4 ms·

I followed Lina Kahn (FTC chair) on Twitter before Biden appointed her, and I was kind of blown away that it happened. She had a very clear philosophical opposi

I followed Lina Kahn (FTC chair) on Twitter before Biden appointed her, and I was kind of blown away that it happened. She had a very clear philosophical opposition to a lot of the way things are done in this country. And I mean, I followed her because I agreed! But my preferences are not mainstream. Amazing to see her slinging rocks at giants from this position.

throwaway128128 3y ago
Biden's had a number of appointments that have been surprisingly on point. I really like how antitrust enforcement is finally, FINALLY getting some teeth.
throe37848 3y ago
Maybe it was her surname. This "hipster antitrust" approach is a nice smoke screen big pharma needs. India and other countries already make generics, there is no need to wait several years for US manufacturers. FTC is just a road block that prevents cheap medical imports.
- emodendroket 3y ago
  Is it really though. Even with the current level of regulation we have more than enough scandals with, say, artificial tears that blinded people who used them.
  - partitioned 3y ago
    FDA should be able to make sure imports are safe
  - alwayslikethis 3y ago
    It's all a trade off. We can have more affordable medicine by importing it. This means more people will be able to access it, meaning less bankruptcies, which isn't any good for one's health. Will it be less safe than the ones you can currently get for an exorbitant prices? Marginally, probably. Overall, society can benefit from letting people import their medicine. It will also drive down prices and force big pharma to drop their prices.
    - emodendroket 3y ago
      I don't think cheaper medicine that is likely poison is much of a bargain at all, but what do I know? IP law would seem to me to have more to do with the cost than the heavy hand of regulation.
- bigbillheck 3y ago
  > Maybe it was her surname. Would you mind expanding on that?
HDThoreaun 3y ago
Khan's utter failure to execute on her goals has imo set back the anti-trust movement in this country heavily. Now every time anti trust gets brought up people think about how the government lost 5 cases in a row and consider it a waste.
- nobodyandproud 3y ago
  More a warning of how stacked the rules are against anti-trust, after 20-30 years of profitable M&A and other anti-competitive behavior.
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  I hear this bandied about so much, but I've never heard justification that the cases weren't well built or that they weren't good cases to bring. The wicked thing about case law is that it builds and builds. The courts have been extremely pro big business for a long time, and it's hard to figure out how anything ever changes or gets better from here. Trying to right this hell is going to take a lot of miserable attempts that go nowhere. That's what happens when the titans already have all the case law in their favor. Yes that means we need to be very well prepared when we go to battle - try to overturn their legalistic dominance - but I'm glad we are trying, and I'm not sure what better paths are available, not sure what the actual lessons are, not sure what should have been better. It feels like such a slim chance. And trying feels necessary, feels like it has a chance, even if odds aren't great. Something has to be done to let us revisit the past, but that's not how the courts especially operate. The courts are the primary upkeeper of existing decisions, and this feels sometimes like ossification, sometimes feels like it eats away from the flesh of the nation.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
    It's also been a mere ~2 years since she was appointed.
  - HDThoreaun 3y ago
    cases that lose are not well built. No excuses. Losing a case further entrenches the precedent against you, there's no silver lining.

throwaway128128 3y ago

Biden's had a number of appointments that have been surprisingly on point. I really like how antitrust enforcement is finally, FINALLY getting some teeth.

throe37848 3y ago

Maybe it was her surname. This "hipster antitrust" approach is a nice smoke screen big pharma needs. India and other countries already make generics, there is no need to wait several years for US manufacturers. FTC is just a road block that prevents cheap medical imports.

emodendroket 3y ago
Is it really though. Even with the current level of regulation we have more than enough scandals with, say, artificial tears that blinded people who used them.
- partitioned 3y ago
  FDA should be able to make sure imports are safe
- alwayslikethis 3y ago
  It's all a trade off. We can have more affordable medicine by importing it. This means more people will be able to access it, meaning less bankruptcies, which isn't any good for one's health. Will it be less safe than the ones you can currently get for an exorbitant prices? Marginally, probably. Overall, society can benefit from letting people import their medicine. It will also drive down prices and force big pharma to drop their prices.
  - emodendroket 3y ago
    I don't think cheaper medicine that is likely poison is much of a bargain at all, but what do I know? IP law would seem to me to have more to do with the cost than the heavy hand of regulation.
bigbillheck 3y ago
> Maybe it was her surname. Would you mind expanding on that?

HDThoreaun 3y ago

Khan's utter failure to execute on her goals has imo set back the anti-trust movement in this country heavily. Now every time anti trust gets brought up people think about how the government lost 5 cases in a row and consider it a waste.

nobodyandproud 3y ago
More a warning of how stacked the rules are against anti-trust, after 20-30 years of profitable M&A and other anti-competitive behavior.
jauntywundrkind 3y ago
I hear this bandied about so much, but I've never heard justification that the cases weren't well built or that they weren't good cases to bring. The wicked thing about case law is that it builds and builds. The courts have been extremely pro big business for a long time, and it's hard to figure out how anything ever changes or gets better from here. Trying to right this hell is going to take a lot of miserable attempts that go nowhere. That's what happens when the titans already have all the case law in their favor. Yes that means we need to be very well prepared when we go to battle - try to overturn their legalistic dominance - but I'm glad we are trying, and I'm not sure what better paths are available, not sure what the actual lessons are, not sure what should have been better. It feels like such a slim chance. And trying feels necessary, feels like it has a chance, even if odds aren't great. Something has to be done to let us revisit the past, but that's not how the courts especially operate. The courts are the primary upkeeper of existing decisions, and this feels sometimes like ossification, sometimes feels like it eats away from the flesh of the nation.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
  It's also been a mere ~2 years since she was appointed.
- HDThoreaun 3y ago
  cases that lose are not well built. No excuses. Losing a case further entrenches the precedent against you, there's no silver lining.