dagblog - Comments for "Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising"

Well, no offense, but you are

eds — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 01:58:18 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

Well, no offense, but you are being dense to think that your reply shows any insight at all into the issue being discussed.

"That makes the ads less competitive with untaxed ads so there will tend to be fewer such ads since the overhead for the ads will be higher, and yes, let consumers who patronize such advertisers pay for the advertising to that extent."

BTW, not all costs get passed onto the nominal consumer. Sometimes profit margins of the producer are reduced, or to be precise, both consumer and producer values are at issue when it comes to cost covering.

No, in point of fact, I was

oleeb — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:46:07 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

No, in point of fact, I was not called on bullshit. You were writing bullshit, you (frequently) miss the point entirely and just gnaw on some tiny portion of what someone writes. You are a pest and a rude one at that.

Yep. Look at his dissent in

rumpole — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:04:31 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

Yep. Look at his dissent in Virginia Pharmacy.

I'm not being dense in the

thepeoplechoose — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:17:12 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

I'm not being dense in the least. I run a business and purchase goods and provide services for resale. In all instances the tax is ultimately passed on to the end user. That is how it works. Plain and simple.

Are you being dense on

eds — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:46:39 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

Are you being dense on purpose? TPM is becoming more and more tedious and illogical these days...

I did not suggest it, I said it was interesting. I also said:

"Don't just tax the product (like cigarettes) tax the ads."

Tax both. That makes the ads less competitive with untaxed ads so there will tend to be fewer such ads since the overhead for the ads will be higher, and yes, let consumers who patronize such advertisers pay for the advertising to that extent.

I'm confused. You suggested

thepeoplechoose — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:49:09 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

I'm confused. You suggested such a tax, implying it be levied on ads, and now seem to question that it gets passed along to the end user. Invariably that is how it ends up. The end user of any product is the one who pays the tax. It sounds like you are retracting the idea of the tax on ads as not such a hot idea? I would agree with that.

Go through your long comment

eds — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:59:25 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

Go through your long comment sentence by sentence?

"Yes, you could go on, but I recommend you don't further demonstrate your slavish devotion to free market ideology, which has taken a beating in the real world over the last couple years."

Maybe that means it's time for free market ideology to have a resurgence, but so what? And anyway, how is critizing the OP sufficient to indicate "devotion to free market ideology", much less a slavish one. Absent proof that I have anything like such a devotion, your comment is fallacious at best.

So, there are two illogical things in your opening salvo.

Look, I don't have time or inclination to correct your comments ad nauseam. But thanks for at least pretending to care about being rational. If you do care, you are free to review the rest of that comment for spin and fallacies and restate if you find it warranted or just ignore my pointers otherwise.

As for this comment:

"The "I'm rubber and you're glue" defense doesn't actually work against people who have a good idea of what they are speaking about."

Again a fallacy, if not two.

"There is no reason for

eds — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:46:36 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

"There is no reason for prescription drugs to be advertised to the general public. "

You're not paying attention: Health enhancement (or quality of life enhancement via prescription meds).

There is plenty of reason to let people know about health enhancing drugs, even if the details are arguable. The point of my aphoristic comment was that MDs are supposed to put a check on the irrational exuberance of some consumers when TV which reaches 'everyone' builds expectations which are not medically appropriate for all.

There are legit concerns about who should pay for life enhancements which are equatable to elective surgeries for say cosmetic reasons alone. My fiscal conservative side says No to my taxes or insurance pool money going to pay for such, in almost all cases.

If we don't put checks on spending, Obama's woefully inept prediction of 2x-3x health care costs will prove true, even with single payer.

That made no sense at all.

eds — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:39:04 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

That made no sense at all.

Why do you reply at all?

eds — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:37:34 +0000

In reply to Things That Ought To Be Done Right Now... the first in a series... Ban Prescription Drug Advertising

Why do you reply at all? Your comments in re my comments are just stupidity in action, and generally amount to only personal attacks.

You were called on bullshit. So far the call sticks and each of your replies to date has only added to your bad reputation.

You wrote a "preach to the choir" post but cannot defend it except by attacking your strawman version of me.

Whatever.