You still have drug companies. They are just nationalized, i.e. non-profit. Most of your research these days is done in universities anyway, and is funded by government grants. The private drug companies are not needed.

Research can be outsources to a variety of places. And they can indeed be paid based on progress. But once they develop a drug, it would become the property of the American people, i.e. "public domain".

That is how it works in many countries around the world, and they all seem to do just fine with it. Even in all these anti-socialized medicine rants I've read, I never have heard allegations of drugs not being available in these other countries. They are available, and are much less expensive.

Nationalized drug companies...worst idea I've ever heard of, hands down. Embryonic stem cell research for starters...would be DEAD IN THE WATER.

Wait a minute, is that a topic that hasn't been beaten to death yet? :rofl:

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

Well, yeah if the government insists on having no federal money spent on such research. This is not a change you can make inside a vacuum and leave everything else the same. It would require major change all around.

You just proved the case for non-socialized medicine! Woohoo :)

It was only a matter of time before he couldn't avoid the truth! :rofl:

Yes, of course. The old "change is bad" additude.

Dictionary Definition:

Conservative: Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.

Yup, that much is clear. Change = bad.

WTF? Okay, do we want to post another topic on conservatism, because what you just posted had nothing to do with Health Care and Michael Moore.

But, thanks for agreeing that socialized medicine would suck :thumbup: