Rebate kickbacks ARE anti-competitive, and are a prime example of harmful government interference with a competitive markets’ ability to produce the most efficient results for both consumers and producers. Monopolies or duopolies are NOT the most efficient scenario for producers… in most instances, they will be ended or curtailed by responsible lawmakers or judges.
Polar, what we need is not a system to produce the most efficient results for both consumers and producers. What we need is a system to produce the best health for our citizens. Health care, with very low price elasticity, can never operate with an efficient market mechanism. Believing otherwise is an article of faith based on the revealed religion of market supremacy. Ayn Rand is dead but even if she were alive she would have no workable solution to healthcare problems other than a suggestion that the poor should simply die now and get out of our hair. Admit it. You would prefer the poor to die. Go on, admit it.
It can’t be that hard, now can it?.
Hilarious. Invective from our Superiors, the Left.
Sweden – which despite liberal mischaracterization, is NOT socialist – recently mandated an EXPANSION of private health care options. What?
You see, they found that private health care kept IMPROVING the dumb, slow, inefficient rationing system offered by government health care.
Competition works. Publish the prices of everything. Then have consumers share some skin in the game. Watch prices fall. (Wait, that’s exactly what Whole Foods and Safeway did and patient satisfaction went UP!)
It isn’t that hard. We just need to confront doctors and hospitals, who make WAY more than doctors or hospitals anywhere else in the world, especially in those lovely “single payer” systems liberals love so much.
@Vox ; I dare you to prove that health care can NEVER operate with an efficient market ‘mechanism’.
Price elasticity is a by-product of Socialized medicine, with limits on doctors fees, etc, A FREE market will adjust prices as needed, without constraints YOU perceive is price inelasticity. Your perception is tainted by living your entire life during a time when MediCare and Medicaid affected health care costs (adversely).
A study I quoted a few years ago said life-altering drugs comprised 33% of all pharma costs, and that percentage was expected to comprise 50% in the next decade or sooner.
I wonder why IJ hasn’t posted (m)ANY articles on the Democrat Congressional leaders plan to push for MediCare for All (your wages), which would essentially end all private health insurance companies. Hey, health insurance CEOs; what do you think of the Dem’s plan to shut down ALL of your companies? Of course, Barry said IF you Like your plan, you can keep your plan, etc., but in the end, you couldn’t. Dems now say health insurance companies will not go away with Single slayer, er, Single Delayer, uh, Single Payer, and you can trust them to keep their verbal word, right?
MARCH 26, 2018 AT 9:16 PM
PolarBeaRepeal says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
1
0
PS it is the author of off-topic or foul comments that get their own comments deleted. Accept responsibility for your actions, whiner.
Actually, this is totally on-topic. You see, pharmaceutical drug prices are part of the overly-expensive medical care system in America.
And now liberals have a solution: Medicare for All! Which would eliminate private insurance, according to some, which has direct impact on all of us, being in insurance.
So, where are the stories about Medicare for All? Can’t wait.
Rebate kickbacks ARE anti-competitive, and are a prime example of harmful government interference with a competitive markets’ ability to produce the most efficient results for both consumers and producers. Monopolies or duopolies are NOT the most efficient scenario for producers… in most instances, they will be ended or curtailed by responsible lawmakers or judges.
“The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the main drug industry trade group, applauded the move.”
Obviously, these guys are going to benefit somehow. I smell trouble.
And obviously the PBM’s hate it, so we know who is benefitting right now.
Polar, what we need is not a system to produce the most efficient results for both consumers and producers. What we need is a system to produce the best health for our citizens. Health care, with very low price elasticity, can never operate with an efficient market mechanism. Believing otherwise is an article of faith based on the revealed religion of market supremacy. Ayn Rand is dead but even if she were alive she would have no workable solution to healthcare problems other than a suggestion that the poor should simply die now and get out of our hair. Admit it. You would prefer the poor to die. Go on, admit it.
It can’t be that hard, now can it?.
Hilarious. Invective from our Superiors, the Left.
Sweden – which despite liberal mischaracterization, is NOT socialist – recently mandated an EXPANSION of private health care options. What?
You see, they found that private health care kept IMPROVING the dumb, slow, inefficient rationing system offered by government health care.
Competition works. Publish the prices of everything. Then have consumers share some skin in the game. Watch prices fall. (Wait, that’s exactly what Whole Foods and Safeway did and patient satisfaction went UP!)
It isn’t that hard. We just need to confront doctors and hospitals, who make WAY more than doctors or hospitals anywhere else in the world, especially in those lovely “single payer” systems liberals love so much.
@Vox ; I dare you to prove that health care can NEVER operate with an efficient market ‘mechanism’.
Price elasticity is a by-product of Socialized medicine, with limits on doctors fees, etc, A FREE market will adjust prices as needed, without constraints YOU perceive is price inelasticity. Your perception is tainted by living your entire life during a time when MediCare and Medicaid affected health care costs (adversely).
should be ‘price inelasticity’ at start of 2nd sentence. bear culpa.
About time. Go after the lobbyist too. Legalized bribery, smh.
On the surface, this appears to be a good start for the Trump administration. Drug prices are an ever-growing part of our overall health costs.
A study I quoted a few years ago said life-altering drugs comprised 33% of all pharma costs, and that percentage was expected to comprise 50% in the next decade or sooner.
I wonder why IJ hasn’t posted (m)ANY articles on the Democrat Congressional leaders plan to push for MediCare for All (your wages), which would essentially end all private health insurance companies. Hey, health insurance CEOs; what do you think of the Dem’s plan to shut down ALL of your companies? Of course, Barry said IF you Like your plan, you can keep your plan, etc., but in the end, you couldn’t. Dems now say health insurance companies will not go away with Single slayer, er, Single Delayer, uh, Single Payer, and you can trust them to keep their verbal word, right?
They would publish articles critical of liberals but they don’t have time. Too busy deleting mine.
MARCH 26, 2018 AT 9:16 PM
PolarBeaRepeal says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
1
0
PS it is the author of off-topic or foul comments that get their own comments deleted. Accept responsibility for your actions, whiner.
Actually, this is totally on-topic. You see, pharmaceutical drug prices are part of the overly-expensive medical care system in America.
And now liberals have a solution: Medicare for All! Which would eliminate private insurance, according to some, which has direct impact on all of us, being in insurance.
So, where are the stories about Medicare for All? Can’t wait.