"Capitalists such as Romney want women to work. They have binders of women applicants. What they don't want is for women to have economic or political power."
That's a sexist statement. It should be
"Capitalists such as Romney want PEOPLE to work. They [want to] have binders of applicants. What they don't want is for PEOPLE to have economic or political power."
Yes Jeff S. is right!!
We in this country seem to have forgotten that the purpose of business is to ADD VALUE (to make wealth by producing something whose value exceeds the cost.) This company is not *making* wealth, it is simply *taking* wealth. The value (of the energy) is in the river already -- they are taking it and not paying for it. There also appears to be costs (pollution and clean up of it) from their operations that they have not paid for.
This company (and every company) should forced to pay everything it uses and pay every cost that it causes, and to survive if and only if it can add value - ie make a profit. This company isn't doing that - it is engaged in "taking wealth" which is usually termed "theft".
Your subtitle The powerful health care lobby ... is wrong. There is no powerful lobby whose goal is health care. There is a powerful health insurance lobby whose goal to maximize their profits by avoiding spending on health care. There is a powerful health care provider lobby whose goal is to maximize profits by selling to people who think somebody else pays the price. But there is no powerful lobby that is trying to maximize the health care for the people of this country.
It is stupid for humans to entrust their health to profit maximizing organizations.
Suppose Smallpox vaccine had been patented by one of today's big pharmaceutical companies. They would have maximized their profits by selling the vaccine at a high price only to the richer people, while allowing poorer people to die of the disease - scaring the richer people into buying their product. They would never have wiped the disease out because that would destroy their market. It is not in the financial interest of the 'health case' companies to care for the health of people.
It is the job of businesses to maximize profits. We should not blame them for doing it; they have no choice. We should, however, decide that we dont want such jobs done, and, instead, that health care should be in the hands of people who care about health.
Reading the DEIS risks - the risk of a release of deadly pathogens is described as "probable" - and lack of mitigation -- there is no evidence they know how to prevent Deer and Mosquito's spreading the disease indefinitely, one has to wonder why they would build NBAF anywhere but on a remote island ... and it is because they decided up front that it had to be near people: researchers. Is it really worth risking embedding these diseases in the US wildlife population - making us permanently susceptible to them, doing to ourselves exactly what we believe we are protecting ourselves from, just to shorten a few peoples' commute to work?
The report says Plum Island is a satisfactory solution -- even ok for the researchers commute - and better than Butner, because the water reduces the risk of deer spreading disease ... so why not put it there?
Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.
Login to choose your subscriptions!
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation