Shouldn't Funding Medical Research Be A Top Priority?

[molson_golden2002]

And when that happens, you'll be first in line bitching about "corporate welfare".

no

[Bungee Jumper]

no

 

 

Oh, so funding private corporations with public money is okay, then?

[pdh1]

1) Smoke screan. Simply a cheap way to blame liberals because it feels good to blame liberals.

 

2) Link?

 

 

1) uh how many drug break-throughs come from France or Canada lately?

 

2) My wife was worked at GlaxoSmithKline for over 10 years. She worked in reasearch and now in sales forecasting.

Consider it insider information.

 

They treat their scientists like rock starts. And they should. Maybe it would help get more kids interested in science again.

if you take away the financial incentives to the research, it would end. You might be able to cap it some. but total government involvement is a bad idea.

 

Another tidbit for you fans of generic drugs. Did you generic drugs are only required to have 75% of the ingredients and effectiveness of the brand name drugs they aim to replace?

 

So you might not want them if your battling bone cancer and such...

[Taro T]

No, you're not getting it. The plan is: tax the rich to help those in need. "Those in need" include not only the poor, but the rich corporations you're taxing to help the poor. So the plan is basically tax the rich and redistribute it to everyone.

Aaah, I SEE said the blind man.

 

Well, it is those rich corporations that are giving jobs to the poor, so I can see where it's a good thing to give money to rich corporations, at least those that have never been run by Dick Cheney.

 

Am I getting the hang of it now?

[Bungee Jumper]

Well, it is those rich corporations that are giving jobs to the poor, so I can see where it's a good thing to give money to rich corporations, at least those that have never been run by Dick Cheney.

 

 

No, because then they're not poor, they're middle-class, and have no rights at all.

[molson_golden2002]

Oh, so funding private corporations with public money is okay, then?

Depends. If they are providing a service then yes, of course its ok.

[Bungee Jumper]

Depends. If they are providing a service then yes, of course its ok.

 

So corporate welfare for Boeing is bad...corporate welfare for McDonalds is good.

[Taro T]

Depends. If they are providing a service then yes, of course its ok.

So as long as a company isn't a manufacturer, the government should fund them?

[Taro T]

No, because then they're not poor, they're middle-class, and have no rights at all.

This lahjikal thinkin' is pretty hard sometimes.

[Johnny Coli]

1) uh how many drug break-throughs come from France or Canada lately?

 

2) My wife was worked at GlaxoSmithKline for over 10 years. She worked in reasearch and now in sales forecasting.

Consider it insider information.

 

They treat their scientists like rock starts. And they should. Maybe it would help get more kids interested in science again.

if you take away the financial incentives to the research, it would end. You might be able to cap it some. but total government involvement is a bad idea.

 

Another tidbit for you fans of generic drugs. Did you generic drugs are only required to have 75% of the ingredients and effectiveness of the brand name drugs they aim to replace?

 

So you might not want them if your battling bones cancer and such...

In ten years those breakthroughs will be coming from China.

 

Funding academic science through government grants is a valuable tool in training homegrown US scientists. If you take away the money to do academic research, you will see entire graduate programs in science disappear. Our most distinguished academic scientists will be hired away by Universities in other countries (already happening, btw). Subsequently, no major pharma companies will stay in the US if there isn't anyone trained (ie, MS and PhDs and post-docs) to hire. They will continue to hire foreign born scientists from countries that are throwing money at science, and with every major pharmaceutical company opening research labs in China there will be no benefit to stay in the US if all the new, excellent, trained scientists are coming from somewhere else. Add the increased restriction on work visas here in the US and there is absolutely no benefit to companies keeping their operations here. You will see our most valuable resource, US citizens trained in science, dry up and dissappear, shortly followed by the pharmaceutical companies.

 

Government funding of science is an investment in the long-term future of this country. Not all science is about "breakthroughs" and huge profits. Science is about answering questions and testing hypotheses. You can only learn how to do science by doing science, and you learn how to do science at a University. There has to be government funding of these programs.

[Bungee Jumper]

So as long as a company isn't a manufacturer, the government should fund them?

 

 

Particularly if they're not a manufacturer like, say, Pfizer isn't a manufacturer, even though they manufacture drugs.

[molson_golden2002]

So corporate welfare for Boeing is bad...corporate welfare for McDonalds is good.

WTF are you talking about?

[molson_golden2002]

1) uh how many drug break-throughs come from France or Canada lately?

 

2) My wife was worked at GlaxoSmithKline for over 10 years. She worked in reasearch and now in sales forecasting.

Consider it insider information.

 

They treat their scientists like rock starts. And they should. Maybe it would help get more kids interested in science again.

if you take away the financial incentives to the research, it would end. You might be able to cap it some. but total government involvement is a bad idea.

 

Another tidbit for you fans of generic drugs. Did you generic drugs are only required to have 75% of the ingredients and effectiveness of the brand name drugs they aim to replace?

 

So you might not want them if your battling bone cancer and such...

You really make no sense at all

[Bungee Jumper]

WTF are you talking about?

 

 

"Depends. If they are providing a service then yes, of course its ok."

 

Boeing is a manufacturing company. Public funding of Boeing is bad. McDonalds is in the service industry. Public funding of McDonalds is good. It's not hard. It's stupid...but then, you said it, not I.

[pdh1]

You really make no sense at all

 

 

Yep, financial rewards for creating new and important drugs after you spend millions in R& D is a crazy idea, I know.

Let's just cap all profit margins in all industries, that will make people work hard.

 

Viva La Chavez!

[Bungee Jumper]

Yep, financial rewards for creating new and important drugs after you spend millions in R& D is a crazy idea, I know.

Let's just cap all profit margins in all industries, that will make people work hard.

 

Viva La Chavez!

 

 

Only in manufacturing industries, though. We should subsidies service companies. Like drug manufacturers.

 

 

About time for molson_goldfish to pull an irrelevant Iraq reference out of his ass, isn't it?

[Nervous Guy]

sh--...does this mean I'm moving to China now?

[Johnny Coli]

sh--...does this mean I'm moving to China now?

Some days I swear I already was.

[Nervous Guy]

here's the thing about drug companies moving to China, they'd probably be able to skip all the animal research and go straight into man...the animal rights people would love it!

[Johnny Coli]

here's the thing about drug companies moving to China, they'd probably be able to skip all the animal research and go straight into man...the animal rights people would love it!

Having your pipeline go straight from discovery right into Phase I would save a ton of Yuan. You'd be passing those savings down to the consumer...well, the ones that lived, anyway.