edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Tue 11 Sep, 2018 10:56 am
Rebel HQ — with Cynthia Nixon for New York.
·
Cynthia Nixon, running for New York's governor says Andrew Cuomo talks like a Democrat but governs like a Republican, handing over massive amounts of power to the Republican party.

GOTV for the New York Primary: Thursday, September 13
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Sep, 2018 12:13 pm
@edgarblythe,
And here you are, being led by the nose to post about it.
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Sep, 2018 12:17 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
And here you are, being led by the nose to post about it.


Look in the mirror, maporsche. Could you post a pic of yourself showing your nose ring - I'll bet it's a porsche model.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Tue 11 Sep, 2018 01:44 pm
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 11 Sep, 2018 10:35 pm
Here is an idea progressives can get behind.
https://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2018/09/Soviet-disco.jpeg?resize=600%2C560&ssl=1
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/09/the-week-in-pictures-anonymous-edition.php
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2018 07:24 am
Kevin de León seems to be catching up to Feinstein.

Inside Kevin de León’s quest to topple Dianne Feinstein, the queen of California
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2018 10:39 am


A pharma executive has defended his decision to raise the price of an antibiotic mixture to more than $2,000 a bottle, arguing there was a “moral requirement to sell the product at the highest price”.

Last month, Nostrum Laboratories, a small Missouri-based drugmaker, more than quadrupled the price of a bottle of nitrofurantoin from $474.75 to $2,392, according to Elsevier’s Gold Standard drug database.

Nitrofurantoin is an antibiotic used to treat bladder infections that was first marketed in 1953, which appears on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines. It comes in a tablet form as well as a liquid version that Nostrum makes.

In an interview, Nirmal Mulye, Nostrum chief executive, said he had priced the product according to market dynamics, adding: “I think it is a moral requirement to make money when you can . . . to sell the product for the highest price.”

Mr Mulye said Nostrum was responding to a price rise from Casper Pharma, which makes a branded version of the product known as Furadantin. Casper increased the price of its product by 182 per cent between the end of 2015 and March 2018, taking a bottle to $2,800, according to the Elsevier database.

Casper did not respond to a request for comment.

“The point here is the only other choice is the brand at the higher price. It is still a saving regardless of whether it is a big one or not,” said Mr Mulye.

Mr Mulye compared his decision to increase the price to an art dealer that sells “a painting for half a billion* dollars” and said he was in “this business to make money”.

Recommended

David Crow
Trump is losing the war on drug prices
He also defended the actions of Martin Shkreli, who became infamous in 2015 for his decision to raise the price of an Aids and cancer drug from $13.50 to $750 per tablet. Shkreli was jailed earlier this year on unrelated fraud charges.

“I agree with Martin Shkreli that when he raised the price of his drug he was within his rights because he had to reward his shareholders,” said Mr Mulye.

Mr Mulye pointed out that Shkreli was able to increase the price of Daraprim so dramatically because his company was the only one making it.

“If he’s the only one selling it then he can make as much money as he can,” said Mr Mulye. “This is a capitalist economy and if you can’t make money you can’t stay in business.”

He added: “We have to make money when we can. The price of iPhones goes up, the price of cars goes up, hotel rooms are very expensive.”

I agree with Martin Shkreli that when he raised the price of his drug he was within his rights because he had to reward his shareholders

Nirmal Mulye
Companies such as Nostrum and Casper have been able to raise the price of the antibiotic so dramatically due to supply shortages of the liquid version that were prompted by new rules on impurities from the US Food and Drug Administration.

Several suppliers, including Nostrum, removed their versions of the drug from the market to reformulate them to comply with the FDA regulations. The medicine now appears on a list of drug shortages that is maintained by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, although it is not on the FDA’s list of shortages.

The liquid version of nitrofurantoin has also been marketed by Amneal at a price of $486.94, although a spokesperson for the drugmaker said it had “put the product on tentative unavailable status”.

In a tweet responding to Mr Mulye’s comments, Scott Gottlieb, FDA commissioner, said: “There’s no moral imperative to price gouge and take advantage of patients. FDA will continue to promote competition so speculators and those with no regard to public health consequences can’t take advantage of patients who need medicine.”

In a follow-up LinkedIn message after the initial interview, Mr Mulye said Nostrum had not yet started re-shipping the product, and that the price could change again “according to market conditions”.

Mr Mulye also launched an unusually outspoken attack on the FDA — which he described as “incompetent and corrupt” — and dismissed the new rules on impurities as a “piece of nonsense”.

The 404 per cent price increase for Nostrum’s product comes as Donald Trump’s administration declares victory in its battle against the soaring cost of prescription drugs in the US.

In July, Pfizer reversed price increases on 100 products after Mr Trump took to Twitter to say the company should be “ashamed” of the move, while several other drugmakers have promised restraint.

However, Michael Rea, chief executive of RX Savings Solutions, which makes software to help employers and patients lower their drug bills, said the Nostrum price increase showed it was “business as usual in the drug pricing world — contrary to what we hear out of Washington”.

He added: “The public shaming effect is waning and triple-digit price increases are not uncommon.”
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2018 01:48 pm
@edgarblythe,
It's not just that they are robbing us blind, but that their work creates alleviators of symptoms meant to cause lifelong dependance on their products, most of which are capable of horrible side effects. And anything that is inexpensive and works is treated like poison.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2018 02:12 pm
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2018 06:26 pm
By Ken KlippensteinSep 12, 20180 comments
As the US-Mexico border becomes increasingly militarized, the US government now anticipates deploying the MQ-9 Reaper drone to the border, according to congressional testimony that has not been reported until now.

Two National Guard generals told a House committee this summer that they expect the Reaper to be used. One said his state’s National Guard has begun the process to acquire them.

The Reaper, a state-of-the-art hunter-killer drone, is no ordinary drone. Capable of carrying 15 times more ordnance than its predecessor, the Predator drone, one of the Reaper’s major advantages is its considerable size—a 64-foot wingspan—and payload capacity. With a maximum takeoff weight of 2,250 pounds, the Reaper is capable of carrying four Hellfire missiles for 1,150 miles. A Hellfire’s blast radius reportedly can exceed 15 meters, depending on the model.

The two generals did not address the Reaper’s weapons capabilities in their testimony. Instead, several times during the hearing, both National Guard and Border Patrol officials referenced the Guard’s emphasis on intelligence collection and surveillance at the Southern border. The Reaper is able to carry far larger amounts of surveillance equipment than other drones can.

Word of the Reaper’s possible use on the border came during a hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee on July 24. The hearing was entitled, “Boots at the Border: Examining the National Guard Deployment to the Southwest Border.”

In his testimony, National Guard Major General John F. Nichols said he expects that Reapers would be deployed to the border. “I think there will be a time in the future for the Reapers to be flying,” General Nichols said. “I know that California has mentioned that; I think Arizona, as well. So we see that as a possible [sic] in the future.”

Nichols currently serves as the National Guard’s adjutant general of Texas. He has an extensive background in piloting fighter planes, having previously served as Assistant Adjutant General - Air, Texas National Guard.

In April, President Trump signed a memorandum deploying National Guard troops along the US-Mexico border, citing a “crisis” of “lawlessness” there. Shortly thereafter, Defense Secretary James Mattis authorized up to 4,000 National Guard troops to be deployed to the border.

Major General Michael T. McGuire, the National Guard’s adjutant general of Arizona, confirmed to the committee that the Guard is seeking Reapers. Asked by Rep. Martha McSally (R-AZ) whether they’re engaged in talks to acquire the Reapers, McGuire replied, “We have been looking for that.”

McGuire also alluded to the benefits that not just the Reaper would confer on patrolling the border, but also Apache attack helicopters.

“While we are using RC-26 and Lakota, there are other rotary wing a remotely piloted systems like MQ-9 and Apache that could be used in night, low-visibility to help support our Customs and Border Patrol agents out of the normal daytime cycle,” said General McGuire.

A Border Patrol official, Rodolfo Karisch, chief of the Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector, was also present at the hearing. Karisch’s remarks shed light on the nature of the assistance that the National Guard has been providing the Border Patrol.

“Guard right now is assisting us on various fronts: on the aviations side, operations, logistics, and administrative support that they’re giving us,” said Karisch. “Critical to the job that they’re doing for us right now is operating cameras. They’re acting as our eyes and ears, giving us greater situational awareness of that border.”

Later, when Rep. Val Demings (D-Fla.) pressed Karisch to specify the nature of the Border Patrol’s work with the Guard, he emphasized their role in intelligence analysis and surveillance.

“Intelligence analysis…working in dispatch centers, but specifically the camera rooms; that’s probably where we have the greatest concentration of Guard personnel right now,” Karisch said.

General Nichols praised the border deployment for the opportunity it gave National Guard personnel “to practice some of their military skills.”

But the hearing was not absent criticism for the National Guard border deployment .

At one point Rep. Lou Correa (D-Calif.) grilled Karisch on what criteria would have to be met in order to end the deployment of the National Guard to the border.

“[The Trump administration] mentioned something to the effect that they would opt to end the deployment of the National Guard to US-Mexico border when, I quote, ‘Our nation’s borders are secure,’” Correa said. “Any thought what definition of ‘our nation’s borders would be secure’ to end the deployment of the national guard?”

Karisch did not provide such a definition.

Later, when Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA) posed a similar question—“What does ‘Mission Accomplished’ look like?”—it was met with complete silence.

Politicians aren’t the only ones critical of the National Guard’s border deployment. The head of the national Border Patrol union, Brandon Judd, told the LA Times that border agents have “seen no benefit” in the deployment. Judd went as far as calling the deployment “a colossal waste of resources.”

The LA Times report quoted several active Border Patrol agents as being critical of the Guard deployment.

The federal government has been critical in the past of the use of drones to patrol the borders. An audit conducted by the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general, released in 2015, found that ground-based sensors and radar towers were far more cost-effective for border monitoring than drones.

Both General Nichols and General McGuire stressed that the decision to deploy Reapers was ultimately up to the Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security.

Contacted by TYT for comment, a spokerson for the US Air Force, Major Malinda Singleton, denied having any knowledge of plans to deploy the Reaper to the Southern border.

Neither the Department of Homeland Security nor the US Army responded to requests for comment.

Ken Klippenstein is a freelance journalist who can be reached on Twitter
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 08:35 am
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/when-timothy-geithner-defied-barack-obama/

Donald Trump is hardly the first occupant of the Oval Office to face insubordination, potentially from somebody in his inner circle. As The New Republic’s David Dayen reminds us, Timothy Geithner’s “refusal to obey his boss” altered the course of the Great Recession—and likely set us on a path toward Trump’s election.

In March 2009, the U.S. economy was imploding. Citigroup had reported losses in excess of $8 billion the previous quarter, and two government bailouts totaling $45 billion, along with an additional $306 billion in loan guarantees, had proved insufficient to right the ship. While President Barack Obama had publicly dismissed nationalizing the country’s most distressed banks, Larry Summer—then National Economic Council director—was intrigued by the idea, so Obama ordered the Treasury Department to explore a radical restructuring of Citigroup.

“Geithner simply didn’t follow the request,” writes Dayen, citing “Confidence Men” author Ron Suskind. “It was a classic Washington move: When your boss asks for something you don’t like, just ignore it and hope that the request isn’t necessary when the boss follows up.”

Geithner adamantly rejected this account, telling Suskind, “I don’t slow-walk the president on anything.” But as Dayen notes, Obama tacitly admitted that that was what happened, expressing his frustration with “the speed with which the bureaucracy could exercise my decision.”


“The Citibank incident, and others like it, reflected a more pernicious and personal dilemma emerging from inside the administration,” Suskind wrote at the time, “that the young president’s authority was being systematically undermined or hedged by his seasoned advisers.”

The rest is history. Using guarantees and Federal Reserve loans, Geithner helped orchestrate a third bailout for Citigroup, and the bank avoided anything even resembling a downsizing. Today, the former treasury secretary heads a private equity firm that appears to specialize in scamming the poor. From The New Republic:

Any objective look at Geithner’s actions in response to the financial crisis confirms that he would maximize his power on behalf of big banks, even if it meant going around his colleagues and his president. That included paying off AIG’s investment bank counter-parties at 100 percent instead of forcing a discount, or blocking [Sheila] Bair, the FDIC chair, from forcing higher capital rules on banks. Every action fit Geithner’s worldview: The financial system must be stabilized at all costs, as the only way to heal the economy so real people benefit.

Since the Great Recession kicked off 10 years ago this week, upward of $33 trillion in wealth has flowed to the top 10 percent, while the average net worth of the bottom half of the country has dipped from $11,000 to $8,000. A new report released by Public Citizen on Tuesday finds that the country’s five largest banks have raked in more than $580 billion during that time, beneficiaries of a taxpayer-funded bailout, a trillion-dollar tax cut and industrywide deregulation.

Overseeing it all is a far-right demagogue—an established birther and an alleged sexual abuser whose political campaign centered on a pledge to “drain the swamp.”
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 10:59 am

billions of gallons of hog feces
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 11:07 am
@edgarblythe,
Maybe send some to San Francisco, they have all kinds of experience handling wandering feces.
camlok
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 01:29 pm
@coldjoint,
That is exactly what everyone likes best about you, cj, your uncanny ability to focus on the topic, no distractions, just zeroing in like a laser to discuss the issue, like Trump does.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 01:42 pm
@camlok,
Quote:
your uncanny ability to focus on the topic,

Pig **** is hardly Trump's fault. He also has 0 control of the weather. Johnny Cash had more control.
camlok
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 02:36 pm
@coldjoint,
Who controls the US Dept of Agriculture? Who controls the EPA?

Pesticide Executives Are Running Ag Policy for Donald Trump ...

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/04/pesticide-executives-are-running-ag-policy-for-donald-trump/

Who controls the swine Trump?
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 07:13 pm
Progress
https://clashdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Zuck-meme.jpg
https://clashdaily.com/2018/09/the-lefts-memes-suck-so-now-the-snowflakes-are-banning-memes/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 07:17 pm
https:/www.theblackloop.com/controversial-video-botham-jeans-apartment-complex-doors-raise-even-questions-cops-claims/?utm_source=FB&utm_medium=D.L.+Hughley&utm_campaign=D.L.+Hughley

Mainstream media allowing Botham Jean to be smeared, ignoring this version of facts
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 07:24 pm
The Ring of Fire
Published on Sep 13, 2018

According to Sean Hannity, the President is planning on firing Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller and will do so sooner rather than later – possibly after Hurricane Maria hits the United States. Hannity didn’t specify whether he thought the hurricane would be a good distraction to use to fire Mueller, but it certainly would prevent widespread coverage of the issue if that’s the goal. Ring of Fire’s Farron Cousins discusses this.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2018 07:40 pm
@edgarblythe,

Quote:
According to Sean Hannity, the President is planning on firing Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller

The whole thing is based on fabricated lies. Mueller is running a freak show anyway. Soon it won't matter what Trump does because it will be in the past for him. Others might have some legal problems. Others could ruin what is left of their legacy.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.16 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 11:52:14