Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Doesn't seem like it. Thier almost as bad as the League of Nations.
I think a bit of distrust is a good thing, especially when it comes to a multinational organization.
Especially considering a majority of the members are tin pot dictatorships, kleptocracys, or backwards third world crapholes with a chip on their shoulders.
So forgive me if I have doubts about their decision making.
edited 21st Sep '15 4:20:02 PM by Skycobra51
Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.@Jack Bans on certain products are fine, but a general embargo is not. Likewise you ban the selling of stuff to countries, not the buying of stuff from them, I don't believe any other country has a ban on stuff being bought from it.
X3 It's only the human rights committee that has a thing about Israel, and I'll admit that that's bull, but the entire UN is not one committee.
That's because the U.S. news only talks about the UN an when it does bad things. Also if you think it's as bad as the Leauge you clearly have no idea how bad the Leauge was.
edited 21st Sep '15 4:14:06 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranFrankly, what gets Americans' goats about the U.N. is that it does not always do exactly what America wants. There is this concept called democracy that extends beyond our borders. It doesn't mean "the U.S. votes and everybody else obeys".
edited 21st Sep '15 4:17:33 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The major issue I have with U.N. is the ridiculous ROE UN Peacekeepers abide, allowing massacres to happen in front of them and in some cases even letting their own troops get killed because the firing order must come from higher ranks instead of the local officers.
None of the grunts I spoke with who came back from Haiti were happy with being the blue helmets, mostly because they had to watch militias and criminal groups kill earthquake survivors for goods and supplies only to be denied to engage because they weren't being fired upon.
Those fuckers haven't learned a thing from Rwanda.
edited 21st Sep '15 4:42:05 PM by AngelusNox
Inter arma enim silent legesAs far as what I'm reading goes, the embargo - and embargoes in a general sense, either not buying or not selling to and from another country - is not illegal. What the UN has a specific issue with are some of the later inclusions to the embargo added in the 90's that allows the US to penalize foreign corporations for doing business with Cuba by not allowing them business in the US. These acts were passed on the grounds that companies were buying American good and selling them to Cuba, thereby getting around the embargo and making a tidy profit. Since this obviously is dragging other countries into the spat between America and Cuba, that's when the UN started making noise about ending the embargo.
Overall, the US is still the 5th largest exporter to Cuba, and that includes Coca Cola.
From a practical standpoint, the embargo doesn't really help the US. Other countries still trade with Cuba despite US pressure not to. The Cuban government is in no hurry to improve human rights in order to end the embargo and it's not like the Castro's are impoverished, they can live the high life no matter what the US tosses at the country. Indeed, some, like Hillary Clinton, say the embargo is actually a handy tool for Cuba's leaders since they can blame it and the US for everything wrong in the country, whether it's true or not. The Unites States is the one losing tourist money and money it could otherwise be making by flooding Cuba with cheap exports.
From a moral standpoint, the blockade obviously isn't improving the lives of the average Cuban, which is it's stated goal.
After several decades of no change, I fail to see how anyone could plausibly see continuing a blanket embargo at this point helps either Cuba or the US. It's not like Cuba can actually hurt us at this point in time, and anyone who cares about human rights in Cuba itself is better served by being able to interact with the people there without fear of getting arrested and so on.
Cross-posting from the medical thread since the company is based in the USA from what I can gather.
[CBS] Turing Pharmaceuticals
announced a 5000% price increase per pill for their drug Daraprim, which is currently the sole means to treat Toxoplasmosis infections along with a few other uses in cancer and AI Ds treatments.
The drug is over 60 years old and previously cost around $10. The new price is $750 per pill. The CEO Martin Shkreli
◊, who is apparently running for some sort of Asshole Of The Year award, said that people who want to continue living will find any means to pay the price (with a sort of smarmy "fuck the ones who can't, we're not a charity" sort of attitude for the cherry on top).
While its mentioned that there are aid programs available to lower the costs, quite a few states (my own NC included) refuse them.
edited 21st Sep '15 4:50:05 PM by carbon-mantis
x5 That's the problem with relying on one sole company to provide medication. Someone will have the bright idea to raise its price.
But if its been around for 60 years, shouldn't there be at least one generic variant?
edited 21st Sep '15 4:47:49 PM by Skycobra51
Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Not disagreeing with you on the embargo, though I do think the likelihood of Cuba becoming Democratic is extremely unlikely,they said the same thing about China. Still, it is wrong for the President of the United States to take the side of the UN against their own nation, and that is what Obama would be doing if he did not veto the resolution.
edited 21st Sep '15 4:53:43 PM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.Not sure about the details of it, but a few sites are saying that he's somehow acquired the exclusive rights to produce it. Apparently since he became CEO he's been in the habit of buying up uncommon drugs for rare diseases and marking up their prices to insane rates.
edit- According to the wiki page on the drug, no one else manufactures it, and it seems that the company is trying to purposefully restrict its availability. I can't find much on whether or not a generic brand can be sold, but at this point in time it'd likely take months at best for another pharmacy to set up a production line even if they could. Until that happens, patients needing it either pay through a shady "Direct" program directly from Turing Pharmaceutical or get fucked.
edited 21st Sep '15 5:06:42 PM by carbon-mantis
I think this would be a great time for the government to exercise some eminent domain on that guy's ass.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

America's immense distrust of the UN really bugs me.
Yeah they're not the most competent organization in the world but they are sort of the last word in many instances of law. Don't see why we're somehow immune to that.
Oh really when?