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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (778080)	4/2/2014 5:07:44 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By PKRBKR Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573941

The above is exactly the type of wrong headed thinking you engage in. Negotiating has nothing to do with price controls. It isn't "wrong headed". It is just reflective of an understanding of what is actually happening. When government sets the fees Medicare will pay a physician for performing a moderate complexity established patient office visit (CPT 99213) it doesn't "negotiate" the price. It says, "As we do every January 1, we are setting the payment schedules for your services. Physicians in [State] performing a 99213 will be paid $x.xx. There is no negotiation. There is no give-and-take. There is, "That is how much it will be." That's not negotiation. That is a price controlled payment. And in fact, Medicare and Medicaid both are price controlled because there is no arms-length negotiation and prices of services are set by government fiat. >> Letting big pharma set their price and we can take it or leave it is price controlling!!! No. By definition, business cannot price control anything (that would be illegal). Government and only government can do that. Why is it that you see Big Pharma as "price controlling" when they set the prices for a drug but you don't see government as price controlling when they do precisely the same thing?