Presidential Address

[kentonio]

Do you know what happens when you control the price of something?

Yes, given that the National Health Service has existed for nearly 70 years now, we do know exactly what happens. In this case, prices stay low because single payer systems have far better leverage over the pharm companies.

[Aeson]

As noted in the Ming thread, there will always be ways around it. But it's better than nothing.

[Kidlicious]

Yes, given that the National Health Service has existed for nearly 70 years now, we do know exactly what happens. In this case, prices stay low because single payer systems have far better leverage over the pharm companies.

Which means you have less pharms etc.....

[kentonio]

Which means you have less pharms etc.....

Yet we have better recovery rates and health outcomes than you overall.

[Nikolai]

Don't bother, he is in his own libertarian dream that one. Won't listen to facts.

[Kidlicious]

Yet we have better recovery rates and health outcomes than you overall.

Why wouldn't that be the case if you had a free market?

[SlowwHand]

I'm pretty sure his point his being missed.

I'm pretty sure you must be correct. Giving a pay raise to the point that his other points come to fruition is beyond me.

[kentonio]

Why wouldn't that be the case if you had a free market?

Like the one you have which results in worse health outcomes? Err, isn't that kind of self evident?

[Kidlicious]

Like the one you have which results in worse health outcomes? Err, isn't that kind of self evident?

No it's not. You have to explain how reducing supplies is going to give us better health outcomes.

[Guynemer]

It's just step one in my plan to make human interaction impossible a better user experience here on Apolyton.

Marry me.

[ColdWizard]

HOLY ****

Who made it so that quotes of people who are on your ignore list show up as "This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote"?

Because, who ever it was, I'd like to donate all of my earned "thanks" to them.

http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/204909-I-m-Back-%29?p=6288758&viewfull=1#post6288758

[rah]

Which means you have less pharms etc....

Yet we have better recovery rates and health outcomes than you overall.

In all fairness, many other countries get benefits from the development done by US pharm companies.
This is not to be considered an endorsement for US pharm companies.

[MrFun]

It's just step one in my plan to make human interaction impossible a better user experience here on Apolyton.

[DinoDoc]

No thread? Are all of his supporters here standing in line for his autograph?

If It Happened There: The State of the Union

WASHINGTON, United States—Americans turning on their televisions on Tuesday night hoping to watch the country’s most beloved telenovela—the inexplicably popular tale of a ragtag team of naval detectives—are in for a disappointment. The nation’s leader will be addressing his citizens, and all the country’s major broadcasters, both public and private, are obliged to carry the speech live.

It is called the State of the Union. A tradition nominally rooted in an ambiguously worded phrase in the country’s constitution, it has evolved into a multimedia extravaganza that dominates the county’s political conversation. Nevertheless, despite the pomp and prime-time billing, most Americans admit they can scarcely remember its message just a few days later.

The ritual, by now, is well-established. President Barack Obama will travel to the lower house of the national legislature from the executive mansion, and before an audience comprised of members of that body, as well as senior leaders of the military and judiciary, give a long speech extolling the nation’s virtues and present circumstances—the state of the union is invariably described as “strong”—and laying out the regime’s priorities for the new year.

Unlike in many Western democracies, in which national leaders interact directly with the legislature, sometimes even answering questions, members of Congress may signal their disapproval by remaining in their seats sitting quietly. Support for popular policies (or political allies) is expressed with applause. Last year, for instance, regime loyalists interrupted Obama’s speech 74 times with rapturous displays of approval for their leader. Members of the opposition typically do not applaud, though they occasionally join in with approval of paeans to the nation’s powerful military, the leaders of which typically sit stone-faced in front of the gallery.

The leader frequently uses the speech to single out ordinary citizens whose actions have made them heroes to the motherland. These lucky few are typically seated with the country’s first lady and asked to stand before their nation for a brief televised moment. The president will also occasionally take advantage of his elevated platform to publicly shame those officials who have displeased him in the previous year.

Every facet of the event, from the president’s long walk to the podium through the crowded gallery of well-wishers to the facial expressions of the nation’s voluble and eccentric vice president, will be carefully dissected by analysts on both regime- and opposition-aligned broadcasters. The leader’s speech regularly provokes arguments among the armchair analysts on the nation’s most popular microblogging sites.

In recent years, the opposition party has been granted the right to give a televised address of its own. However, the halfhearted efforts put forward by the country’s disorganized and splintered opposition have generally only served the regime’s interests. This year, after a series of bizarre and insulting comments about women made by extremists associated with the opposition, the job falls to a little-known congresswoman from one of the northwest frontier provinces.

This year, the president is expected to promise a “year of action,” in contrast with what was widely seen as a year of frustration and inertia for his government. Opponents, however, decry what they see as authoritarian efforts to bypass the legislature entirely. Meanwhile, the country’s hyperactive political media seems to be shifting its attention to the likely contestants of the next election, despite the fact that the current leader still has three years left in office.

In all, many observers see the State of the Union as a sign of the growing disconnect between the nation’s political elite and ordinary citizens. Despite the wall-to-wall coverage the speech receives, viewership of the State of the Union has been steadily declining. Judging by the Americans your correspondent meets in hotels, restaurants, and rental-car agencies, the nation’s citizens seem more eager to view an upcoming football match—not to mention those endlessly entertaining navy detectives.

[kentonio]

No it's not. You have to explain how reducing supplies is going to give us better health outcomes.

It's not reducing supplies for goodness sake, pharma companies just can't get away with charging the same huge markups in a single payer market that they do in the US.