5 ms·

> 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-gen

by 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.
- mothballed 4mo ago
  They keep their processes secret instead under the current system, achieving a "trade-secret" like result for some drugs. For some drugs it achieves the same thing because finding a practical economic synthesis is the hard part rather than coming upon a small bit of chemical that is proven to be effective. For others it wouldn't matter whether you kept it secret or not, someone would isolate and characterize it and reverse engineer a practical synthesis. The biggest value protector arguably of the patent-FDA approval process is on the FDA side, who create massive barriers to entry that mitigate close unpatented chemical competitors from outside the pharma oligopoly from competing.
  - simiones 4mo ago
    I'm not really happy with the current system either - I tend to think that the state should just mandate that all medical research be fully published, and either have companies compete on research and manufacturing, or pay for it directly if it can't be made to work as a private business. My point was just that this is very much not a capitalist or libertarian position.
  - NoMoreNicksLeft 4mo ago
    Is the patent not for the synthesis route itself, rather than the drug? Someone can't just plop down a chemical formula on a piece of paper and patent that, can they?
- ItsMonkk 4mo ago
  This is where prizes come in. If you create a drug and keep it secret, the government can grant you a large prize as an offer to reveal your secret. This is a much better compromise. The company will end up with more money(and faster!) as a result of this prize than under a patent system - since the patent system induces dead-weight losses, and the government will end up with more lives saved.
datsci_est_2015 4mo ago
And yet, the defense of the status quo often relies on the supposition that the US is a capitalist nation, perhaps even a “maximally capitalist” one. I’ll have to keep this in mind the next time it comes up…

by wk_end 4mo ago

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.

mothballed 4mo ago
They keep their processes secret instead under the current system, achieving a "trade-secret" like result for some drugs. For some drugs it achieves the same thing because finding a practical economic synthesis is the hard part rather than coming upon a small bit of chemical that is proven to be effective. For others it wouldn't matter whether you kept it secret or not, someone would isolate and characterize it and reverse engineer a practical synthesis. The biggest value protector arguably of the patent-FDA approval process is on the FDA side, who create massive barriers to entry that mitigate close unpatented chemical competitors from outside the pharma oligopoly from competing.
- simiones 4mo ago
  I'm not really happy with the current system either - I tend to think that the state should just mandate that all medical research be fully published, and either have companies compete on research and manufacturing, or pay for it directly if it can't be made to work as a private business. My point was just that this is very much not a capitalist or libertarian position.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 4mo ago
  Is the patent not for the synthesis route itself, rather than the drug? Someone can't just plop down a chemical formula on a piece of paper and patent that, can they?
ItsMonkk 4mo ago
This is where prizes come in. If you create a drug and keep it secret, the government can grant you a large prize as an offer to reveal your secret. This is a much better compromise. The company will end up with more money(and faster!) as a result of this prize than under a patent system - since the patent system induces dead-weight losses, and the government will end up with more lives saved.

datsci_est_2015 4mo ago

And yet, the defense of the status quo often relies on the supposition that the US is a capitalist nation, perhaps even a “maximally capitalist” one. I’ll have to keep this in mind the next time it comes up…