Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (3369)	12/20/2007 6:28:38 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Marketing might have a higher budget than R&D, but probably not than R&D + testing and approval. It probably does but I don't have time to do the research. If the government actually became the customer, you would not need much marketing at all. ------------------------------------------------ Not really true. There would be expenses associated with direct lobbying of government, as well as marketing to people to 1 - Get them to argue for approval, and 2 - Get them to want to take the drug. That last is probably the most significant, and it closely resembles the current marketing issues that drug companies face. Right now the customers often don't pay for the drugs, their insurance companies (including government insurance like Medicare) do, but the drug companies still have to market to the consumers. It would vastly reduce the cost of marketing/advertising. You watch TV right? How many ads do you see for drugs? It's ridiculous... and shows that the margins are out of the ballpark. Why? Because of government subsidizes of basic research. And in turn the drug companies subsidize the politicians political campaigns. I think that the US consumer should pay the free market price for products, not some government renegotiated for forced price. The marketplace IS the government. It's organized itself in the most efficient fashion to reduce cost... you should like that. The outlier is the US, which chooses not to participate in the efficient marketplace. Also when the government really does negotiate a price (rather than set one by fiat) it often pays more. The tales of $500 toilet seats might exaggerate the effect, but the effect still exists. So that's good for your side, eh?