Overdue Links for February 6, 2011: FDA regulates stem cells as drugs; Obama ignores marijuana questions; Krugman pooh-poohs austerity; others….

February 12, 2012

    "Hold it right there, mister. Are those stem cells 'safe and effective'?"

  1. Stem cells, like other medical products that are intended to treat, cure, or prevent disease, generally require FDA approval before they can be marketed. At this time, there are no licensed stem cell treatments.”

    The article links to the actual FDA opinion. Over/under: How many tens of thousands of people to you think will die unnecessarily while awaiting awaiting the FDA to approve this procedure?

  2. Death by bureaucracy.

  3. How will Obama dance around it tonight? Let’s find out….

  4. [I]t ought to be obvious to everyone that something is very wrong when this many people keep asking the same question and the president has nothing to say.

    Completely ignored this time. Not even laughed at. The amazing thing was that the top questions were all posted right under the video as it aired. The powers that be here did not even try to cover up the blaring silence.

  5. Paul Krugman here in full flower. Usually missing from these austerity-bashing editorials is some indication that the government either actually has, or can reasonably obtain, the money that they are supposed to spend to jump-start the economy. Where is this money cming from? I’m looking for something like this. The concern is usually dismissed, a la Kevin Drum, as a can that may be safely kicked down the road. I say, “No. Let’s talk about that ish right now!”

  6. Politically motivated expulsion of cameramen from a hearing room. Pretty lame.

  7. I hope this means we can forget about it by year’s end. Maybe 2013 will be the “Year of the Bhagavad Gītā”.

  8. Here in America, I’m pretty sure that the court would not touch a case like this due to Establishment Clause concerns. Personally, I would be satisfied with leaving a record that I was baptized as a baby, presumably without my consent, and that I had voluntarily chosen to leave the church. I ain’t in it to re-write my history and say that what had happened did not happen.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.


Last Week’s Links, for February 13, 2012: A Hodgepodge

February 11, 2012
  1. I think the “Big Think” is to progressives like what “LearnLiberty” is to libertarians. This is good, I think, because it showcases for us some often mind-numbing obliviousness.

    I must say I’m a bit confused. The man claims to have been drowning in an ocean of free marketers and Hayekians, yet he doesn’t seem to hear anything they say, much less comprehend it. First, he completely misrepresents their ideas. Then, he claims that no fiscal conservatives are talking about this, that, or the other progressive talking point. It’s as if he had never so much as visited a libertarian website in his life, much less had his voice drowned out by gaggles of real, live libertarians. Maybe he’s talking about Republicans. Hmmm….

  2. Probably the largest picture of Paul Krugman you’re likely to see on the web.

  3. We can gamble in Vegas. We can donate on Kiva or Kickstarter. But it’s illegal to purchase $100 of stock in a job-creating business? That makes no sense.

    The rule evidently applies to those without the financial wherewithal to satisfy the SEC.  I didn’t even know about it. Really? If this is true, then ‘free country’ my ass. It’s really a miracle that anything ever gets done at all with such shackles on markets.  Read the rest of this entry »


Links for October 31, 2011: Stanhope on Liberty; Voices from the “1%”; Government owns polluted rivers; others….

October 29, 2011
  1. Fifteen minutes of brilliance. (NSFW: Language)

  2. Priceless. Uncut footage available here, here, here, and here. I would love even more. Apparently, the conversation lasted three hours.

  3. A different voice from the 1%, This one from the “tax me” contingent. Sorry. You can raise you own taxes if you want, but you got no moral authority to raise your neighbor’s taxes, as far as I’m concerned.

    I have spent far more hours than I should have these last few weeks … trying to understand who these people are and why they would possibly care about my taxes.

    It’s called empathy. It’s called reciprocity. I make more money than some unfortunate people, but I don’t like the idea of other people reaching into my pockets and taking my money on that account. On the other hand, I don’t think I’m better than everybody else. If there were a rule that said: “You may reach into anyone’s pocket but Tim G.’s.” I would consider that rule to be arbitrary and unfair to others. A more fair rule would be: “Nobody reaches into anyone else’s pockets.” I don’t have a particular love for this guy. I just think there ought to be predictable, non-arbitrary, even-handed rules of private property. Is that so wrong?

    The author also extols the government and union help his family received during his impoverished youth. It’s tough to play the “what if” game, but if the government did not interfere so much in the economy to limit people’s productive capacities there is reason to believe that his youth may not have been as bad as he assumes that it would have been. Again, I don’t have a crystal ball, but another way is possible.  Read the rest of this entry »


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 419 other followers