CNN: Feds found Pfizer too big to nail Proof we don't live in a free market. Look at how dependent these monopolistic corporations are on medicare and medicaid receipts, and they have the state in their pocket. Thoughts?
This just proves my point of the power they hold. Now what if mmj becomes legal or even worse legal (sarcasm.) I just couldn't see this pharmaceutical companies along with other corporations letting it happen.
Here's what I don't get-- why was the company itself being criminally investigated in this situation? That's the thermonuclear option for prosecution, because in most cases it destroys the company. The proper course would normally be to engage in regulatory and civil prosecution, not criminal.
yes of course Pfizer cannot and will not collapse even though they are conducting illicit activity. All those subpar pharmacutical drugs are a necessity for our well being under the governments healthcare regulations. Death, Seizures, and loss of mobility of extemities is a risk that we all must take for the collective good.
It's proof that the state and the corporation have become so entwined that they are essentially inseperable. Rather than the two being totally removed from each other, the state has exercised (or rather, NOT exercised) its power to keep the company afloat and operational. That's far beyond government regulation or any other things that I hear libertarians dramatically screaming bloody murder about... that's government AID, that's the government actively supporting and working towards the best interests of the company rather than prosecuting them under the law. And that is completely, utterly wrong - the state SHOULD NOT be helping someone profit. Either have socialist state controlled and run healthcare or have a free market, but for fucks sake don't combine the worst of both! On a practical level, I can understand it - after all, people are going to need their medicines and if Pfizer is on the 'black list' then getting medicated is going to be far more difficult and expensive. But it's absolutely rotten to the core that this is the 'best option', as opposed to doing the right thing and prosecuting them as they deserve. Feel like quoting me some Dire Straights - '...right becomes wrong and left becomes right'
All government regulations actively support the best interests of their pet monopolies. I don't see any reason to think the high costs associated with crippling mandates and regulations are done for consumer interests. They are done to preserve monopolies and eliminate competition. I agree that a corporatist state is worse than both capitalst and socialist. Pfizer is a part of a pharmeceutical cartel known as PhRMA, and their influence in DC is obviously huge. Being the top lobbying firm its no wonder Obama had to guarantee continued dominance in the US health care market by mandating name brand usage. Generic brands are 1/5th the cost and there are plenty of cheaper competitors that would love to be given medicare/medicaid handouts.
No doubt there is heavy, heavy lobbyist ties and corruption ties that link the US government to PhARMA, and in no way do I support this, but do we have a choice? I remember right, they basically shifted the blame to one of their subsidiaries, a trojan horse company that employed no one, and could easily take the blame. If the consequence was distributed to Pfizer, it would (as stated in the article) leave many out of jobs, and even more without the medication they need. At the moment, obviously it's true, they are too big to fail. The US needs to make regulation that they can actually follow though on. In theory, it all looks fine and dandy, but they if they can't practice that shit, new rules need to be made. The punishment has to be realistic and something that they know will effect them. It's a fucking joke for them right now, they're laughing....
Yea, that's the government's argument but I thought I refuted that in my previous post. There is an ample supply of pharmaceutircal companies ready to take the place Pfizer has been given by the state. How are they obviously too big to fail? So you support propping up bad monopolies? Huh? The punishment has to be universal to everyone that breaks the law. Otherwise there is a moral hazard to be exploited.
It must be reassuring to Pfizer to be an american company where you can make an unsafe product and sell it to people even after said product has been banned and face no consequenses. I've never understood the 'too big to fail' argument in a capitalist system it should make for a more vibrant market. I'd chalk it up as another example of institutionalized corruption trumping the good of the american people.
I've never understood how we've been able to get away with calling this system 'capitalism' for so long. But the argument for keynesianism is simple; pass the debt on to future generations because we'll be dead by the time they have to deal with it. Keynes said why wait for the healing process when we can simulate it with inflation?