I did not say they were stupid I just said history indicates that there bad at economics. I'm basing my opinion off verifiable facts in empirical evidence on the performances of of the economy under various presidents. That's a really good book about it I think it's called bulls and bears. Individual presidents non withstanding the Democratic Party is objectively better and economics in the Republican party in every metric.

I don't like the Democratic Party views are a bunch of raging p****** we have to give credit where it's due.

Democrats are better at the economy and republicans are better at religion.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jul 31 2019 03:19pm

Back oin the 70's or early 80's I remember there was a freeze on federal salaries for a while.

I don't see why this or a cap of prescription costs couldn't be implemented. I was readings about the Canadian insulin prices the other day, and in the article they claimed that it cost $6 in the US to manufacture the insulin.
I have no clue if that $6 price is accurate, but I do know that most medicines are very cheap to produce, compared to what they sell for.

Maybe we need another amendment that says something like... you can only charge a set percentage over cost on things people need to stay alive. Not want... but need. Like food and medicine.
Seems to me to be the rational thing to do.

Cool, vote for Bernie Sanders.

LOL. I think what I just said and Bernie's platform are two wildly different things.

He wrote the damn bill that would do this.

such a cap is a horrible idea. the bulk of the cost with many drugs lies not in the production, but in the research and development process. if you cap the revenue at a set percentage over costs, no pharma company would research any cheap to produce drugs anymore since they would have no way to make back their high R&D expenditures from such a cheap drug.

capping big pharma's profit margins, on the other hand, would go a long way to more affordable healthcare.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jul 31 2019 04:28pm

The 70s had stagflation too.

Democrats = socialism = evil but let's put a cap on drug prices




Talking out of both sides of your mouth here.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jul 31 2019 04:29pm

You say potato, I say... etc.


/e 90% of the drugs in question are already long past the R&D stage.

This post was edited by Ghot on Jul 31 2019 04:33pm

so mario lopez got cancelled i guess for saying 3 year olds should not be making important decisions about trans issues
here's what he said that got him cancelled


he ofcouse apologized later for being "ignorant"

why? say a drug had created $25m in R&D cost, plus another $10m to set up the production. it costs $6 to produce one dose, and a law written by president Ghot limits their profit per dose to 16% of its production cost, i.e. to 1 dollar per dose. if it's not a super high volume drug, the company will really struggle to make back the upfront cost.

so what will they do the next time when they're in the research stage and discover a potential drug which could be effective, but would be cheap to produce? they would be inclined to scrap the development of this drug since the percentage-over-cost cap increases the risk of not making the upfront cost back from this drug, yielding a net loss, and it greatly reduces the expected profit over the drug's lifespan even if things go well.



president Black_XistenZ's proposal is to say "if your profit margin (profit divided by revenue) exceeds the threshold of X% in a year by Y percentage points, then you are forced to lower your drug prices by that much in the following year". (a mechanism can be added to take into account the delay between research investment and the revenue this investment generates a couple of years later.)

hence, every pharma company would be allowed to operate with a profit margin of X%, no matter which drugs they produce or how they allocate their R&D resources, but if they get greedy and go beyond X%, an automatism kicks in which keeps the healthcare costs from drugs and the profit margins of big pharma in a healthy balance. my proposal would leave all relevant business decisions to the companies, would not stifle innovation, would still leave the pharma market attractive, but rein in the worst excesses this market would produce if left unchecked.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jul 31 2019 04:52pm