I am so sick of his bullshit. Every one of his voters should be pushed to the margins of society.
this post was submitted on 12 May 2025
-23 points (18.9% liked)
Conservatives
114 readers
31 users here now
Pro-conservative discussions
Rules
- Pro-conservative or crazy liberal post.
- We are a discussion forum. No low effort, trolling comments.
- Everyone is welcome to opine, but be civil.
- Attack the topic, not the person
- Report violations of the rules
- Downvotes are disabled
founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
all 43 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
Can you explaine how this is not a positive for the middle lower class? I may be missing something here, but over all it seams like it would be a good thing?
Do you think this is actually going to lead to anything? Under what circumstances do you imagine the president is vested with the power to price consumer goods? What do you think is actually going to happen here? With one stroke of his fucking sharpie people will have affordable drugs???
How could you - how could anyone - think he works for the average American?
Idk, that is why I'm asking. Best way to learn is to have a civil discussion and to learn other people's views.
I will take you at face value.
This is complete bullshit, amounting to absolutely nothing. The companies that profit from selling us drugs will not just sit by idly while their profits dwindle. They spend billions of dollars on lawyers (to say nothing of buying politicians) and they will challenge the EO in court. It is plainly above and beyond the powers granted to the Executive in Article 2. They will win. This is nothing more than the worthless, fevered, narcissistic daydream of a grandiose cunt who cares not one whit for the common man.
FUCK, I can’t believe this is our fucking reality.
So executive orders are more just instructions? They don't hold any real power, or is it just more the fact that it can be openly fought by anyone? Guessing I don't fully understand how the executive order system works.
Executive orders hold as long as they aren’t overturned by one of the other 2 branches of govt. Congress can pass a law that’s contrary an EO and the prez can’t do shit (assuming the Senate has a veto-proof majority, 67 votes). The courts can also stay or overturn EOs if they’re found to be unconstitutional or in violation of laws. The next Prez can completely upend any standing EOs.
Kk, well with that info, yes I would have to agree. This feels like a very empty gesture.
It seems like you want to be angry at Trump no matter what he does without actually understanding what the actual problem is and when someone asks you to explain you treat them with hostility. So here is what is dangerous about Trumps Pharma tariffs (so you can actually articulate your rage). The order proposes that the US be given Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status – meaning drug companies would be asked to match the lowest price for a drug abroad when selling to US consumers. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/trumps-order-on-us-drug-prices-whats-in-it-and-will-it-work/ar-AA1EDZ1S The thorn in that rose is that Big Pharma will simply raise their prices abroad to compensate for the loss of profit in America - essentially f^cking over every other nation on earth who will now have to pay more for life saving drugs, that includes nations who are so poor that drugs are heavily subsidized just so people don't die in the thousands. There will now epidemics because there will be no one who can afford basic medicine. In the end Covid19 may end up being a holiday compared to what we might yet see.
Your condescension is what I'd expect from a MAGAt. The problem I have with this is that it is utter showmanship horseshit. Take your sanctimony off to someone else (please interpret that as the euphemism it is).
Wow if you actually put down the pipe you would realize I was helping you and no, I'm not a Trump supporter. I tried to help you by giving you an actual argument against Trumps foolish executive order instead of your 'f^ck you' copy/paste replies. I guess it's easier to be angry at everyone who you don't like rather than actually express what makes you angry.
I don't think we can say this will be a positive for the middle class because there's absolutely no actual plan for implementation here
You think drugs should cost more for Americans?
I think fucking congress should pass bills instead of a fucking useless traitor cunt showman bullshitting us.
We didn't vote for Kamala. So no clue who you think is a traitor.
[removed by mod]
[removed by mod]
"I will be instituting a MOST FAVORED NATION’S POLICY whereby the United States will pay the same price as the Nation that pays the lowest price anywhere in the World," Trump said. "Our Country will finally be treated fairly, and our citizens Healthcare Costs will be reduced by numbers never even thought of before. Additionally, on top of everything else, the United States will save TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS."
The president doesn't have the power to unilaterally dictate pharmaceutical prices. The federal government has some power to set the prices paid by Medicare/Medicaid recipients, but let's be very clear that reform in this regard has been blocked by Republicans for decades. When the Biden Admin did it for just a handful of medications, the screeching was deafening.
Anyway, my point is that as usual, this is bluster with no actual implementable policy behind it
But... but... This was the half-assed master plan to replace Obamacare that they finally thought of! It'll definitely work! ... right?
Someone will have to fight it in court. Presidents have done this for a very long time but I do agree. It isn’t a power they have but nobody challenges it
"Presidents have done this for a long time?" Name one and what they did
Biden, Trump, obama,
And when did Biden and Obama try to unilaterally and unconstitutionally dictate pharmaceutical prices
Google is your friend. You don’t remember Biden touting insulin prices ?
Biden had CMS (The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services) negotiate some drug prices with pharmaceutical companies on behalf of Medicare recipients. This is entirely legal, because the federal government is the payer for people with Medicare. Pharmaceutical companies want Medicare to keep covering their drugs, so they're willing to come to the table. Again, this is for Medicare only.
What's harebrained, blatantly not legal, and unimplementable is, "I hereby order all drug prices in the US to be the lowest in the world!"
Google is your friend
This is rich, coming from someone actively demonstrating they lack a basic understanding of what Biden did despite providing a link to it
It isn't my job to link everything for you. People don't typically ask to be cited common knowledge.
It sounds like the government is negotiating pharmaceutical prices for all Americans. Can they do other aspects of the healthcare system too or is that socialized healthcare?
They could and it has nothing to do with socialized healthcare. Peopel throw around the word socialism as if it doesn't have a meaning.
Pharmacy gunna be owing me money nah mean lol
I am not a huge fan of price controls but drug companies need some rails as they shouldn't charge Americans more then other countries.
You know what would really do that? What would ACTUALLY do that?
Single-payer healthcare, AKA socialized medicine. Then you have the gov't negotiating the price for ALL drugs for EVERYONE. That is exactly how every other first-world country does it, and that's the reason why they all pay lower prices. Until 2022, with the Inflation Reduction Act, Medicare wasn't allowed to negotiate, and the IRA only allows the gov't to negotiate some very high-dollar drugs.
And executive order does abso-fucking-lutely nothing. EOs can--at best--only directly affect gov't agencies. You can't use an EO to force a private corporation to give you better prices.
So you’re for taxing the living shit out the poor and middle class like other countries ? Glad to hear it.
We pay far, far more, as a proportion of our income, for medical care than any other western country, and that's when you consider the taxes that other countries pay. We also have, by far, the worst medical outcomes. Socialized healthcare costs less, and has better outcomes, than paying on your own or using private insurance, and allows for better control over ballooning healthcare costs.
Your belief that it would cost more proves that you fundamentally don't understand how medical care is priced. We're paying Bugatti prices and getting Yugos. We have hundreds of insurance companies negotiating prices with thousands of medical groups, and a handful of massive pharmaceutical companies; they simply don't have the leverage to control costs or negotiate better rates, and none of them have a risk pool large enough to make the costs truly cheap for every single person.
And, BTW, yes, I AM in favor of raising taxes. On everyone. Because we deserve more from our gov't than what we're getting. Things like a public education system that works, criminal justice that isn't for-profit and actually reforms people, infrastructure that isn't crumbling, public services that are owned by the public, and so on. Privatising everything has been a disaster; we pay more and get less.
Everyone doesn’t need their taxes increased. If we want to be like Europe. The poor and middle class neeed large tax increases and the wealthy need to have their taxes lowered. Our outcomes are not always worse. It’s a mixed bag. Some are. Some are much better.
Weird I never said it would cost more. Were you speaking with someone else? What I said it would require much larger taxes on the middle and low class and I doubt they want to pay them. Americans as a whole hate taxes
The poor and middle class neeed large tax increases and the wealthy need to have their taxes lowered
Good news, that's what Trump is already doing.
Our outcomes are not always worse. It’s a mixed bag.
The only--ONLY--medical metric that we lead the world on is per capita spending on healthcare. In 2022, we spent an average of $15,222 per person in the US. The next worst country--Switzerland--spent about $8000 per capita. When you compare outcomes, Switzerland gets very nearly identical outcomes to the US, but spends far less per person. And Switzerland does NOT have single-payer healthcare. Canada spends $6000 per capita on healthcare coverage, and leads the US in most outcomes.
would require much larger taxes on the middle and low class
Yes, more in taxes, less (none) in paying premiums, co-pays, or deductibles. So as far as income in your pocket goes, and in terms of medical outcomes, you come out ahead in a single-payer system. Think about it for a second; what's your annual deductible? The insurance I can get through my workplace has an annual deductible of $7000 per person. That means that, aside from visiting my GP, I need to spend $7000 before insurance covers anything at all. That's on top of the $6500 I would have to pay in premiums. After I hit my deductible, insurance covers 80% of my costs, until I've paid a total of $11,000 out of pocket, then it covers everything. So I would have to pay at least $17,500 in a calendar year before insurance picked up everything. If I don't have insurance because I can't afford $250 every two weeks? Then I get the whole hospital bill for everything, which, in most cases, means people declaring bankruptcy. What I'm saying is that you can take that --OR-- you can take $50 out of everyone's paycheck (scaled to income level probably, and based on a risk pool of 330M people) and just be covered, period, no copays, no deductible, no worries that you're gonna be bankrupted by a hit-and-run driver that sends you to the ER.
Sounds like you have a high deductible plan.
No. It's a basic silver PPO, and my employer would pay more per month than I do. And HDHP (bronze level) would have a higher individual deductible, and lower premiums.
Those damn Europeans, with their longer life expectancy, higher quality of life, cheaper medical end education systems, and cleaner environment. Who needs any of that?
High quality of life? I think not. They make less money, higher taxes and live in cramped conditions. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.