It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Committee confirms:Comply With Pelosi Care or Go To Jail

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Originally posted by plumranch


The big money, big prophets in the drug companies is a myth. No matter how many times Obama and Pelosi repeat it, still a myth!


Glad you mentioned that, considering the backroom deals Barack Hussein Obama has been making.


The bill unveiled by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has been blasted as a major giveaway to insurance companies. But the even bigger winners are the drug makers.

That's because the Baucus bill matches up, nearly to the letter, with the secret deal that he, the White House and Big Pharma struck over the summer -- a deal the various parties roundly denied had been struck when it went public...


From the Huffington Post article

Baucus Bill Sticks to Pharma Deal That Supposedly Wasn't Struck





[edit on 9-11-2009 by WTFover]




posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


I agree we all Americans need to fight for the unconstitutionality of the health care bill, it can be challenged but it required the people's and voters efforts, we should not be forced into services and goods mandated by the government.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


I agree we all Americans need to fight for the unconstitutionality of the health care bill, it can be challenged but it required the people's and voters efforts, we should not be forced into services and goods mandated by the government.



I won't buy insurance, not Government insurance and not private insurance. I won't pay a fine and I won't go to jail. Should I be jailed I will consider myself to be a prisoner of war and organize an escape attempt!

I have rights, and I see this for what it is, a bankrupt government desperate for cash, forcing it's entry into and taking over one of the last vital and functioning arms of the U.S. economy for government profit.

Should any attempt be made to jail me for refusing to participate I shall evoke article IV of the Treaty of Paris and declare myself an injured party by the Revolutionary War and demand to be immediately released and one year to travel freely about the nation to settle my affairs before leaving permanently which is my right under binding International Treaty!

I shall then go into exile and look to raise a strong army to liberate America from the unconstitutional military dictatorship that long ago seized it along with it's corporate benefactors!



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


The interesting part of it is that one of the reason the government wants this to be a mandate with penalties and fines is because the big insurance companies are the ones that pushed the mandate with those penalties and fines into the bill, because they knew that the American people will no be forced into buying what they don't want.

But is also sad that back in 1994 when Hilary Clinton wanted to push her agenda of Universal health care the bill was killed because the mandates were look at by the rest of congress as Unconstitutional, so now what have changed since then, I guess now we got more insurance lobbyist money in congress than back in 1994.

If people just keep track of what politics are doing to this nation and us the people we will not be in the mess we are now.

Now rather than focus on the constitutionality of the health care bill the targeting issue is became the Public option and since the second bill passed is abortion issues.

So the whole real danger of the bill that is to force Americans into buying insurance is now into anti abortion groups trying to use the loophole of the abortion to ban abortion in the nation.

Who cares about abortion when we got an issue of constitutionality in our hands with this bill.

Sometimes I wonder how our nations media propaganda can manipulate the people into anything they want.

Dangerous and dirty.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 





Actually, what isn't apparent from the 3.8% profit is how that "profit" is derived. Hidden in company expenses are exorbitant executive pay and bonuses:


Interesting Greenlining study. I find some of their arguments and conclusions questionable, however. Like pharma needs to make larger contributions to the community. Fine, and who would that benifit, why the Greenline advocacy people, of course.

Also Greenline calls for more FDA regulation of Pharma research, however, it is generally thought that excessive FDA regulation is the direct cause of high drug prices.

Generally, what right does the government or Greenline have to regulate or control executive compensation, contributions, marketing and other forces in the pharmaceutical industry unless these companies accept TARP or other government assistance?

Greenline apparently assumes there is some sort of conspiracy in the industry controlling these things where I would contend it is simply competition. There are many big pharma companies and they all had similar expendatures.

I don't agree with their executive compensation, their profit per dollar of drug sales, their donations, etc. but I think the government has no right to do further regulation.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by plumranch
 


The big phama in the US get government incentives and tax payer money for reseach, the last I read about it was about 25 million of tax payer money.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 





Now rather than focus on the constitutionality of the health care bill the targeting issue is became the Public option and since the second bill passed is abortion issues.


That's Congressional obfuscation. Now we're arguing abortion not the bill itself, we won't accept the public option but accept the rest of the governmental interference in our lives!



The big phama in the US get government incentives and tax payer money for reseach, the last I read about it was about 25 million of tax payer money.


Research grants always have strings attached, yes. But it usually relates to how the research is done not executive pay and profit margin.



Who cares about abortion when we got an issue of constitutionality in our hands with this bill.

The anti abortion right and other one issue types. But I agree with you entirely!



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Interview with the President: Jail Time for Those without Health Care Insurance?

The President said that he didn’t think the question over the appropriateness of possible jail time is the “biggest question” the House and Senate are facing right now.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by plumranch
 


You are rights too, obfuscation to covert of how they are going to crap on constitutional rights in the nation.

Things like this may you wonder about the political corruption in this nation.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by plumranch
 


Like I say, incredible, our own president have better issues to target than how he is planning to put citizens in jail for challenging his health care mandate.

I guess he is confident enough that people will just bend over and take it.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by plumranch
 





I don't agree with their executive compensation, their profit per dollar of drug sales, their donations, etc. but I think the government has no right to do further regulation.

Actually, the government not only has the right, in this case, but they have an OBLIGATION under the law to do so. The Sherman Antitrust Act mandates it:


The Sherman Antitrust Act (the full text of which can be found here) authorized the Federal Government to dissolve the trusts. It began with the statement: "Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal." And it established penalties for persons convicted of establishing such combinations: ". . . shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court."


www.linfo.org...

Unfortunately, this Act has been ignored by the last several administrations. If it had been invoked in the case of the health insurance companies, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now, as far as insurance costs go. The entire structure of the insurance system VIOLATES the Sherman Antitrust Act.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 





Actually, the government not only has the right, in this case, but they have an OBLIGATION under the law to do so. The Sherman Antitrust Act mandates it:


You have some competing interests here. On the one hand the government has created pharmaceutical monopolies to encourage research and development of drugs:

Government-Created Monopolies. In many cases, monopolies have arisen because the government has given a firm the exclusive right to sell a particular good or service. For example, when a pharmaceutical company discovers a new drug, it can apply to the government for a patent. If the patent is granted, the firm has the exclusive right to produce and sell the drug for a set number of years. The effects of such a government created monopoly are easy to see. In the case of the pharmaceutical company, the firm is able to charge higher prices for its patented product and, in turn, earn higher profits. With these higher profits, the firm is able to complete further research in its quest for new and better drugs. The government can create a monopoly when, in doing so, it is in the interest of the public good.


And government has the obligation to protect the public from monopolies in this case created by government patent laws which protect traditional drugs for just 5 years!

And what about biological drugs? Since they take longer to develop shouldn't they require longer protection? Billions at stake in ‘biologic’ medicines Shouldn't we be encouraging proving and production of these smarter drugs?


I see a storm on the horizon!



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Wow this is some seriousss bull#! I'm almost 18 and you can bet your ass IM NOT PAYING A DIME on this mandated health insureance, that will so called "help out american citizens". I guess I'll be going to prison :/



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by anarchist-rebel
 





M NOT PAYING A DIME on this mandated health insureance, that will so called "help out american citizens".

You do understand that it is not to help out American citizens, but rather to allow health care to be given to the 30,000,000 free-loading illegal aliens.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join