Page 2 of 31 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 370
  1. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Pasadena, MD
    Posts
    5,658

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by WrongBaldy View Post
    Have a summary? Can't even see the headline through the pay wall.

    Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk





  2. #14

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Ortizer View Post
    Have a summary? Can't even see the headline through the pay wall.

    Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
    copy the link and paste it into google.com then click on the first link that shows up in search. here is there article



    Donald Trump has ordered the US commerce department to assist a Chinese telecoms group that the agency nearly put out of business a month ago, following a personal request from China’s president. The U-turn on ZTE Corp, announced by Mr Trump on Twitter, came despite a commerce department decision in April banning the manufacturer from sourcing vital components from US companies because of findings it had illegally sold equipment to Iran and North Korea. That move in effect put ZTE out of business and the company announced on Friday it had halted operations because of the seven-year ban. The reversal marked an unusual intervention by the US president in what the administration had previously portrayed as a legal and procedural rather than political case. US officials insisted when they announced the ban last month that it was not related to broader US-China trade tensions. “I am speechless,” said Kevin Wolf, who oversaw the launch of the ZTE case as assistant secretary of commerce in the Obama administration. “I’m highly confident that a [US] president has never intervened in a law-enforcement matter like this before . . . It’s so outside the way the rules were set up.” It also marked the second time in the past month that the Trump administration had moved to roll back sanctions against a foreign company that had nearly been pushed into insolvency, raising questions over how thoroughly the White House was co-ordinating sanctions policy with federal agencies. In April, the administration signalled it was prepared to undo sanctions against Russian aluminium group Rusal after the measures sent metals prices skyrocketing. The commerce department barred ZTE from purchasing components in the US for seven years after it was caught violating the terms of a $1.2bn settlement agreed last year in which ZTE admitted illegally selling equipment that included sensitive US parts to Iran and North Korea. Wilbur Ross, commerce secretary, accused ZTE of “egregious” behaviour that could not be ignored. At the time, US officials said the case launched during the Obama administration was not part of Mr Trump’s escalation of trade pressure against Beijing. Officials said they had acted only because ZTE had been caught giving bonuses to the very officials responsible for the elaborate scheme used to circumvent US export control rules and had lied to US authorities about it. But during a meeting in Beijing earlier this month, Chinese officials raised a resolution to the ZTE case as one of their demands for a broader agreement on trade. Those trade talks are due to continue this week with the expected visit to Washington of Xi Jinping’s top economic adviser. “President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast,” Mr Trump wrote on Twitter on Sunday. “Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!” Recommended US-China trade dispute ZTE reprieve paves way for next round of US-China trade talks Mr Trump’s move to help ZTE despite the allegations of sanctions busting came even as the administration was attempting to convince foreign companies to cut off business ties to Iran following his decision last week to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal and reimpose sanctions against Tehran. Just hours before Mr Trump’s announcement, John Bolton, his national security adviser, told CNN that European companies could be hit by sanctions if they did any business with Iran. The White House had also touted tough sanctions on North Korea as a key instrument forcing the country’s leader Kim Jong Un to the negotiating table with Mr Trump. The president’s intervention amounted to an important concession to China and was welcomed as such in Beijing. “Welcome this decision. Whether or not ZTE had been punished as a card played by Washington in its trade war against China. President Trump’s latest decision is a good decision,” Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of the Chinese state-owned Global Times, wrote on Twitter. ZTE last week suspended trading in its shares in Hong Kong and Shenzhen given the gravity of the US moves for the commercial future of a company that relied heavily on imported US chips and other components. The company has said that it submitted an application to the commerce department for a suspension of the ban.





  3. #15

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    gotta love trump workin to save jobs in china





  4. #16

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by WrongBaldy View Post
    I had heard on the radio just the other day that the real issue is that the medicare law as currently written forbids the government from negotiating drug prices.

    http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ibited-negoti/
    Last edited by BPF2; 05-14-2018 at 04:22 PM. Reason: found a link





  5. #17

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by BPF2 View Post
    I had heard on the radio just the other day that the real issue is that the medicare law as currently written forbids the government from negotiating drug prices.

    http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ibited-negoti/

    yup they need to fix this





  6. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    14,479
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by BPF2 View Post
    I had heard on the radio just the other day that the real issue is that the medicare law as currently written forbids the government from negotiating drug prices.

    http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ibited-negoti/
    thats one of those things that makes you wonder why it was written that way in the first place (Big Pharma clearly), but at the same time, is a pretty easy fix. The only people suffering from this are the ones these laws are suppose to benefit, go figure.

    FWIW the initial versions of ACA had it, and the final version didnt. It was negotiated out.
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...er-drug-price/
    -JAB





  7. #19

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by BPF2 View Post
    I had heard on the radio just the other day that the real issue is that the medicare law as currently written forbids the government from negotiating drug prices.

    http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ibited-negoti/
    Quote Originally Posted by WrongBaldy View Post
    yup they need to fix this
    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    thats one of those things that makes you wonder why it was written that way in the first place (Big Pharma clearly), but at the same time, is a pretty easy fix. The only people suffering from this are the ones these laws are suppose to benefit, go figure.

    FWIW the initial versions of ACA had it, and the final version didnt. It was negotiated out.
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...er-drug-price/
    People please no. Think beyond the feel good sound of policy options. This would basically be price control. Price controls have a long history of being terrible plans.
    Why do people continue to think that getting the govt more involved is going to help commerce??????





  8. #20

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by blah3 View Post
    People please no. Think beyond the feel good sound of policy options. This would basically be price control. Price controls have a long history of being terrible plans.
    Why do people continue to think that getting the govt more involved is going to help commerce??????
    With healthcare I don't think most people care about the "commerce" aspect. They just want affordable necessary medicines. Some of these drugs are ridiculously priced and the masses would like a check and balance against Big Pharma pricing them out of life.

    I agree that the Gov. is not gonna help though, since Big Pharma pays most of their bills.





  9. #21

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by cjandrze View Post
    With healthcare I don't think most people care about the "commerce" aspect. They just want affordable necessary medicines. Some of these drugs are ridiculously priced and the masses would like a check and balance against Big Pharma pricing them out of life.

    I agree that the Gov. is not gonna help though, since Big Pharma pays most of their bills.
    No, the Govt isn't going to help because the govt screws with the free market. Price controls are awful policy.





  10. #22

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    big pharma needs to be paid also for spending a ton on R&D and taking chances. otherwise few companies will invest in R&D for new drugs.





  11. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    14,479
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    big pharma uses pseudo monopolies by abusing patents and limiting competition, all to price gouge and make back that investment as soon as possible. the supply/demand is directly linked to life or death in most cases. its not a good policy to allow capitalism in that high stakes field, it can be considered profiteering. All it does is increase premiums for all of us, which we keep seeing as a result of the current system. The R&D is expensive, no doubt, but its part in their approach of just throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks. there will always be a need for innovation, and a hefty price to be paid for it, that still rewards those companies. theres a fine line there, limiting patent abuse or terms would allow for some more competition.

    agreeing to a price upfront, including a return thats agreed upon by that company, is not going to hurt either side. They are already doing this for many plans, its just allowing the government to do the same for their plans/programs. If youre looking at it as more government involvement, so its bad, I can understand. it should be viewed as the government running its own health insurance company, which then why wouldnt they get the same benefit as the rest? that only increases competition among private companies. the government insurance is not intended to be the best option, its the merely an option among the private companies.
    -JAB





  12. #24

    Re: Investment/Economy Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by WrongBaldy View Post
    gotta love trump workin to save jobs in china
    Saving jobs at a Chinese firm, which has been cited as a national security threat by our nation's top counterintelligence official, the same week a Trump branded Indonesian venture is getting a half billion loan from the Chinese government? Nah nothing to see there.





Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Link To Mobile Site