Audio seems slowed to make her seem not-too-bright, but I think that was overkill in this case. The content makes the case.https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1198113793848438784 …
-
-
As long as we also share in the losses when drugs fail, which completely outweighs those that succeed. The costs are massive but so is the time. The way our system works it can take years to develop a drug, multi levels of approval, and 1 rash/sniffle can ruin it all.
-
Doesn't make sense to me: how do companies survive, if the "losses completely outweigh" the successes? Do you account by number of tries or revenue? Aren't there ready tax credits for R&D and thus loss sharing (and only loss sharing?)?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Dilbert mocks cherished political beliefs. *snatch!* Scott Adams removed as author and replaced by more reliable cartoonist. And no more bluecheck for you.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Seems taxing profits would already accomplish this
-
International cooperations are very good in transferring their profits to low tax regions. Getting a share of the patent could/should be better able to follow the money and claw some money back for the tax payer.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I could go along with a fair plan that takes a percentage based on the percentage of reliance on publicly funded research, and returning that money into more publicly-funded research.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.