Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: NOW who wrote (212642)	7/27/2009 7:23:59 PM
From: grusum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

it doesn't follow that because taxpayer or public money was used to research and develop good medicines, that private money wouldn't have done even better. private money would have dynamically entered the market looking for the opportunity to exploit the latest knowledge. they of course would have been looking to make a profit. the only way they could make a profit in a free market (without government interference) is to develop an affordable medicine that works well. public money gets used without much worry about profit. they don't need ROI if they use taxpayer money. but ROI is what makes the use of the money so effective. i believe that if the drug companies operated in a free market their profits would be smaller and the drugs and treatments would be better. insurance companies get favorable laws passed that enriches the insurance companies to our detriment. that is most assuredly not a free market. and the government (FDA) is in the pocket of the insurance companies. it is a natural outcome when the government gets involved in the market.