A Huge Overnight Increase in a Drug’s Price Raises Protests

[Theo520]

The problems are the same because they are caused be human nature.
The additional problem with Govt is the lack of competition at heart. Bad charities get exposed and quickly donations are shifted to other charities, or the charity responds with reforms. That rarely happens in Govt programs.

Perhaps the better model would be if the Govt provided funds to charities that did the execution, and they had competitors for that $, with reporting on how they spent the money and how successful their programs were.

I was asking which one is more important. IMO, it’s a practical - not a philosophical question. Who does what better is a matter of opinion, in my experience. There isn’t a single flaw of government assistance programs that I haven’t seen repeated in charities.

Government wastes - charities waste. Government is plagued by corruption - we also have multiple cases of charities paying millions to their “CEO’s” and giving away expiring junk to the people they’re supposed to be helping. Human beings are human beings and “better” is a matter of what glasses one chooses to wear.

The more important thing is that we at least TRY. Again, God commanded help to the poor, before Christianity was born - so I suspect He is not just speaking to the Church but to all humanity.

Perhaps you might enlighten us on where the Church teaches that helping the poor is a role exclusive to it? Because unlike you, I hardly ever hear that “only government” can help the poor - but rather “helping the poor is the Church’s job, not government’s”. So please enlighten us: where does the Church appropriate that role exclusively?

 

[seekerz]

The problems are the same because they are caused be human nature.
The additional problem with Govt is the lack of competition at heart. Bad charities get exposed and quickly donations are shifted to other charities, or the charity responds with reforms. That rarely happens in Govt programs.

Perhaps the better model would be if the Govt provided funds to charities that did the execution, and they had competitors for that $, with reporting on how they spent the money and how successful their programs were.

You oversimplify these issues, methinks. Any human endeavor, is by definition - imperfect. The point is, the Church to my knowledge, does not teach this new definition of help to the poor as being a command exclusive to itself. I’d be very surprised to find that it EVER has taught this.

 

[Theo520]

You are building another strawman
Who has suggested a “new definition of help to the poor as being a command exclusive to itself (the Church)”

You oversimplify these issues, methinks. Any human endeavor, is by definition - imperfect. The point is, the Church to my knowledge, does not teach this new definition of help to the poor as being a command exclusive to itself. I’d be very surprised to find that it EVER has taught this.

 

[zz912]

It’s a drug that’s rarely used in the US - a very old drug. The company that makes it was recently bought by a former hedge fund manager is what I’ve read. Patent has expired, but I think any company considering making it would have to get their hands on the current product.

So any other drug company is free to make this drug and charge $700/pill instead of the $750/pill the original company is charging. Production of this pill will increase substantially within a month or so if this is true.

Once the other drug companies are producing the drug, the original company will have to lower their price to $650-700 to get back the business they just lost. And the competing companies will lower theirs to $600-650.

A free an open market corrects this problem much quicker than govt bureaucrats.

IMO, it’s nothing but making a profit from human suffering to increase the price of a drug that much. Unbridled capitalism at it’s finest guys. And if that makes me “anti-capitalist”, then I’ll be honored to assume this badge being bandied around with increasing frequency as the Pope gets ready to come stateside. We are here to serve Christ and our neighbors - NOT any man-made system or ideology. If any system doesn’t work at some level, it’s not heresy to speak out against it.

Maybe they are being terrible people, and the free market will punish them severely for their behavior. Hopefully there are no barriers to entry the govt has created to protect this company from the consequences of their behaviors.

 

[sallybutler]

Some states have laws against price gouging. It is possible that he could face criminal charges in Florida. Since his price to produce the product did not go up by that amount (which he admits), and he currently has a monopoly on the product in the United States, he is probably violating all sorts of laws in many different jurisdictions.

 

[zz912]

Some states have laws against price gouging. It is possible that he could face criminal charges in Florida. Since his price to produce the product did not go up by that amount (which he admits), and he currently has a monopoly on the product in the United States, he is probably violating all sorts of laws in many different jurisdictions.

If this is true, then there is the problem. Monopolies are created by govt, protected by govt, and their resulting harm should be laid at the feet of govt.

 

[Theo520]

If this is true, then there is the problem. Monopolies are created by govt, protected by govt, and their resulting harm should be laid at the feet of govt.

The active ingredient is widely produced outside the USA so he can thank the FDA for providing him with a US monopoly.

 

[MugenOne]

Pill cost’s $50.00 and insurance cos will only pay 10%…=$5.00. Increase the amount to $500.00 and insurance cos pays the same =break even! ( this is NOT price gouging !) Where is the problem?: the pharma that is trying to recover costs or the insurance company. The whole system is broken, but you can’t expect the Pharmas to incur the total cost while the big insurance companies pocket our premiums and increase our co-pays.

 

[Theo520]

Pill cost’s $50.00 and insurance cos will only pay 10%…=$5.00. Increase the amount to $500.00 and insurance cos pays the same =break even! ( this is NOT price gouging !) Where is the problem?: the pharma that is trying to recover costs or the insurance company. The whole system is broken, but you can’t expect the Pharmas to incur the total cost while the big insurance companies pocket our premiums and increase our co-pays.

Such Pill costs are as reliable as Hollywood Accounting on movie costs

If we contained the acceptable marketing practices of big Pharma, and approved more generics, the price of drugs would drop and Pharma would still be making a profit. Most of their expenses are to ensure monopoly pricing, not research drugs.

 

[exnihilo]

Capitalism at work, folks.

Not at all. This drug is apparently off patent. I’m not sure whether this is some special formulation. In which case the problem could be Intellectual Property which is not capitalism but a government monopoly. Also I imagine this is in part a big government FDA problem. With a free market someone would just import the cheaper foreign made pill.

Capitalism lowers prices. Socialism and fascism raise them. We are very socialist/fascist but people insist on calling our modern economy, no matter how regulated, free market capitalism.

 

[Inisfallen]

I would trust the Catholic Church with healthcare and helping the poor. The government? Not in the least. Care for the poor is a Church function.

Yes indeed. And the Church has a lot to say about the poor, as well as the limits to the right to private property.

From the Catechism:

In his use of things man should regard the external goods he legitimately owns not merely as exclusive to himself but common to others also, in the sense that they can benefit others as well as himself."188 The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence, with the task of making it fruitful and communicating its benefits to others, first of all his family.

Political authority has the right and duty to regulate the legitimate exercise of the right to ownership for the sake of the common good.

A theory that makes profit the exclusive norm and ultimate end of economic activity is ***morally unacceptable. ***

The development of economic activity and growth in production are meant to provide for the needs of human beings. Economic life is not meant solely to multiply goods produced and increase profit or power; it is ordered first of all to the service of persons, of the whole man, and of the entire human community. Economic activity, conducted according to its own proper methods, is to be exercised within the limits of the moral order, in keeping with social justice so as to correspond to God’s plan for man.

The goods of creation are destined for the entire human race. The right to private property does not abolish the universal destination of goods.

That ain’t socialism, it’s Catholicism.

 

[sallybutler]

Pill cost’s $50.00 and insurance cos will only pay 10%…=$5.00. Increase the amount to $500.00 and insurance cos pays the same =break even! ( this is NOT price gouging !) Where is the problem?: the pharma that is trying to recover costs or the insurance company. The whole system is broken, but you can’t expect the Pharmas to incur the total cost while the big insurance companies pocket our premiums and increase our co-pays.

Generally, when the insurance company only pays a certain amount, the patient ends up paying the rest. Pharma is not involved at that point.

Parma sells to pharmacist
Doctor prescribes
Patient buys from pharmacist
Patient tells Insurance company how much they paid
Insurance company says how nice, we’ll reimburse you this much.

Now, if a pharmacist has an agreement with the insurance company, than the pharmacist may also eat a portion of the cost that the insurance company didn’t pay.

However, almost never is the pharma company that produced the product involved once they sell it to the distributors (aka, the pharmacists).

PS, the pharmacist may bill the insurance company directly, but if they overcharge what the insurance company is willing to pay, you will get a bill.

 

[Theo520]

Please provide links or section number for your Catechism reference.

I see the Catechism as guidance on how Catholics should conduct their affairs. I also don’t see conflict between what you quoted vs our present system of Govt.

Yes indeed. And the Church has a lot to say about the poor, as well as the limits to the right to private property.

From the Catechism:

That ain’t socialism, it’s Catholicism.

 

[MugenOne]

It is not capitalism or monopoly that some drugs cost so much. You should take a look into FDA orphan disease and/or breakthrough designation. Without such FDA designation, biopharmaceuticals won’t risk millions of dollars trying to develop and market drugs to orphan diseases sufferers. Those drugs cost hundred of thousands of dollar per year.

For Mrs. Clinton, she is just trying to deflect attention away from all her other problems. She is not a good or honest person. No doubt that prescription drugs are too expensive, but only when she needs them does she raise her voice! Problem has been getting increasingly worse, but her grandstanding is not the answer.

 

[gnjsdad]

Where have you gone, Dr. Jonas Salk?

 

[Inisfallen]

Please provide links or section number for your Catechism reference.

I see the Catechism as guidance on how Catholics should conduct their affairs. I also don’t see conflict between what you quoted vs our present system of Govt.

I don’t see a conflict, as such, but more of an admonition. The Catechism says that “[p]olitical authority has the right and duty to regulate the legitimate exercise of the right to ownership for the sake of the common good,” and I think we could do with quite a bit more regulation.

 

[_thaddeus]

It’s cheap at any price. Mr Shkreli says “Daraprim is still underpriced relative to its peers,”

US pharmaceutical company defends 5,000% price increase
bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34320413
"
“We needed to turn a profit on this drug,” Mr Shkreli told Bloomberg TV. “The companies before us were actually giving it away almost.”

He says the practice is not out of line with the rest of the industry.

“These days, modern pharmaceuticals, cancer drugs can cost $100,000 or more, whereas these drugs can cost half a million dollars. Daraprim is still underpriced relative to its peers,” he told Bloomberg TV.

On Twitter, Mr Shkreli mocked several users who questioned the company’s decision, calling one reporter “a moron”.
"

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[seekerz]

This is dangerously close to saying the ends justify the means.

Who does it equates to how it is done? In what book?

 

[seekerz]

You are building another strawman
Who has suggested a “new definition of help to the poor as being a command exclusive to itself (the Church)”

Everybody who says it is the Church’s role and ***not ***the government’s, to help the poor. I’ve never once seen the Church teach that.

For example:

Originally Posted by JonNC View Post
I would trust the Catholic Church with healthcare and helping the poor. The government? Not in the least.*** Care for the poor is a Church function***.

Emphasis, mine.

 

[seekerz]

So any other drug company is free to make this drug and charge $700/pill instead of the $750/pill the original company is charging. Production of this pill will increase substantially within a month or so if this is true.

Once the other drug companies are producing the drug, the original company will have to lower their price to $650-700 to get back the business they just lost. And the competing companies will lower theirs to $600-650.

A free an open market corrects this problem much quicker than govt bureaucrats.

Maybe they are being terrible people, and the free market will punish them severely for their behavior. Hopefully there are no barriers to entry the govt has created to protect this company from the consequences of their behaviors.

Surely you jest?

It’s a rare condition. Nobody’s going to run into the breach and start making it.

Is there never a limit to profit levels? Or is capitalism our new religion?