Tag Archives: Big Pharma

Buying into USM Inc.

Forbes gave me the news that actually made me livid. I understand that it is done; I can to some degree even accept that it was done, but it angers me, it is beyond acceptable. It shows that we have aligned with a bully for far too long and if I had to try and be diplomatic (which I will not do) is that in this stage is that current President Donald Trump is the biggest piece of filthy shit in the history of mankind (with well over 5000 years of examples), his existence should be regarded on the same level as the essential extinction of the Neanderthal (and equally as long overdue).

Never before have we needed to be so ashamed of a nation (the United States) who through bullying and fear mongering set the stage of exploitation, gave rise to non-elected officials to exploit systems and demolish our way of life. For the first time in history the United States is the largest danger, larger than Russia in the cold war ever was.

Why?

The headline ‘Huawei CEO To Sell Entire 5G Technology Stack To American Companies In Shock Peace Offer To Trump‘ gives rise to a stage where the flaccid and useless technology sector in the Unites States have bullied others into handing over the IP they never worked for. Iteration and complacency got to score a victory like VHS replaced a superior Betamax through the application of mass marketing.

So when we get the quote: “In a shocking move, Zhengfei Ren, the CEO and founder of Huawei offered the ultimate olive branch to the Trump administration: Sell all of the Chinese telecommunications giant’s 5G technology to American companies. The surprising offer, which was reported earlier this week by New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, would essentially allow the U.S. to finally get in the race for 5G supremacy which is now dominated by Chinese firms Huawei and ZTE, Ericsson of Sweden and Nokia from Finland“.

Should actually be phrased as “American companies that have been unable and became too incompetent to innovate mobile opportunities saw fit via the bullying of the current tenant at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW in Washington, D.C. to bully innovators to hand over technology for mere cents on the dollar. Its approach and tactics that would give regard to consideration for Nazi Germany to be seen as a humanitarian organisation has created a state of uncertainty in all of us and has given view to the unacceptable acts from companies and their unwillingness to face up to their own stupidity, which has now forced Chinese to seek an unacceptable point of view, whilst at present the pharmaceutical industries in America are still willing to destroy what was once the cornerstone of innovation, that same tactic of iteration has shown to be the downfall of American Technology and as such America has become a nation that should no longer be regarded as the leader of the free world, but merely an existing vulture to strengthen and prolong exploitation“, I hope that I was clear here?

As such, I have no chance of my own IP, yet I can prolong the cloud of stupidity in America to hand over all my IP over to Huawei hoping that they will optionally reward me, America surely will not and when 400 million small business owners all show the Huawei sign their shopping window, I will feel satisfaction, even if it does not bring me any wealth in the end.

That part was made clear to me when I considered “Ren added that the American licensees will be able to sell their 5G equipment based on Huawei’s intellectual property anywhere in the world, except in China“, I might be able to give Chinese and Middle Eastern commerce a larger boost, giving a larger appearance on how insignificant and trivial American technology has truly become.

I wonder how the EU will be seen in 15 years when the media would start considering to give the actual events the true and correct exposure of what was; when the people realise what a mess the world become due to stupidity and unacceptable support to Wall Street through the American government administrations, when we see on how the ECB with a third stimulus is poisoning wells that were supposed to be protective, all whilst the gravy trains just keep on driving. To be honest, I have never been so ashamed to give any level of credibility to American interests in the near past. The events from the last 6 months alone give rise to the change of venue away from the US, away from the EU and on the condition of a large muzzle on the head of the ECB.

Part of me finds the rage within me uplifting, I have not been this angry for well over half a decade. The article (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeanbaptiste/2019/09/12/huawei-ceo-to-sell-entire-5g-technology-stack-to-american-companies-in-shock-peace-offer-to-trump) is short and to the point, and I wonder how that idiot with a bad haircut will degrade news into some form of tweeting victory (the one using @realDonaldTrump); even as we see that Huawei clearly won the European war against the American trade bully, we need to realise that ALL our IP is now in danger. If America can resort to this against a tech giant like Huawei, what will it do to anyone that gets in its way of not being pronounced bankrupt? When idiots of that calibre remain in denial of their national debt of well over $22 trillion, with no chance of resolving that debt, when it ignores the never ending exploitation by ‘Big Pharma’ and when Wall Street is not held to account on their actions, we are no longer free, we are merely pawns in a corporatocracy and America is actively dragging Japan and the EU with itself so it can present and delusional consider itself as remaining afloat.

Holy cow, I am so angry today!

you see, I was always of the mind that in this world, in this technology the most innovative one would win, and that it would be a harsh lesson for America to learn that iterative companies could merely exist, but would remain inferior below the true innovators, the fact that we see that this is no longer the case and we remain ruled by foul mouthed bullies is a reality that overwhelmed me to the largest degree. Even now earlier this week when Brad Smith, top lawyer to Microsoft hands out that the Trump Huawei ban made no sense, we now see the truth of the matter. It was merely mind over matter, China initially did not mind, because America did not matter anymore, how wrong we all are! We are being played by the bully and everyone dances (especially the politicians).

It merely gives rise to the fact that we have no freedom, we have no rights, and the rights are only there where corporations accept us to have any. Be honest, how many of you signed up for that? That is the real danger of a corporatocracy, in that stage your right to exist and your rights as a person are linked to how profitable and applicable you are in its workforce. You are either a consumer and an asset, or a liability and a burden (or was that the other way round), at that point there are no equal rights, when you stop being part of the gains spreadsheet of corporations your value becomes nil and that realisation will be scary soon enough. It goes beyond mere age discrimination, race discrimination or religious discrimination, it becomes populist acceptance, the consumer, the user and accepting and paying individual is in the populist group, the rest is not, it is an accelerated and extreme version of those who have and those who have not, those who ‘have not’ would be removed from life, support and consideration.

If we take a step back then I would agree that I was not happy that China had won the 5G fight, I preferred it to be European players like Nokia, yet I accepted it as I clearly saw 4 years of pure innovation by Huawei. Apple with it proclaimed innovation was merely iterative and yes Samsung did have innovations, yet Huawei won and technology leaped forward, to see the events that followed, instigated by a loser named America was just disgusting.

If I had one wish to be granted, then it is that every fear mongering journalist, politician, technologist and reporter who pushed for the fear mongering of ‘Huawei spy risk‘ would be engraved on a monument that showed how these people are too unacceptable to be allowed to exist in this world. I prefer them to be hung, but their actions are not illustrated in any Criminal law act, so that would be an illegal action, and I still believe in the law (for now). However, just like we hung every German in Nuremburg who had the default defence of ‘Befehl ist befehl‘ , we get to engrave the fear mongering and misrepresenting facilitators named on a monument (preferably in the form of a flaccid penis) with the consideration texts on a brass cock ring stating: ‘Most stupid person on the planet‘. People who will hide behind ‘I was misinformed‘, ‘I was led to believe‘ and: ‘this is what they told me‘. People like that should not be allowed to carry titles like ‘Journalist’ they should never again be allowed to be part of news publications and never be given the consideration of credibility ever again.

That part is also seen in Forbes when we see: “U.S. companies would be allowed to modify as they see fit the software code used to run any of Huawei’s 5G equipment or even change it and use their own. That way, they will be able to avoid any fears that the Chinese company might be able to access these licensed American made 5G telecommunications gears to spy for the Chinese government“, it gives Huawei additional consideration, especially as the entire Chinese government spy part was NEVER proven, or clear evidence was ever presented to that effect.

Wow, I am still angry!

It bleeds my heart that we (mainly politicians) gave in to America in unproven ways again. Just like there were no WMD’s, there was no Chinese government espionage evidence. This level of injustice and the way some players got here makes me sick to my stomach and there is actually no chance that this feeling will improve over the next day. Too many people will soon realise that they have been pushed into a state where we were treated to the presentation of the United States Manure corporation (USM Inc.), all sold via corporations and too many players were eager to deal this stuff to the populations at large like they were golden covered chocolate truffles.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

The cost of doing Business

It is the guardian again, not in anything specific; however generically speaking there is an issue that requires visibility.

Let’s take a look at the following headlines: “Ebola is in America – and within range of Big Pharma“, “How bet365 profits from Chinese punters who risk jail for gambling” and “Brutal competition batters supermarkets the world over“, here is the cost of doing business.

How is it relevant?

That is the first part, this is not about relevance, and also, these issues are not linked (as far as I can tell), but they do have something in common (other than that they were all in the Guardian on October 5th 2014). Let’s take a look at big pharma. The article comes from Julia Kollewe and is a good read, from the article I got the following parts:

Unfortunately, the standard economic model for drug development, in which industry takes all of the risk in R&D and gets a return on investment from successful products, does not work for diseases that primarily impact low-income countries and developing healthcare systems” and “GSK is developing a malaria vaccine that could be ready late next year and is expected to be sold on a not-for-profit basis. Its success rate was only about 30% in infants but better in toddlers, although final clinical results and data on the effect of a booster are still due“, last there is “Turner says two commissions are looking at alternative financial models. One idea is that governments could underpin the economic cost of drug development by committing early to buy the first 2m doses of a new vaccine, for example“. How is any of this ‘just accepted’? Let’s take a look at GlaxoSmithKline. It made 25 billion in 2013 with a net income of well over 5 billion (20% net income is amazingly good). Is that not enough? Is the issue not on how they come up with something, how it becomes a solution and then they make a fortune. So, why must they get ‘a set government incentive’? Why are we allowing for governments to bank on failure? Is their continued existence not based upon proven success? Now let’s take a look at the BBC article from May 10th 2012 (at http://www.bbc.com/news/business-17993945) where we see: “The programme obtained confidential tax agreements detailing plans to move profits off-shore to avoid what was a 28% corporate tax rate at the time. Those involved include pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)“. So, not only are they ‘avoiding’ certain due invoices to the Coffers of Osborne, they want pre-ordered and ordained solutions? An anointed decree of set maximised profits. It reads like these boards of directors have a spine no stronger than a paperback, one that is comprised of balance sheets I might add.

So, as we say goodbye on how big pharma will find new ways to get loads of cash on possible medicinal solutions, we should take a look at number two.

Brutal competition batters supermarkets the world over’, the article states ‘observer writers’ yet gives us no names. When we look at certain parts we see a view that is incomplete, but seemingly not inaccurate “Aldi has made huge gains in market share in Australia, from about 3% in 2005 to 10% this year“, this means that the two running the show (Coles and Woolworths), will get a third to deal with. There is more to the entire situation, as we look at the price of milk in Australia “The battle for the hearts and dollars of Australian consumers has distressed the dairy industry, threatened small shopkeepers and prompted a Senate inquiry“, yet is that it? Consider that the dairy market is suddenly downgraded in revenue in excess of 20%, how can that be fair or even good to the supplier and when that is no longer an option, how will the consumer pay for milk when offers will dwindle to 2 suppliers? Then what will the market do?

Last there is ‘Revealed: how bet365 profits from Chinese punters who risk jail for gambling online’, which is an interesting article by Simon Goodley. It is the subtitle that gets us the first part “Bookmaker ‘rotates website addresses to keep ahead of authorities’, says employee“, which already implies that the cost of doing business and ethics are no longer in synch with one another. Ethicality has become a nuisance, especially when a business is actively ‘keeping ahead of the authorities‘.

Then we read “The gambling group says its legal advice is that it has broken no law by taking bets from the country“, is a local law the only part of legality?

When we consider Part 2 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 (UK), we see at sections 44 through to 46, three inchoate offences of intentionally encouraging or assisting an offence; encouraging or assisting an offence believing it will be committed; and encouraging or assisting offences believing one or more will be committed. Is that not the implied part of the ‘alleged’ crime when we see the term ‘keeping ahead of the authorities’?

When we look at section 48(3) we see that a person can only be found guilty of the offence under section 46 (encouraging or assisting offences believing that one or more will be committed) if the offence or offences that the jury find the defendant believed would be committed are specified in the indictment. Yet, this is not enough, for the most, it is not clear to me whether this applies to crimes outside the UK, however In Part 1 section 4 we see “For the purposes of section 1(1)(a), a person has been involved in serious crime elsewhere than in England and Wales if he;

(a) has committed a serious offence in a country outside England and Wales;
(b) has facilitated the commission by another person of a serious offence in a country outside England and Wales; or
(c) has conducted himself in a way that was likely to facilitate the commission by himself or another person of a serious offence in a country outside England and Wales (whether or not such an offence was committed).”

This seems to give enough to warrant it all (if the Jury would agree on this). So why is there such an abundance of acts and actions?

You see, the three articles are unrelated, but together they show a massive change in morale and ethics, the kind that people tend not to get back from. This might be the UK (to some extent), but it is clear that these events have been a fact in the US and are starting to get a more stringent grip to the acts of people in both Canada and Australia.

Now for the part that is linking these three views together. Let’s be clear, that this is a personal link, and as such it is debatable on many levels and also that is up to you to agree and disagree. I am not here to path the road for you, I merely speak of where the next place is, and how you get there is up to you. The press seems to favour emotion over logic (to a certain degree), you see, logic is all about reasoning and emotion is about (rashly) acting. The press gets more signals from the emotional reader, so as we react to soaps and reality TV, the press is having a field day cashing in on a league of events, all informative (in their viewpoint), yet overall not that result driven. Is it for that reason that we see a growing calendar on ‘human events’?

As we look at the big pharma piece we see a growing lack of ethicality. They state one thing, whilst pressing other avenues. The statement of moving in one direction, yet not willing to go the entire distance is something entirely unacceptable. We see the stories on how it is all so expensive to create a drug, yet the other side is not told, on how the top 20 are making in excess of half a trillion dollars, whilst in addition their net revenue is around 25%, which is one of the strongest profit margins. At this point we need to take a look at the initial premise of ‘pre-ordaining’ 2 million vaccines. How unbalanced is all this and with margins that large, why are they allowed these tax breaks?

The Bet365 issue could be regarded as an act, likely to be recklessly criminal. If there was no crime, these places could live on a static IP and we would not see the phrase ‘keeping ahead of the authorities‘. We have entered a stage of living where morality is not just taking a backseat, it is leaving the room, add to that a rapidly declining system of ethics and we end up with a change into chaos. You would wonder how a government would allow for that. Well, that is where the issue becomes murky. I think that for some time now, we have been living under a false pretence. Not unlike Sweden, where in 1917 the King’s powers were considerably reduced, becoming a figurehead with only limited political authority. A change that was done in that case for the good of the Swedish people, yet in many other nations big business made a similar change, only they did not remove power of those elected, as a long term strategy they placed themselves ABOVE the law. This is shown in several of my blogs and the acts BBC showed involving GlaxoSmithKline is only the smallest of examples. I discussed this in my blog ‘The Sanctimonious pretender‘ on August 30th where I stated: ‘Big firms consider leaving the Netherlands, says KPMG report‘, the quote “Some of the Netherlands’ biggest companies are considering leaving the country because of the worsening climate for entrepreneurs, according to a new report by consultants group KPMG“. Well, this is not about worsening climates, this is because nations with a monarchy require a fair bit of accountability, which is why the Netherlands and the United Kingdom has seen much stronger measures for the protection of the people and less so in favour of Big Business.

It is important that we seek solutions that require accountability for all, not just those who are not too rich. It is a tall order, but it can be done if we work together. We accept that there is a cost of doing business, but the view as agreed upon seems to differ as to what big business accepts as a valid cost and what everyone else thinks is a valid cost.

In a world of rapid degeneration of values like Ethics, Morality and Accountability we need to make sure that we see a stronger focus in these three values, if not, standing up to big business might no longer be an option.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics