A few days ago, I mentioned a congressional hearing I saw on C-Span where the discussion concerned large pharmaceuticals paying huge amounts to generic drug manufacturers to NOT manufacture the generic drugs and to hold off on quashing 'patents' at their expiration.

The large companies make money by selling their name brand drugs at huge prices to consumers. They make enough money off their name brands that they can afford to pay huge sums to the generic manufactures to NOT manufacture. The generic manufacturers end up making big sums for DOING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING except hiring a few attorneys. In my opinion, that is CAPITALISM. It represents a beautiful relationship between the drug companies and the government. Of course, the drug companies have to buy a certain number of congressmen, which they do. Problem is, the system gouges the shit out of consumers.

In a market economy, there would be no 'patents' protecting these types of operations. The manufacturers would have to make their profits the legitimate way, i.e., they would have to bring their products to market and compete with other manufactures, just like Wendy's has to compete with McDonald's. There are no patents on hamburgers, and hamburgers do not cost consumers $80 each. And, somehow, both Wendy's and McDonald's are profitable.

This isn't capitalism. What this is, is market manipulation. Forces are being applied to prevent and circumvent the checks that are in place.


Well as long as it is your "opinion". That doesn't make it correct. I hear alot of opinions that are based on totally faulty ideologies.

The government regulation is being circumvented. The only way you can introduce the government into this debate is to show that the government is in collusion with the pharmas and the generics.

That MIGHT be the case.

But, that still does not mean that that is the definition of capitalism. It is the antithesis.


I can't really argue against this. But that is not capitalism.
Why do you say that? Market economics are the foundation of capitalism...

McDonald's holds over 5000 patents.

Without patents, copyrights, and trademarks what you would have would be closer to a Marxist system than a capitalistic one.

Both companies hold patents. That is partly why McDonald's has been able to maintain its edge. There are many secrets that both companies employ. Without the ability to do that what would stop you from finding out Coke's formula, starting a company called Coca-Cola and reaping the profits?

"This isn't capitalism. What this is, is market manipulation."
>>>That's my point. Capitalism IS market manipulation. What red-blooded capitalist ISN'T going to manipulate the market if he has enough cash and congressmen. Their motivation is to form capital, not share the wealth.

"Without patents, copyrights, and trademarks what you would have would be closer to a Marxist system than a capitalistic one."
>>>They all have patents. You can't duplicate a McDonalds Quarter Pounder w/ Cheese, but you always have a choice between a McDonald's hamburger and a Wendy's hamburger. Do you have that same choice with cancer drugs?

"Without the ability to do that what would stop you from finding out Coke's formula, starting a company called Coca-Cola and reaping the profits?"
>>>Pepsi comes close. Coke didn't make huge payouts to Pepsi to keep it from competing.


"Market economics are the foundation of capitalism..."
>>>Maybe once upon a time.

"Well as long as it is your "opinion". That doesn't make it correct. I hear alot of opinions that are based on totally faulty ideologies."
>>>I have no ideology other than pragmatism. All I am doing is pointing out the gaping holes in the capitalist ideology. There are others besides the pharmaceuticals.

"The government regulation is being circumvented. The only way you can introduce the government into this debate is to show that the government is in collusion with the pharmas and the generics."
>>>Collusion may or may not be too strong a word. Let's just say that the government is the GREAT ENABLER.

You are just plain ignorant of what Smith defined.

You haven't read the Wealth of Nations have you?

Or Conspicuous Consumption? Or Das kapital? Or even the Manifesto?

Well, I have a degree in economics and an MBA if that helps you out.

the ones you get out of cereal boxes dont count george....

You economics.............BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It certanly doesn't answer whether you have read Wealth.

Anyways, I shouldn't have been as harsh.

I have a couple of degrees in economics too and frankly I am surprised that you don't understand the basics of Smithian economics!

I read "Wealth" my sophomore year. That was close to 30 years ago.

This is not free market capitalism. The instant you get government involved (re your statement a few congressmen had to be paid off) then this becomes market minipulation, which sure as hell ain't capitalism. This is a complete disregard for rational self interest. Why would a drug company that manufactures drugs decide not to actually sell those drugs? At what point do those companies cease to exist because they have no product to sell. What would stop another company that wasn't taking bribes from the major drug companies to go ahead and put their product on the market? At some point in a capitalistic system someone will decide on rational self interest and then the major drug companies would have paid millions of dollars for nothing.

As far as Wendy's and McDonalds not costing $80.00 a hamburger, one simple reason is they have not had to spend millions if not billions developing the cheeseburger or the McRibs, or a bowl of chili. Part of the high cost of drugs is because of the intervention of government.

True capitalism is the only system that allows complete individual freedom. Any other system is just varying degrees of slavery. And there is no such thing as government control of capitalism, That is like being just a little bit pregnant. Either trade is free or it isn't.

"This is not free market capitalism."

Right-on. But our kind of capitalism can't exist in totally free markets. Government intervention (on behalf of capitalists) is required. In that regard, capitalism is just like any other -ism. It's not even a matter of degree.