[LINK] Einstein's fridge an example for NICTA?

Craig Sanders cas at taz.net.au
Wed Dec 13 13:19:18 AEDT 2006

On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 10:40:09AM +1100, Brendan Scott wrote:
> Chris Maltby wrote:
> > I don't have any to hand. There was a fair amount of discussion
> > about this in the political debate surrounding the impact of the
> > US FTA on Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. The industry

part of the purpose of the AUSFTA is to lay the groundwork for
demolishing the PBS. it's been a thorn in the side of multi-national
pharmaceutical companies for years - not so much because the australian
market is big enough to really care that much about, but because
it provides an unwelcome example of a better way of managing drug
availability and pricing than the american free market model.

> > claims that high retail prices for drugs is necessary to pay for
> > the costly R&D they undertake - the counter argument is that
> > the industry spends more on marketing than R&D (especially pure
> > research). I recall that this assertion was supported by figures
> > showing a decline in the rate of discovery of new drug types...
> "At the same time, companies have been anxious to forge links with
> universities because for all their private R&D dollars they are
> profoundly dependent on public science in all fields of technology.
> In biotechnology the dependence is striking; for example, more than 70
> percent of scientific papers cited in biotechnology patents originated
> in solely public science institutions compared with 16.5 percent that
> originated in the private sector."

yep, that's the preferred model of corporations everywhere. research is
done on the public purse and when anything useful is found, a monopoly
handed over to private companies (for nothing or very little).

public expense, private profits. externalising expenses is great for the
corporate bottom line.


craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>           (part time cyborg)

More information about the Link mailing list