197
Imagine blatantly and in the wide-open, arguing that you should have a right to gouge people for life-saving medications.
They do this because what are people going to do? Boycott them?
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
197 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19120 readers
3320 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's also my understanding that these pharma companies used tax money in development of the drugs they are now trying to gouge us on.
"We just want to continue playing god. What's wrong with that?"
I’d have to say….. the god part.
Not a big fan of the "playing" part when it comes to medicine either, tbh..
And all this time I thought it was just the surgeons that had God complexes
Don't lump honest work into this.
I hope you get injured to the point where you'll need surgery, because you sound like the kind of retard who thinks they've above everything. Yeah, break something and then see how far you'll get without screaming for a surgeon.
Last month, a federal judge in Delaware heard arguments from AstraZeneca's lawyers, which reportedly went poorly. AstraZeneca argued that Medicare's new power to negotiate drug prices violates the company's rights under the Fifth Amendment's due process clause. The forced negotiations deprive the company of “property rights in their drug products and their patent rights" without due process, AstraZeneca claimed. But Colm Connolly, chief judge of the US District Court of Delaware, was skeptical of how that could be the case, according to a Stat reporter who was present for the hearing. Connolly noted that AstraZeneca doesn't have to sell drugs to Medicare. "You’re free to do what you want," Connolly reportedly said. "You may not make as much money."
At a later point, Connolly bluntly commented: "I don’t find their argument compelling."
Had to scroll back up because for a second I thought Half Life 3 was out and that it looked amazing.
What's that symbol you used after Half Life?
Ah, you must be a current/former Valve employee. We call it "3", pronounced "thuh-ree". It is the natural number following 2 and preceding 4.
Steam's code must be a marvel to behold. All those calculations that are necessary to make it run and none of them ever result in a 3, since that would make the client just close.
That's the Baldurs Gate symbol!
Don't know what it has to do with Half Life, though..
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The lawsuit dismissed Monday is just one of nine from the pharmaceutical industry, all claiming in some way that the price negotiations laid out in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 are unconstitutional.
AstraZeneca argued that Medicare's new power to negotiate drug prices violates the company's rights under the Fifth Amendment's due process clause.
But Colm Connolly, chief judge of the US District Court of Delaware, was skeptical of how that could be the case, according to a Stat reporter who was present for the hearing.
Though the plaintiffs in the now-dismissed Texas also made an argument based on the Fifth Amendment's due process clause, the case didn't make it that far.
"[T]he same federal jurisdictional defect likely exists for PhRMA and GCCA, as nothing suggests that either party has presented its claims to the [Health] Secretary," Ezra wrote.
A spokesperson for PhRMA told FiercePharma: "We are disappointed with the court's decision, which does not address the merits of our lawsuit, and we are weighing our next legal steps."
The original article contains 694 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
This guy looks like you asked ab AI to create a mean business person. And his name "Ubl" looks kinda like a misspelled derivative of the word "Übel" from German, which means "mean", "really bad" or "to feel sick"