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: gg cox who wrote (41933)	8/4/2017 3:49:00 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

but this still sums it all up Well that takes it a step up. Not it is a bad (implied) argument for the point, rather than not an argument at all. Responding to each panel that makes a coherent enough point to respond to - 2. Government and private not for profit insurance organizations also deny coverage for treatment. 3 - We also allow food producers, wholesalers and retailers to charge what the market will bear. It works out better than central planning. You might argue that health insurance is different but it would be up to you to explain why and how. 4 - This panel is probably the strongest of the bunch, but it is rather simplistic. The response to the third panel somewhat serves as a response to this one as well, but it would be a rather incomplete response. After all importing drugs is a market action, not a command and control imposition on the market. In this case the command and control imposition is price controls in foreign countries. But mostly its not price controls as such but rather monopsony or near monopsony power. A monopsony buyer can drive down prices so there is that. OTOH doing so will reduce the incentive for new development which is already hit by the huge cost to get a drug tested and approved. Using such monopsony power can under the right conditions be beneficial for the people where the power is used. Its likely beneficial in the short run, and in the long run it can still be beneficial as long as someone else is paying high enough prices to incentivize further research, development, testing, and approval costs. The problem here would be if the US forces prices down with price controls or monopsony buying there is no large Martian drug market around to pick up the slack.