• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump: US to Quit TPP Trade Deal on First Day in Office

truthatallcost said:
Who's 'taken away the financial incentive'? If the drug you mentioned earlier was a success, your employer would stand to profit nicely for the next 8 years. There's plenty of money in drugs as is.

How else to explain:
The top 20 highest-paid biopharma CEOs
1. Len Schleifer, Regeneron $41.97 million
2. Jeffrey Leiden, Vertex Pharmaceuticals $36.64 million
3. Brent Saunders, Allergan (formerly Actavis) $36.61 million
4. Martine Rothblatt, United Therapeutics $33.21 million

etc.
The top 20 highest-paid biopharma CEOs | FiercePharma

Pharma is profitable beyond belief, even with all those generics you'd like to see disappear.
Click to expand...

Again with the strawman!

The generic concept is great. All for it.
 
truthatallcost said:
Because it doesn't have the necessary House votes to get off the ground. Be thankful that Democrats were rejected Nov 8.
Click to expand...

TPP wasnt a partisan issue. Both Democrats and Republicans came together to reject it.
Earlier vote on the TPP in 2015, and Nancy Pelosi lead the charge against it: Dems reject Obama's key trade proposal in House vote - CNNPolitics.com
And in the Senate in 2015 actually more Democrats voted against the "fast track legislation" than Republicans... "The Trade Promotion Authority bill passed 62 to 37, with the support of 14 Democrats and most Republicans." Senate passes 'fast track' trade promotion bill - CNNPolitics.com
And if you look at the final fast track vote in the house, way more Democrats voted against it than the Republicans.
ev6q8j.png

https://projects.propublica.org/represent/votes/114/house/1/374
 
Ikari said:
Except that it doesn't as drug prices begin to skyrocket due to the oligarchy in place. We pay for all sorts of research, both through subsidies to Big Pharma and to research in universities and other labs. But then in the end, once Big Pharma takes all this money, they still charge huge amounts for their drugs and we have seen recently the skyrocketing costs of drugs that have already been developed and on the market. Yet Big Pharma makes tons of money, and tax payers support a lot of their drug developments, just to be double-charged. Once to help pay for the research, and again by the price gouging from the government enforced oligarchy.
Click to expand...

yes because they spend huge amounts of money to develop the drug. you don't know what you are talking about.
Say a company makes drug X. they either got it from their own R&D or from a college research system. They file a patent.
the patent is only good for 20 years from the date of the patent.

The FDA usually requires a minimum of 10 years of study to test the drug. after that they company can then file and see if they are going to
be able to bring it to actual market. if they are declined it has to go back to testing. once the 20 year mark is up any company can make a
generic out of it. so between when the company can launch the drug to market and the remaining years left on the patent is when they have to make
their money back.

We are not spending in the way the benefits the majority of the People, look at Threegoofs own admission several pages ago. He said his company could have researched a drug that would have been of great benefit to many people, but because they couldn't make enough profit on it, they didn't. Does that sound like something that benefits the majority of the People? No, it benefits the pockets of Big Pharma.

We're already paying, might as well get something good out of it. Not more fat cats, but actual medicine at affordable prices for the People.
Click to expand...

Many people is not the majority of people. 100 people is many people but it isn't 1m people.
 
reinoe said:
Liberals, right now as we speak, are protesting Trumps refusal to arm, train, and fund terrorists in the middle East. The protesters have become unhinged.
Click to expand...

Ok, so in three posts the topic has moved from TPP, to gay rights, to arming "terrorists" in the ME. Sort of a moving target you've got going, so I'm out. :peace
 
ludin said:
yes because they spend huge amounts of money to develop the drug. you don't know what you are talking about.
Say a company makes drug X. they either got it from their own R&D or from a college research system. They file a patent.
the patent is only good for 20 years from the date of the patent.

The FDA usually requires a minimum of 10 years of study to test the drug. after that they company can then file and see if they are going to
be able to bring it to actual market. if they are declined it has to go back to testing. once the 20 year mark is up any company can make a
generic out of it. so between when the company can launch the drug to market and the remaining years left on the patent is when they have to make
their money back.



Many people is not the majority of people. 100 people is many people but it isn't 1m people.
Click to expand...

https://www.google.com/amp/www.cbsn...iption-drug-prices/?client=ms-android-verizon

https://www.google.com/amp/www.lati...snap-story,amp.html?client=ms-android-verizon

https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj....ug-costs-1460340357?client=ms-android-verizon

The soaring costs aren't because it's taking them so long or because of investments, it's because Big Pharma has helped set the stage where government legislation gives them an enforced oligarchy wherein massive price fixing takes place, to the detriment of the People.

So not only are we subsidizing Big Pharma, footing the bill for base research, but we allow them to rig the systems and price gouge the crap out of us.

We're already paying, so why pay for fat cats to get fatter? Might as well get something for our money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom