Well...as to the charging more in the US for drugs, than abroad....this is because most countries (especially Canada and those in Europe) regulate the amount drug companies can charge for their products. In many cases, they are NOT allowed to recoup R&D costs....only production costs. They can make a profit off just making the stuff.....but somehow need to recoup the 7+ years of R&D (costs just inventing the product, and passing all the regulatory testing.) The US market bears that cost, for the most part. Which is why we pay so much for our meds. Now...before you guys get on your high horse, and decide "well...we should do the same thing those countries do".....take a moment and think about it. If NO COUNTRY allows for the pharma company to recoup the R&D costs....guess what.....there will be NO R&D....meaning NO NEW DRUGS. Do you want to pay low-cost the rest of your life....or do you want them (pharma companies) to actually invent new cures?
Yes, I know that.
And my point was that we the US consumer are paying the Lion's share of that R&D which the rest of the world enjoys.
And my point was that we the US consumer are paying the Lion's share of that R&D which the rest of the world enjoys.
If you're cool with that then ok.
I'm NOT cool with it. BUT...our choices (though I'm open to hear other options) are:
A) Refuse to pay for it as well...in which case all R&D ceases to happen for future breakthroughs; or
B) Force the other countries to pay their full share (good luck with that one).
I'm NOT cool with it. BUT...our choices (though I'm open to hear other options) are:
A) Refuse to pay for it as well...in which case all R&D ceases to happen for future breakthroughs; or
B) Force the other countries to pay their full share (good luck with that one).
I don't really see an easy solution here.
No, it's not an easy solution.
Nor do I think we are ever gonna solve anything anyways, given the nature of partisian politics that has reduced the national dialogue in this country to that of some bitter divorced couple incessantly bickering.
The mere topic of health care reform in America is very divisive.
I did want to add that I'm really impressed by what I feel to be the passionate concern for the health care issues by the ones who have posted here. To me, these spirited discussions show that people really care for others, and we're all frustrated by the inneffective approach used by our political leaders.
I think that NiceGuy should run for office. He'd get my vote any day of the week.
I don't know if others heard about the Federal Judge who has demanded that the Justice Department frame a position statement from the white house, based on President Obama's speech Monday in the Rose Garden, where he said that he expected the unelected judges to support the law of a democratically elected Congress. But I couldn't help mentally picturing some guy or woman, a legal expert who thought all was happy and wonderful in the world, getting tapped on the shoulder within thirty minutes, being "informed" that he/she was chosen to write the first draft of the reply.
"You want me to write what???"
"Ummm ... can we just say that we were pulling their leg??"
I missed this the first time, but am truly at a loss over this requirement by the Fifth Circuit. While it may have been unwise, what Obama said was no different that any other rant made about activist judges. He was defending the law, perhaps to get some influence. But I certainly did not see how he was calling into question the Supreme's ability to strike down the law.
A writer on CNN called it a "hissy fit" and I have to say I agree with that.
I mean seriously, at least three pages, single spaced? Did it also include what the lawyers did over their summer break?
I won't say there's price fixing, but it's like buying a car on the internet. Everyone knows what you know they know. So there's almost zero price variation across the whole market. And this results in an oligopolistic model that is structurally very strong and results in somewhat the same thing as a cartel. It would be better for everyone in the long run to follow a more regulated price structure similar to the way regulated utilities operate. There's a negotiated min and max profit margin and the end consumer costs are held in those boundaries. It's really no different than extending the Medicare part B price model to the whole market space. But affixing the return REGARDLESS of how the payment is made or from whom.
Wow...I have been away for only a week. So many comments I want to respond to but I will not.
All I am going to say is this. It appears that everybody on this thread has given more thought on the subject then the elected officials that passed 1200 pages of poo into law.
I won't say there's price fixing, but it's like buying a car on the internet. Everyone knows what you know they know. So there's almost zero price variation across the whole market. And this results in an oligopolistic model that is structurally very strong and results in somewhat the same thing as a cartel. It would be better for everyone in the long run to follow a more regulated price structure similar to the way regulated utilities operate. There's a negotiated min and max profit margin and the end consumer costs are held in those boundaries. It's really no different than extending the Medicare part B price model to the whole market space. But affixing the return REGARDLESS of how the payment is made or from whom.
Dog,
All it takes is one to break the cartel.
When people are free to shop - and there are many suppliers - magic happens.
So - will the Supreme Court vote also follow party lines?
The beauty of the Court is that they don't have to worry about getting re-elected. So - to while in their hands - hopefully the issues are properly addresses and no longer politicized.
If even they come back with a party-lined vote - it might be time to give up and move to Canada.
When people are free to shop - and there are many suppliers - magic happens.
Price elasticity only functions in an efficient market and one where the buyer can purchase from a widely dispersed array of suppliers. I'm not driving a thousand miles for a CAT scan.
Price elasticity only functions in an efficient market and one where the buyer can purchase from a widely dispersed array of suppliers. I'm not driving a thousand miles for a CAT scan.
Add to it that on certain things, people do not associate cheaper with better. I think medical care is one of them. I recognize that part of this is based on others (in the form of insurers) paying for the care, but even when people pay at least a portion fo the cost themselves, advertising a lower cost does nto get the expected result.
Price elasticity only functions in an efficient market and one where the buyer can purchase from a widely dispersed array of suppliers. I'm not driving a thousand miles for a CAT scan.
No one would expect you to.
Yet, there are plenty of services in urban centers.
Let's not pretend there isn't - just so we can centrally plan something very stupid and cumbersome.
Add to it that on certain things, people do not associate cheaper with better. I think medical care is one of them. I recognize that part of this is based on others (in the form of insurers) paying for the care, but even when people pay at least a portion fo the cost themselves, advertising a lower cost does nto get the expected result.
32Likes
Re: Any thoughts on the health care crisis? 
