POLITICS Drug Prices

Discussion in 'Politicants' started by Indy, Feb 8, 2019.

  1. Ssmiff

    Ssmiff Went to the White House...Again

    billions
     
  2. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Founder of the Mike Honcho Fan Club

    Yet Pfizer has a 21% profit margin last quarter despite all of that. Some quarters were as high as 40+%.

    Walmart operates at about 2-4% profit margin as best as I can see. As does Target.

    And all of the big drugs developed these days have heavy government subsidies to help develop them.
     
    justingroves likes this.
  3. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    And a lot of grocery stores operate below 2%. That doesn't mean Wal-Mart is ripping people off. Those are two very different businesses and I don't think comparing their margins is very meaningful.
     
  4. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Founder of the Mike Honcho Fan Club

    Why is it different? Profits are profits are profits. In fact, I would argue it is far more grotesque because of the fact that the pharma companies have a hostage for a client.
     
    JayVols likes this.
  5. Ssmiff

    Ssmiff Went to the White House...Again

    If the time and money needed was reduced to get thru govt hurdles and litigation wasnt so popular, drug prices would reduce. Many good ideas and companies run out of capital to pay the right people.
    Its all as dumb as the political bs to me. 5 billion to bring a drug to market, still prescribed with potential side effects of death, cancer, lymphoma and another 30 seconds of reading off side effects on the commercials. We believe my wife got cancer from an injection. Too hard to prove it. But hey, that drug and all the chemo shes taking now were approved after spending 5 billion to bring to market via fda standards, so thanks FDA for continuing the cycle. Sure am glad that Solara or whatever it was passed your tests and paid their fees
     
  6. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    if one ignored literally the entire rest of western civilization, this would be a conclusion one could reach if they worked from the premise of "regulation bad." granted, the FDA system needs reform. but it isn't much different from its peers in other places without our price problem.
     
  7. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    21% is not a grotesque profit margin. Come on.
     
  8. Ssmiff

    Ssmiff Went to the White House...Again

    litigation is a huge difference. Americans sue. by the way, One of my products is finally being looked at by the FDA. One of 9 of 250 applicants to be looked at as a product/service effective in reducing narcotic need. We've treated over 7000 patients and shown reduction of need and pain in the vast majority, but most insurances won't approve due to no "proof". After 11 years they are finally going to look further at us. The whole system is jacked up. I've been in it from pharma side in the 90's and medical or a mix from 2000 on. Reform is an understatement. When guidelines of treatment are from studies in the 60's, with technology advances, its a problem
     
  9. TennTradition

    TennTradition Super Moderator

    Well for starters, the implied market and technological risk of their businesses are very different - and the result is that the companies see a bigger cost of debt (lenders want a premium to loan them money) and cost of equity (investors demand higher returns due to perceived risk). The higher cost of capital basically necessitates a higher profit % for these companies to remain solvent.

    As an industry this is a general statement. It isn’t to say there aren’t bad actors in the middle taking advantage of folks. I also don’t know the market well to say whether their margins are overly healthy or not.
     
  10. warhammer

    warhammer Chieftain

    Why doesn't it?
     
  11. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    Chicks dig jerks.
     
  12. warhammer

    warhammer Chieftain

    You got that right.
     
  13. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Founder of the Mike Honcho Fan Club

  14. kmf600

    kmf600 Energy vampire

    Hmmm, drug companies bribing doctors to prescribe their drugs. Next thing you'll want to tell me drug companies are bribing politicians
     
    justingroves likes this.
  15. IP

    IP Super Moderator

  16. Volst53

    Volst53 Super Moderator

    one of the most regulated markets in the country by the government, yet it’s free market forces driving the cost up.

    If companies couldn’t keep competition out of by the market, by using the same people you want more of being over it.

    You wouldn’t see 30 year old drugs being that expensive
     
  17. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    it isn't a free market. that was my point. it can't be a free market by its nature.
     
  18. Volst53

    Volst53 Super Moderator

    With that logic, almost any essential object or service can be ran by market forces.

    I don’t subscribe to that chain of thought.
     
  19. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    what is a life-essential object or service that is free from regulation or subsidy?
     
  20. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Founder of the Mike Honcho Fan Club

    These sorts of practices that this company apparently engaged in is what makes me skeptical of a free market approach, especially one where copyrights are extended for such a long period of time or simply repackaging of the drug allows them to almost permanently extend its copyright.

    I just don't have faith in Corporations to do the right thing.
     

Share This Page