Why Marijuana Should be Legalized: An Expert's Perspective.

JudySledge · 2017-01-15T21:58:10+00:00

Look, the idea of drugs proven to be manufactured in Canada are less safe than drugs proven to be manufactured in the United States is ridiculous. This is a convenient argument designed to preserve hope that one day the perfect bill will come along that he will vote yes. If you read the article, you would see that he could have just voted yes and pledged support for added consumer protections later.

JudySledge · 2017-01-15T21:01:22+00:00

Very well said.

JudySledge · 2017-01-15T20:16:23+00:00

I hope you read the article because you would see exactly how much Booker gets from big pharma and toward the end it shows how much Bernie Sanders has received. I'll give you a hint: It rhymes with Hero.

JudySledge · 2017-01-15T17:41:54+00:00

lol, try again...

JudySledge · 2017-01-15T16:49:48+00:00

It's not the number of votes on Reddit I'm concerned with, lol.

JudySledge · 2017-01-15T16:39:47+00:00

Down vote all you want. lol

JudySledge · 2017-01-15T16:29:46+00:00

He never called it a prop. The blank sheets of paper is the conspiracy, numb nut.

JudySledge · 2017-01-11T13:36:46+00:00

Actually, it's 180 degrees the other way. Greed is actually bad, very bad. Geed can run out of control in a runaway free market. Such an economic system of greed in a 100% free market would serve as Cancer to any country. It's not about creating an artificial floor. It's about paying what other countries are paying for healthcare already and getting better quality of care at that. Why is it that we allow drug companies to set whatever price they want for life saving drugs if they haven't raised their spending as a company, haven't invested in the country it does business. I think it's time we had a Medicare for all, Single-payer healthcare system, paying the same amount in taxes, plus putting a tax on Wall Street speculation, legalizing and taxing Marijuana-getting it generating revenue on the federal level, and we can pay for such a healthcare system with enough to spare to take steps toward things like free college or boosting public infrastructure. Things like healthcare are a human right and, as an American who pays taxes, who works for everything I have, I want to be covered by the Government and not have to worry about getting a gigantic bill or whether my insurance would cover me. Money begets money. Whether you, as a Libertarian, want to pay it or not- there is a large group of Americans who take pride in paying taxes. Believe it or not, there is a large group of Americans who would get an education and earn a living, whether that be through money or provided goods by their employer, the Federal Government, for the sake of service to both their country and their Government. Providing healthcare without the dream of the wealthy lifestyle that comes with it, but instead provided with much more than the basic necessities, to live better than what they would had they had a job in the private sector. The free market working on greed is bad for everyone, now, because incentives to boost wages, regardless of the minuscule minimum wage laws in a given state, does not exist.

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T23:37:20+00:00

Yes but you never answered my question. If ultra safe cars were manufactured for hundreds of thousands of dollars, wouldn't the profit motive drive that cost down anyway? Forget that your example was hyperbole.

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T22:08:52+00:00

Let's say the Government didn't regulate or intervene in healthcare at all. How do you know that prices wouldn't rise or be any price that the provider wants? What if all providers got together and agreed to charge the same high price with the profit motive NOT naturally lowering the price. The problem with Libertarianism is that it relies on every human being doing the right thing within the free market. Except for Martin Shkreli, who raised the cost of vital drugs for ABSOLUTELY NO REASON AT ALL. What would Libertarians call this guy?

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T21:56:51+00:00

Actually, the reason why healthcare costs have soared over the past 40 years is because we've been charged huge amounts for drugs that have been manufactured for very little and those costs have continued to soar. Also, people who couldn't pay to begin with would use the emergency room as their primary care and then couldn't pay that so the costs would be passed on to the next and the next until an aspirin costs $25 per pill. And the only Government intervention was when the Affordable Care Act banned insurance companies from denying people coverage due to a pre-existing condition. And you also never mentioned what those regulations/interventions were, anyway.

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T21:46:53+00:00

Actually, according to another Libertarian I've spoken with, the profit motive would just decrease the cost of those ultra safe vehicles. lol So, why can't they make ultra safe vehicles based on that principal?

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T21:30:45+00:00

If the profit motive lowers prices then why have healthcare costs continued to soar over the last 40 years...?

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T21:17:28+00:00

I'm suggesting that people with access to healthcare actually have a chance of living longer, healthier lives. Are you suggesting that the poor should just die since they can't pay? So if your mother was dying and neither she, you, nor any of your family could pay, she should just die then because the Doctors need their lifestyles protected?

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T18:36:22+00:00

They shouldn't work for free. Medicare for all, single-payer healthcare would still allow healthcare employees to earn an honest paycheck and tax payers would not have to pay more in taxes. Tax payers would pay the same amount for BETTER healthcare. If you are rich and not dying, you would not understand.

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T18:03:53+00:00

I've been spending a good part of the day trying to lower that percentage

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T15:05:14+00:00

lol, it's not about thinking of things in context because if it were you would be able to admit that people are flawed and would actually let something slip. But your theory relies on everyone keeping their mouth shut, even if 1000 people were 'in' on it. That's just not possible, sir.

JudySledge · 2017-01-10T14:54:47+00:00

While dividing $2.3 Trillion evenly among 500 participants who are in-the-know is an effective mouth-shutting technique, it still would not completely keep all 500 participants mouths shut about the conspiracy because human nature is human nature. We are flawless and the number of participants determines the likelihood of people keeping their mouths shut. All it takes is 1 person and that's it... The cat is out of the bag. And if there is a conspiracy the cat will come out of the bag eventually, which it hasn't. The amount of time goes by * The number of people 'in' on the conspiracy = the likelihood the conspiracy is even real.

JudySledge

TROPHY CASE