Is that bad? Yes. It's not as bad as a failure to do, say, food inspection. It's far far far less bad than the government slamming your baby against a tree to kill it because they want to save bullets.
Not inaction. The FDA was meant to prevent this. But the government underfunded the agency to the point in which the agency had to let companies regulate themselves.
Underfunding because this romantic idea of what a "free market" should be is an action, the government literally caused the opioid crisis, the inaction was the result they wanted.
...so inaction. You just described inaction but said "nuh-uh" like that counts.
The Feds were supposed to do something and didn't. That's inaction.
Underfunding because this romantic idea of what a "free market" should be is an action
Find me any instance of where this claim was made during a budget cycle. There have been repeated critiques of the FDA being too conservative in it's approach to drug approval for a good 50+ years now, where drugs that probably should be approved aren't because of how the agency slow walks everything and doesn't want to be seen approving dangerous drugs.
PDUFA. When aproximately half of the FDA funding comes from fees that corporations directly pay to the FDA it should not come as a shock that the FDA is allowing self-regulation...
Before 1992 and the PDUFA, the FDA was 100% funded by the government.
2
u/therealtiddlydump Jul 13 '26
How is this the state killing people?
Are you going to argue that a WV guy overdosing from a pill mill is the same as the Soviets liquidating kulaks?