It is the same thing, if you consider establishing a working public healthcare system as infrastructure parallel to (and – in the sense that NOT doing it incurs even more expense – with a stronger case than) building your bridge.
In the healthcare system, paying a wage sufficient to retain staff is part of the expenditure necessary for maintaining the level of service the public relies on.
Do you really advocate building your bridge and then not budgetting anything for maintenance, so that it falls apart after people have started using it?
The borrowing vs. not borrowing distinction is specious because it's entirely determined by what and who the government has decided not to tax.
As Ben Goldacre has pointed out, the drug company argument that they need to price-gouge because of Massive R&D Costs in producing new drugs! ... is hard to maintain when their R&D budget is dwarfed by their marketing expenditure.
Little of substance indeed. :-/
(i) Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from social consequences of the content of your speech. You can say what you like; but you can still be shunned as a result.
(ii) Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to use any particular platform without regard to its rules of use. You can say what you like; but you can still be banned and/or your content deleted as a result.
(iii) "it seems you are seeking to incite": Citation needed. What violent or unlawful action is being called for? Or are you just seeking to smear?
I imagine Pfizer and other drug companies are wary about dealing with India because of that country's history of successfully undercutting Big Pharma's price-gouging with generics. To meet the demand, there's going to have to be some vaccine production within India under license as part of the deal, and that does pose some commercial risk for the company. But I also imagine the practicalities of responding to a pandemic should see a reasonable deal reached. The whole point is that no country should be left behind, otherwise the pandemic continues with fresh mutations requiring further vaccine updates and … oh, wait.
It's weird having morally dubious profit-seeking companies cast as the saviours of the species.
Great to see you still here, but if the party (and the Party) is on Facebook, and this place is left to "ferals", spambots, cockroaches, and the occasional lawyer ... doesn’t that mean Facebook is winning on both counts?
Pretty good actually, I didn't notice any additional points
(assuming the correction for the last one is to replace "is" with "in").
Corrigenda (if you still have any chance to revise your submission)
* "is put a deliberately wide" --> "it put …"
* "hosts should not be expected to screen every ... video uploaded": "screen" is ambiguous in this context, "evaluate" is probably intended rather than "display" (later "censor" is used in the same context).
* " It is should abandon its role in favour of the Secretary for Internal Affairs" [sic]: It seems some words have been omitted, leaving this expressing the exact reverse of its intended meaning.
* "it should recommend that a number of amendments": delete "that".
Meanwhile in Japan, Suga is continuing to deny the need for a lockdown as the third wave continues to spike out of control at levels that will overwhelm the healthcare system within a few weeks. Vaccination may start for healthcare workers in February, but at projected rates of rollout, won't reach the full population for another year, while pressure mounts to reopen face-to-face classes with the population sector currently most actively involved in spreading the virus. And true to form, Japan has just closed its borders to nonresident foreigners again to "keep out the new strain", after it's already here and spreading.
What keeps nutcases away from power is, (i) parties having a wide range of different potential coalition partners, and conversely, (ii) governing parties being forced to run policies past the scrutiny of their partners. The threshold is a blight on NZ democracy.