Random Politics & Religion #00

Eorzea Time
 
 
 
Langues: JP EN FR DE
users online
Forum » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » Random Politics & Religion #00
Random Politics & Religion #00
First Page 2 3 ... 955 956 957 ... 1375 1376 1377
VIP
Offline
Posts: 12259
By Jassik 2015-09-22 10:31:20
Link | Citer | R
 
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
Jassik said: »
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
Hillary Clinton and Jassik can go buy the company together and give the drugs away for free then. Problem solved....

wait a tick...just how many parasites does jassik have!?

Naw, I don't expect it to be free. But a lot of the drugs that have seen insane hikes are older and generic. There's doing business, then there's profiteering.

so buy the company and sell the drugs for a modest profit...

do I have to think of everything!


and really dude how many freaking parasites do you have anyways

3, but 2 are Pugs and one has a diamond ring.
[+]
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-09-22 10:32:04
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Jassik said: »
Ramyrez said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Incidentally, it might not be the common people with the biggest target on Shkreli's head if it ends up being his actions that bring the business model crashing down due to government intervention. It's one thing having the public hate you, but it's another having the super rich holding you personally responsible for their losses.

I actually saw one of his tweets that was very, very accurate.

He said his job wasn't to please consumers. It was to please his shareholders and take public heat for it.

That's frequently why the various sports commissioners are so reviled yet keep their jobs for decades on end.

They get paid millions to be the public face of the owners and take the heat for the owners questionable/unpopular calls that pad their bottom lines.

I don't like it. But it is true.

They should also be criminally liable for the result of those actions. If they faced actual consequences for breaking the law on behalf of the shareholders, there would be some incentive to push back against them.
We are criminally liable (and financially liable) for all of our actions as executives.

Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002

Dumbed down version of the law

Justice department deals almost always include immunity. Just because someone CAN be held liable doesn't mean they ever are.
VIP
Offline
Posts: 12259
By Jassik 2015-09-22 10:35:54
Link | Citer | R
 
Hundreds of criminal investigations of companies resulting in THOUSANDS of charges and you think a half dozen or so executives getting charged means anything? The fact that you threw Madoff in there is enough evidence that you're just trying to pick a fight.
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2015-09-22 10:38:41
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
They should also be criminally liable for the result of those actions. If they faced actual consequences for breaking the law on behalf of the shareholders, there would be some incentive to push back against them.

They're not breaking any laws.

I wish they were, but they're not. That's how the system is currently constituted. The question of whether I agree with you or not about what should be is not what we're discussing.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-09-22 10:39:45
Link | Citer | R
 
Give us some examples then, instead of talking out of an orifice (your pick).

Please tell us what crime they committed, what charge was brought against them, and why they were not prosecuted....

Don't worry, we all know you won't do anything.
VIP
Offline
Posts: 12259
By Jassik 2015-09-22 10:46:21
Link | Citer | R
 
Ramyrez said: »
Jassik said: »
They should also be criminally liable for the result of those actions. If they faced actual consequences for breaking the law on behalf of the shareholders, there would be some incentive to push back against them.

They're not breaking any laws.

I wish they were, but they're not. That's how the system is currently constituted. The question of whether I agree with you or not about what should be is not what we're discussing.

MANY are, including the GM executives who worked absolution into their bankruptcy deal prior to the DoJ's suits. They knew the defect had already caused deaths and acted implicitly to hide it while working protections into deals with regulators.
 Garuda.Chanti
Offline
Serveur: Garuda
Game: FFXI
user: Chanti
Posts: 11407
By Garuda.Chanti 2015-09-22 10:56:53
Link | Citer | R
 
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
It is definitely a tricky situation trying to balance Pharma profits with R&D costs, but this jackwad Martin Shkreli is going about it in the worst way possible.
That jackwad incured no research costs. He bought the drug.
 Bahamut.Ravael
Offline
Serveur: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Ravael
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-09-22 10:58:50
Link | Citer | R
 
Garuda.Chanti said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
It is definitely a tricky situation trying to balance Pharma profits with R&D costs, but this jackwad Martin Shkreli is going about it in the worst way possible.
That jackwad incured no research costs. He bought the drug.

Did you miss our follow-up discussion earlier?
[+]
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-09-22 10:59:53
Link | Citer | R
 
Still waiting Jassik
VIP
Offline
Posts: 12259
By Jassik 2015-09-22 11:01:23
Link | Citer | R
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Still waiting Jassik

I think someone is gunning to be the first victim of the new rule... Read my last post, then do a little research. If you want to participate in a conversation, you should have at least SOME idea what it's about.
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2015-09-22 11:05:19
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
MANY are, including the GM executives who worked absolution into their bankruptcy deal prior to the DoJ's suits. They knew the defect had already caused deaths and acted implicitly to hide it while working protections into deals with regulators.

I was referring to this specific drug situation.
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
Serveur: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-09-22 11:05:27
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
I think someone is gunning to be the first victim of the new rule...

there are more new rules!?
[+]
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-09-22 11:05:56
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Still waiting Jassik

I think someone is gunning to be the first victim of the new rule... Read my last post, then do a little research. If you want to participate in a conversation, you should have at least SOME idea what it's about.
Isn't it the one who made the statement who should provide the sources, not the one who counters the statement?

Why don't you admit that you have nothing but fluff?
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2015-09-22 11:06:44
Link | Citer | R
 
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
Jassik said: »
I think someone is gunning to be the first victim of the new rule...

there are more new rules!?

Everything which is not forbidden is compulsory!
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-09-22 11:07:35
Link | Citer | R
 
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
Jassik said: »
I think someone is gunning to be the first victim of the new rule...

there are more new rules!?
It's the "Catch-all" rule which Jassik wants to abuse.

Quote:
"Crappy posts are against the rules, even if they do not explicitly ‘break’ a rule. Don’t be a rules-lawyer. If you find yourself typing 'but what rule, exactly, did I violate', it’s this one."

This rule is very subjective in nature. By default, everyone has crappy posts.
[+]
VIP
Offline
Posts: 12259
By Jassik 2015-09-22 11:13:11
Link | Citer | R
 
Ramyrez said: »
Jassik said: »
MANY are, including the GM executives who worked absolution into their bankruptcy deal prior to the DoJ's suits. They knew the defect had already caused deaths and acted implicitly to hide it while working protections into deals with regulators.

I was referring to this specific drug situation.

Naw, though a case could be made for profiteering or price-fixing.

Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Isn't it the one who made the statement who should provide the sources

Jassik said: »
the GM executives who worked absolution into their bankruptcy deal prior to the DoJ's suits.

One VERY well documented and well known case that happened recently. They knew the defect existed, knew it had caused deaths, continued to install the defective parts in new vehicles, and knew that the DoJ would find out, so they worked immunity into their bankruptcy and bailout deals.

Asura.Kingnobody said: »
It's the "Catch-all" rule which Jassik wants to abuse.


It's specifically for situations where a poster is being unnecessarily aggressive or antagonistic.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-09-22 11:18:29
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
One VERY well documented and well known case that happened recently. They knew the defect existed, knew it had caused deaths, continued to install the defective parts in new vehicles, and knew that the DoJ would find out, so they worked immunity into their bankruptcy and bailout deals.
Only thing I could find about that bailout deal was improper wages.

I'm sure you have some source that would specifically tie knowledge of defects and immunity of any legal action. Well, besides hearsay, I hope.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-09-22 11:18:51
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
It's specifically for situations where a poster is being unnecessarily aggressive or antagonistic.
So, you then?
 Bahamut.Ravael
Offline
Serveur: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Ravael
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-09-22 11:19:40
Link | Citer | R
 
On the flip side, there was that recent case with the peanut butter execs who are getting plenty of prison time for the salmonella outbreak that they tried to hide.
VIP
Offline
Posts: 12259
By Jassik 2015-09-22 11:24:33
Link | Citer | R
 
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
On the flip side, there was that recent case with the peanut butter execs who are getting plenty of prison time for the salmonella outbreak that they tried to hide.

Yeah, the guy got like 28 years for knowingly putting contaminated food on the market that lead to the deaths of like 9 people and hospitalized at least 700. That's a pretty light sentence for those crimes and it's pathetic that we're applauding that as justice.
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2015-09-22 11:27:58
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
On the flip side, there was that recent case with the peanut butter execs who are getting plenty of prison time for the salmonella outbreak that they tried to hide.

Yeah, the guy got like 28 years for knowingly putting contaminated food on the market that lead to the deaths of like 9 people and hospitalized at least 700. That's a pretty light sentence for those crimes and it's pathetic that we're applauding that as justice.

My hang up there comes with knowing that if some crazy poor (monetarily speaking) guy knowingly tampered with a product on shelves with intent to harm people and was caught, they'd face some serious, serious sentencing. Way stiffer than 28 years in a likely-comfortable prison situation.

Edit: Frankly, I say they should have just made him eat the peanut butter and refused him medical care for any ensuing complications.
[+]
 Bahamut.Ravael
Offline
Serveur: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Ravael
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-09-22 11:28:32
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
On the flip side, there was that recent case with the peanut butter execs who are getting plenty of prison time for the salmonella outbreak that they tried to hide.

Yeah, the guy got like 28 years for knowingly putting contaminated food on the market that lead to the deaths of like 9 people and hospitalized at least 700. That's a pretty light sentence for those crimes and it's pathetic that we're applauding that as justice.

As one commenter pointed out in an article I was checking, when you're 61, a 28 year prison sentence is basically life.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2015-09-22 11:29:45
Link | Citer | R
 
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
As one commenter pointed out in an article I was checking, when you're 61, a 28 year prison sentence is basically life.

Assuming he serves 28 years, and doesn't just do 5 and get paroled for good behavior back to the lifestyle he had as he squirreled away money every which way before going on the inside.

Crime/punishment/sentencing is completely broken in this country though. Something I think most all of us have agreed upon in principle, if not the specifics.
VIP
Offline
Posts: 12259
By Jassik 2015-09-22 11:29:45
Link | Citer | R
 
Ramyrez said: »
Jassik said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
On the flip side, there was that recent case with the peanut butter execs who are getting plenty of prison time for the salmonella outbreak that they tried to hide.

Yeah, the guy got like 28 years for knowingly putting contaminated food on the market that lead to the deaths of like 9 people and hospitalized at least 700. That's a pretty light sentence for those crimes and it's pathetic that we're applauding that as justice.

My hang up there comes with knowing that if some crazy poor (monetarily speaking) guy knowingly tampered with a product on shelves with intent to harm people and was caught, they'd face some serious, serious sentencing. Way stiffer than 28 years in a likely-comfortable prison situation.

Exactly. And, it's not like there's a considerable amount of doubt, they have copies of emails where he was informed of the contamination and told them to sell it anyway. If I worked in that warehouse, a few pallets would fall off the dock and I'd see a lawyer about wrongful termination.
VIP
Offline
Posts: 12259
By Jassik 2015-09-22 11:33:48
Link | Citer | R
 
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
As one commenter pointed out in an article I was checking, when you're 61, a 28 year prison sentence is basically life.


Basically life? That's a windfall, plenty of people are charged with HUNDREDS of years in prison. In this case, he'd be eligible for parole as early as his mid 70's and probably get it because of his age and the nature of his crime. It's really irrelevant how old he is now, previous sentences are used as a precedent in a lot of future sentencing. This guy get's 28 years, so the next guy whose negligent actions cause the death of half as many people might get 10-12, paroled in 7, etc.
 Bahamut.Ravael
Offline
Serveur: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Ravael
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-09-22 11:34:56
Link | Citer | R
 
Ramyrez said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
As one commenter pointed out in an article I was checking, when you're 61, a 28 year prison sentence is basically life.

Assuming he serves 28 years, and doesn't just do 5 and get paroled for good behavior back to the lifestyle he had as he squirreled away money every which way before going on the inside.

Crime/punishment/sentencing is completely broken in this country though. Something I think most all of us have agreed upon in principle, if not the specifics.

Federal prisoners can't get parole, and there's no way he's only doing 5 for good behavior. It doesn't work like that.
[+]
 Bahamut.Ravael
Offline
Serveur: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Ravael
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-09-22 11:37:20
Link | Citer | R
 
Jassik said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
As one commenter pointed out in an article I was checking, when you're 61, a 28 year prison sentence is basically life.


Basically life? That's a windfall, plenty of people are charged with HUNDREDS of years in prison. In this case, he'd be eligible for parole as early as his mid 70's and probably get it because of his age and the nature of his crime. It's really irrelevant how old he is now, previous sentences are used as a precedent in a lot of future sentencing. This guy get's 28 years, so the next guy whose negligent actions cause the death of half as many people might get 10-12, paroled in 7, etc.

Yeah, quote your source that says he can get parole. I'd like to see how he magically bypasses the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984.
[+]
VIP
Offline
Posts: 12259
By Jassik 2015-09-22 11:37:43
Link | Citer | R
 
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ramyrez said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
As one commenter pointed out in an article I was checking, when you're 61, a 28 year prison sentence is basically life.

Assuming he serves 28 years, and doesn't just do 5 and get paroled for good behavior back to the lifestyle he had as he squirreled away money every which way before going on the inside.

Crime/punishment/sentencing is completely broken in this country though. Something I think most all of us have agreed upon in principle, if not the specifics.

Federal prisoners can't get parole, and there's no way he's only doing 5 for good behavior. It doesn't work like that.

Early release. Serving half of a sentence for good behavior is very common. Federal crimes are generally served concurrently, but good behavior credit is compounded.
 Bahamut.Ravael
Offline
Serveur: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Ravael
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-09-22 11:39:25
Link | Citer | R
 
Half of 28 isn't 5. And it's "very common" to serve a half sentence anyway? I see loads of hearsay and generalizations being spewed out today.
[+]
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2015-09-22 11:40:05
 Undelete | Link | Citer | R
 
Post deleted by User.
First Page 2 3 ... 955 956 957 ... 1375 1376 1377