If the hypothesis is that money has power, then the drug companies should have sufficient power, unless someone else with more money was pushing this policy through. Since the point of your argument is that people are more or less powerless, it can't be them. It is unlikely some other major financial power (banks, oil companies, who else? Gun, alcohol, media, cigarettes to an extent...) pushed this through.
So either you have: Some major financial power deliberately hitting drug companies (internal conflict) or you have politicians that aren't following the money = absolute power hypothesis.
And why do people keep getting banned? I'm confused.
|