FDA & Free Market Regulation?

January 2nd, 2011 | by admin |

A potential solution: free market rating agencies that charge companies for the right to get their “stamp of approval” on their products. There would be high consumer demand for this safety service, since few buying medicine want to get sick or die, so it would be a profitable industry attracting competition. If we had many “FDAs” competing for our trust, then whenever we find out that one goes corrupt, it could be reported, and people would begin to prefer alternative rating agencies instead.

Duration : 0:5:28


  1. 11 Responses to “FDA & Free Market Regulation?”

  2. By adjohnson916 on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    @anubis2814 Are …
    @anubis2814 Are they regulated by the government? I don’t believe every rating agency is, or is that much, and anyway that surely isn’t necessary because their entire business model as rating agencies depends on their trustworthiness, so they’d naturally want to be open to the public eye, with government or without.

    I agree that lots of layers of coverage is beneficial, which is why there would be demand for it on the market. Perhaps agencies that conveniently rate baskets of rating agencies.

  3. By anubis2814 on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    @adjohnson916 You …
    @adjohnson916 You do realize that UL and the ADA are also government regulated right? Both work so well because there is a government and civilian oversight. 2 layers of coverage is better than one. If the drug companies wanted to they could probably easily set up something of the same but it would be regulated too, they just have not found it financially worth it.

  4. By adjohnson916 on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    @anubis2814 As for …
    @anubis2814 As for BP, personally I am boycotting the company, and if others had any sense, they would do the same. Yes, it is just PR. In business, PR is critical.

  5. By adjohnson916 on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    @anubis2814 Do you …
    @anubis2814 Do you realize how much money it costs to have a legal monopoly tax the economy to hell? Besides, there will probably be plenty of people willing to take the risk on less verified products simply because the price might be cheaper, like me for example since I’m a gambling mofo. If the price for safety tests got too outrageous, people would be more willing to gamble without it. Therefore the safety testers would be forced to not only maintain trust, but do it at the maximum efficiency

  6. By adjohnson916 on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    @Elenkhos Well I …
    @Elenkhos Well I don’t think most libertarians or anarchists support the criminalization of covert spy employees. That law was probably lobbied into legislation by the big corporate entities who didn’t want to be found out, since they have so much manipulative control of the legal monopoly that is government, which is one of the major problems with statism.

  7. By anubis2814 on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    Unlike these …
    Unlike these companies you mentioned, the comparative amount of money needed to put heir stamp on a drug verses a toaster or dishwasher is an astronomical difference. This ensures that it is a hard to enter market, and one or 2 companies would hold the monopoly. The idea is one I’ve heard of before. Any agency like this, as profit is their only goal would also be just fine with just appearing to be safe as opposed to actually being safe. BP is treating this crisis as a PR problem mostly

  8. By Elenkhos on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    I see the general …
    I see the general idea of what you are saying, like UL, but, UL does not operate under it’s own guids, they use their own but have a base guideline by the Government. Also, you could not use “covert” individuals to spy on businesses because it is illegal to become employed with a company to spy on them, it’s a form of espionage.

  9. By adjohnson916 on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    @AnduinX Thank you …
    @AnduinX Thank you kindly, sir or madame. Remember to rate, favorite, or subscribe as you wish… :P

  10. By adjohnson916 on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    @FishofMuu Yes, …
    @FishofMuu Yes, thanks, see the annotation around 1:40

  11. By AnduinX on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    Good job with this, …
    Good job with this, it sums up my position well.

  12. By FishofMuu on Jan 2, 2011 | Reply

    You forgot to …
    You forgot to mention current successful private regulatory companies (like the UL).

Post a Comment