How about something far simpler - reduce to the us government to only enumerated powers. If they want to do something not enumerated pass an amendment.
That would just end in a situation even worse than now - such a policy requires a government in the continental European parliamentary form to make sure the government always has a parliamentary backing.
No, actually it would be far superior. We should strictly limit the power of the Federal government to what was actually intended by the Founders instead of using the Commerce Clause as a loophole. Devolve everything else to the several states.
That would just end in a situation even worse than now - such a policy requires a government in the continental European parliamentary form to make sure the government always has a parliamentary backing.
No, actually it would be far superior. We should strictly limit the power of the Federal government to what was actually intended by the Founders instead of using the Commerce Clause as a loophole. Devolve everything else to the several states.
We tried that. It was called the Articles of Confederation[0]. It was an unmitigated disaster, and the reason we have our current Constitution with power actually consolidated under a Federal government.
Sure, if you want much less innovation: "IRA means 40% reduction in new drugs over 10 years, report finds" https://bio.news/health/ira-impact-new-drugs-pharmaceutical-...
Then we should: 1) Explicitly fund research with public dollars, then, not make people who need drugs that aren't even very new fund it. 2) Stop paying to fund everyone else's research (I think this is about 90% bullshit, seeing as other developed countries have strong drug research sectors and I doubt that's solely because of their sales in the US, but even if it's not bullshit—why the hell would we do that?) Every…
Most of the basic research is already publicly funded. Where pharmaceutical companies have huge expenses is in running large scale clinical trials necessary to bring drugs to market. In theory that work could be nationalized but in practice I doubt that government bureaucrats without a profit motive would make good choices. More likely they would operate based on political pressure and focus on whichever diseases have the loudest advocates.
I don't disagree with you, but at some point the number stops mattering. What's the difference in lifestyle between 300K and 500K? 500K and 1M? And even if there is a difference, is that worth the opportunity cost of paying everyone else a little bit better? It's not a very popular opinion, but there should be a maximum salary imo. Beyond a certain number money is a means of acquiring power and influence, and it feel…
$300k - after taxes - is not buying you a lavish lifestyle of in most major cities. It's probably not even getting you comfortably into one of the better neighborhoods, unless your partner is the bread winner. Chicago is one of the most affordable major cities in the US - and $300k isn't gonna do more than have you comfortably living in a small condo in the better neighborhoods.
A household income of $220k puts you in the 95th percentile of income in Chicago[0]. Is the bar for comfortable that you get to rub elbows with Bezos?
Obligatory reminder that "negotiations" in this case just means that Medicare dictates a price.
Every other developed country imposes price controls on at least parts of the healthcare industry. Drugs are just about always on the list. Either directly, or through monopsony power.
Yes, currently most of the world is "free riding" on the US, which is the only country paying full price for drugs.
If/when the US also stops paying, I expect drug development will stagnate a lot.
> It's also a 4-bdr condo even in some parts of the Loop. The average $800k+ condo in the loop is 2 bedrooms. Sure, maybe there's a couple rare 4-bdrm's for $800k - but there's a reason they are so much cheaper... At the moment - there does not appear to be a single 4-bedroom listed on Zillow for less than https://www.zillow.com/the-loop-chicago-il/?searchQueryState... In fact - there's not one listed above $800k eit…
I encourage anyone who's interested in this weird claim to just go to Redfin and punch 750k-850k condo into the search, and shop around. If you're not from around here, do take note that living in the actual Loop is not something people generally do! It's the Chicago equivalent of owning a 4 bedroom condo in Nolita. Where you'd probably actually buy, with $800k burning a hole in your pocket, is Wicker/Bucktown, Lakev…
imo, 1/3rd of that is more than enough to be 'comfortable'. Certainly enough for a small apartment or roommate situation, yearly international vacation and multiple domestic, mix of eating out (3-4 times per month) and cooking at home (packing lunches is required imo), going to a few concerts/museums/plays per month, cheap gym membership, etc. Add a spouse w/ shit income into the mix + children, okay, not good ... but those are choices ;)
I encourage anyone who's interested in this weird claim to just go to Redfin and punch 750k-850k condo into the search, and shop around. If you're not from around here, do take note that living in the actual Loop is not something people generally do! It's the Chicago equivalent of owning a 4 bedroom condo in Nolita. Where you'd probably actually buy, with $800k burning a hole in your pocket, is Wicker/Bucktown, Lakev…
imo, 1/3rd of that is more than enough to be 'comfortable'. Certainly enough for a small apartment or roommate situation, yearly international vacation and multiple domestic, mix of eating out (3-4 times per month) and cooking at home (packing lunches is required imo), going to a few concerts/museums/plays per month, cheap gym membership, etc. Add a spouse w/ shit income into the mix + children, okay, not good ... bu…
Sure. For upper-middle class professionals, 300k-400k feels roughly like the modal home price here. Whatever the actual mode is, an 800k house in Chicago is a very expensive place!
The gov should do what Singapore does: pay senior officials well but exterminate any sort of non monetary perquisites and impeach or fire violators. Also ban any gov person from trading on insider info. Also, if I had it my way, no government person while in the employ of the gov, should be able to vote at the level they represent or work in. If they’re fed employees no voting in fed elections and so on. Yes, I know…
For a long time, basic pride by Supreme Court justices kept this in check. But now it's time for external enforcement. There are too many justices who think that they embody law and order in themselves, and therefore no matter what they do they are obeying the law, since they are the law. Similar to most police forces these days.
For a long time, basic pride by Supreme Court justices kept this in check.
That's incredibly naive.
If anything politics and was dirtier in the past than the present. The media in the past did a great job of covering up things since they were so cozy with politicians.
Read about some of the politics of the 1800's in the US and it's far worse than today.
Obligatory reminder that "negotiations" in this case just means that Medicare dictates a price.
Every other developed country imposes price controls on at least parts of the healthcare industry. Drugs are just about always on the list. Either directly, or through monopsony power.
The US already imposes price controls in the US. Look up things like 340B, Medicaid mandatory rebates, etc.
This is a bad joke, right? Would you hold the politicians that you support to the same standards? Of course not, and none of Bernie’s supporters could possibly care less if he has a home in Vermont and a home in DC just like literally every single senator. You can't possibly even know what socialism is if making such an airheaded comment.
It's because it's a tu quoque. Normally when confronted with an argument that ties ones argument with ones behavior, we would say that the argument stands independent from the person saying it. But for what ever season, that seems not to be an assumption with this topic - which is itself a case of special pleading. I'm curious, why though? Isn't it just a case of letting emotions control logic?
I don't know what you think you're onto but it's giving far too much credit to what is nothing more than another toothless, idiotic utterance of the absolutely depraved American bourgeoise mind mush.