Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 54 of 54

Thread: RFK Jr wants to ban Big Pharma ads

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post
    Pretty sure the Zuckerbucks pumped into the great ballot harvest of 2020 suspiciously makes it willful but okay.
    It's very possible that zuckerberg censored stuff voluntarily, but I don't see the what difference it makes. Is your position that we should only nationalize corporations that voluntarily censor?



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    I'm not arguing that "corporations are people". I'm arguing that corporations are merely a group of individual owners and that individual owners should have the same rights as anyone else.

    Ron Paul agrees with me:

    "Paul rejects the notion that corporations are people, with collective rights. He says that only individuals have rights; people are individuals, not groups or companies.[107][108] "Corporations don't have rights per se, but the individual who happens to own a corporation or belong to a union does have rights, and these rights are not lost by merely acting through another organization."
    How does an individual lose their rights because they are a member of a group? It's the same argument as "Minority" (etal) rights. Again, rights have responsibilities. Who is responsible for the actions of a corporation? The shareholders whose rights you believe I'm taking away?
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    By way of the affected parties entering contracts that agree to that condition.
    Yes. Contractual freedom with no consequences.
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  6. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    How does an individual lose their rights because they are a member of a group?
    They don't. Where did I say that? That's your argument.


    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    Again, rights have responsibilities. Who is responsible for the actions of a corporation? The shareholders whose rights you believe I'm taking away?
    The owners are responsible for the actions of a corporation.

  7. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    It's very possible that zuckerberg censored stuff voluntarily, but I don't see the what difference it makes. Is your position that we should only nationalize corporations that voluntarily censor?
    I do not agree with your initial premise that there was no cooperative effort between the Biden administration and Zuckerberg in their efforts to censor or diminish opposing viewpoints (via stamping them with 'fact-checks') during the COVID epidemic, so I'm going to have to disregard your follow up question as a sort of out-of-place red-herring.

    (that may not be how you intended it, but I'm simply pointing out that if we do not agree on the fundamentals of your assertion, then the question you pose is rather moot)
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    They don't. Where did I say that? That's your argument.
    "but the individual who happens to own a corporation or belong to a union does have rights, and these rights are not lost by merely acting through another organization."






    The owners are responsible for the actions of a corporation.
    When are shareholders held accountable? That's the point of a corporation.
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    And these rights that they have include their right to pool their resources and delegate to a board the allocation of those resources to exercise whatever rights those shareholders delegate, including speech on their behalf.
    It constantly annoys me that only maybe 2 or 3 people on this forum agree with us on this. It's not theoretical either. I can't think of a quicker way to wreck a country than to start nationalizing corporations. Look at Venezuela for example.

    At least Ron Paul agrees with us.

  10. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    It constantly annoys me that only maybe 2 or 3 people on this forum agree with us on this. It's not theoretical either. I can't think of a quicker way to wreck a country than to start nationalizing corporations. Look at Venezuela for example.

    At least Ron Paul agrees with us.
    SCOTUS agrees with you. The courts agree with you. Hell, common law agrees with you. They banned cigarette ads decades ago, still no Venezuela, even theoretically.
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  11. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post
    I do not agree with your initial premise that there was no cooperative effort between the Biden administration and Zuckerberg in their efforts to censor or diminish opposing viewpoints (via stamping them with 'fact-checks') during the COVID epidemic, so I'm going to have to disregard your follow up question as a sort of out-of-place red-herring.

    (that may not be how you intended it, but I'm simply pointing out that if we do not agree on the fundamentals of your assertion, then the question you pose is rather moot)
    I said that zuckerberg may have censored voluntarily and was not forced by government. I don't see the difference but I'll use your exact words. If there is a cooperative effort between the administration and the corporation in their efforts to censor or diminish opposing viewpoints, do you think that corporation should be nationalized?

  12. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    It constantly annoys me that only maybe 2 or 3 people on this forum agree with us on this. It's not theoretical either. I can't think of a quicker way to wreck a country than to start nationalizing corporations. Look at Venezuela for example.

    At least Ron Paul agrees with us.
    FWIW, I agree with you on this.

    I just don't think Big Pharma qualifies to be viewed as some innocent private corporation trying its darn'dest to work independently of Big Government (I'm trying not to laugh as I type that out) and thus I do not weep when someone in said government (like a Kennedy) flips the dagger around and holds it at their throat.

    Sleep with dogs. Get fleas.

    EDIT: I hope that answers your latest question. Or at least, further helps you understand my point of view.

    In 2020, we ALL witnessed one of the largest concerted propaganda campaigns this country has ever witnessed, between the forces of Big Pharma, Big Government, and Big Media. As far as I'm concerned, that level of coordination DOES NOT HAPPEN organically in a free market and thus, as far as I'm concerned, these corporations whose rights you are losing sleep over, are already, DE FACTO, nationalized. (and . . . they LOVE IT)

    To which I say:

    Do your worst, Mr. Kennedy.

    PS. Can libertarians please start finding hills to die on that someone actually gives a f'k about?
    Last edited by nobody's_hero; 01-21-2025 at 06:08 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    It constantly annoys me that only maybe 2 or 3 people on this forum agree with us on this. It's not theoretical either. I can't think of a quicker way to wreck a country than to start nationalizing corporations. Look at Venezuela for example.

    At least Ron Paul agrees with us.
    I've seen some decent articles on this topic over the years at mises.org too.
    There is nothing to fear from globalism, free trade and a single worldwide currency, but a globalism where free trade is competitively subsidized by each nation, a continuous trade war is dictated by the WTO, and the single currency is pure fiat, fear is justified. That type of globalism is destined to collapse into economic despair, inflationism and protectionism and managed by resurgent militant nationalism.
    Ron Paul
    Congressional Record (March 13, 2001)

  15. #42
    Supporting Member
    Phoenix, AZ
    Cleaner44's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    4
    Posts
    9,323
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    So you think Big pharma TV ads should be banned by the state?
    Yes.
    Citizen of Arizona
    @cleaner4d4

    I am a libertarian. I am advocating everyone enjoy maximum freedom on both personal and economic issues as long as they do not bring violence unto others.

  16. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    "but the individual who happens to own a corporation or belong to a union does have rights, and these rights are not lost by merely acting through another organization."
    That was a quote from Ron Paul, which happens to be my position as well.


    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    When are shareholders held accountable? That's the point of a corporation.
    Corporations get sued all the time and it drives down the stock price and the dividend shares of the shareholders.

  17. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    SCOTUS agrees with you. The courts agree with you. Hell, common law agrees with you. They banned cigarette ads decades ago, still no Venezuela, even theoretically.
    Yeah, well we're 36 trillion in debt, we've printed 7 trillion since 2008 and we're running trade deficits of a trillion a year. That says we're on the path to Venezuela. And a large part of the problem is businesses can't make a profit from all the taxes and regulations.

  18. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    That was a quote from Ron Paul, which happens to be my position as well.




    Corporations get sued all the time and it drives down the stock price and the dividend shares of the shareholders.
    Of course. Corporate officers can also be charged criminally if warranted. Shareholders are never held criminally or civilly liable for the actions of their company. They simply, potentially lose their investment. That's my point. The reason is that the Law defines a corporation as an individual, not a collective. The Law claims this entity has rights, although limited, bestowed upon it by the Law, that are separate from the rights of its constituent owners.
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  19. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    Yeah, well we're 36 trillion in debt, we've printed 7 trillion since 2008 and we're running trade deficits of a trillion a year. That says we're on the path to Venezuela. And a large part of the problem is businesses can't make a profit from all the taxes and regulations.
    Agreed on all points. Pretty much reining in big pharma is the tipping point, though.
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  20. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post

    PS. Can libertarians please start finding hills to die on that someone actually gives a f'k about?
    I tend to focus on economic issues and property rights more than most people. I really think we're on the edge of a major economic collapse and adding more regulations to our businesses is going to make things much worse.

  21. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Madison320 View Post
    I tend to focus on economic issues and property rights more than most people. I really think we're on the edge of a major economic collapse and adding more regulations to our businesses is going to make things much worse.
    And there are plenty of economic issues that are more relatable to the average American than the plight of (quasi-nationalized) corporations that willfully cooperated with contacts in government in a mutually beneficial scheme to diminish the free speech rights of any and all contrary opinion-holders for the last 4 years.

    I mean, it's just not something that rallies people around the flag, ya know?
    Last edited by nobody's_hero; 01-21-2025 at 06:26 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #49
    https://x.com/RealDrJaneRuby/status/1881902539492524040


  24. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    Of course. Corporate officers can also be charged criminally if warranted. Shareholders are never held criminally or civilly liable for the actions of their company. They simply, potentially lose their investment. That's my point. The reason is that the Law defines a corporation as an individual, not a collective. The Law claims this entity has rights, although limited, bestowed upon it by the Law, that are separate from the rights of its constituent owners.
    I'm not following how any of what you said proves that you can deny the rights of (in this case censor) a corporation (group of owners) but not an individual.

    Suppose Bob decides to have a garage sale and he hires Fred to run the sale while Bob is out of town. In this scenario Bob is equivalent to the shareholders and Fred is the CEO. Fred would be the one who gets criminally charged if he injured a customer. Since Bob wouldn't be held responsible for the actions of Fred, would that mean Bob loses his rights? Would it be ok to ban Bob from advertising his garage sale for example?

    Also look at the practical side of it.

    Suppose Fred spills grease and a customer slips and is paralyzed and it's going to cost 10 million to treat him. Compare that to a customer who slips in a walmart. Who is more likely to get compensated? Obviously the customer at walmart is far more likely to get compensated.

  25. #51
    Big Pharma is tied at the hip with government and is thus not a person, individual or otherwise

    It has no rights
    Last edited by TheTexan; 01-22-2025 at 09:50 AM.
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!

    My pronouns are he/him/his

  26. #52
    Bring Back Liquor ads and of course My Pillow ads.

  27. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    SCOTUS agrees with you. The courts agree with you. Hell, common law agrees with you. They banned cigarette ads decades ago, still no Venezuela, even theoretically.
    If we explicitly declared that all corporate decisions will be made by the US government, as you appear to be in favor of, no corporations would exist in the US. Then we absolutely would become venezuela.

  28. #54
    I remember how it was before the airwaves were polluted with big pharma ads. It was a real boon to big pharma dn doctors when patients started coming in telling doctors what they wanted. It sickens me when I see a big pharma ad...I wish they would be taken off the air people were healthier before big pharma was able to promote itself in media. It makes it easy for me to not watch tv though

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-12-2017, 07:00 PM
  2. Eat one meal a day and keep Big Pharma away
    By green73 in forum Health Freedom
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 06-07-2014, 09:48 AM
  3. Big Pharma Is Dangerous
    By donnay in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-05-2014, 04:01 PM
  4. Little Kid on Big Pharma Drugs
    By dannno in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-03-2011, 10:46 PM
  5. Big Pharma
    By DarylBurns in forum Ron Paul: On the Issues
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-11-2007, 12:13 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •