Jump to content
Thai Visa Forum

Thomas J

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Thomas J

  1. 2 hours ago, Surelynot said:

    Who is talking about confiscating profits?

    You are


    If you take away their patent protections, that gives the right for any competitor to manufacturer the vaccine with nothing paid to whoever formulated it.  

    Comrade Surelynot, 

    Since you are against companies profiting from the Covid pandemic, I suggest you co-sponsor legislation calling it the Surelynot altruistic act.  It would require companies not to act out of a profit motive but only for the good of mankind.  

    Since you don't think the companies who came up with the vaccines deserve to profit, why stop there?  Why should any company profit from the pandemic and responding to it.  Here are a list of companies who also profited from the pandemic.  I would suggest that given your nature you can even come up with more companies.  


    Clorox – Profits from bleach to kill the virus

    Cardinal Health for personal protective gear

    GOJO Industries and others – For hand santizers
    3M – for masks
    Abbot and others – For Covid Test Kits

    Gilliad –For Remedsivir treatment of Covid

    Baxter- For medical infusion bags and tubes

    Becton,Dickinson & Others – Syringes to administer vaccine

    Medtronic, GE & others – For manufacturing hospital patient ventilators
    UPS, Fed EX, & DHL- Transporting the vaccine and Covid related supplies
    Walgreen, CVS, Rite Aid & others – For dispensing the Covid Vaccine
    American, United Delta & Others – For flying the vaccine & supplies
    Amazon, Walmart, Target & others – For selling masks, hand sanitizer & gloves

    Now when you are done removing all the profit incentive from companies who are trying to help with the pandemic, let me know how that works out. 

  2. 2 hours ago, Surelynot said:

    Pfizer's posts $4.9B 1Q profit as vaccine strategy pays off

    Selling vaccines during a pandemic has boosted Pfizer’s bottom line and proven that a strategy it embarked upon over a decade ago is now paying off handsomely

    Again, so what.  That is what companies do. They invest, take a risk hoping that it pays off.  You would not be shedding any tears for them, if Pfizer spent a billion on vaccine research and it failed.  Again, you want them to spend the money, take the risk and then if successful take the gain away.  


  3. 1 minute ago, Surelynot said:

    To the best of my knowledge Moderna and Pfizer are making an absolute fortune out of the virus.......read the financial news......AZ isn't because the UK government funded everything from day one.



    So what if they are making a fortune from it.  Amazon is making a fortune and its success is entirely contingent on the internet which was developed by the U.S. military.  Does that give the USA the right to confiscate Amazon?  NASA invented Teflon and Velcro.  Do you then confiscate all the profits made by companies using those?   The U.S. government developed the GPS system.  So do you take a piece of Garmin, Tom Tom, and of course Google because of Google Maps. 

    I have repeatedly said, IF there was any agreement that the government would pay companies for their research and the agreement stipulated that the vaccines developed were the property of the government than it should make those vaccines an open source. 

    However that was not the agreement.  Those companies diverted their research resources as requested.  Pfizer specifically declined any government funding.  The fact they are making money from it is a good thing not a bad thing.  Would you preferred they were unsuccessful and lost money but there was no vaccine. 

    Russia in 1917 took private property and redistributed it for the "common good"  Cuba following its revolution took properties broke up large farms and redistributed them "for the common good"  

    This is no different.  These companies did what they were asked and now exactly because they are successful you believe they should have that success taken away.  So is the issue their profits or is it their inability to meet production?  

    If it is profits, I suggest that getting a vaccine that potentially saves my life for $39 USD for two shots from Pfizer, $32 for two shots from Moderna, and $10 USD for one shot from Johnson & Johnson are a bargain.  Those costs include packaging, shipping, and the person injecting the vaccine.  

    If it is production then facilitate and orchestrate the licensing of their vaccine with others.  Allow them to do as they do with other drugs receive compensation for their licensing. 






  4. 2 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

    .as in preventing a world pandemic (or bringing it under control) to prevent millions of deaths ...........now how on earth might that be for the good of the public?......Much better to see profits maximized and dividends paid surely?

    Again, THESE COMPANIES DID EXACTLY THAT.  They came up with the vaccine for bringing the world pandemic under control.  That is what the government ASKED THEM TO DO

    If just as in WWII the government wishes to take private property for THE WAR EFFORT it should pay for that taking.   I see nothing wrong with mandating that those companies hit production targets and forcing them to subcontract.  But, to just say, thanks for the billions you spent and congratulations on coming up with a vaccine but now we are going to just give it away to your competitors is worse than communism. 

    If the government wants to BUY THE PATENT then it should do so.  If the government under the War Powers Act wants to mandate production to a private company it should facilitate contracts between the vaccine companies and other sub contractors.  That is not maximizing profits, that is preserving the private enterprise system that operates on the basis of private individuals/companies investing money, taking risk and reaping the fruits of their labors.  

  5. 21 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

    Beer isn't there for the collective good..........a patent free virus for fighting a world pandemic.....mmmmm???

    As said what gives you and others the idea that somehow because it is deemed to be in the good of the public provides the right to confiscate another property without confiscation escapes me. 

    The current system is actually worse than communism.  At least in communism the government owns everything and is responsible for investing its money and if a venture proves unsuccessful takes the loss. 

    Here you have the government pleading with private pharmaceutical companies to use 'THEIR RESOURCES' to come up with a vaccine.  Some like Pfizer, Moderna, were successful.  Others like Merck were not.  So you think it is OK to say to Pfizer and Moderna well you use YOUR MONEY, TIME AND RESOURCES as we asked and now we are going to just confiscate your patent and give it away and to Merck well sorry for your losses but we do appreciate your time and effort. 

    In WWII the War Production Act 'confiscated" public property for the war effort.  

    The Lionel toy train company started producing items for warships, including compasses.

    Ford Motor Company produced B-24 Liberator bombers. 

    Alcoa, the aluminum company, produced airplanes.

    The Mattatuck Manufacturing Company, which had made upholstery nails, switched to making cartridge clips for Springfield rifles.

    Would it have been OK for them to expect that the companies were not paid?  After all it was a world crisis.  

    The changing of laws to suit the aims of government means there are no laws.  That is a a banana republic where businesses shy away from because they can not count on anything being permanent.  One thing is for sure, if the patents do get vacated the next time there is a world crisis the pharmaceutical companies will be loathe to invest their money, time and effort for a solution knowing that it the end, even if successful they will lose the asset they created.  Nice Outcome. 

  6. Just now, Surelynot said:

    I would have look back through a lot of posts.......but I am pretty sure this will still prove to be the biggest load of dross I have read on TVN

    You should certainly know, you shovel a lot of it. 

    I have no idea why people think that just because "you want it" or need it, it is OK to have the government confiscate it.  The major asset of a pharmaceutical company is its patents.  The taking of those is no different than a government taking of land to build a school.  The landowner is owed compensation for its loss.  

    To think that it is ok for any government to take what belongs to a private individual or company strictly because it wants to is the very essence of communism.  That nothing is truly privately owned but it is all there for the collective good. 

  7. 16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

    1. Individual sovereign nations have the absolute right to ignore the patents and can be expected to do so if it is in their national interest to do so. India and Cuba are two examples of nations with a history of ‘patent busting’ essential medicines

    Sounds like a real communistic thing to do.  Ask private enterprise to come to assist and when they respond confiscate the fruits of their labor. 

    What is next, in your mind.  Confiscating land to put up windmills because it is in the nations interest in having more wind turbines.  How about requiring Tesla to divulge all its secrets to the other car manufacturers because it is deemed important for their "national interest"  Now if you are confiscating the Covid vaccine, why stop there.  Why not require the pharmaceutical companies to divulge all of their research to their competitors because to do so would increase production, lower costs and be beneficial to the national interest.  

    The confiscation of property is "Communism"  In the USA even the taking of land under the right of eminent domain requires the government pay for the taking.  As previously stated if you void the patent now, do you really believe the pharmaceutical companies will be so eager to help the next time they are called on.  The right thing to do is to establish required production numbers.  If the company has to "license" its vaccine to others to produce in order to meet those numbers then it will be able to contract with other pharma companies to meet those numbers.  If the government wants to negate the patent then just like taking of land to build a highway, school, or urban renewal project, the government should then BUY THE PATENT and then it would be free to give it away if it so chooses.  

    One of the reasons that companies don't locate in countries with unstable political systems is that they fear that the rules today get changed and they can't establish what their permanent rights are.  That is exactly what you are suggesting is OK in the USA/World is to change the rules and just take what others invested their time and money on.  That breeds a mind set that "if they did it once, then why won't they come for my next vaccines, medicine, or medical device" on the premise that it is in their national interest.  So the long term effect would be a cautiousness to invest large sums of money fearing that the fruits of those would only be confiscated.  

    If the government wants to give them away, it should do the right thing and pay for that.  Otherwise it should have negotiated up front to pay those companies for their efforts to find a vaccine with the agreement that the product of those efforts belonged to the government not the company. 

  8. 5 minutes ago, billd766 said:

     The Pink ID card is issued at the Amphur on production of your yellow book

    I am residing with my fiance.  She is Thai and owns a home in Pattaya.  I do have a Thai drivers license and previously obtained the residence certificate for both my drivers license and car purchase.  

    Given it is the government I "assume" that won't be enough to get a pink card. 

  9. 3 minutes ago, simple1 said:

    US govt spent $10billion on Operation Warp. How much capital / investment funds did US companies spend on development, how many billions have they already received in orders, boost to stock prices etc. Some companies are already providing Covid vaccine at cost etc. Plus of course if the developers went ahead with now providing  IP to offshore manufacturers they likely would claim billions in tax write offs.. In any case US pharma developers have been ripping off the US public for decades with exorbitant profits

    You miss the point.  Irrespective of how much money the government spent.  THEY ASKED THE COMPANIES FOR ASSISTANCE.   If it was agreed to in advance that the government would "fund" the research but in return they would have to forfeit their rights to patent protection OK.  However that is not my understanding.  

    These are PRIVATE companies.  Do you favor confiscating TESLA's secrets and passing them on to competitors because you desire to speed up production and sale of electric vehicles.  You say that these companies made money.  First off so what.  Secondly that ignores the numerous companies who invested their own money in a Covid Vaccine and then abandoned the research after they saw that other companies had reached the finish line first. 

    What you are really advocating is a "communistic taking" of private property for the public.  Again, if those companies can not meet production targets they should be given at least the right to contract with other suppliers to license their vaccine not have the government confiscate the fruits of its research to be given to competitors. 

    While you may think that is good public policy. I would suggest that the next time the world needs to solicit their help in fighting a medical emergency you will get few volunteers since they will see that those who waited, spent nothing, got the same reward as those who spent their money, invested their time, and successfully came up with a cure. 

  10. Now just to walk you through this scenario.  The USA declared Operation Warp Speed that asked the pharmaceutical companies to expend all necessary amounts at breakneck speed to come up with a vaccine for Covid.  They did it.  Now they are suppose to "give" the results to competitors. 

    Now the next crisis occurs and again the government implores pharmaceutical companies to come up with a cure a vaccine or a treatment to "save us"  What incentive does the company now have to spend hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars to solve the problem, knowing that if they just wait, they will get the benefit of other companies developments for free.  As a result, everyone sits around waiting for the other guy. 

    I recognize the imperative of getting as much vaccine as possible as soon as possible.  However instead of "confiscating" their patent protections they should work with those companies to come up with a plan to meet certain production capacity.  If the developing company can not come up with the necessary production and has to outsource it, the developing company should be allowed to negotiate with other companies to license its vaccine so that it is compensated for the investment and risk it took in developing it.  To do otherwise just insures they will have little incentive to respond in the future when called upon. 

  11. On 5/2/2021 at 4:07 PM, maddermax said:

    Just can't do it cause everything is in Thai.  HELP !!!!

    You might want to try this.  It is a bit cumbersome but it works.  I use a computer but I have also used two cell phones.  On sites that allow me to translate using google translate I just click on it and it translates the page.   For some items particularly those using graphics that won't translate, I use my cell phone and go to Google on my cell phone and click the picture icon next to the search box.  One of the options is translate.  You point the phone camera to the text or image you want to translate and it will do so.  You can either read it as it is being translated or copy it with the translation listed like a subtitle. 

    • Like 1
  12. 3 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

    The hospitals are now using electronic system, not relying on cards, for both the 30 baht system and Social Security


    However she should be able to pre-register for a hospital number, which will save a little time later


    As long as her ID card shows her as living in Bang Lamang district she won't have a problem.

    Thank you.  Trying to obtain information from hospital personnel or the internet is like grabbing smoke.  You can see it, smell it, but can't grab a hold of it. 

  13. 6 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

    I have yet to meet a Thai who was not thoroughly familiar with this so I wonder if something got lost in translation in your discussions with her, or if she is being less than honest for some reason.

    Thanks Sheryl, 

    As always you are a wealth of information.  No, she lived out of the country for over 20 years and has only recently returned.  Now, we went yesterday to Bang Lamung hospital which "I believe" is the hospital she would be required to go to.  Her home is in Huay Yai close to the Floating Market.  She was told no they didn't issue cards.  If she required treatment for anything she would have to show up at 8:00 a.m. and register and then the hospital would issue her a card.  I found this strange since I traveled to Queen Sirikit hospital as a foreigner to get some information on Cataract surgery.  Despite that I am not covered by any Thai insurance and I never received a consultation, they signed me up with an ID card.  As I understand it, this card if given to any hospital tracks my medical history.   So I am wondering if she needs to go back to the local government clinic in the area or back to Bang Lamung to sign up for the 30 baht program or just wait until she does need any treatment as the  representative from Bang Lamung hospital stated. 

  14. 2 hours ago, webfact said:

    However, people wanting the Moderna jab would still have to register on "Mor Prom" as data must be collected.


    I guess I need someone to explain the OP.  First, why would foreigners have to register with Mor Prom if they are getting their vaccine from a private hospital.  Second, if they do have to register, how do they do it?  It asks for your Thai ID.  Does that mean every foreigner will need to go to the local Amphur and get a Pink Card?  Now if Mor Prom contacts you, does that mean it is the government contacting you for an Astra Zeneca or Sinovac injection, or does it mean you have the opportunity to go to a private hospital to receive the Moderna, Johnson & Johson, or Pfizer vaccine assuming they hospitals have them. 

  15. My fiance is Thai but has never registered for the Thai healthcare program.  I have heard about the 30 baht plan but don't know if that is the general plan for everyone or just for a certain group of people.  Does she have to register?  If so, where does she do it and is there an advantage to doing it versus her just going to one of the hospitals in the event she needs treatment??

  16. 7 hours ago, Surelynot said:

    Can't have your cake and eat it........any vaccine going into the arm of a foreigner is a vaccine not going into the arm of a Thai.................we might see that private vaccinations are no longer an option to be considered.

    That is true and that is probably why you will not see any vaccines in the private hospitals anytime soon.  Assuming they were available, I don't see any problem with those who pay getting them.  That "may not be fair" however life is not fair.  Those willing to pay fly first class while those who don't pony up fly coach.  But I am not holding my breath that the private hospitals will be getting any vaccine until such time as the government gets all that it wants first. 

  17. Just now, Surelynot said:

    and one way of protecting their citizens is to ensure there isn't a significant group of individuals who remain unvaccinated and capable of spreading the disease.


    However.......the consequences of not vaccinating "us" could bring the same result......if 100,000 expats receive a vaccine......100,000 Thais won't........maybe you are right??????

    I see your point, however if the Thai's are vaccinated first then they won't get the Covid. 

    However, as said, any government should always put itself and its citizens first in terms of policies.  I get infuriated when I read back in the USA things like those who entered the country illegally getting free hotels rooms, food, and their children being given private teachers while U.S. citizens have their children's schools closed.  I am a guest here. 

    Now, with that said, I see nothing wrong with the private hospitals if they have a supply of the vaccine providing it to Expats for a fee while while Thai's who are getting it free may have to wait in line. 


    • Like 1
  18. 11 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

    Of course, this damage is not easily measurable or as dramatic as Covid harm

    Doctors take an oath to "do no harm"  I am not sure what is being done today follows that principle.

    The trouble with the approach that is taken today is exactly as you describe.  Not dramatic.  So you don't get fifty headlines each day about yet another 5 workers at this store that closed, or 10 at this restaurant that can't pay their bills.  Is Covid something to be concerned about - Yes.  However it has become all consuming.  The steps they have taken have yet to be proven to truly have any marked impact on reducing the spread of the virus.  And since we are now on our third wave, even if it had some positive effect, that is lost as soon as those controls are relaxed.  The benefit of those draconian measures is "conjecture" but the impact on the economy, peoples income, loss of home, car, food shortages, etc is a "certainty"  
    Did Sweden do it right?  Who knows but based on what I see, their outcome is not materially different to most of Europe yet as you say, the impact on their everyday life has been far less punitive. 


    • Like 2
  • Create New...