"Denmark “In Crisis Mode” After Terrible Trump Phone Call on Greenland"
...
...
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Such silly games might work on someone like Trump, but Xi and China couldn’t care less what a bunch of walking-dead American sock puppets think or say. Ukraine support for the One China principle is precisely as impactful as its rejection of it, which is zero. No one cares what a future Russian province thinks, and what does the opinion of soon-to-be-dead men matter anyways?
The best Ukrainians can hope for at this stage is for China to host their unconditional total surrender to Russia with the promise of no mass executions or reprisals afterwards. If they are too stubborn or stupid to realise that, then they can continue collecting their individual Darwin Awards until either they wise up or no one is left alive. Personally I think Putin would actually prefer they fight to the last Ukrainian, as it would make the post war integration go a lot smoother than having to deal with a full blown terrorist insurgency fed by NATO.
The cost might be the monopoly profits of some pharmaceutical companies.
At least from my perspective, this is a desperate struggle by some pharmaceutical companies to maintain their monopoly position, attempting to influence government decisions by turning it into a public issue. Moreover, why would anyone equate product price with product quality? In a market that lacks regulation and is controlled by monopolistic companies, the goods available are often overpriced and of low quality.
More importantly, using the potential efficacy issues of a few specific drugs to argue that the entire procurement system is unreasonable is utterly absurd. If one truly wishes to demonstrate that procurement policies have led to a widespread decline in drug quality, a statistically significant report would be far more convincing. The most important question is this: to improve drug quality, should we allow monopolistic companies to control the market and set unreasonable high prices in exchange for possible efficacy improvements, or should we strengthen drug quality regulations while encouraging companies to upgrade their production technology? At least if I had to choose, I would lean toward the latter.
Last edited:
Prices in healthcare must be regulated. Experiences of many countries in the last 50 years are watertight about this. The reason is healthcare does not have to comply with market forces. The barriers for entry are very high therefore oligopolies emerge. Cost effectiveness aren't really a thing from the customer's perspective either. A company can charge anything for cancer treatment because the customer has to pay it.
Anti CN us based hongkonger?
Last edited:
R1 is Weapons grade with Geopolitical implications... /s
Oh it’s starting.
People are waking up to the fact that they’ve been fed garbage tier propaganda by the MSM all their lives.