Let unpack both of your points separate. Last point, first: I don't mind subsidizing the world to a degree. A lot of these are US companies or international pha

Let unpack both of your points separate. Last point, first: I don't mind subsidizing the world to a degree. A lot of these are US companies or international pharma with substantial US presence. The US is a phenomenally wealthy country, and a healthy and stable world is in everyone's interest along with being a moral imperative. The balance of whom that is falling on is inequitable for various reasons within the US, though. Back to your first point: this is exactly about companies charging crazy markups. Look at https://costplusdrugs.com/ https://costplusdrugs.com/ for some examples of how bad it is. Now, we all understand that R&D and studies for safety are necessary and expensive, and not every drug succeeds. Every successful drug pays those as amortized costs, it's not simply a matter of manufacturing and raw materials. However, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Shkreli https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Shkreli was a famous and egregious example vis a vis Daraprim of a common practice. Further, you have increases for non-elastic needs (insulin, epi-pens) that far exceeds increases to increases in manufacturing costs. Then you ones like Solvaldi that are just priced on the max the market will bear: https://www.fiercepharma.com/financials/gilead-prices-hep-c-giant-sovaldi-china-at-one-fifth-u-s-price-report https://www.fiercepharma.com/financials/gilead-prices-hep-c-... ... this is not all about recovering development and testing costs, obviously.