|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Hillary Clinton has received her first national security briefing as the Democratic presidential nominee, meeting intelligence officials on Saturday for an overview of the major threats facing the US around the globe.
The Republican nominee, Donald Trump, received his briefing earlier this month, a customary move for major party nominees but one that has been the subject of a political tussle during the campaign.
Some critics and opponents of Trump have questioned whether he is capable of handling sensitive information responsibly; some of Clinton’s critics say her use of a private email server while secretary of state raises concern over her ability to protect classified information.
Clinton attended her briefing for more than two hours at the FBI office in White Plains, New York, near her suburban home. As Barack Obama’s secretary of state, she held a high security clearance and received a copy of the president’s daily brief, the highest-level US intelligence document that includes sensitive intelligence and analysis from around the world.
Saturday’s briefing was her first since becoming her party’s nominee and no aides were present, her campaign said. Trump was accompanied to his briefing by retired lieutenant general Michael Flynn and New Jersey governor Chris Christie.
The briefings, which are delivered by career staffers from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, have been traditional for presidential nominees for more than 60 years, to ensure a smooth transition for the next commander in chief.
Source
|
On August 28 2016 04:24 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 04:15 Falling wrote:On August 28 2016 03:07 biology]major wrote:On August 28 2016 03:03 Luolis wrote:On August 28 2016 03:00 biology]major wrote:On August 27 2016 19:10 Liquid`Drone wrote:On August 26 2016 11:13 xDaunt wrote:
I still haven't seen anyone actually highlight a particular opinion that Milo holds that is worthy of the hate that he receives. All that I am seeing is general impeachment and character assassination (not to say that it's not all unwarranted).
C'mon, TL liberals. Stop being lame and say something interesting. I thought part of the problem with the PK regime was that people weren't allowed to express their opinions without being branded as assholes because of them, yet you seem not to acknowledge that people's hatred of Milo stems from his personality rather than his opinions? I'm totally willing to debate ideas, but this to me seemed like a debate about Milo, and what I am seeing is that most of us leftists are saying that his ideas are largely irrelevant in explaining why we 'hate' him. I think this is slightly off-base - I think his offensive personality is more offensive because we also disagree with his ideas (I think Michael Moore is an absolute clown, but I'll easily admit to being 'more riled up' by someone like Milo), but the point is still that his ideas are not the reason why people refuse to engage with him. If you want to debate his specific ideas, why not provide us with examples of his ideas that are not draped in asshole-skin? This is a consequence of the pc climate. People are too sensitive, the responsibility is shifted from the person who gets offended to the person offending. I doubt any right wing posters in this thread would be satisfied with such a weak response such as "he's just an asshole". If someone is being a dick, getting offended is your problem. Unfortunately we are taught the reverse these days by encouraging social shaming, safe spaces, and overall just being a thin skinned p****. Yeah man, we should just encourage everyone to be a dick, that's how we get better people :D That's exactly what we should do, that way everyone would be more honest and quit hiding behind formalities and pleasantries and it would make people build a tolerance to bs. Something severely lacking right now You are describing a society run by four year olds, which granted are very very honest. However, truth and formality are not opposed to each other. It's just that we learn self-control, tact, and diplomacy- all of which makes a person more pleasant to work or live with. Learning to control the tongue, I think is an essential skill to becoming a well-adjusted person in a civil society. And it has nothing to do with people being overly sensitive. I would love to live in a society where no one was offensive and no one was offended, but everyone starts of soft and gets exposed to bs throughout life and adjusts accordingly. We have over corrected so far towards the pc side that people will remain sensitive throughout adulthood, which is what's happening now. College campuses are a joke, glad University of Chicago is headed in the right direction. My suggestion for everyone to be dicks was just to counteract what is happening now, but ultimately you should aim be tactful, honest and hard to offend. Dicks and assholes are like mosquitoes flying around inoculating you with viruses that hurt you in the short term but eventually give you immunity.
is that a malaria joke?
|
On August 28 2016 04:37 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 04:24 biology]major wrote:On August 28 2016 04:15 Falling wrote:On August 28 2016 03:07 biology]major wrote:On August 28 2016 03:03 Luolis wrote:On August 28 2016 03:00 biology]major wrote:On August 27 2016 19:10 Liquid`Drone wrote:On August 26 2016 11:13 xDaunt wrote:
I still haven't seen anyone actually highlight a particular opinion that Milo holds that is worthy of the hate that he receives. All that I am seeing is general impeachment and character assassination (not to say that it's not all unwarranted).
C'mon, TL liberals. Stop being lame and say something interesting. I thought part of the problem with the PK regime was that people weren't allowed to express their opinions without being branded as assholes because of them, yet you seem not to acknowledge that people's hatred of Milo stems from his personality rather than his opinions? I'm totally willing to debate ideas, but this to me seemed like a debate about Milo, and what I am seeing is that most of us leftists are saying that his ideas are largely irrelevant in explaining why we 'hate' him. I think this is slightly off-base - I think his offensive personality is more offensive because we also disagree with his ideas (I think Michael Moore is an absolute clown, but I'll easily admit to being 'more riled up' by someone like Milo), but the point is still that his ideas are not the reason why people refuse to engage with him. If you want to debate his specific ideas, why not provide us with examples of his ideas that are not draped in asshole-skin? This is a consequence of the pc climate. People are too sensitive, the responsibility is shifted from the person who gets offended to the person offending. I doubt any right wing posters in this thread would be satisfied with such a weak response such as "he's just an asshole". If someone is being a dick, getting offended is your problem. Unfortunately we are taught the reverse these days by encouraging social shaming, safe spaces, and overall just being a thin skinned p****. Yeah man, we should just encourage everyone to be a dick, that's how we get better people :D That's exactly what we should do, that way everyone would be more honest and quit hiding behind formalities and pleasantries and it would make people build a tolerance to bs. Something severely lacking right now You are describing a society run by four year olds, which granted are very very honest. However, truth and formality are not opposed to each other. It's just that we learn self-control, tact, and diplomacy- all of which makes a person more pleasant to work or live with. Learning to control the tongue, I think is an essential skill to becoming a well-adjusted person in a civil society. And it has nothing to do with people being overly sensitive. I would love to live in a society where no one was offensive and no one was offended, but everyone starts of soft and gets exposed to bs throughout life and adjusts accordingly. We have over corrected so far towards the pc side that people will remain sensitive throughout adulthood, which is what's happening now. College campuses are a joke, glad University of Chicago is headed in the right direction. My suggestion for everyone to be dicks was just to counteract what is happening now, but ultimately you should aim be tactful, honest and hard to offend. Dicks and assholes are like mosquitoes flying around inoculating you with viruses that hurt you in the short term but eventually give you immunity. is that a malaria joke?
Its a failed analogy because it doesn't make sense to use mosquitoes paired with the rest of the sentence.
|
On August 28 2016 04:37 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 04:24 biology]major wrote:On August 28 2016 04:15 Falling wrote:On August 28 2016 03:07 biology]major wrote:On August 28 2016 03:03 Luolis wrote:On August 28 2016 03:00 biology]major wrote:On August 27 2016 19:10 Liquid`Drone wrote:On August 26 2016 11:13 xDaunt wrote:
I still haven't seen anyone actually highlight a particular opinion that Milo holds that is worthy of the hate that he receives. All that I am seeing is general impeachment and character assassination (not to say that it's not all unwarranted).
C'mon, TL liberals. Stop being lame and say something interesting. I thought part of the problem with the PK regime was that people weren't allowed to express their opinions without being branded as assholes because of them, yet you seem not to acknowledge that people's hatred of Milo stems from his personality rather than his opinions? I'm totally willing to debate ideas, but this to me seemed like a debate about Milo, and what I am seeing is that most of us leftists are saying that his ideas are largely irrelevant in explaining why we 'hate' him. I think this is slightly off-base - I think his offensive personality is more offensive because we also disagree with his ideas (I think Michael Moore is an absolute clown, but I'll easily admit to being 'more riled up' by someone like Milo), but the point is still that his ideas are not the reason why people refuse to engage with him. If you want to debate his specific ideas, why not provide us with examples of his ideas that are not draped in asshole-skin? This is a consequence of the pc climate. People are too sensitive, the responsibility is shifted from the person who gets offended to the person offending. I doubt any right wing posters in this thread would be satisfied with such a weak response such as "he's just an asshole". If someone is being a dick, getting offended is your problem. Unfortunately we are taught the reverse these days by encouraging social shaming, safe spaces, and overall just being a thin skinned p****. Yeah man, we should just encourage everyone to be a dick, that's how we get better people :D That's exactly what we should do, that way everyone would be more honest and quit hiding behind formalities and pleasantries and it would make people build a tolerance to bs. Something severely lacking right now You are describing a society run by four year olds, which granted are very very honest. However, truth and formality are not opposed to each other. It's just that we learn self-control, tact, and diplomacy- all of which makes a person more pleasant to work or live with. Learning to control the tongue, I think is an essential skill to becoming a well-adjusted person in a civil society. And it has nothing to do with people being overly sensitive. I would love to live in a society where no one was offensive and no one was offended, but everyone starts of soft and gets exposed to bs throughout life and adjusts accordingly. We have over corrected so far towards the pc side that people will remain sensitive throughout adulthood, which is what's happening now. College campuses are a joke, glad University of Chicago is headed in the right direction. My suggestion for everyone to be dicks was just to counteract what is happening now, but ultimately you should aim be tactful, honest and hard to offend. Dicks and assholes are like mosquitoes flying around inoculating you with viruses that hurt you in the short term but eventually give you immunity. is that a malaria joke?
Mosquitos transmit a lot more than malaria, and I was referring to viruses. Secondly I guess vaccines would have been a better analogy.
|
On August 28 2016 03:00 biology]major wrote:
This is a consequence of the pc climate. People are too sensitive, the responsibility is shifted from the person who gets offended to the person offending. I doubt any right wing posters in this thread would be satisfied with such a weak response such as "he's just an asshole".
If someone is being a dick, getting offended is your problem. Unfortunately we are taught the reverse these days by encouraging social shaming, safe spaces, and overall just being a thin skinned p****.
IDK why you're conflating the issues of pc culture with being an asshole.
Political correctness and general civility are two different things. It's possible to be a complete jerk while falling in the bounds of political correctness and it's totally possible to be show general decency while expressing politically incorrect opinions.
Political correctness impeding truthful and frank discourse does not mean that we should abandon general civility, and abandoning civil discourse doesn't make political correctness any less of an impedance to honest discourse.
On August 28 2016 04:42 Luolis wrote:
Being a dick =/= being more honest :D
Basically this.
|
On August 28 2016 03:07 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 03:03 Luolis wrote:On August 28 2016 03:00 biology]major wrote:On August 27 2016 19:10 Liquid`Drone wrote:On August 26 2016 11:13 xDaunt wrote:
I still haven't seen anyone actually highlight a particular opinion that Milo holds that is worthy of the hate that he receives. All that I am seeing is general impeachment and character assassination (not to say that it's not all unwarranted).
C'mon, TL liberals. Stop being lame and say something interesting. I thought part of the problem with the PK regime was that people weren't allowed to express their opinions without being branded as assholes because of them, yet you seem not to acknowledge that people's hatred of Milo stems from his personality rather than his opinions? I'm totally willing to debate ideas, but this to me seemed like a debate about Milo, and what I am seeing is that most of us leftists are saying that his ideas are largely irrelevant in explaining why we 'hate' him. I think this is slightly off-base - I think his offensive personality is more offensive because we also disagree with his ideas (I think Michael Moore is an absolute clown, but I'll easily admit to being 'more riled up' by someone like Milo), but the point is still that his ideas are not the reason why people refuse to engage with him. If you want to debate his specific ideas, why not provide us with examples of his ideas that are not draped in asshole-skin? This is a consequence of the pc climate. People are too sensitive, the responsibility is shifted from the person who gets offended to the person offending. I doubt any right wing posters in this thread would be satisfied with such a weak response such as "he's just an asshole". If someone is being a dick, getting offended is your problem. Unfortunately we are taught the reverse these days by encouraging social shaming, safe spaces, and overall just being a thin skinned p****. Yeah man, we should just encourage everyone to be a dick, that's how we get better people :D That's exactly what we should do, that way everyone would be more honest and quit hiding behind formalities and pleasantries and it would make people build a tolerance to bs. Something severely lacking right now
Being a dick =/= being more honest :D
|
maybe he is talking about the great gift of sickle cell anaemia?
|
Norway28736 Posts
On August 28 2016 03:00 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 19:10 Liquid`Drone wrote:On August 26 2016 11:13 xDaunt wrote:
I still haven't seen anyone actually highlight a particular opinion that Milo holds that is worthy of the hate that he receives. All that I am seeing is general impeachment and character assassination (not to say that it's not all unwarranted).
C'mon, TL liberals. Stop being lame and say something interesting. I thought part of the problem with the PK regime was that people weren't allowed to express their opinions without being branded as assholes because of them, yet you seem not to acknowledge that people's hatred of Milo stems from his personality rather than his opinions? I'm totally willing to debate ideas, but this to me seemed like a debate about Milo, and what I am seeing is that most of us leftists are saying that his ideas are largely irrelevant in explaining why we 'hate' him. I think this is slightly off-base - I think his offensive personality is more offensive because we also disagree with his ideas (I think Michael Moore is an absolute clown, but I'll easily admit to being 'more riled up' by someone like Milo), but the point is still that his ideas are not the reason why people refuse to engage with him. If you want to debate his specific ideas, why not provide us with examples of his ideas that are not draped in asshole-skin? This is a consequence of the pc climate. People are too sensitive, the responsibility is shifted from the person who gets offended to the person offending. I doubt any right wing posters in this thread would be satisfied with such a weak response such as "he's just an asshole". If someone is being a dick, getting offended is your problem. Unfortunately we are taught the reverse these days by encouraging social shaming, safe spaces, and overall just being a thin skinned p****.
I'm really not particularly offended and I'm not saying that people need to cater to my emotions, I'm just saying that I and all my fellow leftists are also free to choose who we bother spending time arguing with and I think it is much more pleasurable to debate if my opposition is interested in the honest exchange of ideas rather than blurting out incendiary statements. I don't expect the right wing to attempt honest debate with Michael Moore - I expect them to fundamentally discredit him based on his character.
(I'm not saying Milo is exactly the same, I don't necessarily think his problem lies is the dishonest representation of 'facts' or statistics or even that he's particularly strawmanny, but rather that he has offending as an independent agenda rather than as a means of achieving something else. I'm willing to admit that it's possible that he thinks he needs to be incendiary for his thoughts to develop popularity, or that he thought he needed to develop this type of persona in the first place to achieve any type of fame or notoriety required to become part of the public internet debate spectrum, but either way, I don't want to reward that).
You can consider this as like, a debate/ideas version of free market enterprise. People who are incapable of presenting their ideas without some trollface-gotcha-I want to offend-appendage are deemed 'not worthy of our time'. I'm not arguing that Milo should not be allowed to be Milo, I just think that there are lots of people in the world who are capable of expressing their thoughts in an honest manner because they want their ideas to butt heads for them to eventually evolve into the best set of ideas rather than their insults to butt heads for them to eventually evolve into the best set of insults, and I would much rather spend my time arguing with the former rather than the latter group.
|
As an example from this forum, I find Danglars' posts to be relatively easy to engage with. I might disagree with him strongly on a lot of things, but I still generally enjoy reading what he has to say compared some of the more combative posters (some of which might share more similar opinions to my own). This is not that Danglars' is any "more PC" than other posters who hold similar opinions, it's just that he actually takes the time to express himself properly so he doesn't sound like a complete dickbag even if he's talking about issues that may offend people.
The idea that "we should act like assholes as a counter to PC culture" fundamentally misunderstands what the problems of PC culture even are. Being willing to talk about sensitive issues in an honest manner doesn't mean there's a reason to abandon basic civility in how you express yourself.
|
Capitalism/Free Market is great for those who can afford it.
The chief executive of Mylan Pharmaceuticals, which makes the $600 EpiPen allergy treatment, defended her company’s pricing policies in an interview published today in The New York Times, saying, “I am running a business.”
CEO Heather Bresch has come under intense scrutiny in recent weeks over the soaring cost of the company’s popular epinephrine injector, which is used to help counteract life-threatening allergic reactions. The drug has risen in price to around $600 from about $100 in 2009, according to medical literature and GoodRx, which lists drug prices at various pharmacies.
But Bresch made no apologies for such pricing: “I am running a business,” she told The New York Times. ”I am a for-profit business. I am not hiding from that.”
Mylan has priced the EpiPen to recover the company’s investment in the product, she told the newspaper.
But even her own father, a U.S. senator, has weighed in on the onslaught of criticism over the EpiPen.
"I am aware of the questions my colleagues and many parents are asking, and frankly, I share their concerns about the skyrocketing prices of prescription drugs,” Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., said Thursday in a statement. “Today I heard Mylan's initial response, and I am sure Mylan will have a more comprehensive and formal response to those questions.
"I look forward to reviewing their response in detail and working with my colleagues and all interested parties to lower the price of prescription drugs and to continue to improve our health care system."
The company did not immediately respond today to ABC News’ request for comment.
But in response to the widespread criticism, Mylan Thursday promised to expand a discount program for the medication.
The company released a statement saying it was taking steps to reduce the cost of the EpiPen for uninsured or underinsured users by, in part, providing a savings card to offset the cost by up to $300.
Source
|
On August 28 2016 06:55 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Capitalism/Free Market is great for those who can afford it. Show nested quote +The chief executive of Mylan Pharmaceuticals, which makes the $600 EpiPen allergy treatment, defended her company’s pricing policies in an interview published today in The New York Times, saying, “I am running a business.”
CEO Heather Bresch has come under intense scrutiny in recent weeks over the soaring cost of the company’s popular epinephrine injector, which is used to help counteract life-threatening allergic reactions. The drug has risen in price to around $600 from about $100 in 2009, according to medical literature and GoodRx, which lists drug prices at various pharmacies.
But Bresch made no apologies for such pricing: “I am running a business,” she told The New York Times. ”I am a for-profit business. I am not hiding from that.”
Mylan has priced the EpiPen to recover the company’s investment in the product, she told the newspaper.
But even her own father, a U.S. senator, has weighed in on the onslaught of criticism over the EpiPen.
"I am aware of the questions my colleagues and many parents are asking, and frankly, I share their concerns about the skyrocketing prices of prescription drugs,” Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., said Thursday in a statement. “Today I heard Mylan's initial response, and I am sure Mylan will have a more comprehensive and formal response to those questions.
"I look forward to reviewing their response in detail and working with my colleagues and all interested parties to lower the price of prescription drugs and to continue to improve our health care system."
The company did not immediately respond today to ABC News’ request for comment.
But in response to the widespread criticism, Mylan Thursday promised to expand a discount program for the medication.
The company released a statement saying it was taking steps to reduce the cost of the EpiPen for uninsured or underinsured users by, in part, providing a savings card to offset the cost by up to $300. Source
The funny thing about this story isn't just that they are gouging (which could kill people for the sake of profit, or that they are tied to Democrat Joe Manchin), it's that they are gouging the US because we let them. EpiPen in Canada runs between about $100-$150.
|
They should really have backpedaled and run, though I guess it's too late for it now, and that CEO is screwed (image-wise, though they got tons of money i'm sure)
You gotta be careful when doing stuff like that to not go so far that public outrage forces politicians to act. And while the pharma lobby is strong, pharma is also a target a politician can take advantage of.
also, the reason prices can get jacked up is because of things that interfere with the free market and/or prevent it from functioning right, so it's not really an indictment of free market per se.
|
Free market breaks down when demand is inelastic and price is life, which is why police / fire departments are not for profit (or not suppose to, that kinda get messed up in US as well).
|
On August 28 2016 07:48 zlefin wrote:
also, the reason prices can get jacked up is because of things that interfere with the free market and/or prevent it from functioning right, so it's not really an indictment of free market per se.
This sounds a lot like saying "free markets work, except when they don't." The fact that market failures exist is, in fact, a failure of free markets.
|
A lot of the problems with healthcare aren't really "free market" problems (health disparities, failures "driving" pricing, healthcare institutions placing profits over patient health). They're just market problems that will always exist unless you deform the situation so much it isn't a market at all anymore, which is probably not possible in the U.S. so instead we just get this regulated hemi-market that's nearly the worst of all possible worlds (a truly free market in health care is almost certainly the worst of all possible worlds unless you think stupid and poor people deserve to die).
The problem right now isn't the freedom, it's just the market.
|
On August 28 2016 06:55 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Capitalism/Free Market is great for those who can afford it. Show nested quote +The chief executive of Mylan Pharmaceuticals, which makes the $600 EpiPen allergy treatment, defended her company’s pricing policies in an interview published today in The New York Times, saying, “I am running a business.”
CEO Heather Bresch has come under intense scrutiny in recent weeks over the soaring cost of the company’s popular epinephrine injector, which is used to help counteract life-threatening allergic reactions. The drug has risen in price to around $600 from about $100 in 2009, according to medical literature and GoodRx, which lists drug prices at various pharmacies.
But Bresch made no apologies for such pricing: “I am running a business,” she told The New York Times. ”I am a for-profit business. I am not hiding from that.”
Mylan has priced the EpiPen to recover the company’s investment in the product, she told the newspaper.
But even her own father, a U.S. senator, has weighed in on the onslaught of criticism over the EpiPen.
"I am aware of the questions my colleagues and many parents are asking, and frankly, I share their concerns about the skyrocketing prices of prescription drugs,” Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., said Thursday in a statement. “Today I heard Mylan's initial response, and I am sure Mylan will have a more comprehensive and formal response to those questions.
"I look forward to reviewing their response in detail and working with my colleagues and all interested parties to lower the price of prescription drugs and to continue to improve our health care system."
The company did not immediately respond today to ABC News’ request for comment.
But in response to the widespread criticism, Mylan Thursday promised to expand a discount program for the medication.
The company released a statement saying it was taking steps to reduce the cost of the EpiPen for uninsured or underinsured users by, in part, providing a savings card to offset the cost by up to $300. Source
Usually you don't refer to monopolies by Free Market, but yeah, this is ridiculous.
|
From what I'm seeing, Mylan heavily lobbied the US gov and FDA to keep out competitors from their market. This isn't about a failure in the free market.
|
Lobbying is a feature of the free-market, not a bug. Free markets without lobbying don't exist
|
On August 28 2016 08:47 Nyxisto wrote:
Lobbying is a feature of the free-market, not a bug. Free markets without lobbying don't exist
You're missing the point. In a free market, absent government intervention, there would be competitors and lower prices. It's the government regulation that failed. Not the free market.
|
On August 28 2016 08:50 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 08:47 Nyxisto wrote:
Lobbying is a feature of the free-market, not a bug. Free markets without lobbying don't exist You're missing the point. In a free market, absent government intervention, there would be competitors and lower prices. It's the government regulation that failed. Not the free market.
Or they few big firms in the market just collude and charge whatever they want because demand for health services is completely inelastic? The same thing that happens every time when vital resources like water are privatized
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
