4 ms·

The USA should nationalize the health care industry and all the pharmaceutical companies. Illness should not be a source of profit.

andsoitis 2y ago
> The USA should nationalize the health care industry and all the pharmaceutical companies. Novo Nordisk is a Danish company. Read that again: it is European.
- AequitasOmnibus 2y ago
  Nationalized healthcare doesn’t stop at a pharmaceutical manufacturer’s borders. You think NHS or any other country with socialized medicine pays what the US does? With socialized healthcare the pharmaceutical companies pay what the nation dictates or it doesn’t do business with that nation. I highly doubt Novo Nordisk would write off the US if it went to Medicare for all.
- redwoolf 2y ago
  Not really sure what that has to do with anything. It would be easy for the USA to keep Novo Nordisk from doing business within its borders and have a nationalized pharmaceutical company produce the drugs at cost.
JKCalhoun 2y ago
I recall when we hiked to to Canada to get the same drugs at a fraction of the price. No need to pirate, just kick in gear the Great White express.
- lesuorac 2y ago
  Dallas Buyers Club needs to go north
bottlepalm 2y ago
Like education, government involvement only causes prices to go up. Why wouldn't they? The government has unlimited money. The education and healthcare industry beats the government like a money pinata. Why would you suggest more government to a government created problem? Usually because people don't realize the government as the root cause in the first place. Get the government out, let people actually pay for their own health care, so they actually 'care' what they're paying. Use insurance for the exceptions cases. And social programs for the people who really can't afford it. Capitalism actually works if you let it.
- schmidt_fifty 2y ago
  [dead]
- A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
  > Capitalism actually works if you let it. Right. This is why drugs like BPC-157, mentioned above, go for $25/month. There's a lot of competition on the gray market, and often the only way for vendors to differentiate themselves from the pack is on pricing, so drugs rarely if ever sell for more than double their manufacturing cost. In the world of legitimate patented pharmaceuticals, the manufacturing cost is not even a consideration. It is often -- as it is here -- less than a single percentage point of the sale price.
- redwoolf 2y ago
  > Capitalism actually works if you let it. This argument is always that if the government would just step out of the way the private market would provide for everyone and there would be full employment. As though somehow things like minimum wages and OSHA are what keep capitalism from reaching its full potential. As though things were better in the 19th century. I've read Friedman and Hayek. The world they wanted is a terrifying world indeed.
  - bottlepalm 2y ago
    Nothing wrong with minimum wage and OSHA. When the government creates a level playing field, capitalism can flourish. When companies stop competing with each other, and start trying to suck as much money out of the government that they can - that's when things fall apart.
derbOac 2y ago
I think there should be more competition, and one source of competition should be public health care and maybe publicly subsidized medical supply corporations or nonprofits. I don't know that nationalizing existing private companies is really necessary.
RcouF1uZ4gsC 2y ago
> Illness should not be a source of profit. Exactly. Let's take this further. Nobody should be making money off other people's suffering. So. Let's also zero out doctor's and nurse's salaries. Hospital administrator's salaries. This would also apply to all charities that try to alleviate any suffering. No administrator should make any money off other people's suffering. The only profitable enterprise should be showing ads!
- redwoolf 2y ago
  This is a very disingenuous argument. There's a huge difference between a doctor making $300k a year and a relatively small amount of people making millions (or billions) selling easily mass produced chemicals at prices that can't be afforded out-of-pocket. And you know this, but you think you're being clever. It's not clever.
  - RcouF1uZ4gsC 2y ago
    This is a very disingenuous argument. These same people are the ones who formulated a chemical that works, proved that it works, proved that it is safe. That same chemical improves the health of the population saving billions in costs and quality adjusted life years. So just describing it as just a manufacturing cost is disingenuous. And you know this, but you think you're being clever. It's not clever.
zefalt 2y ago
Going to leave a link here to a reddit thread I ran across recently for the curious. https://old.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1cn8dy8/what_are_the_strongest_indicators_of_current_uk/ https://old.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1cn8dy8/what... Look at how many times NHS is referenced and how it is viewed by those utilizing the system. In my opinion, socialized medicine tends to fail as the overall demand for healthcare will usually exceed the available supply in most societies. I'm sure there are counterexamples to be provided; however, I think the benefits of a capitalist healthcare system are underappreciated.
- moate 2y ago
  Your point is “we have too many sick people, let some of them die so the rich can keep their ease of access” and it’s gross. That’s what “demand” represents in this equation. Not people who want faster cars or different colored Stanley cups, but access to life saving drugs and treatment. I’m not saying para-socialized systems are better (it’s capitalism with a wig) but the “benefits” of capitalism are nowhere near equally shared and in fact highly concentrated at the top. The benefits are in fact over-appreciated by those who have them and they will do anything to keep the dirt people away from their stash. I don’t have a solution, but my point is praising mass death for the squalid masses is tacky and I personally wouldn’t do it on public forums. *edited for spelling error
  - zefalt 2y ago
    I am a physician, and I am also entitled to my own opinions. You can take a moral highground if your want. But, I feel I know more about healthcare than most people on this public forum. I tend to deal in practicality. And where do you see me praising mass death? Further edit: I would go far enough to say you lack any understanding of our current healthcare system besides meaningless feelings on how it should be in a utopian society. Resources are not limitless. There is a continual shortage of healthcare providers which there are no good solutions for currently. If you don't want to address this reality, there is really nothing to address at all.
    - 2y ago
namlem 2y ago
No thanks, I'd rather not permanently destroy a productive and innovative industry with communist schemes.

andsoitis 2y ago

> The USA should nationalize the health care industry and all the pharmaceutical companies. Novo Nordisk is a Danish company. Read that again: it is European.

AequitasOmnibus 2y ago
Nationalized healthcare doesn’t stop at a pharmaceutical manufacturer’s borders. You think NHS or any other country with socialized medicine pays what the US does? With socialized healthcare the pharmaceutical companies pay what the nation dictates or it doesn’t do business with that nation. I highly doubt Novo Nordisk would write off the US if it went to Medicare for all.
redwoolf 2y ago
Not really sure what that has to do with anything. It would be easy for the USA to keep Novo Nordisk from doing business within its borders and have a nationalized pharmaceutical company produce the drugs at cost.

JKCalhoun 2y ago

I recall when we hiked to to Canada to get the same drugs at a fraction of the price. No need to pirate, just kick in gear the Great White express.

lesuorac 2y ago
Dallas Buyers Club needs to go north

bottlepalm 2y ago

Like education, government involvement only causes prices to go up. Why wouldn't they? The government has unlimited money. The education and healthcare industry beats the government like a money pinata. Why would you suggest more government to a government created problem? Usually because people don't realize the government as the root cause in the first place. Get the government out, let people actually pay for their own health care, so they actually 'care' what they're paying. Use insurance for the exceptions cases. And social programs for the people who really can't afford it. Capitalism actually works if you let it.

schmidt_fifty 2y ago
[dead]
A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
> Capitalism actually works if you let it. Right. This is why drugs like BPC-157, mentioned above, go for $25/month. There's a lot of competition on the gray market, and often the only way for vendors to differentiate themselves from the pack is on pricing, so drugs rarely if ever sell for more than double their manufacturing cost. In the world of legitimate patented pharmaceuticals, the manufacturing cost is not even a consideration. It is often -- as it is here -- less than a single percentage point of the sale price.
redwoolf 2y ago
> Capitalism actually works if you let it. This argument is always that if the government would just step out of the way the private market would provide for everyone and there would be full employment. As though somehow things like minimum wages and OSHA are what keep capitalism from reaching its full potential. As though things were better in the 19th century. I've read Friedman and Hayek. The world they wanted is a terrifying world indeed.
- bottlepalm 2y ago
  Nothing wrong with minimum wage and OSHA. When the government creates a level playing field, capitalism can flourish. When companies stop competing with each other, and start trying to suck as much money out of the government that they can - that's when things fall apart.

derbOac 2y ago

I think there should be more competition, and one source of competition should be public health care and maybe publicly subsidized medical supply corporations or nonprofits. I don't know that nationalizing existing private companies is really necessary.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 2y ago

> Illness should not be a source of profit. Exactly. Let's take this further. Nobody should be making money off other people's suffering. So. Let's also zero out doctor's and nurse's salaries. Hospital administrator's salaries. This would also apply to all charities that try to alleviate any suffering. No administrator should make any money off other people's suffering. The only profitable enterprise should be showing ads!

redwoolf 2y ago
This is a very disingenuous argument. There's a huge difference between a doctor making $300k a year and a relatively small amount of people making millions (or billions) selling easily mass produced chemicals at prices that can't be afforded out-of-pocket. And you know this, but you think you're being clever. It's not clever.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 2y ago
  This is a very disingenuous argument. These same people are the ones who formulated a chemical that works, proved that it works, proved that it is safe. That same chemical improves the health of the population saving billions in costs and quality adjusted life years. So just describing it as just a manufacturing cost is disingenuous. And you know this, but you think you're being clever. It's not clever.

zefalt 2y ago

Going to leave a link here to a reddit thread I ran across recently for the curious. https://old.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1cn8dy8/what_are_the_strongest_indicators_of_current_uk/ https://old.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1cn8dy8/what... Look at how many times NHS is referenced and how it is viewed by those utilizing the system. In my opinion, socialized medicine tends to fail as the overall demand for healthcare will usually exceed the available supply in most societies. I'm sure there are counterexamples to be provided; however, I think the benefits of a capitalist healthcare system are underappreciated.

moate 2y ago
Your point is “we have too many sick people, let some of them die so the rich can keep their ease of access” and it’s gross. That’s what “demand” represents in this equation. Not people who want faster cars or different colored Stanley cups, but access to life saving drugs and treatment. I’m not saying para-socialized systems are better (it’s capitalism with a wig) but the “benefits” of capitalism are nowhere near equally shared and in fact highly concentrated at the top. The benefits are in fact over-appreciated by those who have them and they will do anything to keep the dirt people away from their stash. I don’t have a solution, but my point is praising mass death for the squalid masses is tacky and I personally wouldn’t do it on public forums. *edited for spelling error
- zefalt 2y ago
  I am a physician, and I am also entitled to my own opinions. You can take a moral highground if your want. But, I feel I know more about healthcare than most people on this public forum. I tend to deal in practicality. And where do you see me praising mass death? Further edit: I would go far enough to say you lack any understanding of our current healthcare system besides meaningless feelings on how it should be in a utopian society. Resources are not limitless. There is a continual shortage of healthcare providers which there are no good solutions for currently. If you don't want to address this reality, there is really nothing to address at all.
  - 2y ago

namlem 2y ago

No thanks, I'd rather not permanently destroy a productive and innovative industry with communist schemes.