Drug Lobby Wins Again in Washington...

What have the drug companies said that I'm believing? I'm professing a lack of faith in government to do the right thing without threat of failure come reelection, hardly a unique statement for me.

Your expressing a faith in government to do the right thing now, when current inertia is to do nothing. Re-importation breaks that inertia, gives government an incentive to do something because the drug overlords will demand it (as will fair traders).

Think outside the box!
New paradigm!
Strategic shift!
Fuck yeah!

What part of "I favor lifting the reimportation ban, but I think it will take longer than you think to have any effect." don't you understand? Furthermore, why have you ignored the multiple times I've posted a proof of the latter clause? And need I remind you that earlier in the thread, you were saying that it was the drug companies, not the lobbyists in Washington, who were going to get the price caps lifted by pressuring the Canadian government?

Who do the lobbyists work for?

Yeah, that comment didn't make any sense. The lobbyists and the drug companies are one in the same... Maybe his failure to understand this is where all of that convoluted logic comes from?

It occurred to me that he probably thinks we've meant the AARP when using the term lobbyists. It's about the only thing that would explain the massive irrationality he's displayed through this thread.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=41196

Pharma lobbyist spending at the state level alone in 2003/2004 dollars. Extrapolate from there.

The drug companies efforts against the Canadian price caps are not going to be limited to lobbying Washington to get Congress to take action. Why? Because the lobbying in Washington is going to fail if it occurs after the price for drugs in the US has come down. No Congressperson is going to risk actively pissing off the elderly and the uninsured (which would be the net result of Congress successfully pressuring the Canadian government into lifting the price cap) just for a campaign contribution from the drug industry.

There's 5 things Congress can do, in decreasing happiness for the people: 1. Successfully attempt something in the people's favor, 2. fail in an attempt to do something in the people's favor, 3. do nothing, 4. fail in an attempt to do something against the people, and 5. successfully do something against the people. In this case, "something in the people's favor" is to lower prescription drug prices, and "something against the people" is to raise prescription drug prices.

The Senate killing lifting the ban is a 2. Congress hypothetically lifting the ban is a 1. Congress then hypothetically successfully putting pressure on Canada to remove the price caps is a 5.

If Congress can keep doing 2's while raking in the campaign contributions, they will (I don't think they can, which is why they resort to excuses about the FDA). But once they do a 1, they sure as hell better not do anything worse than a 4, or else all the campaign donations in the world aren't going to save them. So every Congressman who voted to do the 1 will say "keep your money, I'll look like a flip-flopper if I put pressure on Canada, and worse, one who's betrayed the people instead of betraying you lobbyists."

I suspect that the drug companies are making more money on the US than they anticipated, and have calculated that the price caps and subsequent higher prices in the US are actually better for their bottom line, but it could also simply be that Canada simply will not listen to the US government pressuring them to remove the price controls.

I don't know anything about the Canadian government's POV, but I *do* know that U.S. pharma companies deliberately jack up the prices within the U.S. Their prices in Canada are closer to the actual market value of the drugs.

However, you'd have to take my word for it, based on having spent 10 years listening to marketing people talking about pricing differentials, particularly when the occasional doc in the audience, not entirely lulled by the golf outing or the trip to DisneyWorld, asked the radical question "But how can I prescribe a drug that costs $10 a pill to my needy patients?"

Following the moment of stunned silence, the chirpy little marketing person will invariably say "But that's why our reps give you samples!"

As doling out those little sample packs to patients with chronic, life-threatening diseases solves the problem.

However, you won't find that info on a Google search, and I've long since dumped my files. Not that I could post these things verbatim without violating a confidentiality agreement, anyway.

Americans are being ripped off. And more and more insurers are either refusing to offer prescription coverage, or sneaking the added costs into higher and higher premiums.

But suggest that the system sucks and the Propertarians shit themselves and scream "SOCIALIST1!!1!!"

How do you know what the "actual market value" is? There's no free market to let it settle on a price on its own.

How do you know your assumption that the rest of the world paying less for our drugs is not closer to the actual price? That is the basic premise of your whole argument, but I see no evidence to back it up.

All I see is justification (from the pro side in this thread) for the drug companies to keep artificially inflated prices in our own domestic market with the help of our gov't.

From listening to the marketing people tell the docs things along the line of "Now, this is a drug that costs about 3 cents per pill to make, and we've loooong since recouped the R&D, but we feel justified in charging $3 a pill because of patent limitations and all the hoops we have to jump through with the FDA."

Again, anecdotal. Can't link you to anything. These are the things they say when they forget that not everyone who hears the audio will appreciate them for their cleverness.

So you admit the gov't is bolstering these inflated prices?

God-fucking-dammit YES, again. I've never denied it! Unless you're talking about the Canadian government, in which case you're wrong.

Where the hell do you get that? The only way that could possibly be my argument is if Canada's price ceilings are actually above market price, which is plainly not the case.

Okay, let's clarify something:

What is it you think my argument is?

What you are assuming is that the extreme price differential between our market and foreign markets means that our price is closer to the actual market price, when there is no evidence of that. How do you know that the actual price isn't closer to what it is being priced at in other markets? Maybe it isn't at the ceiling that Canada sets, but that doesn't mean it is anywhere close to the artificial price set in the U.S. market either.

Doesn't matter. Drug prices here go from 400 to 100 to 150 instead of 400 to 150 due to Congress, the people will not be happy.

Condescension aside ( )...One of your basic arguments is saying that the drug companies will suffer as the U.S. imports the price controls of other nations on drugs. My answer to that is 1) it's their own damn fault, but 2) it may not be as detrimental to the companies as you assume...

What would help here is: How long does it typically take a drug to recoup R&D costs with the way the system is rigged now?

In any case, there is no justification for continuing the ban, and like gul, I believe that the removal of the ban will prompt action rather than the status quo that currently screws the American consumer. I do not agree with your assessment that it will take years as the drug companies have several options available to them and aren't as helpless as you claim.

People deal with that shit everyday. It's called filling up your tank. They'll still be happy that they don't have to pay $400 anymore.

Well, then, would you please talk some sense into Paladin, Storm and Listy? They won't listen to me, but they respect you 'cause you got guns.

Wrong, that's part of the evidence for my argument, not my argument.

It doesn't matter how much or how little, the fact is that they will need to correct the shortfall.

No idea, and I don't see why it's relevant.

There is if you're a Congressman. See post 218.

What evidence do you have that Congress will put listening to lobbyists over getting reelected? Or, for that matter, that Congress will be any more effectual than the drug companies in getting Canada to rethink its price caps. What can the government do to make Canada possibly care if we import their price controls?

What options, beyond raising prices (out, so long as the price caps are in place), restructuring (which can only work so long), retargeting R&D, and accepting lower profits (not a chance) are there?

Hey, garamet don't drag my ass into this.

All I've said, aside from voicing my justified disapproval and dislike of poor people, is that this is a problem arising from the fact you people want government regulating business.

I don't want more, or new, regulations, taxes, tariffs and restrictions.

I want all existing regulations, taxes, tariffs and restrictions lifted. On drugs and everything else.

Like I said -- you people demanded the government interfere with the market. Well, you got your wish.

Show me how allowing pharma companies to artificially inflate their prices for American consumers is *not* government regulating business.

As long as they're doing it without government power then it's their business. It's their product, they can charge what they want.

Err... they are doing it with government power - Canadian government power.

It's regulation Storm likes, therefore it's not regulation. By definition, if Storm approves, it's the free market in action, not government intervention. Don't you know anything?

I was trying to think of a way to say exactly that, and you beat me to it.

See, I *get* Storm and Paladin. "I'm young and healthy and I've got killer health insurance coverage and I don't give a shit about anyone else."

It's Listy's "I don't mind paying more than I need to for my diabetes meds because it's The American Way" that I don't get.

You find me one instance where I said I support government regulation of ANY business any time ever and I'll pay for your health care for the rest of your life.

Otherwise you must admit you're agreeing with a lowlife sack of shit lying mama's boy aka Liet.

Give it up Storm; you're a pathetic, useless self-parody who couldn't form an argument if his daughter's life depended on it. Time for you to retire this troll persona and start over with a dual.