Under what pretense?
A high-enough percentage of Tor users are there for drugs and child porn that a clever FBI attorney could convince a friendly judge that donating to Tor is Probable Cause. GCHQ probably doesn't even clever word smithing to investigate them.
As a Swede, presumably living in Sweden
There are 8 metric ass-loads of people of Swedish descent living is the US.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
The FBI, GCHQ, BND, etc are going to tear apart the finances of every person that donates to this project.
I'm completely shocked that when given additional opportunity, you still won't back up your claims.
The bizarre thing is that you're accusing me of "singling out one particular issue based purely on the person implementing it," when you have literally no example of me ever doing that, ever, least of all in this discussion, where if anything I was taking Gruber's side.
... you did seem to lament the courts' inaction
Not in any way, no, I did not.
you
You're a liar.
When talking about transparency, it's yours that is the most obvious...
I agree. I am nearly completely transparent and obvious and clear. I lack pretense or disguise.
... exactly the way your financiers want it
No. It's true that the framers and most people who understand politics want the people to be ignorant about most issues in government, because otherwise, the people would be spending too much time watching government and not enough time enjoying life and being productive. Everyone should want to be ignorant about most things, especially most things government does. Otherwise you'll be miserable.
But it's not true that they want people to be ignorant, but with a delusion of lack of ignorance. You're just making things up.
... with its present day monolithic two-face one party system. Not a single independent in the house. Smells very bad...
There's no objective reason why it's a bad thing.
Of course not, you dope!
I'm a dope because you
... you believe the charade is for real
You're a liar.
Well, yes, people who believe what they are told -- and then profess to know those things -- without investigating it, are stupid.
Gruber was mostly right, although the word "stupid" is probably not what he meant. But the fact is that whoever believed it wasn't a tax, it wouldn't raise rates, it wouldn't force you to change plans and possibly doctors, etc., was ignorant. Not stupid, necessarily, but ignorant. That said, someone who is ignorant and thinks that he actually knows these things is kinda stupid. So all the news folks, for example, who said that what Republicans said about the ACA were lies
The fact is that almost everything the GOP said about the ACA was true. Federal funding of abortions, subsidies for illegals, massive government control defined at a later date by an administrator and not Congress, death panels, increased taxes and premiums, decreased choice
I'd expect an article talking about criminally prosecuting Gruber would at least make reference to some violation of the criminal code. I see no crime. Neither the author nor his interviewee mention any crime. He makes vague references to "Deceit. Fraud. Premeditated felonious theft.," but he simply gave his opinions; he didn't implement anything. The theft was by the government, not him. The fraud was perhaps aided by him, but no court has ever found that government fraud of this type is prosecutable, so prosecuting a private citizen for aiding the government in something that can't be prosecuted makes no sense.
I guess I don't know whether fuck all means "everything" or "nothing".
the way they negotiate lower prices is to guarantee exclusivity in the supply chain. A treatment available on Medicaid from GSK won't be available through the same route from Pfizer, because Pfizer will be frozen out of the chain by virtue of a GSK-included clause in the Medicaid contract.
It sounds like you're referring to drug patents and the lack of certain drugs in the generics market. Am I misunderstanding you?
If not, then you need to do a better job explaining, since if that's not drug patents then what you wrote makes zero sense.
"Doofus" is an apt description for someone who says "So what?" to reducing the cost of drug testing.
drug makers will charge whatever maximizes their sales revenue, regardless of their development costs.
And insurance companies (including Medicare/Medicaid) know this, and thus negotiate much lower prices for drugs in their Formularies. Thus, insurance companies can negotiate even lower costs.
Or... the drug companies run same-size tests and get more accurate predictions on outcomes.
if you don't limit yourself to the requirement that the text be optically readable
Also totally useless for the requirement of restarting an industrial civilization.
BLISS is ignorance.
