3 ms·
the problem there is that our drug sector is so bloated that we'd need to pay 10x-1000x for every drug produced domestically. the government can't just mandate
by clairity 7y ago
the problem there is that our drug sector is so bloated that we'd need to pay 10x-1000x for every drug produced domestically. the government can't just mandate a production number and a price, as then that's essentially state control (and susceptible to corruption).
we really need drugs to move more rapidly through the cycle of being novel and experimental to patent-unencumbered commodities, and open up competition in hospitals (i.e., don't let them charge $400 a pop for their monopoly tylenol). in fact, we need a more vigilant and active FTC and a high-functioning commerce department to stamp out monopoly behavior and encouurage competition across the board.
i'm also ok with setting up tariffs, with mandatory sunset provisions, to allow time for international price equalization of all sorts of outsourced industries. global markets aren't yet competitive and equitable (for instance, pricing in pollution externalities on manufacturing and shipping), and we won't get a structural move to re-industrialization without it.
- tracker1 7y agoDual sourcing as a requirement would mean having to license patents at a reasonable rate in order to even sell their product. In practice, it would largely sort itself out. Dual sourcing would largely offset the protections of patents in the system... of course there should also be patent reform, but at least with a dual sourcing requirement it would largely allow for self-correcting.
- tracker1 7y agoIn addition to my prior comment. U.S. manufacturing would not cost anything resembling 10x production cost vs. China. And even then, it's only a very small part of drug company expenses, and pricing is largely market driven, not based on a a true cost + markup equation anyway.