A Quote by Amy Klobuchar

Where there's a lack of competition - as we saw with Mylan Pharmaceutical's virtual monopoly on EpiPen - price increases often follow. — © Amy Klobuchar
Where there's a lack of competition - as we saw with Mylan Pharmaceutical's virtual monopoly on EpiPen - price increases often follow.
Over the years, EpiPen's manufacturer, Mylan, made meaningful modifications to its auto-injector pen. The company maintains some important intellectual property around these revisions. Mylan rightly argues that these features differentiate its device.
I am deeply troubled by Mylan's misclassification of the EpiPen as a generic drug.
If a company is not a monopoly, then the law assumes market competition can restrain the company's actions. No problem. If a monopoly exists, but the monopoly does not engage in acts designed to destroy competition, then we can assume that it earned and is keeping its monopoly the pro-consumer way: by out-innovating its competitors.
Whereas a competitive firm must sell at the market price, a monopoly owns its market, so it can set its own prices. Since it has no competition, it produces at the quantity and price combination that maximizes its profits.
Despite the large number of mergers, and the growth in the absolute size of many corporations, the dominant tendency in the American economy at the beginning of [the 20th] century was toward growing competition. Competition was unacceptable...it was not the existence of monopoly that caused the federal government to intervene in the economy, but the lack of it.
You want an idea that turns into a monopoly. But you can't get a monopoly, in a big market right away; too much competition for that.
As the great naturalist Charles Darwin saw clearly, individual and collective interests often coincide, as in the invisible hand narrative. But he also saw that in many other cases, interests at the two levels are squarely in conflict, and that in those cases, individual interests generally trump. That simple observation suggests that market failure is often the result not of insufficient competition (the traditional charge from social critics on the Left), but of the very logic of competition itself.
EpiPen is not unique. It falls into a category of old drugs, many of which should have long been subject to generic competition.
In proportion as the mass of citizens who possess political rights increases, and the number of elected ruler's increases, the actual power is concentrated and becomes the monopoly of a smaller and smaller group of individuals.
Government is the ultimate monopoly. And monopolies, as any economist will tell you, often breed complacency and a lack of innovation.
If somebody has a monopoly position, and wants to keep that monopoly position, it means that you are effectively shutting out competition from other sources.
Like many businessmen of genius he learned that free competition was wasteful, monopoly efficient. And so he simply set about achieving that efficient monopoly.
It is not competition, but monopoly, that deprives labor of its product. Destroy the banking monopoly, establish freedom in finance, and down will go interest on money through the beneficent influence of competition. Capital will be set free, business will flourish, new enterprises will start, labor will be in demand, and gradually the wages of labor will rise to a level with its product.
Videogames based on golf have often been viewed as, to mangle a phrase, a good walk through a virtual world spoiled. Connecting with your virtual golfers has often been as hard for gamers as understanding the sport itself.
WWE is basically scooping up all the talent and making it really difficult. They say they want competition and like competition, but I don't believe that. They are trying to make this a monopoly.
Land monopoly is not only monopoly, but it is by far the greatest of monopolies; it is a perpetual monopoly, and it is the mother of all other forms of monopoly.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!