|
|
"fresh~horses" <fresh~horses@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1126216285.566192.122950@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com wrote:
>> Hawki63@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> > hmmm...I suppose this could go to auto
>> > manufacturing...furniture...clothes...etc
>> >
>> > how many are ACTUALLY unique??
>> >
>> > they are ALL "me too"
>> >
>> > but then...THAT is a different issue..
>> >
>> > yeah right
>>
>>
>> COMMENT:
>>
>> I seem to remember trying this argument on Zee and getting the response
>> that me-too autos didn't count because drugs are a different
>> commodity-- one which saves lives.
>
>
>
>
> You seem to remember wrong boyo. You can expect things like this to
> happen now you're 50. You'll have other problems too.
>
> Your erections won't be as high and hard as they were when you were 28.
> I think we should do a limpectomy. And while we're in there...
>
> Drugs are (in civilized western nations) healthcare not stockholders
> share.
>
>
>
> Zee
do you have citations to document that "civilized western nations" are in
the drug development and sales business purely for altruistic reasons?? that
they don't have to pay their bills,,salaries..etc etc
so it is OK for auto makers to worry about "stockholders share"...but not
that of drug makers??
what a dreamworld you live in
>
>
>> Of course, that was before she got off on the OTHER socialist idea that
>> what's breaking the bank is really "life-style" drugs, of the sort that
>> don't save impoverished Africans. So THOSE really are more like autos.
>>
>> Okay, let us stipulate the real economic pharm problem is really
>> "me-too lifestyle drugs." :) But how THESE differ from luxury
>> transportation, escapes me. Unless your doofus government is
>> constructed so that it's obligated to pay for them.
>>
>> Then--- everybody waits in line for their BMW. Remind you of anyplace?
>>
>> SBH
>
|
|