Merck Sues Over Law Empowering Medicare to Negotiate With Drugmakers

[GMDino]

(06-07-2023, 02:36 PM)Dill Wrote: "Wanting more stuff" was M's answer to the question of why, now, so many families have two bread winners; I don't think he classed drugs with "stuff."

I think he wasn't impressed with my framing of the issue in economic terms, with the earning power of families remaining static even with both spouses working. Though the economy has been more productive, a greater share of that value now, proportionally, flows to that top quintile, concentrating wealth at the top.

I don't see recognizing that as "off track" when we are discussing the obscene cost of drugs now, and government efforts to reign them in. Gov. became, in part, the problem when Bush cut negotiation, from the gov. side, out of Big Pharma drug sales to the largest customer in the world--Medicare. 

That looks like corporate "capture" of government, which makes people angry at government and more likely to elect politicians who think less government will be better than good government. 

As the more and more people buy the notion that government is bad, that gives big business a freer rein to do what it wants "freed" from oversight and regulation. 

Also, many people think of drug companies as service- rather than profit-focused, and think of them as the main drivers of research, as opposed to small companies and (often) publicly funded universities. Big companies frequently buy little ones once they have produced something ready for testing and marketing. And public university research is funded by taxpayers--though now we see "partnerships" with corporations which socialize the cost of research--but often not the patents and profits. If you are running Pfizer or Merck or other behemoths, your goal is to harvest profit wherever you can. That can mean doing your own research, or just waiting for some other small company or university to get the ball rolling and then buy in to acquire patents and profits. 

But it largely means charging high prices for drugs to captive customers and telling people it's to recoup research rather than marketing costs. 

To be clear I wasn't implying or saying at all that is what he meant.  Just that no matter what the desire is to buy more stuff this is a separate issue about things we should have to worry about affording.