...the budgeting problem comes when contractors, thriving on opportunism, purposefully mislead the government and then ask for a budget that's 2-10x as big as what they originally said they could pull the job off with.
competition starts with a pointless bidding war here and ends up hurting the taxpayer.

especially the massive war that would break out in korea. does ron paul have a plan that would make sure that blood doesn't get on his hands?
and it's the amassing of troops on the southern border thing...that's kind of an act of war.

and we also have to completely rehash our outright racist immigration quota system. northern and western european countries get a disproportionate amount of slots for immigration.
example: southern europe is preferred over eastern europe
malta: population 400,000. 2 slots
lithuania: population 3,500,000. 2 slots

the system is broken and quite the hassle for any potential immigrant.
i've repeatedly heard calls about how all of these illegals should just go through the proper procedure, but the system won't let them through and is insanely difficult to begin with.

why would any business lower prices when they're selling something you literally can't live without?

...what regulations?
i'm very wary of those who seek to deregulate without providing specific references

yes, because doctors are really going to compromise a system that makes them millionaires...

or maybe we could just ask the french to help us set up a system like their own

...or maybe we could actually look at the systems that ARE the envy of the world and get some advice from them.

it seems that the data on this one is a bit inaccurate.
H.R. 2717: Hunger-Free Communities Act of 2005
a bill which he isn't a cosponsor of.
hmm...either this is a simple typo or an outright lie
let's hope it's the first.

H.R. 2717: Access to Medical Treatment Act
Sponsor: Rep. Dan Burton [R-IN]

Cosponsors [as of 2008-01-27]
Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]

Last Action: Jun 14, 2007: Referred to the Subcommittee on Health

www.govtrack.us...

i find his lack of examples...disturbing
and the FDA has been protecting us from quite a bit. he acts as if they do nothing...

FDA bureaucrats have even refused to abide by the DSHEA section allowing the public to have access to scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against diseases by claiming that every article concerning this topic is evidence of intent to sell a drug.

Because of the FDA’s censorship of truthful health claims, millions of Americans may suffer with diseases and other health care problems they may have avoided by using dietary supplements. For example, the FDA prohibited consumers from learning how folic acid reduces the risk of neural tube defects for four years after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended every woman of childbearing age take folic acid supplements to reduce neural tube defects. This FDA action contributed to an estimated 10,000 cases of preventable neutral tube defects!

The FDA also continues to prohibit consumers from learning about the scientific evidence that glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate are effective in the treatment of osteoarthritis; that omega-3 fatty acids may reduce the risk of sudden death heart attack; and that calcium may reduce the risk of bone fractures.

The Health Freedom Protection Act will force the FDA to at last comply with the commands of Congress, the First Amendment, and the American people by codifying the First Amendment standards adopted by the federal courts. Specifically, the Health Freedom Protection Act stops the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative, mitigative, or preventative effects of dietary supplements, and adopts the federal court’s suggested use of disclaimers as an alternative to censorship. The Health Freedom Protection Act also stops the FDA from prohibiting the distribution of scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against disease.

www.ronpaul2008.com...

wow, seems like the good doctor doesn't have any knowledge of epidemiology
how else are we to prevent an epidemic?

until it's a true monopoly that can crush competition before it starts.

hooray, we're going to cure cancer by learning about erections!
...no, seriously. it's not beneficial in the same way that curing life threatening disease is. this isn't a point of view issue, it's a simple objective issue.

...it doesn't matter how informed we are. a company isn't going to put out a product that isn't profitable.

exactly, and reform doesn't fall into that category.

that's their CHOICE. you shouldn't get tax credits on choices.

true, but we need to address the root causes of crack addiction instead of saying "F it" and legalizing it all

yet Uncle Sam doesn't seem to put warning labels on them. in europe you get large warning labels that take up half the box without obscuring the logo...

but crack and meth will still be cheap to make. any corporation that wanted to get into the magically legalized drug game would end up realizing just how profitable they are.

and the faceless corporations will be even more attracted to that money.

Here‘s a reference on a lot of things he‘s written regarding healthcare:

www.ronpaul2008.com...

Cutting down the insurance they pay, would cut down their charges.

Didn’t you say allowing tax cuts on medical bills was socialized healthcare?

Maybe we are looking at all of our options and trying to form a solution that will work for our situation.

The more ideas the better, I’m sure the competition of their success would push to improve the free market system, and vise-versa.

it seems that the data on this one is a bit inaccurate.
H.R. 2717: Hunger-Free Communities Act of 2005
a bill which he isn't a cosponsor of.
hmm...either this is a simple typo or an outright lie
let's hope it's the first.

H.R. 2717: Access to Medical Treatment Act
Sponsor: Rep. Dan Burton [R-IN]

Cosponsors [as of 2008-01-27]
Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]

Last Action: Jun 14, 2007: Referred to the Subcommittee on Health

www.govtrack.us...

Originally posted by captainplanet
It was a brief definition of his stance. Refer to the link I posted for more explanations on health issues. Here’s something out of his proposal of the Health Freedom Protection Act about the FDA:
(snip)

If there is a problem and we need shots, tell us where to go. If you don’t get one, I guess you’ll get sick. Luckily your smart neighbor got one, so you wont get him sick.

You can’t stop people from competing with you, only the market or government regulations can do that. Someone will offer what your not.

You don’t know what they’ll come by when they’re researching anything, research is good.

It’s a big market, there’s room for both because there’s demand for both. Profit driven research covers many fields and yields unexpected discoveries.

If we know about a life saving, but non profitable drug, someone will raise funds and produce it.

Reform is a joint effort, that‘s why the president has veto power.

I don’t think money should make you privy to a better education, they should get credits so everyone can afford a competitive education.

I see making it illegal without stopping importation as the “F it” attitude. The root cause is social and medical, not legal.

So that stuff about lung cancer, heart disease, Emphysema, and complicated pregnancies on every pack of cigarettes in America is from their marketing department?

You will have cheap alternatives.

Corporations aren’t faceless, they can even be sued. Activists would know exactly who was dealing drugs. Drug dealers live off of the darkness we provide them.

yes, you seem to believe that everyone is capable of being properly educated when we live in a country where 18% of the population still seems to believe that the sun orbits the earth.

since we're on the subject of military, how is ron paul going to pay for his proposed worldwide pullout?

um...we're actually entitled by diplomatic agreements to help them out.
here's some reasoning:
our troop presence is stopping 2 of the world's largest militaries from going to war
if a we withdraw them and follow ron paul's policies regarding international relations, a war is incredibly likely to start
therefore, we should keep the troops there to prevent the war from happening until a proper peace can be established between north and south korea

ok, and what are we going to do with the rest of our soldiers? where are we going to keep the 1.4 million active military personnel?

but that's the thing about the drug industry...they're selling something that only they make that you can't live without. great demand + one supplier = prices as high as the consumers are willing to pay for their lives

very true. but at least we can find some stuff we can agree on, and we're discussing this like mature citizens instead of the typical internet discussions you see on politics.

or they could maintain their charges, seeing that people are willing to pay them, and keep the money for themselves

by Ron Paul, Dr. May 3, 2004

Last week the congressional Joint Economic committee on which I serve held a hearing featuring two courageous medical doctors. I had the pleasure of meeting with one of the witnesses, Dr. Robert Berry, who opened a low-cost health clinic in rural Tennessee. His clinic does not accept insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid, which allows Dr. Berry to treat patients without interference from third-party government bureaucrats or HMO administrators. In other words, Dr. Berry practices medicine as most doctors did 40 years ago, when patients paid cash for ordinary services and had inexpensive catastrophic insurance for serious injuries or illnesses. As a result, Dr. Berry and his patients decide for themselves what treatment is appropriate.

Freed from HMO and government bureaucracy, Dr. Berry can focus on medicine rather than billing. Operating on a cash basis lowers his overhead considerably, allowing him to charge much lower prices than other doctors. He often charges just $35 for routine maladies, which is not much more than one’s insurance co-pay in other offices. His affordable prices enable low-income patients to see him before minor problems become serious, and unlike most doctors, Dr. Berry sees patients the same day on a walk-in basis. Yet beyond his low prices and quick appointments, Dr. Berry provides patients with excellent medical care.

www.ronpaul2008.com...

but we seem to not be going to the experts. if i were a candidate i would actively say that we are going to have talks with nations that have superior systems to see how they can help.

or maybe we just need to abandon the free market system on this one.

ok, i didn't want to repost that entire thing, but i just want to say...he's not putting forth a case for removing power from the FDA, just putting forth one for why we should reform it

but again, you're expecting people to make rational decisions on their own. sometimes people need to be told to do things for their own good

until the larger company buys out the smaller one...

but those discoveries are only applied if they will yield a profit and are protected so that they will only be used at the profit of the company that found them.

but that's another problem
here's a simple capitalist view of cancer: letting people live with cancer for an extended period of time is far more profitable than curing it, so we won't develop a cure.

it took a damn long time with penicillin

The discovery of penicillin is usually attributed to Scottish scientist Sir Alexander Fleming in 1928 and the development of penicillin for use as a medicine is attributed to the Australian Nobel Laureate Howard Walter Florey.

...He expressed initial optimism that penicillin would be a useful disinfectant, being highly potent with minimal toxicity compared to antiseptics of the day, but, in particular, noted its laboratory value in the isolation of "Bacillus influenzae" (now Haemophilus influenzae).[3] After further experiments, Fleming was convinced that penicillin could not last long enough in the human body to kill pathogenic bacteria, and stopped studying penicillin after 1931, but restarted some clinical trials in 1934 and continued to try to get someone to purify it until 1940.

In 1930 Cecil George Paine, a pathologist at the Royal Infirmary in Sheffield, attempted to treat sycosis - eruptions in beard follicles - but was unsuccessful, probably because the drug did not get deep enough. Moving onto opthalmia neonatorum - a gonococcal infection in babies - he achieved the first cure on 25th November 1930. He cured four patients, one adult the others babies, of eye infections although a fifth patient was not so lucky.[5]

In 1939, Australian scientist Howard Florey (later Baron Florey) and a team of researchers (Ernst Boris Chain, A. D. Gardner, Norman Heatley, M. Jennings, J. Orr-Ewing and G. Sanders) at the Sir William Dunn School of Pathology, University of Oxford made significant progress in showing the in vivo bactericidal action of penicillin. Their attempts to treat humans failed due to insufficient volumes of penicillin (the first patient treated was Reserve Constable Albert Alexander), but they proved its harmlessness and effect on mice.

Some of the pioneering trials of penicillin took place at the Radcliffe Infirmary in Oxford. On 1942-03-14, John Bumstead and Orvan Hess became the first in the world to successfully treat a patient using penicillin.[7][8]

en.wikipedia.org...

several others had earlier noted the antibacterial effects of Penicillium such as Ernest Duchesne, who documented it in his 1897 paper; however it was not accepted by the Institut Pasteur because of his young age.

en.wikipedia.org...

no, the president has a veto power to preserve the balance of power and uphold the constitution.

i don't think money should make you privy to a safer car, they should get credits so everyone can afford a car that will protect you

i don't think money should make you privy to living in a bigger home, they should get credits so everyone can live in a house that's spacious enough for their family

but legalizing it does absolutely nothing to stop

see the difference?

but the crack and meth will still be insanely cheaper. if the price of cocaine goes down by 2/3, the price of crack will go down by just about the same fraction

and how do you sue people for making a legal product?

mcdonald's gets sued for $2 billion, so what?
multibillion dollar drug company gets sued for the products it makes, so what? it will find a way around it and keep making them

it's odd that nobody here has decided to demonstrate why ron paul would be such a great candidate and/or why his policies would work...

can anybody provide that for me?

i never said that 18% of the population is backwards, my point is that there's an education problem. that 18% of the population probably hasn't had all the information given to them...that's the problem here, we can't educate 100% of the populace on issues.

why? keeping our troops in other nations is actually beneficial to america and many other nations as long as we're not using them to perpetuate illegal wars.

and it would really hurt a selling point the military uses for recruitment, "travel the world"

the profit margins would be as big as the companies could realistically keep them. that's going to hurt the consumer and benefit the drug companies

but there are some instances where there isn't proper competition because there simply can't be. some specialists have an entire market cornered because they're that obscure.

one more thing i'd like to add, ron paul has repeatedly asserted that he disagrees with the concept of universal healthcare and thinks that healthcare is not an inherent right...

he isn't creating awareness and addressing all the root causes.

actually, they could still hurt others
if they get the disease and have some other disease within them we could get an entirely new strain that would end up hurting people who haven't been vaccinated.

well, in theory, but that's not the truth. homosexual marriage has yet to be shown to impose on someone else's rights, but it's illegal...

until one of the companies gets big enough to halt the cycle

you can't always do that. if one company has control of the entire process from supply to market, there's not a single way for a new company to emerge

and we've made exponentially more progress through academia than we have through free market, profit driven research...
i guess that means we should hand it over to the academics

i never said they are, i'm just saying that it's simply a more logical point of view. if a treatment is more profitable than a cure, then the treatment will be the emphasis of research

and that's the problem...if all the money going into erectile dysfunction and hair growth was funneled into all these alternatives, we can find a way to make it happen.

well, that was france in the 19th century...so i'm not sure that's something we can apply to now

how about we simply use the money that you want to use for this purpose and put it directly into improving education?

now you're simply making an assertion. there isn't any evidence to show that your solution is anything but irresponsible

i never said we'd continue the current course of action, i just said that your position is wrong

but then what's to stop the underworld from becoming the mainstream?

separation of church and state, ron paul doesn't believe in it.
preservation of my religious freedom is a big enough reason.

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life. The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance.