The Hidden Tribes of America and the Need for Compromise

I believe you are right about a great many of the pharmaceuticals and other medicines we buy in the U. S. actually being made in India or China. I've done some light research on this, and I'm not done yet, but so far when I dig into it, I find that the vitamin and mineral supplements I take every day (a lot of them) are made in -- you guessed it -- INDIA OR CHINA.

A friend of mine (another 'old guy') unfortunately has to take several prescription meds every day, just to survive, and for years he has ordered everything through pharmacies in Canada. I don't take any prescription drugs (yet, thank God), but apparently many Americans who do get away with having 'scrips filled in Canada. Link: https://www.pharmacychecker.com/askpc/can-us-doctors-send-prescriptions-to-canada/ .

And yet, maybe it's not strictly legal...? I also found this:

"If you're in the U.S., it's legal to order a medication online that is mailed directly from a U.S. state-licensed pharmacy. It's not legal, under most circumstances, to order and import medicine from a pharmacy in another country, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

However, millions of Americans order and import lower-cost medicines to fill prescriptions from pharmacies located in Canada and other countries because they are never prosecuted for doing so. They also almost always receive their prescription orders."

Link: https://www.pharmacychecker.com/askpc/is-it-legal-to-order-medication-online-from-other-countries/

Anyway, back to the central contention -- we need to sweep away ALL restrictions on an American citizen's right to order prescription drugs and medicines from anywhere in the world he WANTS to order them from! As an independent, freedom-loving Conservative, why would I want the GOVERNMENT telling me where I can, and can NOT, order my prescription medicines from...?!

I can't help but wonder how much CASH Big Pharma is shoveling at our oh-so 'ethical' politicians right now, to make certain that we Americans pay grossly-inflated prices for drugs, while offshore populations pay a mere fraction of what we do....

 

The 'Deep State Government' is in REAL trouble when guys like Te and me start to compromise and agree on things! I WANT that to happen. I'm sick and tired of 'being at each other's throats' and having others after mine -- while this country's opponents laugh their asses off at BOTH of us....

When American really was "GREAT", the various political factions didn't necessarily love each other, but we got along well enough to do what was good for nearly everyone who was a citizen of the United States of America. I WANT that -- a lot! It's been a hell of a long time since that was true....

 

You make an intelligent statement then discredit it with the " Deep State Government " nonsense. Your imaginary deep state government is nothing new and is nothing but career civil servents who have been a part of government since government began.

Want a better government time to eliminate all those Sunshine laws and open government laws that make compromise impossible.

 

You alleged that others are "opposed to border security". No one has been opposed to any of the things you mention above EXCEPT the outgoing GOP House members. They OBSTRUCTED all of those things that were already in the Senate BIPARTISAN border security bill. Is that who you were referring to as being "opposed to border security"?

 

Way too much which is a major part of the problem. It gets even worse because Big Pharma has gone to other nations and filed lawsuits to prevent the export of drugs from the nations that make them and the importation into the countries that need them, especially 3rd world nations that can't afford to pay the extortionist prices.

From what I have gathered if you, or your friend, tried to import a drug from India the package is first inspected by the carrier, e.g. DHL, etc, and if it contains any of the Big Phama drugs they will refuse to ship them even though the drugs have already been paid for as well as the shipping costs.

This is the WORST kind of capitalist greed because people like your friend, and millions just like all around the world, are at risk of dying without those drugs.

So we are in 100% agreement that this nefarious practice must be stopped and American citizens must have their RIGHTS restored to enable them to purchase what they need anywhere in the world.

 

I like the concept of reversing the Gingrich-speak divisiveness terms. We need to give it some thought and see if we can come up with a list of alternative terms to use for the most common slurs. Maybe start a thread where everyone on both sides can contribute to improving our communications.

 

Thank you for your support and the link to your excellent Ranked Vote thread on Immigration. You pioneered this concept here at PF and it is proving to be an excellent vehicle for constructive civil discourse.

While you focused on prioritizing these issues I am approaching them from a different angle.

I am looking to find where each side is willing to give a little in order to gain what they want. For example when @Pants brought up Single Payer and Immigration reform that is a trade off compromise IMO. The right wants stricter immigration which is opposed by the left and the left wants UHC which is opposed by the right. So let's compromise with something that both sides can live with. The left supports the immigration reforms as prioritized in your thread and the right supports opening up Medicare for All Americans.

That is just one of the compromises that might work but there might be just too much opposition to to make that one to work so instead what if Immigration Reform was traded off for improved Race Relations or Infrastructure Funding? These are the kinds of out of the box suggestions I am looking for. Both @Seth Bullock and @Kode (in a different thread) came up with very well thought out positions as to what they are looking for. I am going to use those posts, and all the others, to try and see where compromises might be feasible.

My objective is to see if we here at PF can achieve areas of compromise on what is essentially the common ground we share. If we can do that then we will lay out a path for moving forward united rather than divided. In practical terms it might go something like this; @Thought Criminal alleges that I am opposed to "border security" so my response is to offer my support for Immigration Reform in return for TC supporting Medicare for All. If we can do that deal then two issues of contention between us have just been resolved.

Does this mean that the same compromise can be achieved between those on either of the extremes? That is doubtful but we don't need them to achieve these compromises because when we combine the Exhausted Majority it is 67% of the nation and so we get to move forward together by no longer pandering to the extremes. Let them rant and predict the downfall of the nation while we get on with the backlog of things that need to be accomplished.

 

LOL!

Something that is often missed during the contention that flies around here at PF is that just because we disagree does not mean that we do not respect the other person's right to hold those positions.

Back in the days when we still had face to face debates I can recall having intense arguments about which method was the best in order to achieve the stated goals. These could go on for hours but then we would head out to the bar and have a few amicable drinks together.

Having friends across the aisle in politics used to be quite common. By all accounts Ruth Bader Ginsberg is friends with Clarence Thomas.

We all have way more in common than the petty issues that divide us IMO.

 

Neither political party wants to fix the problem.

There are (maybe) members of both parties who want to fix the problem, but the parties, as a whole, do not.

All of their so-called fixes always turn out to have been shams or scams. The deals always show the same results. 'Give them amnesty in exchange for legal reforms and improved security.' always ends up being: 'Amnesty, which encourages more gate-crashers, in exchange for some lines on paper which say we made improvements.'

The 2006 bi-partisan "secure fence" bill was passed, but never funded sufficiently to complete it per specifications. They just strung some ineffectual wire and called it good.

 

My belief is that we must not do anything about them until after the flow of new illegal border crossers and visa overstays is stopped.

Any more blanket amnesties summarily granted to illegal aliens, will just add to the incentives for more to come illegally. This has been proven.

Only after the inflow has been stopped, completely, would I consider granting them a permanent legal residency status, along with a spot in line toward citizenship. The legal residency status would not include all of the rights and benefits of citizenship.

 

Thank you for the clarification.

It did raise another question though.

Given that the MAJORITY of illegals arrive in our nation via LEGAL means of entry, aka visas, how do you intend to "stop that inflow"?

 

I think that the question: "how do you intend to "stop that inflow"?" is overly combative. I have no power to do anything about it, therefore it would be fruitless for me to have any intention to do anything about it.

Now, if you had asked: what solution might you suggest?, I might answer that a visa overstay is no different from a border crasher. They should be summarily dumped back to wherever they came from.

As soon as their visa expires without them having left the country, they are fugitives. Too bad for them. Toss them back.

 

Sorry, I intended no offense with that choice of terminology. I was using the generic "you".

Classifying visa overstays as being no different to those coming over the border illegally does not address the problem of how to locate them and then deport them. That is what I was trying to determine. What suggestions do you have in regard to tracking down and deporting visa overstays?

 

Sounds like Alt Left disinformation to me. You have a US Customs report that confirms visa over-stays outnumber illegal crossings? Somehow I doubt you have.

 

It's a tough problem to solve.

There are a few things that can be easily done, the low-hanging fruit, which would be a step in the right direction.

Stop ignoring the problem. Start investigating the overstays.

End the support for illegal aliens, by stopping the anti-American practice of giving them "sanctuary".

Prosecute those who interfere with the exercising of the lawful duties of enforcement officials.

End the demonization of enforcement officials.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino...der-crossings-trend-expected-continue-n730216

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/illegal-immigration-statistics/

Since there is no US Customs data we have to rely upon the next best source which is from a former director of the INS Statistics Division.

 

Thank you for those suggestions. As is evident in what you have suggested that will require additional manpower for those investigations to be conducted. That costs money so what are you willing to reduce funding in order to fund these investigations. Please note that you must be willing to fund it from sources that you support rather than those that you oppose. For example you could take funds from Defense spending rather than from Medicaid.

 

So you've confirmed my suspicions ... Alt Left disinformation. Pelosi 'probly clutching that pseudo science whilst refusing to hear the DHS report / statistics most recently compiled. CMS is a Vatican propaganda mill. Libs embrace the strangest bedfellows ... Any flat earthers you'd like to quote?

 

I honestly don't care what you demand I must do.

It's all too often too difficult for me to find direct answers to my searches.

It's reported that the combined costs of ethanol subsidies, regulatory requirements, and increased costs to consumers is $10billion per year. That might be a good start.

 

I am not demanding you do anything other than what the OP topic is all about.

If we are going to compromise in order to achieve what we want we must be willing to give up something on our own side.

I don't follow how those subsidies are partisan since they are usually passed with bipartisan support in Congress. We already know that those on the right are opposed to regulations so once again that is not giving anything up.

 

Like I said.

I don't care.

Please show that continuing to nod and wink at illegal immigration doesn't have bi-partisan support.