4 ms·

The prices of drugs in the USA are especially high. This is interesting because the USA claims to pursue a maximum capitalistic society - but if this were the c

The prices of drugs in the USA are especially high. This is interesting because the USA claims to pursue a maximum capitalistic society - but if this were the case, you'd have competition in a free market. But you don't have that. You have a cartel (or rather more than one). A pure capitalistic society works on assumptions that are not real. People are often cheaters. This would have to be taken into account. But when you have an orange Al Capone in charge, it is pillage day. Even before the orange King you had heavily overcharged prices in the health care system. You need to realise that you have a mafia in charge that does not want to change this system. Why kill the cow that you can milk for free?

MrBuddyCasino 4mo ago
Look at the development of price and quality of something that is outside the regulated medical system, like eg Lasik, and everything within that system. Its like night and day. If we had proper competition and price discovery, things would be much better.
- Geeek 4mo ago
  On the other hand, dental work, especially anything above basic filings, are prohibitively expensive. I'd say Lasik is the exception, not the rule.
  - MrBuddyCasino 4mo ago
    Are you under the impression that dentists are under competitive pressure? The labour supply is artificially limited, similar to other doctor specialisations.
  - mothballed 4mo ago
    Are you in the US? This is not my experience at all. I've paid in US <2000 for dental invasive surgery including general anesthesia straight cash. That's approaching prices for medical care in Mexico.
  - Der_Einzige 4mo ago
    Dentists are only slightly more honest as a profession than Chiropractors. More than half of the one's you meet are outright fraudsters/charlatans/scammers. Most who work in that business will reincarnate as cockroaches or durian fruits.
wk_end 4mo ago
> This is interesting because the USA claims to pursue a maximum capitalistic society No it doesn't. This is silly. Drug prices in the US are high for non-generic drugs because patent law gives the patent holder an artificial government-granted monopoly, which is blatantly not "pure" or "maximum capitalistic". Generic drugs - where the free market does apply - in the US are as cheap or cheaper than in other countries. See [0]: U.S. prices for brand-name originator drugs were 422 percent of prices in comparison countries, while U.S. unbranded generics, which we found account for 90 percent of U.S. prescription volume, were on average cheaper at 67 percent of prices in comparison countries, where on average only 41 percent of prescription volume is for unbranded generics. [0] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11147645/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11147645/
- none2585 4mo ago
  I believe you two are arguing the same thing. Maybe the poster could have better worded it "general thought among most people is that the USA ..." Because you are both absolutely right.
- vjvjvjvjghv 4mo ago
  "Drug prices in the US are high for non-generic drugs because patent law gives the patent holder an artificial government-granted monopoly, which is blatantly not "pure" or "maximum capitalistic"." This is very much capitalistic. It's not competitive markets (which are good for consumers) but capitalists hate competition once they have made it to the top.
  - parineum 4mo ago
    Capitalism doesn't serve capitalists. It's built to create an environment where the capitalist, doing what they do best, also serves the community. Monopolies are anti-capitalism, despite it being something that capital strives for. This is like being upset that bug spray doesn't actually spray bugs, in fact, it actually deters them.
- simiones 4mo ago
  The maximum libertarian alternative to patents isn't free-for-all copying, it's trade secret formulas - e.g. Coca Cola. Drug patents actually exist as a compromise given the clear need for the state to force companies to publish their drug formulas for research. Allowing companies to just keep their drugs secret would be even more capitalistic, and would increase drug prices even more.
bluGill 4mo ago
The US is not a capitalist society, it is a liberal society. Capitalism is a consequence of that but it isn't the reason.
- tehjoker 4mo ago
  This is completely backwards read Marx. Superstructure (culture, politics) flows from the economic base (there are some important exceptions, but that’s the dominant arrow).
  - bluGill 4mo ago
    Marx can say what he wants but history itself disagrees.
  - doublepg23 4mo ago
    > read Marx read Popper
    - tehjoker 3mo ago
      Popper talks about sociology as though it were physics. Unfortunately, competitive games and the subjective belief of people can influence the course of history if the right material conditions are in place. Sometimes you try different things and get different results in different contexts.
Aurornis 4mo ago
> This is interesting because the USA claims to pursue a maximum capitalistic society I don’t know why you think this. The US is not a maximally capitalist society. The reason drug prices are so high is due to regulations restriction who can manufacture them due to government-granted temporary monopolies through patent law. If the US was maximally capitalist it would be a free for all with no patent protection.
- vjvjvjvjghv 4mo ago
  You are confusing capitalism with competitive markets. These are very different things.
- simiones 4mo ago
  > If the US was maximally capitalist it would be a free for all with no patent protection. The much more likely alternative in a maximally capitalist / free market maximalist society would be keeping all drug formulas as trade secrets, and thereby having all drugs as branded, no generics whatsoever (or few - perhaps some substances could be reverse engineered). In such a society, having the state force companies to publish their formulas would be seen as unacceptable interference in the free market, almost certainly.
  - bit-anarchist 4mo ago
    I'm not convinced about trade secrets being the capitalistic route here, specially since, as pointed out somewhere else, the current system is basically like trade-secrets already, which suggest inverted causality. In a pure free market, someone could try to keep the formulas secret, but others can just reverse engineer it into being public, which is basically guaranteed to happen if there's sufficient demand. Given that they aren't wasting money trying to obfuscate the recipe nor the formula, these competitors do have an advantage over the original. As such, I posit that free-to-copy will be default behavior in a pure free market, with trade-scerets being resteicted on niche sectors. The reason we can't do this today is primarily that reverse engineering is heavily restricted by IP laws.
    - 3mo ago

MrBuddyCasino 4mo ago

Look at the development of price and quality of something that is outside the regulated medical system, like eg Lasik, and everything within that system. Its like night and day. If we had proper competition and price discovery, things would be much better.

Geeek 4mo ago
On the other hand, dental work, especially anything above basic filings, are prohibitively expensive. I'd say Lasik is the exception, not the rule.
- MrBuddyCasino 4mo ago
  Are you under the impression that dentists are under competitive pressure? The labour supply is artificially limited, similar to other doctor specialisations.
- mothballed 4mo ago
  Are you in the US? This is not my experience at all. I've paid in US <2000 for dental invasive surgery including general anesthesia straight cash. That's approaching prices for medical care in Mexico.
- Der_Einzige 4mo ago
  Dentists are only slightly more honest as a profession than Chiropractors. More than half of the one's you meet are outright fraudsters/charlatans/scammers. Most who work in that business will reincarnate as cockroaches or durian fruits.

wk_end 4mo ago

> This is interesting because the USA claims to pursue a maximum capitalistic society No it doesn't. This is silly. Drug prices in the US are high for non-generic drugs because patent law gives the patent holder an artificial government-granted monopoly, which is blatantly not "pure" or "maximum capitalistic". Generic drugs - where the free market does apply - in the US are as cheap or cheaper than in other countries. See [0]: U.S. prices for brand-name originator drugs were 422 percent of prices in comparison countries, while U.S. unbranded generics, which we found account for 90 percent of U.S. prescription volume, were on average cheaper at 67 percent of prices in comparison countries, where on average only 41 percent of prescription volume is for unbranded generics. [0] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11147645/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11147645/

none2585 4mo ago
I believe you two are arguing the same thing. Maybe the poster could have better worded it "general thought among most people is that the USA ..." Because you are both absolutely right.
vjvjvjvjghv 4mo ago
"Drug prices in the US are high for non-generic drugs because patent law gives the patent holder an artificial government-granted monopoly, which is blatantly not "pure" or "maximum capitalistic"." This is very much capitalistic. It's not competitive markets (which are good for consumers) but capitalists hate competition once they have made it to the top.
- parineum 4mo ago
  Capitalism doesn't serve capitalists. It's built to create an environment where the capitalist, doing what they do best, also serves the community. Monopolies are anti-capitalism, despite it being something that capital strives for. This is like being upset that bug spray doesn't actually spray bugs, in fact, it actually deters them.
simiones 4mo ago
The maximum libertarian alternative to patents isn't free-for-all copying, it's trade secret formulas - e.g. Coca Cola. Drug patents actually exist as a compromise given the clear need for the state to force companies to publish their drug formulas for research. Allowing companies to just keep their drugs secret would be even more capitalistic, and would increase drug prices even more.

bluGill 4mo ago

The US is not a capitalist society, it is a liberal society. Capitalism is a consequence of that but it isn't the reason.

tehjoker 4mo ago
This is completely backwards read Marx. Superstructure (culture, politics) flows from the economic base (there are some important exceptions, but that’s the dominant arrow).
- bluGill 4mo ago
  Marx can say what he wants but history itself disagrees.
- doublepg23 4mo ago
  > read Marx read Popper
  - tehjoker 3mo ago
    Popper talks about sociology as though it were physics. Unfortunately, competitive games and the subjective belief of people can influence the course of history if the right material conditions are in place. Sometimes you try different things and get different results in different contexts.

Aurornis 4mo ago

> This is interesting because the USA claims to pursue a maximum capitalistic society I don’t know why you think this. The US is not a maximally capitalist society. The reason drug prices are so high is due to regulations restriction who can manufacture them due to government-granted temporary monopolies through patent law. If the US was maximally capitalist it would be a free for all with no patent protection.

vjvjvjvjghv 4mo ago
You are confusing capitalism with competitive markets. These are very different things.
simiones 4mo ago
> If the US was maximally capitalist it would be a free for all with no patent protection. The much more likely alternative in a maximally capitalist / free market maximalist society would be keeping all drug formulas as trade secrets, and thereby having all drugs as branded, no generics whatsoever (or few - perhaps some substances could be reverse engineered). In such a society, having the state force companies to publish their formulas would be seen as unacceptable interference in the free market, almost certainly.
- bit-anarchist 4mo ago
  I'm not convinced about trade secrets being the capitalistic route here, specially since, as pointed out somewhere else, the current system is basically like trade-secrets already, which suggest inverted causality. In a pure free market, someone could try to keep the formulas secret, but others can just reverse engineer it into being public, which is basically guaranteed to happen if there's sufficient demand. Given that they aren't wasting money trying to obfuscate the recipe nor the formula, these competitors do have an advantage over the original. As such, I posit that free-to-copy will be default behavior in a pure free market, with trade-scerets being resteicted on niche sectors. The reason we can't do this today is primarily that reverse engineering is heavily restricted by IP laws.
  - 3mo ago