@CowperKettle That's the first place where you'd expect it to happen. The US's main feature is its unbridled capitalism across the board.
They were/are so afraid of "communism" they'd reject wearing pants if commies were known for wearing them.
Well, I'm not saying that people necessarily believe that (actually a lot of them probably do) but that their system of "government" reflects these ideas.
@userr2684291 Disclaimer - I'm not for unbridled capitalism, especially when it comes to medical care because no-one is going to choose the cheapest doctor when a loved one is dying. However, you misunderstand the actual economic effect of over-regulation, meaning the kind that suppresses competition, stifles innovation, and adds unnecessary cost.
We've never seen unbridled capitalism anywhere in the world in modern history
Yes. Companies can set whatever price they want when there is no-one willing to sell cheaper. The government setting an artificial price doesn't solve that. If they set the price too low, then people stop making the drug.
But drugs are something different because supply-demand is life-death
Yes, I'm aware of that, but that doesn't really matter because it's a very widespread good. We're not talking something very specific, there's a lot of diabetics.
I don't have the time to explain all of this - I'm at work cutting a release - and this is probably not the place, but insulin isn't too expensive in the US because of capitalism
it's because our health care system is completely broken
and our health care system is completely broken because our government is incompetent
and more worried about what people tweeted years ago than actually getting anything done
I'm convinced you're completely wrong, however, and I'm not sure how you don't see that unchecked prices are exactly what rampant, greedy capitalism looks like. Sure, you get innovation, but really, at its core, we're looking at companies making new profits.
If it's too difficult for a new entry to join the market to offer a drug - because of the necessary inspections, certifications, etc - then you end up with effective monopolies without any need for patent protection or anything. You want exactly the right level of regulation to ensure quality and safety and no more.
(nb: I'm about as far from laissez-faire as you can get, but I still know there's such a thing as too much regulation)
I've finally read the article above, haha, and it says that the problem lies in how insurance companies negotiate prices with manufacturers through some intermediaries.
But at the same time these monopolistic companies won't allow for any transparency-seeking laws.
(While blaming the intermediaries and promising to halt price increases.)
(And at the same time offering the drug for like half the price. I have no idea how that's possible... unless the price was artificially blown up in the first place.)
This doesn't look like a result of regulations; it's exactly the opposite. For one, there's no single body in the US regulating these drug prices. It looks like shady capitalistic business BS that shifts money from one pocket to another at the expense of customers.
I guess I'm missing something, but reading a couple of articles on this topic I get the same impression I've had since the beginning.
The overregulation that people claim isn't on prices - it's on the production of the medicines. I don't know enough to know whether there's a valid argument there, just that there is the potential for overregulation in that sphere.
The answers to this earlier question about contacting moderators essentially say flag one of your posts and ask them to create a private room for you.
But my current position isn't exactly that. I recently received and replied to a message from the ELL mod team within the User Interface. A littl...
Language Overflow
Language Overflow