SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Canadians are in a kerfuffle over the Trump administration's preliminary plan to allow Americans to import lower-cost prescription medications from Canada.
The plan was announced July 31 and is part of the administration's long-sought effort to drag down the US's skyrocketing drug prices. But it's a long way from being a reality. Even if the plan does pan out, it will likely be years before regulators review, approve, and scale up efforts to import drugs.
Still, Canadians are infuriated by the idea and already brainstorming ways to toss it down the garburator, according to a report by health-news outlet STAT. Many fear that American importation would exacerbate current drug shortages in Canada.
"You are coming as Americans to poach our drug supply, and I don't have any polite words for that," Amir Attaran of the University of Ottawa told STAT. Prof. Attaran went on to refer to the plan as "deplorable" and "atrociously unethical." "Our drugs are not for you, period."
[...] On Monday, August 12, Canada's Minister of Health Ginette Petitpas Taylor was set to meet with pharmacists, patients, and industry officials to discuss a response to the US plan, according to STAT. Petitpas Taylor has pledged to "ensure there are no adverse effects to the supply or cost of prescription drugs in Canada."
In order to protect Canadians, some advocates and policy experts suggested that Canada could begin controlling the export of pharmaceuticals, pass new laws simply banning exporting drugs meant for Canadians, or impose new tariffs.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday August 14 2019, @03:34AM (2 children)
Hurray for extremely low standards. So what, if your government has many failings? We can always find something, if we look hard enough, that the government isn't too badly incompetent or malicious at. Let's review some of the problems with the stuff you wrote. First, you have no clue how corrupt your police force is, but 2% is highly optimistic and situational. A semblance of education means what? They drafted people in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, it was just via a legal mechanism that snagged people who served in the previous few years. Your government spends freely on new road construction, but has this mysterious trouble in finding money to maintain existing roads. Somewhat safe? And shiny weather forecasts (the relative non-failing appears).
Most of your neighbors do that for themselves.
"Except of course..." pretty much kills the point. It's always interesting how people gloss over the corruption and waste.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 15 2019, @06:49PM (1 child)
Time to swab out your brain cavity. They addressed the corruption and waste specifically to address the outliers where we're being ripped off by the gov AND corps. Yet you turn it around like some sort of attack.
This is the kind of disingenuous bullshit people don't like from you, maybe go re-read the comments on your whiny journal entry.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday August 17 2019, @12:50AM
In addition to the above example in this thread, we have someone dismissing [soylentnews.org] the claim that "resources are preferentially going to the older generations" with the moral assertion that "most healthcare supports those who are older (preventive care aside) is pretty much the way it ought to work". It still means that they just granted said preferential allocation of resources.
Don't want the "disingenuous bullshit" obvious rebuttal? Then don't make the Wizard of Oz fallacy. We're never going to agree that the Wizard of Oz is mysterious and all powerful when we can see him running around like a chimpanzee behind the curtain. The mention of a counterexample never negates the counterexample. It's time to learn that.