2024 Field

Carp said:
1. Pharma companies make plenty enough to cover their costs and then about 10 times over. Much of the money Big Pharma spends on "development" is simply buying out smaller pharmaceutical companies (or their patent) that actually did 99% of the work.

2. Since when did I say or even imply that other countries or non-Americans are entitled to the rights of US citizens?
Click to expand...

I don't care how much or how little a company makes. They can charge what they want and if the cost is too high, people won't buy and they will need to lower the costs. I ask you again why do you think Americans dominate drug innovation but Europeans do not? They are incredibly fortunate that we them our drugs for cheaper than Americans are required to pay. The innovation in medicine has been incredible and has led to longer lives. I don't want that innovation to stop because Joe Biden says Phizer isn't allowed to turn a profit. For the record, they got paid for their covid vaccines

2. there are places in America that has no access to electricity. Should a group of energy people be forced to go and build that technology for those areas, free of charge?
 
Carp said:
1. Life saving drugs are developed specifically to save lives. It is unethical to develop life saving drugs and then charge prohibitively high prices for them, particularly while you take money hand over fist from the government while developing the drug. That makes you a monopoly.
Click to expand...

The thought with research and development is that there are significant positive externalities. This implies we should subsidize it. One way to do that is patents, which ensure high profits for a while. It isn't the only way to subsidize something but that's been part of our approach to research and development. High profits are sort of the carrot for ensuring enough R&D takes place.

At the same time there are solid humanitarian and economic reasons for making sure health insurance is universal.

You can have a policy that incentives R&D, which involves high prices and high profits, and a policy to offset those high prices. It seems contradictory but I don't think it is.
 
Carp said:
There is no flawed logic. Do farmers (well any farmer in particular) have a monopoly over food? But more to your point, we do offer food programs for the poor and elderly. I guess we should take those away too, eh? I mean eff those people, let 'em die, amirite?

So border security is something that benefits all Americans, but literal life saving drugs do not.... sure that checks out.
Click to expand...

I'm not following your point. Biopharma isn't a monopoly. There are tons of them. Farmers produce what, 99.9% of food on the planet? And I am against government food programs, correct. The private markets, churches, and charity are substantially better at administrating those programs

Yes border security benefits all Americans. Insulin does not
 
sturg33 said:
I don't care how much or how little a company makes. They can charge what they want and if the cost is too high, people won't buy and they will need to lower the costs. I ask you again why do you think Americans dominate drug innovation but Europeans do not? They are incredibly fortunate that we them our drugs for cheaper than Americans are required to pay. The innovation in medicine has been incredible and has led to longer lives. I don't want that innovation to stop because Joe Biden says Phizer isn't allowed to turn a profit. For the record, they got paid for their covid vaccines

2. there are places in America that has no access to electricity. Should a group of energy people be forced to go and build that technology for those areas, free of charge?
Click to expand...


Maybe, just maybe, if we didn't allow them to jack up prices, some of these smaller pharmaceutical companies could provide actual competition in the drug market. And for your information, 4 of the top 10 pharmaceutical companies worldwide are located in countries with HCFA, including the 2nd most profitable.

And yes, the US or local government should provide access to electricity everywhere in America that requires it. I think that goes without saying. I'm guessing you hate that we provide access to clean drinking water to our citizens as well. The NERVE of some people requiring clean water to live.
 
Carp said:
Maybe, just maybe, if we didn't allow them to jack up prices, some of these smaller pharmaceutical companies could provide actual competition in the drug market. And for your information, 4 of the top 10 pharmaceutical companies worldwide are located in countries with HCFA, including the 2nd most profitable.

And yes, the US or local government should provide access to electricity everywhere in America that requires it. I think that goes without saying. I'm guessing you hate that we provide access to clean drinking water to our citizens as well. The NERVE of some people requiring clean water to live.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why your first point doesn't also apply to food

Matter of fact, I don't understand why your second point doesn't also apply to food
 
Carp said:
1. Pharma companies make plenty enough to cover their costs and then about 10 times over. Much of the money Big Pharma spends on "development" is simply buying out smaller pharmaceutical companies (or their patent) that actually did 99% of the work.

2. Since when did I say or even imply that other countries or non-Americans are entitled to the rights of US citizens?
Click to expand...

Who defines how much money is “plenty enough”?
 
sturg33 said:
I'm not following your point. Biopharma isn't a monopoly. There are tons of them. Farmers produce what, 99.9% of food on the planet? And I am against government food programs, correct. The private markets, churches, and charity are substantially better at administrating those programs

Yes border security benefits all Americans. Insulin does not
Click to expand...

Biopharma is absolutely a monopoly on certain things. Not to mention, that just about of them are primarily owned by Vanguard, SSGA and/or BlackRoc.

Nice to know you want millions of Americans to starve to death. What a white knight you are.

Border doesn't currently affect me directly. I don't live close to many illegals. My town is rather safe. My job is certainly safe from illegals taking it. My taxes have barely changed. Of course that may not be the case in future, but hey that is future me's problem right?
 
sturg33 said:
I've appreciate the good faith back and forth we have had. But then you throw this at me. Do you actually believe that is what I want?
Click to expand...

Feel like we have more than enough, “you either agree with me or …you want China to take over the world / you hate poor people / you’re fine with slave labor / etc.” around these parts
 
sturg33 said:
I don't understand why your first point doesn't also apply to food

Matter of fact, I don't understand why your second point doesn't also apply to food
Click to expand...

Because we have access to grow our own food for 1. Secondly, food is in large supply with various foods and diets available at different price points. How does access to food apply to capping the prices of food? You do understand the difference in access of water vs cost of water don't you? I am not advocating for a cap on water bills. Like, you get that right?
 
Carp said:
Because we have access to grow our own food for 1. Secondly, food is in large supply with various foods and diets available at different price points. How does access to food apply to capping the prices of food? You do understand the difference in access of water vs cost of water don't you? I am not advocating for a cap on water bills. Like, you get that right?
Click to expand...

Does NYC have access to food outside of the grocery store? Should food prices be capped there?
 
acesfull86 said:
Feel like we have more than enough, “you either agree with me or …you want China to take over the world / you hate poor people / you’re fine with slave labor / etc.” around these parts
Click to expand...

We can have a philosophy that we need a massive inefficient government to solve all problems, or we can look at better solutions to those problems that have proven better across the board.

The second is not saying to not address the problem, it is saying to address more productively
 
sturg33 said:
I've appreciate the good faith back and forth we have had. But then you throw this at me. Do you actually believe that is what I want?
Click to expand...

If you don't support some sort of government program to provide food for people in poverty and the elderly, then you are at least indifferent to people starving around the US.

There are certainly limits to what we can realistically provide as a nation. I don't enjoy seeing people abuse the system. But there are far more people that depend on these services than abuse them. Churches and charities simply don't have the money, nor the man power, nor the necessary applications to provide assistance to the roughly 40 million people living below the poverty line in the US. It just isn't feasible. And I don't think you can point to a successful country around the world that doesn't provide these sort of services in some fashion.
 
Last edited:
sturg33 said:
Does NYC have access to food outside of the grocery store? Should food prices be capped there?
Click to expand...

Yes, many people in NYC do in fact have access to grow their food. But that's irrelevant as NYC is part of NY state which is a part of the US.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top