More on the FDA...blah blah blah

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd assume (I'd concede, if you want) that the primary objective of any organisation, and espcially of a bureaucratic, hierarchical organisatiion, is to perpetuate itself, i.e. the equivalent of the reproduction instinct in living beings. So, yes, the FDA, like most aforesaid organisations, first and foremost would want the necessity of its existence continuously affirmed and strengthened. Which would affect its overall work, in some way, one supposes.

Still, and that's the significant difference, such a motive pales in comparison to the importance of the motive behind the private organisation putting out its products (drugs): that organisation's sole objetive is profit maximization. Apparently, people have wisely decided to check that motive, as best as they could, through the creation of social woking agencies such as the FDA.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



But when profit is a motive, and there is no government intervention stifling free trade and competition, then companies do have an incentive to provide safe products, since companies profit by getting voluntarily consenting customers, most of which would not like to purchase unsafe products. Your point about the average person not being an expert on drugs, etc., is irrelevant, since there are plenty of ways to get information on products that do not involve an agency that can coercively decide which products you can and can't use.

I really do not understand how you think the FDA has a real incentive to do a good job. Since the FDA does not actually serve anyone voluntarily, it can do as [censored] a job as it wants and still "perptuate itself" because it is a government agency funded through taxes, etc.
Bun when a company needs to "perpetuate itself", somehow they will almost surely provide unsafe products?? This makes no sense--they have far more incentive to provide good service than the FDA, since the company can only survive by profiting, and can only profit by selling a product people voluntarily buy. Like anything in the real world, obviously bad things can happen on a free market, and comanies concerned with profit may try to peddle poor products, but there is a system of checks and balances already in palce to prevent this--free trade and open competition (in theory--obviously we don't have anything close to that now, and eliminating the FDA is a small part of a bigger task).