The problem with this analysis, Harry, is that patents ARE controlled by the ‘free market’, that is, by companies who assert the very patent right as a condition of their release of the product. Further, it is those very companies that lobby Washington to keep foreign manufacturers out. So the bottom line is that consumers are screwed, and your fall-back position – that consumers can always vote with their wallets – is not available.

 

The REAL ‘free-market’ allows these monopolistic activities.  I don’t think you can have your cake (low prices, good quality) and eat it (shrug at the reality of monopolies), too.

 

As for your question about my support for monopolies, I will suggest that your rhetorical flourishes generously exceed your logic. Colourful, but not enlightening.

 

Cheers,

Lawry

 


From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 8:20 PM
To: 'Lawrence deBivort'; 'Christoph Reuss'; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Futurework] Re: the best service at the cheapest price (wasRe:Italy and the Euro)

 

Lawry, old lad,

 

Almost always a critique of the free market process uses an example that is as far from being a market as you can get.

 

The drug monopoly simply wallows in government privileges.

 

Patents come first and the drug companies patent practically every combination of chemicals they can – in case something useful will be found for it. (Patents are not completely necessary. Even when a patent finishes, it is possible to tie up competing generic  production using government regulations.)

 

Imports of competing drugs are kept out of the country and away from the market.

 

The cost of putting a new drug through the FDA system is so high (some hundreds of thousand of dollars) that small firms cannot afford it, so they have to go through the big companies.

 

Bush will manage to reduce drug prices with his upcoming policy. He’ll do it by using our tax money to subsidize the high cost. In this way we’ll get “cheaper” drugs, while the drug companies will get their outrageous monopoly prices.

 

Taking profits and losses into account, this is why the top ten drug companies in the Fortune 500 make more profit than the other 490 companies combined.

 

This is why they fight against a free market.

 

And why I welcome you to the advocacy of a free market – the best way to cut these damned monopolies down to size.

 

Or, are you on the side of the monopolists?

 

Harry

 

*******************************

Henry George School of Social Science

of Los Angeles

Box 655  Tujunga  CA 91042

818 352-4141

*******************************

 

 


From: Lawrence deBivort [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 1:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Christoph Reuss'; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Futurework] Re: the best service at the cheapest price (wasRe:Italy and the Euro)

 

Nonsense, Harry.

 

You said: You mean the market simply obeyed the instructions of the people. The people didn’t want the things you think they should want (and would force them to if you could). You should come to the US where every possible kind of good is available at the cheapest possible price.

 

Lawry: For example: US consumers pay much more for prescription drugs than, say, Canadians. Why? Not because US consumers have chosen higher prices, surely?

 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to