The Trans-Pacific Partnership

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Trans-Pacific Partnership

Are you in favor of the TPP?
	Yes
	No
	N/A without more data

Jonah Galtberg: Feb 11, 2009

Kalman posted:

ISDS is the international law equivalent of the 5th Amendment. I have zero problem with that.

I happen to live in a country with a (mostly) functioning PBS and public health system, I have some degree of a problem with giving foreign corporations the ability to sue my government for providing drugs and other medical supplies to the populace at affordable prices.

# ¿ Jun 14, 2015 13:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 15, 2024 05:17

Jonah Galtberg: Feb 11, 2009

Kalman posted:

It helps pharmaceutical companies actually see a return on the extremely high investments that biologics require, which leads them to actually invest in creating biologics.

Doctors Without Borders is a great group, but their primary interest is in cheap medicines, not in development of new treatments. They worry about inexpensive versions of existing treatments, not about what new treatments might be found. Drug companies don't develop drugs out of charity - they do it because they expect to be able to receive some return on the investment. The point of the patent system isn't to promote competition while the item is patented - it's to promote development of new ideas and to encourage post-patent cooperation.

If you dislike that system and want some other system (public prizes or similar), that's fine and it's also not a reason to be against TPP. TPP doesn't bar public research and public domain biologics, but it does (at least, in the leaks I've seen) require that you receive a minimum time on market after regulatory approval. Because pharma patents don't correlate well to the regulatory process (even with term extension for approval delay, you aren't getting anywhere near 20 years and typically not even 10 years) it provides alternate protection to drugs with long approval processes.

And even then, you can still make a generic during data exclusivity - you just have to spend the money to independently prove your drug is safe rather than relying on the first comers' clinical trials.

(And just one more thought: the pharma companies don't charge 11k a month in other countries, nor would they be able to after TPP. They price based on ability to pay.)

hahahahahahaha

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ¿ Jun 14, 2015 22:42

Jonah Galtberg: Feb 11, 2009

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhh_GeBPOhs

# ¿ Jun 14, 2015 23:19

Jonah Galtberg: Feb 11, 2009

Nintendo Kid posted:

I have a hard time understanding how Africans are going to be affected by a treaty that has no African countries involved, even as observers.

Yeah this is dumb, there are plenty of poor people that stand to get hosed pretty hard in the countries that are participating

# ¿ Jun 15, 2015 00:11

Jonah Galtberg: Feb 11, 2009

JeffersonClay posted:

Why would drug companies attempt to cure malaria, for instance, if all the countries with significant malaria infection will not protect their intellectual property?

Wait a minute. Is this ironic?

# ¿ Jun 15, 2015 00:24

Jonah Galtberg: Feb 11, 2009

blowfish posted:

Globalisation is scary both for 1950s conservatives and for 1970s leftists, which describes a shocking proportion of 2015 conservatives and leftists.

It's also pretty scary for the poor

# ¿ Nov 24, 2015 03:56

Jonah Galtberg: Feb 11, 2009

asdf32 posted:

Which poor people? It's benefited most of them.

yeah man NAFTA did wonders for Mexican labour

# ¿ Nov 24, 2015 07:17

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 15, 2024 05:17

Jonah Galtberg: Feb 11, 2009

asdf32 posted:

Neoliberalism and globalization are completely separate things.

If the question is "have [hundreds of millions of] poor Chinese benefited from globalization" the answer is an easy yes.

Hundreds of millions? Not 15?

# ¿ Nov 24, 2015 23:52

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Trans-Pacific Partnership