What incentive does a drug company have into spending millions of dollars researching and developing a product to maybe reap benefits 40 years in the future? In a similar situation, I would move onto something more lucrative in a reasonable time frame. It's conceivable to imagine an industry completely stifled by having extremely high barriers to market entry.
Additionally, imagine being forced to use research that is at least 40 years behind the curve (undoubtedly it'll be more), when the new is available.
I understand you may have been exaggerating -- but this is still a good point to bring up.
Well, not everything on earth should be done by the private businesses. This one can be financed by the public, knd of like the nuclear bomb and stuff.
Legal mind-enhancing drugs are a great danger to society. They will put everyone in the position where they have to take those drugs, or risk perpetual unemployment. If side effects surface decades later they will cripple entire population of the country because no one will be able to abstain. The same level of danger is not present in any other drug - there is currently no pressure to take drugs on anyone but small group of competitive athletes.
"Legal mind-enhancing drugs are a great danger to society. They will put everyone in the position where they have to take those drugs, or risk perpetual unemployment."
Replace "drugs" with "education", and ask what should be done. Ban learning?
By contrast to drugs, "education" has thousands of years to prove it's long-term medical safety. Different drugs have proven to have all kinds of nasty side-effects to a point where it is normal to hold them all suspect by default.
Sometimes you have to take risks. There is some question as to whether cell phones have long term medical risks, but I bet you use a cell phone (for increased productivity no less).
What incentive does a drug company have into spending millions of dollars researching and developing a product to maybe reap benefits 40 years in the future? In a similar situation, I would move onto something more lucrative in a reasonable time frame. It's conceivable to imagine an industry completely stifled by having extremely high barriers to market entry.
Additionally, imagine being forced to use research that is at least 40 years behind the curve (undoubtedly it'll be more), when the new is available.
I understand you may have been exaggerating -- but this is still a good point to bring up.