bripat9643
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,163
- 47,312
- 2,180
ROFL! Now that's confidence: Telling your critic to stop posting.Stop posting. You know nothing.Government doesn't get the money, moron.Jesus you’re slow. It’s pay off to government. Government and big pharma are one."payoff" to whom? Certainly not the drug companies.Payoff. It’s a racket. But I doubt they pay that much. More lies.If that's the case, then why does it cost $1 billion to get a drug approved?The FDA is a rubber stamp for big Pharma. If you don’t know this you don’t know much.The FDA raises the cost of prescription drugs by $1 billion for each drug, and you support what it does. Now you want to convince us that you're concerned about drug costs.How can anyone suggest government protected monopolies are not interfering with a "free" market?That's a complex subject. Some Libertarians would say they are. Others would say not.
Dean Baker, "The Reform of Intellectual Property", Post-Autistic Economics Review, issue 32.
"The economics profession has devoted vast amount of research and textbook space to proving the inefficiency of various forms of protectionism.
"The basic story in this work is that protectionism causes the price to exceed the marginal cost of production.
"All of this work is entirely applicable to patents and copyrights, except the impact is at least an order of magnitude larger than with most instances of protectionism in international trade.
"While tariffs and quotas rarely raise the price of goods by more than 30 or 40 percent, patents on prescription drugs typically raise the price of protected products by 300 to 400 percent, or more, above the marginal cost."
Who are you trying to kid?
All you ever do is post establishment pap.