Quote:
Originally posted by Wafflinson
(Numbering just to keep my thoughts organized)
1. Doesn't change my point though. If a corporation has an issue with a law it seems like an inefficient mess for them to have to go through their government to do so.
2. Unfortunately that is the reality. Obviously a balance must be reached, but developing drugs MUST remain profitable. Even as a liberal I know that. It is all good that allowing people to steal one another's plans makes drugs cheaper..... but then you have to consider the future advancements that could fail to happen if new development stops.
Your post specifically excludes any info on how damn expensive research is. Sure, the final result may be cheap to make, but they still have to make the money that they spent back.
3. The United States does have the superior bargaining position. This is true. We can complain about the unfairness of it all, but our elected officials are voted into office to protect their constituents.
I would love to see a truly international community where everyone has an equal say. There is no way the USA (or the EU, or Russia, or China) would ever agree to it though.
|
1. So now, not only are corporations people in the United States, but they are also countries under these new policies. And up till now, corporations have been having a grand old time expanding and growing in spite of these "hoops" they have to jump through. What is the point in making them even more powerful?
2. But some of these drugs aren't special at all. They just list a specific naturally occurring chemical as the cure for this ailment or that. Also, there are PLENTY of industries like the food industry and the fashion industry that are multiple times the size of the pharmaceutical industry, and they do not have basically ANY patent or copyright protection (very very limited and strictly defined), and they still manage to flourish. The tech industry, also, used to be very guarded but with an increase in open-sourced systems and sharing, tech companies are booming and bigger than ever today. Your argument that keeping the system closed only benefits a monopolistic system, and NOT true capitalism.
3. Look at the countries listed in the agreements: Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. We're not dealing with China and Russia here. It's countries that are basically allies of the U.S., friendly, and/or much weaker politically and economically. Using its might to get what it wants certainly isn't unprecedented, but we have tended to look down on those instances of swagger in hindsight ala the big-stick policies toward Latin America in the 19th and early 20th century.