isadore;1315973 wrote:no it would mean they would have to spread the cost around more evenly to other nations rather than inflict it only on Americans.

I don't think you really understand how single payer systems work.

gut;1316100 wrote:I don't think you really understand how single payer systems work.

my above statement is about medical costs, especially drugs.

As for Candidates who I think will try for the GOP nomination in 2016

Christie
Rubio
Paul (Rand)
Jindal

I would say those Four are early candidates. I do think that maybe Paul Ryan and Jeb Bush may also be in the mix.


As for Dems

Hillary
Biden
Cuomo

I do think Hillary is the most likely of those

isadore;1316101 wrote:my above statement is about medical costs, especially drugs.

So is mine. You don't understand how single payer works.

They make much less profit globally, sometimes even at a loss, on drugs because they are a price taker. By being able to charge higher prices in the US, we have subsidized those R&D costs. But still we have seen them cutting less profitable drugs and R&D for drugs with smaller markets. Have the US start dictating margins and they will cut even more drugs and R&D.

It's hard for me to whine about subsidizing global pharma when the US gets subsidized interest rates and oil. There are other gives and takes, but that's the global economy in a nutshell. There are winners and losers, but the US is hardly a net loser in that game.

gut;1316109 wrote:So is mine. You don't understand how single payer works.

They make much less profit globally, sometimes even at a loss, on drugs because they are a price taker. By being able to charge higher prices in the US, we have subsidized those R&D costs. But still we have seen them cutting less profitable drugs and R&D for drugs with smaller markets. Have the US start dictating margins and they will cut even more drugs and R&D.

It's hard for me to whine about subsidizing global pharma when the US gets subsidized interest rates and oil. There are other gives and takes, but that's the global economy in a nutshell. There are winners and losers, but the US is hardly a net loser in that game.

Gosh 6 out of the nine largest drug producers in the world are not American. They are from Switzerland, Germany, UK and France, nations with healthcare systems with greater government involvement than ours.
Why should we be subsidizing drug production for these foreign corporations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_industry

isadore;1316155 wrote:Gosh 6 out of the nine largest drug producers in the world are not American. They are from Switzerland, Germany, UK and France, nations with healthcare systems with greater government involvement than ours.
Why should we be subsidizing drug production for these foreign corporations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_industry

Ummm, ever hear of exporting? And, ummmm, half those revenues are US companies. So I'm not sure what the point is, other than you are clueless.

I'm not saying we SHOULD subsidize it, I'm saying we do. And when you remove that subsidy, R&D will suffer. But with Obamakare you'll be able to go to the doctor and get a script for a nice sugar pill.

gut;1316189 wrote:Ummm, ever hear of exporting? And, ummmm, half those revenues are US companies. So I'm not sure what the point is, other than you are clueless.

I'm not saying we SHOULD subsidize it, I'm saying we do. And when you remove that subsidy, R&D will suffer. But with Obamakare you'll be able to go to the doctor and get a script for a nice sugar pill.

So, half those revenues are not for American Companies. Each of those countries has standards of living comparatively close to ours, longer life spans, health systems with greater government involvement, much and much lower heath care costs per person. Why shouldn’t they subsidize R&D as much as we do. Greater government control would allow us to have more control over the prices. Gosh the drug companies prevent it when Medicare Drug Plan was set up because of Republican efforts to protect them.

why

isadore;1316210 wrote:So, half those revenues are not for American Companies. Each of those countries has standards of living comparatively close to ours, longer life spans, health systems with greater government involvement, much and much lower heath care costs per person. Why shouldn’t they subsidize R&D as much as we do. Greater government control would allow us to have more control over the prices. Gosh the drug companies prevent it when Medicare Drug Plan was set up because of Republican efforts to protect them.

Do you not understand the concept of exporting?

gut;1316215 wrote:Do you not understand the concept of exporting?

gosh just a private health system that make sure the Americans get ripped off to support drug companies, many of which are foreign. and other countries with comparative standards of living and greater government control over health care system are able to get better prices for their people.

isadore;1316266 wrote:gosh just a private health system that make sure the Americans get ripped off to support drug companies, many of which are foreign. and other countries with comparative standards of living and greater government control over health care system are able to get better prices for their people.

You are truly clueless. I know you are searching for enlightenment - you're in for a rude awakening if you ever find it.

Well...that didn't take long.

http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/rubio-heads-iowa_662073.html

gut;1316413 wrote:You are truly clueless. I know you are searching for enlightenment - you're in for a rude awakening if you ever find it.

gosh a ruddies it would be great if American were not being ripped by the drug companies.

isadore;1316454 wrote:gosh a ruddies it would be great if American were not being ripped by the drug companies.

And the trade-off will be fewer new medicines to fight disease. You get what you pay for.