How long has this been going on? Spine regeneration works best when administered closer to the accident. I believe that Miami University is working with The Stem Cell Institute on a clinical trial for spinal cord damage.
He has been paralyzed (quadriplegic) for 30 years. He has participated in a couple of studies at various hospitals over the years.
So yea, medical care is dolled out by need in single-payer so if someone wants a facelift and another has a heart problem then the heart problem takes precedence. Man, how evil.
And our system rations choice by the size of your bank account. The ACA a totally republican idea.
[quote=âanon50325502, post:855, topic:241023â]
Lolz. You, the guy that wants to throw people in jail because of your feelz thinks he knows what freedom truly is. Fucking hilarious.
[/quote/]
So Pharma ought to be able to deny the choice to the public in an effort to make more money. And that is okay with you?
Here is some info. www.greenmedinfo.com/search/google-cse#gsc.q=medical cannabis
So there goes your Bob Marley analogy. You seek to uphold policies that deny the public choice. You make light of the people who are claiming relief by saying, in essence, they only like the feeling. So medicinal legalization is mainly for the public to get high and not relieve theyâre symptoms. You are truly a total piece of shit.
Would you call the disparity of wealth a success?
Would you call the thousands of lost jobs shipped overseas so that those at the top can make more a success?
Once Co-Ops take over then these things will become far less of a problem.
As usual just accusations.
Am I too assume you disagree with Citizens United?
The proof that it works is everywhere. Cutting down opioid deaths by as much as 25%. Just take a look yourself or do you want me to hold your hand?
Not only is it more effective than synthetic chemicals made by pharma it has far less side effects. Has there ever been 1 death attributed to cannabis? Not so with pharmaceuticals. Even if it did cost more, which it doesnât, wouldnât it be worth the higher cost to not get addicted and have death as a constant threat?
My gawd youâre uninformed. Just so ignorant.
Where do I excuse politicians?
You make excuses all day for corporations.
None of this has anything to do with the corruption they pursue.
You missed the point how unusual of you⊠I always chuckle when you try to draw a distinction between necessary and elective procedures knowing full well that every Stem Cell treatment is an elective procedure. So, you favor not giving people the choice to have elective Stem Cell treatments them? Did I zep right?
Further, as has been demonstrated, a âheart problemâ does not take precedence because a lot of Single-payer systems have shortages or bed, doctors, etc⊠They canât handle the volume because, as many of us understand, you canât have free, fast, and affordable at once. Itâs damn near if not impossible to have all three simultaneously.
It has nothing to do with good or evil this isnât a fucking comic book.
Some care is rationed based on the size of your bank account. The vast majority of care is not. You act like every single person in America, not just Americanâs but just physically here, canât get a heart procedure for free. We have like 500 social programs to pay for life-threatening diseases and we have an actual LAW prohibiting hospitals from turning patients away.
This is literally just a search page⊠But, it doesnât even matter because I favor legalization of marijuanaâŠ
Ya, bro. People are fighting tooth and nail to legalize marijuana for the potential health benefit. Right, Iâm sure thatâs the vast majority of em.
Not once have I made light of their claim not have I even dismissed their claims. Try reading whatâs written one time.
Lolz.
Didnât name a successful economic model. I wonder whyâŠ
I would consider the greatest economy in the history of the world a success.
Garbage, already dismattled garbage.
- You didnât even know what a co-op was until I explained it to you. 2) Co-ops have been around for fucking ever, lol. I mean, fucking lol. 3) They ainât taking over, ever.
I
donât
even
like
pharmaceuticals
Fuck, if this isnât why our one-sided back and forths are so funny. I despise taking pharmaceuticals and only do so if absolutely necessary. I donât even like to take Tylenol I use Biotest Curcumin instead. Jesus⊠I am all about holistic health. Fuck.
What the fuck are you even talking about. It costs more than buying it off the street because of taxation (your friend) and business/administrative costs. This isnât complicated. It has nothing to do with a comparison between pharmaceutical costs and marijuana costs. We literally had this conversation with @pfury like last week.
You excuse politicans every single time you say something stupid like
Paraphrasing âCorproations buy politciansâ. Politcians have to accept the money in order to be bought. Itâs a two way transaction. This isnât complicated.
I have never once made an excuse for a corporationâs actions. I just happen to actually understand whatâs happenings and what Iâm talking about and donât just gobble your bullshit.
Corporations donât pursue corruption, youâre fucking stupid.
1 Like
No, it IS the fucking point. Thatâs why we asked you those 3 questions.
Lol. Thatâs colossally stupid to say even for you.
Now THATâS the kind of profits Iâm talking about!
Side note: we still never play Monopoly at my house anymore. Too many fights broke outâŠboards flipped over
Seems appropriate for this shitshow of a thread:
âCEOâs are paid too muchâ
Thanks, government!
1 Like
I know youâre probably just baiting Zep, but I have 0% disagreement with a publicly traded company being required to disclose top exec salaries.
The market is supposed to crack the whip on greedy human nature, not the govt.
I donât really care either way in relation to issuers tbh (why stop at executive pay? Might as well just disclose the pay of everyone), but, at least in Buffetâs opinion, itâs driving executive pay up not cracking the whip.
1 Like
I wouldnât necessarily be opposed to that. Probably wouldnât be nearly as much demand for the data though
Iâd bet it is. The free market has never been all that great at stopping high level greed. Itâs mostly mid/low level.
The way the power dynamic changes as you climb the ladder is too different for the free market to stop high level greed on its own imo
I think you could easily see shareholders demanding HC reduction to increase profitability.
Perhaps, but Buffetâs point is basically that the required transparency has lead to pay levels that wouldnât necessarily exist without it. In other words, the regulatory transparency (something I support for issuers) has potentially caused the inflation of executive pay. So, in a way, the government has exacerbated the wage gap.
It reminds of professional athletes. No way Joe Flacco becomes the highest paid QB if NFL player salary is confidential, imo.
But this can be done without line item pay per employee
Indirectly I would definitely agree. Imo the govt isnât the culprit here though. Human greed relies on information to know where the line is. Unfortunately more information means those with the means to abuse it will be able to
Never understood that one tbh. Never made much sense to me to disclose that stuff. Seems like it just became an excuse for why your team lost.
Sure, but it would be more of a blind âreduce HC by 5%â type of thing. Depending on the # of employees and the tenacity of shareholders you might even see the targeting of specific employee based on their pay. From a managerial perspective thatâs a nightmare.
The way I see it is a) the government requires the disclosure by law so itâs at least partially their fault (whether the disclosure in the aggregate is a good thing or not) and b) I donât see it as greed, but a negotiation tool. I know, for me, anytime Iâm looking for work or being promoted I take a gander at glassdoor (glass ceiling?) to get an idea of where I am in relation to others in the same field/job. If Iâm unhappy I can (and have) requested higher pay. Does that make me greedy? Some might say yes, but they donât pay my mortgage⊠I donât see it as any different at the executive level.
Maybe in the U.S.
Where is your sources that back up your insinuation that people just want to get high? Just a bunch of stoners.
Youâve implied it several times. Just try reading what you type. Oh I forgot, sometimes you donât mean what you type. Forgive me for not mind-reading.
One run by the people not the managerial class. Co-Ops.
So what has this great system done for Americans lately?
Thrown people out on the streets. Made homeless veterans.
Real awesome!
Have done nothing of the sort. Saying you have is not the same thing.
Total bullshit.
the-future-of-business/
They fare better than private business. What is there number 1 obstacle to get started? Funding. So when Jeremy Corbyn was asked about this he smiled and said, that the government will fund the at low interest rates
That is, co-ops have a higher business survival rate of around 2 to 1.[4][5][6] than private business.
It will take some time but eventually they will be the dominant business structure.
And you risk going to jail. Any proof that it costs more than pharmaceuticals. Should I just believe you cause you said it?
So why do they bribe politicians?
So I guess that youâre fucking stupid.
Possibly, but I doubt it. Thatâs pretty deep in the weeds for someone whose job it is to make a company more efficient, let alone your average shareholder.
Not to speak of the inevitable wrongful firing suits that would stem from it. No way it ever comes close to cash flow positive for the company
I can get on board with a non zero amount of blame
I had a big block typed out but as I read it itâs meh. It really is a subjective thing at what point ânegotiationâ transitions to âgreed.â I might think that an exec making 50mil a year is being greedy if he demands more, but Iâm not attached enough to that view to care if people agree with me.
Ultimately if the market can bare a higher salary, ultimately thatâs what youâre âworth.â I do think a day will come when the market stops stomaching the massive difference between employee and exec, but that day is not this day
1 Like
There is an intermediary between the market (shareholders) and the humans that decide executive pay (the board). Board members are almost all c-suiters themselves. So it behooves them to drive up average C-suite compensation.
The free market way to fox this problem is to use activist investors to elect board members who want to push that number down.
Iâve often wondered why corporations just donât shop around more for CEOâs more.
Candidate A: 50 years experience, Harvard MBA, excellent leader. $50 million/year
Candidate B: 40 years experience, Wharton MBA, still a great leader, but 10% less effective than candidate A. $25 million/year
Wow, what a nuanced point. Almost as astute as usmccd423.
Which is why I donât think high level execs can be reigned in with the free market in itâs current state. Too much for guarding the hen house.
While this is a possible fix, I donât think itâll ever be plausible. The necessary capital would be staggering
âYou scratch my back I scratch yours.â Probably ties into the board/exec relationship you spoke of. Not much in the way of incentive for a board member to keep pay down for execs
A âhealthcareâ system that tries to prevent people from getting better in the name of profits is absolutely awful.