New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

You Wonder Why Drug Prices Are So High?

OldTrapper

Council Member
It is not because of Obama, or the ACA:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2019/05/13/teva-and-other-generic-drug-makers-accused-price-fixing/1190531001/

A coalition of attorneys general from 43 states and Puerto Rico claim in a federal lawsuit that generic drug manufacturers conspired to fix prices and markets of 114 drugs for both minor infections and chronic diseases such as arthritis, cancer, diabetes and HIV.

The sweeping 510-page lawsuit filed Friday at U.S. District Court in Connecticut alleges Teva, Pfizer, Mylan, and 17 other pharmaceutical companies worked in tandem to create a "fair share" of the generic drug market and avoid price-lowering competition.

The lawsuit also names 15 pharma executives in a price-fixing conspiracy that allegedly overcharged states and consumers billions of dollars.

Congress has sought to lower drug prices through policies that encourage robust competition among generic drug manufacturers.

But Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said investigators have obtained emails. text messages, phone record and accounts from former company insiders that show a years-long effort by generic drugmakers to "fix prices and divide market share."
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
It is not because of Obama, or the ACA:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2019/05/13/teva-and-other-generic-drug-makers-accused-price-fixing/1190531001/

A coalition of attorneys general from 43 states and Puerto Rico claim in a federal lawsuit that generic drug manufacturers conspired to fix prices and markets of 114 drugs for both minor infections and chronic diseases such as arthritis, cancer, diabetes and HIV.

The sweeping 510-page lawsuit filed Friday at U.S. District Court in Connecticut alleges Teva, Pfizer, Mylan, and 17 other pharmaceutical companies worked in tandem to create a "fair share" of the generic drug market and avoid price-lowering competition.

The lawsuit also names 15 pharma executives in a price-fixing conspiracy that allegedly overcharged states and consumers billions of dollars.

Congress has sought to lower drug prices through policies that encourage robust competition among generic drug manufacturers.

But Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said investigators have obtained emails. text messages, phone record and accounts from former company insiders that show a years-long effort by generic drugmakers to "fix prices and divide market share."
I see.

And we all "know" it is NOT because of obamicare because YOU, in all of the sel-professed, di m/li bby uber-enlightenment presented us with undeniable "proof"and "evidence" as;

"A coalition of attorneys general ...claim..."

"The .. lawsuit …. alleges..."

" The lawsuit also names 15 pharma executives... that allegedly overcharged..."

Well done Dick Tracy. Not everyone could find claims and allegations the "prove" one position over any other.

Typical dem/lib position.

An allegation, claim or insinuation is all that is required to "prove" a wrong. IF it against a legal US citizen who might be an evil-assed 'ol republican, conservative, businessman etc. I mean.

Now when it comes to other dems, any member of the multitude of PC protected, self-identified, life-long "victimhood" subsets of our society who constitute their voter base...….Not so much.

Street corner drug dealer, gang-banger, car jacker, liquor store bandit, street walker, d im politician, etc. Now to "prove" anything on any of them there has to be, at MINIMUM, half a dozen eye-witnesses, (4 of which need to be members of the same sub-set the accused is a member of), live video, a confession notarized by the mother of the oppressed and MAYBE even something notarized by a local radical Imam.
 
I see.

And we all "know" it is NOT because of obamicare because YOU, in all of the sel-professed, di m/li bby uber-enlightenment presented us with undeniable "proof"and "evidence" as;

"A coalition of attorneys general ...claim..."

"The .. lawsuit …. alleges..."

" The lawsuit also names 15 pharma executives... that allegedly overcharged..."

Well done Dick Tracy. Not everyone could find claims and allegations the "prove" one position over any other.

Typical dem/lib position.

An allegation, claim or insinuation is all that is required to "prove" a wrong. IF it against a legal US citizen who might be an evil-assed 'ol republican, conservative, businessman etc. I mean.

Now when it comes to other dems, any member of the multitude of PC protected, self-identified, life-long "victimhood" subsets of our society who constitute their voter base...….Not so much.

Street corner drug dealer, gang-banger, car jacker, liquor store bandit, street walker, d im politician, etc. Now to "prove" anything on any of them there has to be, at MINIMUM, half a dozen eye-witnesses, (4 of which need to be members of the same sub-set the accused is a member of), live video, a confession notarized by the mother of the oppressed and MAYBE even something notarized by a local radical Imam.
Did you take the time to read the lawsuit?
They have 500 pages of text messages and phone conversations of pharma executives conspiring to not compete with one another.
There is a lot of proof.
Why don't think you are qualified to judge the evidence for yourself?
 

OldTrapper

Council Member
I see.

And we all "know" it is NOT because of obamicare because YOU, in all of the sel-professed, di m/li bby uber-enlightenment presented us with undeniable "proof"and "evidence" as;

"A coalition of attorneys general ...claim..."

"The .. lawsuit …. alleges..."

" The lawsuit also names 15 pharma executives... that allegedly overcharged..."

Well done Dick Tracy. Not everyone could find claims and allegations the "prove" one position over any other.

Typical dem/lib position.

An allegation, claim or insinuation is all that is required to "prove" a wrong. IF it against a legal US citizen who might be an evil-assed 'ol republican, conservative, businessman etc. I mean.

Now when it comes to other dems, any member of the multitude of PC protected, self-identified, life-long "victimhood" subsets of our society who constitute their voter base...….Not so much.

Street corner drug dealer, gang-banger, car jacker, liquor store bandit, street walker, d im politician, etc. Now to "prove" anything on any of them there has to be, at MINIMUM, half a dozen eye-witnesses, (4 of which need to be members of the same sub-set the accused is a member of), live video, a confession notarized by the mother of the oppressed and MAYBE even something notarized by a local radical Imam.
Typical right wing low IQ response that comes from one that does not understand, or know anything about, the legal system, or much of anything else for that matter.

One day you may even grow a spine that will allow you to get off your knees from in front of your corporate masters.
 

OldTrapper

Council Member
Did you take the time to read the lawsuit?
They have 500 pages of text messages and phone conversations of pharma executives conspiring to not compete with one another.
There is a lot of proof.
Why don't think you are qualified to judge the evidence for yourself?
The lawsuit itself is 510 pages long, :eek:
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
Did you take the time to read the lawsuit?
They have 500 pages of text messages and phone conversations of pharma executives conspiring to not compete with one another.
There is a lot of proof.
Why don't think you are qualified to judge the evidence for yourself?
I'm not. Never claimed to be. Thus the reason you cannot find anywhere I spoke of the guilt nor innocence of those involved.

All I have ever claimed to be is intellectually honest enough to state I will have to wait for an actual guilty verdict from those who ARE qualified to judge, before stating anything either way.

UNLIKE so may dems/libs who love to run with claims, allegations and insinuations as "proof" of guilt.

Nothing more, nothing less.
 
I'm not. Never claimed to be. Thus the reason you cannot find anywhere I spoke of the guilt nor innocence of those involved.

All I have ever claimed to be is intellectually honest enough to state I will have to wait for an actual guilty verdict from those who ARE qualified to judge, before stating anything either way.
So what happens when you get jury duty? and its literally your job to judge the evidence presented?
Do you cop out then too?
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
Typical right wing low IQ response that comes from one that does not understand, or know anything about, the legal system, or much of anything else for that matter.

One day you may even grow a spine that will allow you to get off your knees from in front of your corporate masters.
Ouch...…...kitty got claws.

I never claimed to be a self-professed Rhodes scholar when it comes to any and ever issue anyone brings up, including our legal system, otherwise I would, like you, be a di m.

But one need not be a legal expert to understand the part of our judicial system that says people are actually considered to be innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Not "accused", not because something is "claimed" or, "alleged", CONVICTED.

Look at it this way, hoss, I ain't no veterinarian either but I can recognize a horse's a ss when I see one.




Howdy, nice to meet ya.
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
So what happens when you get jury duty? and its literally your job to judge the evidence presented?
Do you cop out then too?
No.

I observe the evidence presented to me, THEN, the evidence or counter points made by the accused and then form my opinion.

You see, unlike you dems, I actually WANT to see everything I can, from BOTH involved parties as opposed to ONLY the accusations of one party.

Pretty fukin' radical, right?
 
No.

I observe the evidence presented to me, THEN, the evidence or counter points made by the accused and then form my opinion.
Guess what? You don't need to be part of a jury to do that. You can it from the comfort of your own home.
There are text messages from pharma executives from different companies telling each other, "You know what? Instead of actually competing, let's not compete in order to keep prices high"

Is that not price-fixing to you?
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
Guess what? You don't need to be part of a jury to do that. You can it from the comfort of your own home.
There are text messages from pharma executives from different companies telling each other, "You know what? Instead of actually competing, let's not compete in order to keep prices high"

Is that not price-fixing to you?
All absolutely evidence of price-fixing to me.

Problem is, not for you I know, but for me, is that there really is no evidence, proof, the accused may use during the trial that I can view from the comfort of my own home with which to compare/contrast those from the accusers.


As I said before, that is a problem to ME.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
It is not because of Obama, or the ACA:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2019/05/13/teva-and-other-generic-drug-makers-accused-price-fixing/1190531001/

A coalition of attorneys general from 43 states and Puerto Rico claim in a federal lawsuit that generic drug manufacturers conspired to fix prices and markets of 114 drugs for both minor infections and chronic diseases such as arthritis, cancer, diabetes and HIV.

The sweeping 510-page lawsuit filed Friday at U.S. District Court in Connecticut alleges Teva, Pfizer, Mylan, and 17 other pharmaceutical companies worked in tandem to create a "fair share" of the generic drug market and avoid price-lowering competition.

The lawsuit also names 15 pharma executives in a price-fixing conspiracy that allegedly overcharged states and consumers billions of dollars.

Congress has sought to lower drug prices through policies that encourage robust competition among generic drug manufacturers.

But Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said investigators have obtained emails. text messages, phone record and accounts from former company insiders that show a years-long effort by generic drugmakers to "fix prices and divide market share."
60 minutes did a great show last week on this. The email between drug manufacturers agreeing to a price increase and non-compete pretty much nails it.
 
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ocasio-cortez-confronts-ceo-for-nearly-dollar2k-price-tag-on-hiv-drug-that-costs-dollar8-in-australia/ar-AABsDP0?ocid=spartandhp
So your problem is she can't tackle all the world ills in one fell swoop? Do you think that is realistic?
NARCAN is FREE for dope heads!
And its still more economical that having dead dopeheads.
 

Boca

Governor
Years ago I sent a proposal/suggestion to my Congressman and Senators to fix the pharmaceutical pricing problem.

The idea came to me after having spent a number of years as an administrator of RDSP for a Fortune 50 aerospace corporation. (RDSP = Research, Development, Studies, Proposals.)

Simply put the company would submit proposals to undertake new Research and Development for high tech aerospace applications. If approved the company would earn a negotiated fee for the work and the Government would own the resulting patents/technology, administered by the DOD in that case, which they could then license others to develop and produce.

The idea being a similar arrangement with pharma that would result in Government ownership of the patented drugs, administered by the FDA, and thus be able to regulate pricing.

It would also have been a moneymaker for the US Treasury considering pharmaceuticals are marketed world wide.

Thinking out of the box is in most cases not a trait of politicians.
 
Last edited:
Years ago I sent a proposal/suggestion to my Congressman and Senators to fix the pharmaceutical pricing problem.

The idea came to me after having spent a number of years as an administrator of RDSP for a Fortune 50 aerospace corporation. (RDSP = Research, Development, Studies, Proposals.)

Simply put the company would submit proposals to undertake new Research and Development for high tech aerospace applications. The company would earn a negotiated fee for the work and the Government would own the resulting patents/technology, administered by the DOD in that case, which they could then license others to develop and produce.

The idea being a similar arrangement with pharma that would result in Government ownership of the patented drugs, administered by the FDA, and thus be able to regulate pricing.

It would also have been a moneymaker for the US Treasury considering pharmaceuticals are marketed world wide.

Thinking out of the box is in most cases not a trait of politicians.
Yes, Good for you. Finally waking up to the ills of unregulated capitalism.
 

Boca

Governor
Yes, Good for you. Finally waking up to the ills of unregulated capitalism.
I don't see it as capitalism vs socialism. Rather government participating in capitalism.

You own something and license it for use you make money....be it a copyright, a trademark, or a patent.

The 7 year patent on new drugs was intended to allow the developer to recoup development expenses. The proposal was to pay Pfizer or any firm, during the development phase, plus a negotiated profit.

Pure capitalism.
 
I don't see it as capitalism vs socialism. Rather government participating in capitalism.
You mean... like the "public option"


The 7 year patent on new drugs was intended to allow the developer to recoup development expenses. The proposal was to pay Pfizer or any firm, during the development phase, plus a negotiated profit.

Pure capitalism.
Can anyone get in on it? Or is it just subsidizing R&D for big pharma? How is this different from the R&D tax credits/deductions already in place?
 
Top