You are disagreeing not agreeing
Pharma Execs Don't Know Why Anyone Is Upset by a $94,500 Miracle Cure
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
well, just about every problem you cited involved the government. And if the government was not involved I don't know what we would be bitching about.
What I am suggesting is that sometimes private industry leads and we all should benefit from their brilliance without being gouged. And sometimes the government leads with tax dollars and those technologies trickle down to private corporations that then give us great products.
No one says don't make a profit. Just be fair with things that can save peoples lives. Go ahead and charge whatever you want for a yatch or a mansion or a ferrari. No one cares. But people care what you charge for a life saving medicine.
No one says don't make a profit. Just be fair with things that can save peoples lives. Go ahead and charge whatever you want for a yatch or a mansion or a ferrari. No one cares. But people care what you charge for a life saving medicine.
The only reason the internet exists is because the government stepped in to subsidize risky research that the free market was to scared to fund themselves. the thing about innovation is that its risky, and the free market doesnt like the risk so it tries to avoid it or dump the risk on somebody else.
in this case the government took on the risk but let the reward go to others, because the government is infiltrated by the corporations that do this stuff. bought and paid for.
If society has a need, it's not up to the shareholders of the pharma industry to take a loss and meet them.
There's something called an orphan drug program the gubbermint has that funds rare disease drugs that the pharma companies wouldn't do without outside help.
But it brings up a larger question which is what price are taxpayers supposed to pay to save one life? We already have a example in the federal highway system. It is without question that if we lowered the speed limit to progressively lower levels, there would be less auto fatalities. But we don't. Because we have decided as a society that it is too high a price for the other citizens to pay. So letting people die rather than charge the rest of society is not unprecedented. We already do it. And we should keep that in mind when we're talking about gauging pharma companies to save a life.
There's something called an orphan drug program the gubbermint has that funds rare disease drugs that the pharma companies wouldn't do without outside help.
But it brings up a larger question which is what price are taxpayers supposed to pay to save one life? We already have a example in the federal highway system. It is without question that if we lowered the speed limit to progressively lower levels, there would be less auto fatalities. But we don't. Because we have decided as a society that it is too high a price for the other citizens to pay. So letting people die rather than charge the rest of society is not unprecedented. We already do it. And we should keep that in mind when we're talking about gauging pharma companies to save a life.
it's a moot point, if someone needs the drug they are going to get it. If they can't pay the bill they will just declare medical bankruptcy and others will pay in increased costs at the hospital.
you could eliminate private drug companies and just hire government workers to develope drugs, then the government would control all drugs and they could set the price at anything they want, whatever they think is "fair"
just what we need, The Department of Drugs
you could eliminate private drug companies and just hire government workers to develope drugs, then the government would control all drugs and they could set the price at anything they want, whatever they think is "fair"
just what we need, The Department of Drugs
that would probably best, as the US government is the number 1 inventor in the world and holds the most patents, means government funded innovation would probably improve society alot more. they just need better work commercializing their patents.
kind of a difference between government, and government funded. Our military innovation is government funded, and we all know how that goes. Bombs are not getting any cheaper.
Everything works just fine according to natural laws and the way God created it until the government gets involved. Then suddenly it is all our problem, or at least anybody that pays taxes.
I have to pay more for a car which has seatbelts, even though I am totally willing to accept the risk (and pleasure) of driving without those uncomfortable burdens. And according to nature and God that would be just fine. But get the government involved and then my risks become a federal big deal.
It's all about your view of man. If you believe man is greedy and would allow another man to die because he didn't have money to pay for care, then you must demand the government does something about it.
If you are like me, and I believe you are, because most people are just like me, due to the fact that I am average, we can figure out how to take care of the sick with no help or intervention from the government.
If you are like me, and I believe you are, because most people are just like me, due to the fact that I am average, we can figure out how to take care of the sick with no help or intervention from the government.