Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Torie

Perhaps this is true.

On the other hand, perhaps it will simply drive Pfizer down from first place, and smaller American pharmaceutical companies out of business. Glaxo, a British pharmaceutical firm, is in second place, and the complicated Aventis/Sanofi-Synthelabo merger of French pharma giants creates the third place company.

The French drug makers have a larger market share in France, Europe, Asia and Latin America than in the US. Pfizer, of course, most profits in the US market.

So, if the US government passes such a law, it will cut most deeply into Pfizer, and least deeply into Aventis/Sanofi among the top manufacturers. The law of unintended consequences is likely to be to reduce the Anglo-Saxon pharma companies' profit margins on their chief turf, America, while harming the French pharma companies proportionately less, thereby levelling the competitive playing field a bit for the French contender.
Aventis will not be hurt in the home market by the Americans harming their own pharmaceutical flagship in their home market.

And all of that assumes that the capricious US court system will not simply strike down such a law as being unconstitutional, for some reason. It does not seem to require a discernible reason for American judges to act as they do.


48 posted on 05/27/2005 10:37:48 PM PDT by Vicomte13 (Et alors?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: Vicomte13

No, you don't get it. All drug companies world wide fleece American consumers with higher prices, because the other places with money to buy drugs are monopsonistic government buyers. It is an imperfection in the market, which works to subsidize inter alia the French. It is wrong to subsidize the French.


50 posted on 05/27/2005 10:44:49 PM PDT by Torie (Constrain rogue state courts; repeal your state constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: Vicomte13
And all of that assumes that the capricious US court system will not simply strike down such a law as being unconstitutional, for some reason

You should be so lucky. Nope. SCOTUS is quite comfortable with economic regulation, particularly when it strikes out at monopolistic or monopsonistic practices. If and when this law is passed, or becomes law by decree when Torie becomes the benevolent dictator, SCOTUS will just send out a bouquet.

51 posted on 05/27/2005 10:47:59 PM PDT by Torie (Constrain rogue state courts; repeal your state constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: Vicomte13
American health care is approximately the same as French health care, with similar results.

If Princess Di had her car accident in the U.S. she would be alive today. And I can gaurantee you our health system doesn't shut down for two weeks during the summer while our elderly die of heat stroke.

But this quote.

That Americans spend 4.9% less, and have universal anxiety. It is a judgment call.

France is Jerry Lewis and Woody Allen combined when it comes to nuerosis and anxiety.

You point out we have a 50-50 split in private to public funding of education. Imagine how much more money would be available at our classroom level if we didn't pass it through our government filter. France invented bureaucracy, America gluttonized it.

I love your discovery rules. Wish our civil law was like that.

France was once the greatest nation on earth. But she has lost her way. Stop selling out your principles for fleeting power and wealth.

73 posted on 05/28/2005 1:39:43 AM PDT by Diplomat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson