Re: If you had a magic wand...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
We heard you the first time.
And balance the books, yes... :)
:unsure: I didn't think I had actually posted the first time, I started the post but was called away by my daughter to deal with a spider emergency.
Ok. next one:-
The FDA will make decisions strictly on medical grounds when it comes to drugs.
Spiders are not the concern of the government; they definitely fall into a father's bailiwick.
The FDA should be done away with entirely; it's current concerns are best dealt with by the free market.
How many people die from bad drugs?
A few, but not for long; word gets around, and people stop taking the drug.
Courts can resolve any residual disputes.
Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people have died waiting out the snail's-pace process that has become the FDA's hallmark.
This is not necessary.
If the free market were allowed to work, drug companies wouldn't dare ignore due diligence.
As an aside, if the media advocated for the citizenry (as it should) instead of big government, it would be a tremendous help...
Re: If you had a magic wand...
The FDA needs (as does everything government) a boot up the backside and made to be efficient. However the thought of free markets deciding if a drug is safe is one of the most insane ideas I have ever heard. IF however it was the case all tort reform limiting lawsuits should be removed.
We should be allowed a free market in respect to being able to buy drugs from wherever we wish though.
Next:-
FULL healthcare will be available to everyone no matter their financial circumstance or illness. Nobody should have to lose their home to pay hospital bills. I don't care how this is achieved but it must be achieved.
Re: If you had a magic wand...
Make the Rep's black and women ,see if they could do any bettter .
Re: If you had a magic wand...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
The FDA needs (as does everything government) a boot up the backside and made to be efficient. However the thought of free markets deciding if a drug is safe is one of the most insane ideas I have ever heard. IF however it was the case all tort reform limiting lawsuits should be removed.
We should be allowed a free market in respect to being able to buy drugs from wherever we wish though.
Next:-
FULL healthcare will be available to everyone no matter their financial circumstance or illness. Nobody should have to lose their home to pay hospital bills. I don't care how this is achieved but it must be achieved.
Why should we have to support (with our taxes) an agency whose activities would better be provided by the market dynamic of competition?
If you make a inferior/deadly product, the market itself puts you out of business by depriving you of it's product, which is it's money.
What better impetus could there be to avoid sloppiness in research and manufacture?
Companies are subjected to FDA penalties all the time, but any fines accrued go the government-each offended party must seek legal redress on his own, and at great cost.
Nobody ever goes out of business; no effective penalty is ever levied.
What good is that?
There should be a death-penalty for bad business.
An added benefit of getting the government (in the guise of the FDA, here) out of business would be removal of any impetus to lobby the government on behalf of that business...no money=no bribes=no favoritism-even better and more fair competition.
Neat, huh?
Go ahead and uncap damage amounts; in a truly free market, there would be precious few legal actions anyway.
BTW-what purpose would uncapped damages serve?
So someone gets $100 million instead of $10 million?
Explain the rationale. please.
Re: If you had a magic wand...
Quote:
Originally Posted by peat moss
Make the Rep's black and women ,see if they could do any bettter .
The hustings should be "free-market" also, peat.
Ideas compete, as they should.
The better one wins, period.
Re: If you had a magic wand...
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Why should we have to support (with our taxes) an agency whose activities would better be provided by the market dynamic of competition?
If you make a inferior/deadly product, the market itself puts you out of business by depriving you of it's product, which is it's money.
What better impetus could there be to avoid sloppiness in research and manufacture?
I don't want the market discovering the bad product, I want it discovered before it gets there. Besides who would take up the case...those evil lawyers that are destroying our healthcare I guess. :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Companies are subjected to FDA penalties all the time, but any fines accrued go the government-each offended party must seek legal redress on his own, and at great cost.
Nobody ever goes out of business; no effective penalty is ever levied.
What good is that?
Which goes against this how?
Quote:
Originally Posted by me
The FDA needs (as does everything government) a boot up the backside and made to be efficient.
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
There should be a death-penalty for bad business.
An added benefit of getting the government (in the guise of the FDA, here) out of business would be removal of any impetus to lobby the government on behalf of that business...no money=no bribes=no favoritism-even better and more fair competition.
Neat, huh?
Why not make financial contributions from lobby illegal? (apart from the point that it is detrimental to tom delay's ethical behaviour)
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
BTW-what purpose would uncapped damages serve?
So someone gets $100 million instead of $10 million?
Explain the rationale. please.
to remove the "financially worth taking" risk factor
Next:-
The president will be elected by popular vote
Re: If you had a magic wand...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
I don't want the market discovering the bad product, I want it discovered before it gets there. Besides who would take up the case...those evil lawyers that are destroying our healthcare I guess. :rolleyes:
The problem is that during the "before it gets there" phase is when people are dying for want of a drug the FDA has slowed to the marketplace by virtue of it's bureaucracy, vid.
Why do you think it takes so much cash to market a new drug?
The drug companies didn't pull that argument out of thin air, you know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Companies are subjected to FDA penalties all the time, but any fines accrued go the government-each offended party must seek legal redress on his own, and at great cost.
Nobody ever goes out of business; no effective penalty is ever levied.
What good is that?
Which goes against this how?
Quote:
Originally Posted by me
The FDA needs (as does everything government) a boot up the backside and made to be efficient.
Like this:
INEFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES SHOULD DIE THE SAME HORRIBLE DEATH AS BAD BUSINESS.
There is nothing sacrosanct about government agencies, nor should there be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
There should be a death-penalty for bad business.
An added benefit of getting the government (in the guise of the FDA, here) out of business would be removal of any impetus to lobby the government on behalf of that business...no money=no bribes=no favoritism-even better and more fair competition.
Neat, huh?
Why not make financial contributions from lobby illegal? (apart from the point that it is detrimental to tom delay's ethical behaviour)
To make them illegal would require another ineffective government enforcement agency to suck up tax money.
Have you ever seen a regulatory agency (which this would definitely be, right?) our legislators couldn't get campaign money past?
Eliminate the need to do so, and it will not happen; whatever you may think of the practice of lobbying/contributing, the people who do it think they are getting smething for it from the government, and if the government has nothing to give, it will stop, and what's really cool is...we get to keep our money instead of giving it to the government!
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
BTW-what purpose would uncapped damages serve?
So someone gets $100 million instead of $10 million?
Explain the rationale. please.
to remove the "financially worth taking" risk factor
I see.
What is the "financially worth taking" risk factor, please?
Re: If you had a magic wand...
J2.
What is the point of having this magical wand that makes government work how we want it to if you are going to take the position that government can't be made efficient with this wand?
Re: If you had a magic wand...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
J2.
What is the point of having this magical wand that makes government work how we want it to if you are going to take the position that government can't be made efficient with this wand?
Government can be made efficient vid, by lopping off great flipping chunks of it that serve no purpose.
There is no rule, likewise, that states a "wand" cannot have a knife-edge.
Besides which, if we stop government working to our detriment, are we not making it "work how we want it to"?
Re: If you had a magic wand...
Much as I welcome vid's participation here, is no one else willing?
