted to both. But thank you for kindly rubbing it in my face afterwards. Classy
Classy?
ramtour, I don’t fuck around in this space. This shit has real world consequences and there are people out there spewing disinformation - whether by accident, on purpose, or for lack of trying - and you did just that.
If it takes you more than a couple back and forths and then additional tries with Google and you still can’t come up with simple stuff, you gotta start worrying about something else and start trying a different way.
Dont have to be a Dem (I'm not) to know this is good news.
The Biden administration on Tuesday announced the first 10 medicines that will be subject to price negotiations with Medicare, kicking off a landmark program that is expected to reduce the government’s drug spending but is being fought by the pharmaceutical industry in court.The medications on the list are taken by millions of older Americans and cost Medicare billions of dollars annually. The drugs were selected by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services through a process that prioritized medications that account for the highest Medicare spending, have been on the market for years and do not yet face competition from rivals
GustavBahler wrote:Dont have to be a Dem (I'm not) to know this is good news.
The Biden administration on Tuesday announced the first 10 medicines that will be subject to price negotiations with Medicare, kicking off a landmark program that is expected to reduce the government’s drug spending but is being fought by the pharmaceutical industry in court.The medications on the list are taken by millions of older Americans and cost Medicare billions of dollars annually. The drugs were selected by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services through a process that prioritized medications that account for the highest Medicare spending, have been on the market for years and do not yet face competition from rivals
Yessir and thank you for the post.
Sleepy Joe Biden must have woken up from his nap. Bro can take as many naps as he wants in my book.
martin wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Dont have to be a Dem (I'm not) to know this is good news.
The Biden administration on Tuesday announced the first 10 medicines that will be subject to price negotiations with Medicare, kicking off a landmark program that is expected to reduce the government’s drug spending but is being fought by the pharmaceutical industry in court.The medications on the list are taken by millions of older Americans and cost Medicare billions of dollars annually. The drugs were selected by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services through a process that prioritized medications that account for the highest Medicare spending, have been on the market for years and do not yet face competition from rivals
Yessir and thank you for the post.
Sleepy Joe Biden must have woken up from his nap. Bro can take as many naps as he wants in my book.
The only concern I have is that Pharma Companies may opt to terminate future potential drug programs in order to focus on what will be profitable over what will be beneficial. Takes about 10 years and ~$1 Billion to bring a drug to market with probably 80% more wasted on targeted programs in development that do not move forward beyond clinical trials because they are either not effective or not safe.
foosballnick wrote:The only concern I have is that Pharma Companies may opt to terminate future potential drug programs in order to focus on what will be profitable over what will be beneficial. Takes about 10 years and ~$1 Billion to bring a drug to market with probably 80% more wasted on targeted programs in development that do not move forward beyond clinical trials because they are either not effective or not safe.
To be fair, that could be true but it probably isn't.
That is the sales line the pharma industry keeps repeating to get away with the galactic sized profits they do today.
There is no reason why the gov't shouldn't be able to negotiate drug prices. We are a capitalistic country, right? And if those costs for program development are too high, perhaps this should be taken over and then subsidized by a gov't entity, right?
It's the same as filing taxes. The gov't already knows the tax amount for like 80% of the normal filers and could VERY easily just have those people electronically upload their info/payment without cost but companies like Intuit had enough lobbyists to block that simple feature. As does/had the pharma industry with Medicare-D negotiations.
I know you may not have intentionally intended to do so but you just passed along a well lubricated sales pitch from the pharma industry.
Was that your intention?
Do you have a background in this industry that perhaps you could share with us? I'd love to be better informed on this topic.
martin wrote:ramtour420 wrote:martin wrote:ramtour420 wrote:Thank you for pointing out that the article is outdated, I missed that. Apparently, upon conducting some additional research, Biden has provided a certain degree of relief. I was wrong. It's far from what he promised, and on October 1 there will be interest that will start accruing... but I definitely was off when I said that he has done nothing.
Bro you were not just wrong but also you failed at the simple task of using google effectively for like 2 seconds. Even though you tried multiple times.
You don’t even pay attention to what you are reading when you take the time to actually do that.
Do better man. Like by a lot.
I admitted to both. But thank you for kindly rubbing it in my face afterwards. Classy
Classy?
ramtour, I don’t fuck around in this space. This shit has real world consequences and there are people out there spewing disinformation - whether by accident, on purpose, or for lack of trying - and you did just that.
If it takes you more than a couple back and forths and then additional tries with Google and you still can’t come up with simple stuff, you gotta start worrying about something else and start trying a different way.
fwiw, Martin is offering you some solid advice.
In general, it's better to put in the effort to be well-informed and avoid coming across (with anyone and in any forum) like a posturing opinion-slinger. A key facet of that would be open mindedness and a willingness to embrace information outside the boundaries of your preconceptions.
+1 to what Martin said...you ought to take what you can from it because it WILL help you more broadly than at UK.
martin wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Dont have to be a Dem (I'm not) to know this is good news.
The Biden administration on Tuesday announced the first 10 medicines that will be subject to price negotiations with Medicare, kicking off a landmark program that is expected to reduce the government’s drug spending but is being fought by the pharmaceutical industry in court.The medications on the list are taken by millions of older Americans and cost Medicare billions of dollars annually. The drugs were selected by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services through a process that prioritized medications that account for the highest Medicare spending, have been on the market for years and do not yet face competition from rivals
Yessir and thank you for the post.
Sleepy Joe Biden must have woken up from his nap. Bro can take as many naps as he wants in my book.
That's quite a list of initial meds. My mom is on Eliquis and she has to plan her entire monthly budget around affording it because the price is astronomical and it's required to save her life. I am a proponent of pharma creating amazing drugs...but the market alone won't control insane pricing. That is where the federal government MUSt step in and regulate. And now they are. Phew!
martin wrote:foosballnick wrote:The only concern I have is that Pharma Companies may opt to terminate future potential drug programs in order to focus on what will be profitable over what will be beneficial. Takes about 10 years and ~$1 Billion to bring a drug to market with probably 80% more wasted on targeted programs in development that do not move forward beyond clinical trials because they are either not effective or not safe.
To be fair, that could be true but it probably isn't.
That is the sales line the pharma industry keeps repeating to get away with the galactic sized profits they do today.
There is no reason why the gov't shouldn't be able to negotiate drug prices. We are a capitalistic country, right? And if those costs for program development are too high, perhaps this should be taken over and then subsidized by a gov't entity, right?
It's the same as filing taxes. The gov't already knows the tax amount for like 80% of the normal filers and could VERY easily just have those people electronically upload their info/payment without cost but companies like Intuit had enough lobbyists to block that simple feature. As does/had the pharma industry with Medicare-D negotiations.
I know you may not have intentionally intended to do so but you just passed along a well lubricated sales pitch from the pharma industry.
Was that your intention?
Do you have a background in this industry that perhaps you could share with us? I'd love to be better informed on this topic.
There's HUGE risk in trying to bring important drugs to market. But once a drug makes it through P3 trials and has established its efficacy and safety profile...the VAST percentage of the costs of bringing it to market are marketing related. So controlling costs in Medicare might impact the upside profit potential, but it will not render the effort "unprofitable"...just less so. Pharma isn't in it only for the profit...they are also on a mission to save and enrich lives.
Moonangie wrote:martin wrote:foosballnick wrote:The only concern I have is that Pharma Companies may opt to terminate future potential drug programs in order to focus on what will be profitable over what will be beneficial. Takes about 10 years and ~$1 Billion to bring a drug to market with probably 80% more wasted on targeted programs in development that do not move forward beyond clinical trials because they are either not effective or not safe.
To be fair, that could be true but it probably isn't.
That is the sales line the pharma industry keeps repeating to get away with the galactic sized profits they do today.
There is no reason why the gov't shouldn't be able to negotiate drug prices. We are a capitalistic country, right? And if those costs for program development are too high, perhaps this should be taken over and then subsidized by a gov't entity, right?
It's the same as filing taxes. The gov't already knows the tax amount for like 80% of the normal filers and could VERY easily just have those people electronically upload their info/payment without cost but companies like Intuit had enough lobbyists to block that simple feature. As does/had the pharma industry with Medicare-D negotiations.
I know you may not have intentionally intended to do so but you just passed along a well lubricated sales pitch from the pharma industry.
Was that your intention?
Do you have a background in this industry that perhaps you could share with us? I'd love to be better informed on this topic.
There's HUGE risk in trying to bring important drugs to market. But once a drug makes it through P3 trials and has established its efficacy and safety profile...the VAST percentage of the costs of bringing it to market are marketing related. So controlling costs in Medicare might impact the upside profit potential, but it will not render the effort "unprofitable"...just less so. Pharma isn't in it only for the profit...they are also on a mission to save and enrich lives.
The test for this theory is how much Pharma spends on new drug research vs. how much is spent on changing formulas of existing medications to preserve patent rights. You won't be surprised that in the real world what you are talking about counts for a very small part of development costs.
We scoured the companies’ 2017 annual reports. A total of 62 products — 44 from Pfizer and 18 from J&J — were listed in them. The discovery and early development work were conducted in house for just 10 of Pfizer’s 44 products (23%), as listed in Table 1. Only two of J&J’s 18 leading products (11%) were discovered in house, as shown in Table 2.
https://www.statnews.com/2019/12/10/larg...
Also, crowing about Biden reducing prices for meds is akin to the MAGA group cheering for the Wall. I will believe it when it happens. I'll add that Congress has full rights to change IPR law at anytime and allow generics on the market at anytime. Constitution says Congress has to make a IPR law but the amount of time is up to them.
gradyandrew wrote:Also, crowing about Biden reducing prices for meds is akin to the MAGA group cheering for the Wall.
My opinion is that your take is colossally stupid.
Lowering drug prices threw negotiations with govt is what all countries do that care about their citizens. But of course conservatives oppose that and have convinced the rank and file Republican paying more for drugs to billionaires is great for them. But same Republican operatives challenge the status quo of the pharmaceutical industry by unscienfically challenging one of the abortion pills as being unsafe, cause they say so. The two positions can't be held by the same conservative base can it ?
GustavBahler wrote:Dont have to be a Dem (I'm not) to know this is good news.
The Biden administration on Tuesday announced the first 10 medicines that will be subject to price negotiations with Medicare, kicking off a landmark program that is expected to reduce the government’s drug spending but is being fought by the pharmaceutical industry in court.The medications on the list are taken by millions of older Americans and cost Medicare billions of dollars annually. The drugs were selected by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services through a process that prioritized medications that account for the highest Medicare spending, have been on the market for years and do not yet face competition from rivals
Be a Dem. I was a Republican. It makes more sense on a whole
martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Also, crowing about Biden reducing prices for meds is akin to the MAGA group cheering for the Wall.
My opinion is that your take is colossally stupid.
LOL
Chapter 4 of this book has some good points.
https://deanbaker.net/books/the-conserva...
BTW Insulin drug prices dropped for millions of American via the same Inflation Reduction Act legislation with the above Medicare-D drug price negotiation.
The price drop was for Medicare recipients and then Eli Lilly followed up and dropped it for EVERYONE.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room...
Real world solutions.
gradyandrew wrote:martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Also, crowing about Biden reducing prices for meds is akin to the MAGA group cheering for the Wall.
My opinion is that your take is colossally stupid.
LOL
Chapter 4 of this book has some good points.
https://deanbaker.net/books/the-conservative-nanny-state.htm
Go ahead and laugh all you want but this is a reality for a lot of people.
I have no idea of the veracity of this person's medical background or what he is saying or anything else but maybe you can come up with some better things to laugh at.
This guy may not be on the up and up, decide for yourself.
