Pfizer

[MrSnusNSnuff]

Pfizer is getting slammed for unethical business practices by the federal government. The FDA and federal courts will be policing them for the next 5 years as well as getting slapped with a 2.3 billion dollar lawsuit.

As a free-market libertarian this brings up some interesting issues. First, how far does government go to regulate these drug agencies? Their overhead is insane and corruption is rampant, probably due to the inflationary effect of a heavily regulated HMO system. Unquestionably, what Pzfizer did was completely out of line - but should government step in? Or should precipitous drop in sales and client trust be the ultimate punishment for Pzfizer? It would be sort of like boycotting gasoline - many peoples' lives benefit from their prescription drugs, and boycotting products such as these generally do not receive much support from the public. Telling a horny old man to boycott Viagra might be like encouraging a cat to write a poem.

I distrust state-controlled agencies - you have the same problem as unchecked corporate power. Unchecked absolute power in government agencies like the FDA leaves a bad taste in my mouth. But so does Pfizer's actions. It's like the 2nd grade classroom scenario. Everyone is expecting a Pizza party at the end of the day. But one kid acts out and the whole class loses the pizza party because the teacher is pissed off.

[VBSnus]

Or should precipitous drop in sales and client trust be the ultimate punishment for Pzfizer?

I like the free market approach where lack of demand is their punishment. However:

1) The drug companies are a multi-company monopoly
2) Doctors will still recommend their drugs, and consumers do what their doctor says
3) Many times drugs are offered from subsidiaries and sibling companies so the consumers have no clue what they're buying

And again HOWEVER:

The Federal Government should be slammed for unethical government practices for listening to Pfizer lobbyists, accepting their bribes, and enacting laws in their favor.

[MrSnusNSnuff]

[quote="VBSnus"]

I like the free market approach where lack of demand is their punishment. However:

1) The drug companies are a multi-company monopoly
2) Doctors will still recommend their drugs, and consumers do what their doctor says
3) Many times drugs are offered from subsidiaries and sibling companies so the consumers have no clue what they're buying

And again HOWEVER:

The Federal Government should be slammed for unethical government practices for listening to Pfizer lobbyists, accepting their bribes, and enacting laws in their favor.

It's a if not A, then B dilemma. And then if you have B, then A. Feds do their job, but then try to take too much power based on a handful of specific incidents. And they are equally, if not more corrupt than multinational monopolies. Corporations do their job, but then they try shady shit when given the opportunity. Then you end up with 1000-page regulations to try to nitpick what is right and what is wrong. Good for aspiring lawyers like me. Bad for a mostly uninformed public who doesn't know even a fraction of what goes on in the world around them.

I still often wonder what would happen if we just "let go" as a nation. Stopped trying to control everything, and create a "perfect" world where we attempt to prevent every possible bad scenario from happening. I think of the scene in Fight Club where the narrator and Tyler Durden are in the car and Tyler yells at the Narrator just to "let go." The car does crash, but he emerges alive and stronger from the experience.

[VBSnus]

I still often wonder what would happen if we just "let go" as a nation. Stopped trying to control everything, and create a "perfect" world where we attempt to prevent every possible bad scenario from happening. I think of the scene in Fight Club where the narrator and Tyler Durden are in the car and Tyler yells at the Narrator just to "let go." The car does crash, but he emerges alive and stronger from the experience.

Sure. Like we should have done with the car companies.

This is an ages old concept...the more you try to control something, the worse it becomes.

In movies, look at the Matrix...they tried to make us a perfect world, but we rejected it. They had to make an imperfect world to keep us happy. And even then, there is always an anomaly.

But I don't believe in "just letting go" too much in government, because companies won't give any more than they have to. Look at American snus vs. Swedish. Why does Camel's suck? Don't know, don't know what's in it. Why does it make my gums burn? Don't know, don't know what's in it. What's in our food? Additives, chemicals, natural or artificial ingredients. What's in our drugs? Don't know.

Non-disclosure from companies and no regulations from government would be bad news. You know companies would start using lead paint and calling it "Special Paint". Just like dentists used to call fillings "Mercury fillings" then "amalgam fillings" and now just "silver fillings".

[MrSnusNSnuff]

I still often wonder what would happen if we just "let go" as a nation. Stopped trying to control everything, and create a "perfect" world where we attempt to prevent every possible bad scenario from happening. I think of the scene in Fight Club where the narrator and Tyler Durden are in the car and Tyler yells at the Narrator just to "let go." The car does crash, but he emerges alive and stronger from the experience.

Sure. Like we should have done with the car companies.

This is an ages old concept...the more you try to control something, the worse it becomes.

In movies, look at the Matrix...they tried to make us a perfect world, but we rejected it. They had to make an imperfect world to keep us happy. And even then, there is always an anomaly.

But I don't believe in "just letting go" too much in government, because companies won't give any more than they have to. Look at American snus vs. Swedish. Why does Camel's suck? Don't know, don't know what's in it. Why does it make my gums burn? Don't know, don't know what's in it. What's in our food? Additives, chemicals, natural or artificial ingredients. What's in our drugs? Don't know.

Non-disclosure from companies and no regulations from government would be bad news. You know companies would start using lead paint and calling it "Special Paint". Just like dentists used to call fillings "Mercury fillings" then "amalgam fillings" and now just "silver fillings".

Even Little Joey loves to paint with Special Paint! Fun for the whole family!

Or the guy in the labcoat saying "cigarettes have been shown to have no ill health effects. The only effect you'll get is smooth flavor and lasting enjoyment."

[VBSnus]

Haha, exactly.

It would be neat in ways...a scholarly government where the primary law is full disclosure of effects and ingredients. People would study types of products in the hopes of getting a job explaining the products properly through literature or advertisement. Those who produce the best products with the best and most reasonable explanations would be popular.

Perhaps this is how capitalism is meant to work? Companies disclose everything so their buyers can make informed decisions about provide adequate demand. But with obfuscation, the availability of every possible product under the sun, government interference, and false advertising, we've lost this ability and now just "consume".