Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'[W:39]

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

apdst said:

No, it can't and if the government is running the whole industry, there can't be any choice, nor competition.

Click to expand...

Great, you agree then that lack of normal market forces like choice and competition is fundamental to a healthy market. If I want a television, I can buy a number of different brands, look at different sizes, picture quality, features, prices, etc. Or I can skip the TV and do netflix/hulu. Or I can buy a playstation. Or a tennis racket, these are all "entertainment dollars." Best of all, if nothing on the shelf is something I am willing to buy for the price, I can walk away and buy nothing at all.

Now, when I need health care... what's my choice? Where's my competition? If I need hip surgery... I need hip surgery. I can't get chemotherapy or antibiotics instead. There aren't competing products, and I don't have a choice to walk away. Failing to get healthcare can be life or death. Or ignoring a problem can make it get worse over time, which also isn't a realistic option.

So I can only find competition in who actually performs the surgery... but that's not real competition either. Go ahead, try and shop around for hip surgery. Ask them what it costs. Nobody will tell you.

And let's get back to good ol' Econ 101. Supply and Demand. Health care is an almost ideal inelastic product. The demand curve for continuing to live is infinity.

Just how on earth are market forces supposed to solve this?

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Higgins86 said:

The OP didn't say that though. He was disgusted by the actions of certain alleged actions by drug companies.

Even if you dont want drug companies run by the government surely you agree that they should be made accountable? Making money from our suffering isn't something anyone can support, especially a man like yourself who has served his country for the greater good.

Click to expand...

I can support making money from suffering. That's basically the reason trade exists in the first place. One person has something the other person wants. If I work to create a farm, and youre starving, Im going to take advantage of that to get something I want in return for giving you food.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Deuce said:

Great, you agree then that lack of normal market forces like choice and competition is fundamental to a healthy market. If I want a television, I can buy a number of different brands, look at different sizes, picture quality, features, prices, etc. Or I can skip the TV and do netflix/hulu. Or I can buy a playstation. Or a tennis racket, these are all "entertainment dollars." Best of all, if nothing on the shelf is something I am willing to buy for the price, I can walk away and buy nothing at all.

Now, when I need health care... what's my choice? Where's my competition? If I need hip surgery... I need hip surgery. I can't get chemotherapy or antibiotics instead. There aren't competing products, and I don't have a choice to walk away. Failing to get healthcare can be life or death. Or ignoring a problem can make it get worse over time, which also isn't a realistic option.

So I can only find competition in who actually performs the surgery... but that's not real competition either. Go ahead, try and shop around for hip surgery. Ask them what it costs. Nobody will tell you.

And let's get back to good ol' Econ 101. Supply and Demand. Health care is an almost ideal inelastic product. The demand curve for continuing to live is infinity.

Just how on earth are market forces supposed to solve this?

Click to expand...

It isnt. Some have to go without. Econ 101. Free markets produce the greatest benefit for the greatest number of people. Sometimes thats many, sometimes that few.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Chomsky said:

This is why I believe healthcare should be a public good, like defense, utilities, police, or fire protection.

By it's very nature it doesn't work as a freemarket commodity.

Click to expand...

I would suggest that you look a bit closer at this specific problem. In this case the buying and selling of patents. I would suggest a better solution would be for limiting patents more and making the non transferable.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Chomsky said:

This is why I believe healthcare should be a public good, like defense, utilities, police, or fire protection.

By it's very nature it doesn't work as a freemarket commodity.

Click to expand...

Nothing in a public model would stop that from happening. In a public model such actions could and would still increase the price paid for the commodity, and would translate into stricter rationing of the drug on delivery to patients.

How many drugs, by the way, have been produced by government agencies versus profit seeking research firms.

I mean, sure, there are drugs invented in Scandinavian countries, and Canada, and Europe that have local single payer or single provider models... but how many of those drugs were actually invented by the state with no expectation of ROI?

I mean, this story should give you that answer since the company involved purchased the drugs from a public company and tried to sell them at huge markup to public healthcare systems in Europe.

For your system to work we'd need state run research programs to turn out new and improved cancer drugs.. and I don't see that happening.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

washunut said:

Have to respectfully disagree. You can't forget the forget the innovation aspect of health care. Companies spend a ton to get a drug through the approval proceess. I would agree that th bad actors have to be dealt with and put out of business. Not sure we want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Click to expand...

Drug companies spend more on advertising and promotion than they do on R&D. I agree we need innovation, but I am pretty sure we would still have it if the government used its purchasing power to bargain for cancer drugs at 15k a month rather than 50k a month.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

apdst said:

Right, because the government is so much more efficient and responsible for it's own actions.

Click to expand...

No one is talking about government control of healthcare here. At worst we are talking that perhaps artifical price inflation via destroying drugs to treat cancer should be condemned and outlawed. How is that a horrible thing?

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

trouble13 said:

Its not a basic right to demand others to provide you with services at a price you set. Its not my basic human right to get sick and demand my neighbor come over with chicken soup.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Again in most western countries it is.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

jonny5 said:

I can support making money from suffering. That's basically the reason trade exists in the first place. One person has something the other person wants. If I work to create a farm, and youre starving, Im going to take advantage of that to get something I want in return for giving you food.

Click to expand...

But I wouldn't expect a farmer to destroy other food sources so I could only buy from him exclusively and an inflated price.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Chomsky said:

This is why I believe healthcare should be a public good, like defense, utilities, police, or fire protection.

By it's very nature it doesn't work as a freemarket commodity.

Click to expand...

I think if North Korea, Iran, Russia, and China didn't exist or were harmless nations who believed in God, Apple Pie, and Freedom, that goal would be easily attainable!

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

jonny5 said:

It isnt. Some have to go without. Econ 101.

Free markets produce the greatest benefit for the greatest number of people. Sometimes thats many, sometimes that few.

Click to expand...

Free markets do that.

Health care isn't a free market, for the reasons I just explained. That's the part a libertarian will always miss: that sometimes market forces just aren't present. It's a bizarre oversight, because you clearly understand the concept. You're not demanding market-based law enforcement or national defense, because you recognize those things are inherently not a market.

Healthcare can't be a free market because healthcare isn't a choice. How can a free market possibly exist without choice?

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'[W

Surrealistik said:

Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%' | The Independent

Absolutely disgusting and reprehensible. I have nothing more to say on the matter beyond that such sociopathic behaviour needs to be legislated against.

Click to expand...

No problem. Trump promised to change all that with Big Pharma. It is why he hired so many Goldman Sachs people. Apparently Goldman Sachs people believe that obscene profits made on the backs of middle class and working class people are totally unacceptable. Goldman Sachs is the champion for lower and middle class people, right? Donald Trump knows this. We are going to pay a lot less money. "You won't believe it."

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

jonny5 said:

I can support making money from suffering. That's basically the reason trade exists in the first place. One person has something the other person wants. If I work to create a farm, and youre starving, Im going to take advantage of that to get something I want in return for giving you food.

Click to expand...

And if you start burning crops to intentionally create a shortage and inflate prices, knowing this will literally kill people, that's when the torches and pitchforks come out.

Is it really so difficult to understand that "well, **** it, some people will die in the name of my profit" isn't an acceptable economic policy to some people?

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'[W

Surrealistik said:

Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%' | The Independent




Absolutely disgusting and reprehensible. I have nothing more to say on the matter beyond that such sociopathic behaviour needs to be legislated against.

Click to expand...

You've hit on yet another reason that health care costs are so high. The problem now is that republicans are against any sort of regulation / protections and they think that the free market will police itself in instances like this.

You may have noticed a lot of R and D commercials by pharmaceuticals lately which is how they are justifying high consts as the health care debate continues. So it's really down to a matter of national welfare vs greasing palms. This country was built on greasing palms however, so that tells where this is unfortunately going. The trick is satisfy the needs and keep the market in full swing. It's a kind of financial trap because for profit companies are responsible to their share holders and there in lies the rub; this is exactly why a government solution seems to be the only way to solve the scenario we face. It's a pretty good web that has been weaved with insurance costs and skyrocketing services to cover such costs and keep the profession "viable for good talent".

I think that if the tables were turned, and insurance companies were regulated into having to provide services instead of US having to buy insurance, a median could be reached based on the the local cost of living, making it a state mandate. THAT way government expenditures for things like Medicaid would go way down for normal services only kicking in for emergency and surgery. But all of that is going to take a lot of pressure from the voters who are apithetic enough already to have allowed ourselves to walk into this quick sand.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

say if this happened in the US then corruption charges should be brought up.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Chomsky said:

This is why I believe healthcare should be a public good, like defense, utilities, police, or fire protection.

By it's very nature it doesn't work as a freemarket commodity.

Click to expand...

i will give you that the pharmaceutical companies and ANY corporation serving a public necessity need to act morally and responsibly regardless of their bottom line, and if they are shown not to be able to do so, then regulated to MAKE them do so.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

CMPancake said:

No one is talking about government control of healthcare here. At worst we are talking that perhaps artifical price inflation via destroying drugs to treat cancer should be condemned and outlawed. How is that a horrible thing?

Click to expand...

Post #2 is and that's the post I originally responded to.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Deuce said:

Great, you agree then that lack of normal market forces like choice and competition is fundamental to a healthy market. If I want a television, I can buy a number of different brands, look at different sizes, picture quality, features, prices, etc. Or I can skip the TV and do netflix/hulu. Or I can buy a playstation. Or a tennis racket, these are all "entertainment dollars." Best of all, if nothing on the shelf is something I am willing to buy for the price, I can walk away and buy nothing at all.

Now, when I need health care... what's my choice? Where's my competition? If I need hip surgery... I need hip surgery. I can't get chemotherapy or antibiotics instead. There aren't competing products, and I don't have a choice to walk away. Failing to get healthcare can be life or death. Or ignoring a problem can make it get worse over time, which also isn't a realistic option.

So I can only find competition in who actually performs the surgery... but that's not real competition either. Go ahead, try and shop around for hip surgery. Ask them what it costs. Nobody will tell you.

And let's get back to good ol' Econ 101. Supply and Demand. Health care is an almost ideal inelastic product. The demand curve for continuing to live is infinity.

Just how on earth are market forces supposed to solve this?

Click to expand...

Do you have health insurance through your employer and is your plan a good one, or a POS?

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Higgins86 said:

But I wouldn't expect a farmer to destroy other food sources so I could only buy from him exclusively and an inflated price.

Click to expand...

I might expect him to destroy his own stock to drive up the price, yes.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'[W

Threegoofs said:

Interesting story, but the actual article has lots of sensational details wrong or misrepresented.

First of all, this has no relationship to a 'drug giant', but is primarily a relatively small generic drug manufacturer who seems to have a business model of selling really old and fairly unpopular drugs that don't have a lot of market competition.

Secondly, the dramatic price increase shown showed a monthly supply going from 5 pounds to 65 pounds.

The 4000% never happened, and was apparently a negotiating tactic, as was the odd story about threatening to destroy drug supplies. This wasn't 'plotting', it was the opening in negotiation.

Given that hysterical tone, I have to wonder what this 'loophole' in the story they are talking about is.

Note that the drugs they are discussing are really rarely used old nasty chemotherapy agents that most companies don't bother to make because of low usage.

Click to expand...

Aspen is not a small generic drug manufacturer (they're the largest pharma company in South Africa and a multinational), they celebrated substantial increases in cancer drug prices at the expense of governments and their constituents, the price increases were substantial, they threatened a wholesale blockaide of supply of a vital drug that was clearly being utilized as a negotiating tactic, and they had material impacts on health care spending.

The tone of the article may be a bit dramatic, but not nearly hysterical, and it definitely sheds light on repugnant practices in the pharmaceutical industry.

jmotivator said:

Nothing in a public model would stop that from happening. In a public model such actions could and would still increase the price paid for the commodity, and would translate into stricter rationing of the drug on delivery to patients.

How many drugs, by the way, have been produced by government agencies versus profit seeking research firms.

I mean, sure, there are drugs invented in Scandinavian countries, and Canada, and Europe that have local single payer or single provider models... but how many of those drugs were actually invented by the state with no expectation of ROI?

I mean, this story should give you that answer since the company involved purchased the drugs from a public company and tried to sell them at huge markup to public healthcare systems in Europe.

For your system to work we'd need state run research programs to turn out new and improved cancer drugs.. and I don't see that happening.

Click to expand...

Or you simply put up legislation that forbids such price gouging; the only reason the price increases were possible was due to a loophole.

Public healthcare may not directly prevent gouging, but it is at the very least strongly correlated with its prevention in that these systems generically tend to be accompanied with legislative and regulatory frameworks that permit and promote robust negotiation, and preclude such gouging as a matter of practicality and necessity.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Deuce said:

And if you start burning crops to intentionally create a shortage and inflate prices, knowing this will literally kill people, that's when the torches and pitchforks come out.

Is it really so difficult to understand that "well, **** it, some people will die in the name of my profit" isn't an acceptable economic policy to some people?

Click to expand...

I understand the psychology of wanting what someone else has and being upset when they wont give it to at the price you think is right (which oftentimes is free). I understand the psychology of greed. What I dont understand is why tyranny is the solution to freedom.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

Hypothetical said:

i will give you that the pharmaceutical companies and ANY corporation serving a public necessity need to act morally and responsibly regardless of their bottom line, and if they are shown not to be able to do so, then regulated to MAKE them do so.

Click to expand...

Case in point. I dont understand this morality. Do what I want, or Ill make you.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

jonny5 said:

I understand the psychology of wanting what someone else has and being upset when they wont give it to at the price you think is right (which oftentimes is free). I understand the psychology of greed. What I dont understand is why tyranny is the solution to freedom.

Click to expand...

I understand the psychology of wanting to leave as much of economy as possible up to the free market and to have a very limited government. What I don't understand is the shear inability that some people have of accepting the reality that necessary healthcare is a market failure.

If cancer drugs went up by 10 fold overnight, there would be no reduction at all in the number of cancer patients. That is the very definition of a market failure.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

SouthernDemocrat said:

I understand the psychology of wanting to leave as much of economy as possible up to the free market and to have a very limited government. What I don't understand is the shear inability that some people have of accepting the reality that necessary healthcare is a market failure.

If cancer drugs went up by 10 fold overnight, there would be no reduction at all in the number of cancer patients. That is the very definition of a market failure.

Click to expand...

If cancer drugs went up by 10 fold overnight, it would result in less sales, which would drive the price back down, or competition in the form of alternatives, which would drive the price back down, or a method of paying the higher price, or a change in behavior to better prevent cancer. Thats the definition of market success. When they are constrained to one outcome, that is all you ever get. When they are free to work out inefficiencies, they do.

Re: Pharmaceutical giant 'plotted to destroy cancer drugs to drive prices up 4000%'

jonny5 said:

Case in point. I dont understand this morality. Do what I want, or Ill make you.

Click to expand...

because price gouging, following profits regardless of public impact, and celebrating the destruction of ALREADY made things that could benefit one's fellow human beings are not freedom. that is the true greed and immorality of mega corporations and should be regulated. Those mega corporations owe a debt to the society that provides for them and that they are built upon the backs of. when they fail to act morally to repay this debt then they are no longer worthwhile and should be regulated if not shut down outright.

thats how its going to have to be if we want a morally good society going forward, without corporate overlords.

I have certain conservative values, and believe in capitalism, but I am no more a corporatist than I am a socialist. everything in moderation.