Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Firstly what you are referring to as the most egregious is only possible because of the other issues. Cannot all of these problems be directly attributed to government regulations that make it possible for this to happen to begin with?
Duh! Wouldnt more people suffer if no drug is being produced?
You know what? I'm in no mood for coy little word games today. The drug was produced and sold for $50/pill. So don't - just don't - try to pretend the drug wouldn't be produced if it couldn't be sold for $768 per dose. We know it would. Because it was.
Some extortionist creep decided that cancer patients were holding back on him, because once you hold people's lives in your hands, damn, you can squeeze them but good.
Just once, I'd like to see the free-market fetishists stop defending this sort of sociopathic behavior.
That's exactly what the GOP wants. People like your grandmother are looked at as burdens to society by today's conservatives. You'll witness this first hand as this thread goes on. Some of them are unbelievably cruel and inhumane towards their fellow citizens.
Do you think that Universal Healthcare/Socialized Medicine would cure this problem?
This is economics 101 crap but you plainly don’t understand.
Nope. I have plenty of common sense to see that it is wrong to put a price so high on a drug that the people who need it can't afford it. Everyone else sees it because they have common sense as well. It's conservatives who refuse to acknowledge the problem so they create deflections like you're attempting to do.
Its not captalism when the state prevents would be competitors from entering the marketplace. And yet you want more of the same a.k.a. single payer
What do you call this and who does it?
Quote:
One of the FTC’s top priorities in recent years has been to oppose a costly legal tactic that more and more branded drug manufacturers have been using to stifle competition from lower-cost generic medicines. These drug makers have been able to sidestep competition by offering patent settlements that pay generic companies not to bring lower-cost alternatives to market. These “pay-for-delay” patent settlements effectively block all other generic drug competition for a growing number of branded drugs. According to an FTC study, these anticompetitive deals cost consumers and taxpayers $3.5 billion in higher drug costs every year. Since 2001, the FTC has filed a number of lawsuits to stop these deals, and it supports legislation to end such “pay-for-delay” settlements.
The patent is expired on this drug, the question that needs to be answered is why is no one else making it? Why is that?
I can take a guess... The Trump Administration is looking into rolling back the regulatory hurdles that allows things like this to occur.
Could they possibly squash thuggish practice of hiking price of meds BEFORE "rolling back the regulatory hurdles?"
THAN it would all make sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
