If you don't know politics, don't discuss it!

[hhvorausgesagt]

I arleady looked it up

[The Anti-Wisemon]

... You've spent the past week implying that I'm a communist, and now you want people to stop labeling you?

All that I was saying is that the proposal that the rich are evil and that that money should go to the government IS rather marxist.

I arleady looked it up

Then how do you figure that libertarians aren't for the privatization of schools? Libertarians are for the privatization of almost everything, that the government only serves to protect people from abuse and to control the (rather small) military. They also believe in isolationism (I don't becayse I feel it's impossible). They also believe in the free market, no taxes, and hold property rights in very high esteem.

Meanwhile liberals are big-government, with the addition of such things as welfare programs, regulation programs ete. They also believe in anti-business legislation and the regulation of businesses. They do not believe entirely inthe free marke and will fix prices in some businesses (like the drug industry). They do not respect property rights, high taxes, and ae internationalists.

[Wisemon]

Meanwhile liberals are big-government, with the addition of such things as welfare programs, regulation programs ete. They also believe in anti-business legislation and the regulation of businesses. They do not believe entirely inthe free marke and will fix prices in some businesses (like the drug industry). They do not respect property rights, high taxes, and ae internationalists.

What we really don't respect are wars that serve as blame shifting distractions and billions of dollars of profit in military contracts for companies owned by high ranking government officials, but yeah, the price of name brand drugs is way too high. Contrary to what Bush will have you believe, the drugs in Canada are safe. :roll:

[The Anti-Wisemon]

That's not the issue. The issue is that in Canada drug prices are fixed to make them affordable. This seems like a harmless thing to do (a lot of countries do this), but the cost of research is too high for the prices to be that low. So what are the drug companies forced to do? They have to raise prices in countries where prices aren't fixed in order to keep a profit. So, fixing prices in other countries are screwing US over. And if we allowed people to buy from other countries, then they would lose a profit and then we lose the drug companies.

[Wisemon]

That's not the issue. The issue is that in Canada drug prices are fixed to make them affordable. This seems like a harmless thing to do (a lot of countries do this), but the cost of research is too high for the prices to be that low. So what are the drug companies forced to do? They have to raise prices in countries where prices aren't fixed in order to keep a profit. So, fixing prices in other countries are screwing US over. And if we allowed people to buy from other countries, then they would lose a profit and then we lose the drug companies.

Do you have any idea how much of a profit American drug companies make? I have a very good idea, because I've been on the receiving end. Allow me to elaborate. We all know that drug companies use their profits for campaign contributions to keep their prices legally high, that's a 'duh'. What a lot of people don't know is that drug companies give thousands of dollars worth of freebies to doctors in order to sway them into prescribing their drugs. They haven't done it nearly as much in the last few years, because it doesn't look good, and because they don't get the same results that they get by paying off politicians, but as the son of a doctor, I used to get free dinners at fancy restaurants about once every month. I went to a Patriots' game five years in a row, including three games in a skybox (not in the past few years, of course). Those perks stopped, but we still get all the free pens we could ever possibly need. Last month, they visited my school and gave out free laser pointers to chemical engineers, hoping to win some over. The point is, they make enough of a profit for cash to throw around, and still have enough for research, and more importantly for them, enough for the whopping C.E.O. salaries. That's too much profit; it should be regulated.

[The Anti-Wisemon]

This has me curious. Is your dad in a high position? Seems like such a waste to do this to a low doctor.

[Wisemon]

He's a family doctor, that's the lowest doctor on the doctor food chain (salary-wise). However, because they have to cover everything, and they handle the general medicine, they do the most prescriptions. The specialists make the most money, but unless you're willing to plan each bribing event based on which part of the body your pill helps, you're not going to pay attention to which specialists would be interested in which medicines ("you" being a drug representative). Personally, I agree, it was a waste, but they don't really do it anymore.

[The Anti-Wisemon]

This seems an awful lot like what vendors do to companies all the time. It's common business practices to butter the buyer up.

[Anonmon]

That doesn't matter, it's still wrong no matter HOW many people or companies do it.

Oh, and for political definitions I recommend www.politicalcompass.org . That'll measure your leanings, and spit out something that will always mean the same thing because you can always reference it back to the same source.