How much money should big pharma make off a Vaccine developed with public funds?

[fingerbang]

I listened to this and found it fascinating given the world I come from.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/is...avirus-vaccine

I believe that with something like this... something that is made with public money the amount of "Profit" drug companies can make off of public money should be limited.

Why does the government need to fund any of it to begin with? There's obviously plenty of incentive for a company to create a vaccine and I see no reason why they wouldn't be able to come up with funding on their own.

The failure isn't capitalism, it's big government intertwined with big business and that ain't capitalism.

[nastynice]

Why does the government need to fund any of it to begin with? There's obviously plenty of incentive for a company to create a vaccine and I see no reason why they wouldn't be able to come up with funding on their own.

The failure isn't capitalism, it's big government intertwined with big business and that ain't capitalism.

The only reason the failure isnt capitalism is because big govt is intertwined with big business. If they weren't, the failure would be capitalism.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Scoots]

They will....they're wrong, but they will...however, I believe it will along the line of Medicare type profits...if so, at least a BIT less.

What a lot of people don't realize with pharma, too, is the fact they have for decades routinely priced their NEW drug high enough to fund research on their NEXT drug. On top of that having deals with the various insurance companies to push them. For example, I have Type 2 Diabetes. The first few years since I was diagnosed, I took the weekly shot Trulicity. I paid $25/mo but I know the 'retail' price is around $900/mo. I have no idea how much the insurance company actually pays. But, earlier this year I changed jobs and my new insurance company prefers a different shot. Matters not to them that I've now had several months of things like blurred vision while my body transitions, it's just the company they have the best deal with. So, while MY cost didn't change much, the 'retail' price of Victoza is 'only' around $750/mo.

Now, multiply scenarios like that hundreds of millions of times....and that doesn't even get into the Medicaid scenarios....and you start to see how big pharma has far too much power.

The drug companies are trying to maximize profits before their drugs go generic, and the fact that regular consumers are not paying the prices they get to set them at whatever they want and the consumer gets secretly screwed. The promotional deals with health providers is, as you say, a major issue too.

This is one of the many reasons I support a consumer based fix to universal health care

[Crovash]

Why does the government need to fund any of it to begin with?

The failure isn't capitalism, it's big government intertwined with big business and that ain't capitalism.

Good point. Just think of it, if we had unregulated capitalism, not only would many more old people have died in those nursing homes run by private equity companies, but a good chunk of the population would have killed themselves with remedies such as, say, drinking draino or injecting battery acid (admittedly, a segment of the population we could probably do without anyway).

[GGGGG-Men]

Why does the government need to fund any of it to begin with? There's obviously plenty of incentive for a company to create a vaccine and I see no reason why they wouldn't be able to come up with funding on their own.

The failure isn't capitalism, it's big government intertwined with big business and that ain't capitalism.

Have we anointed you the resident libertarian yet? We should. You’re a great libertarian. Even if you don’t want the label.

[Scoots]

Good point. Just think of it, if we had unregulated capitalism, not only would many more old people have died in those nursing homes run by private equity companies, but a good chunk of the population would have killed themselves with remedies such as, say, drinking draino or injecting battery acid (admittedly, a segment of the population we could probably do without anyway).

You know he didn't say he wanted unregulated capitalism. The point is that corrupt government leads to corrupt results, it's not that capitalism fails so much as the people overseeing it are corrupt (much the same as what happens with socialism and communism).

[ewing]

Why does the government need to fund any of it to begin with? There's obviously plenty of incentive for a company to create a vaccine and I see no reason why they wouldn't be able to come up with funding on their own.

The failure isn't capitalism, it's big government intertwined with big business and that ain't capitalism.

Do you think the Market can exist without rules? Like its a pure and naturally occurring thing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ewing]

You know he didn't say he wanted unregulated capitalism. The point is that corrupt government leads to corrupt results, it's not that capitalism fails so much as the people overseeing it are corrupt (much the same as what happens with socialism and communism).

What’s unregulated capitalism? Barter? It’s a myth. When people don’t like the regulation they pretend all regulation is bad and that the market is some intrinsically good naturally occurring thing. When they like the regulations it’s no longer govt interference its part of this organic market. It’s a myth. I think Finger definitely buys into the myth.

You are right powerful people will always be corrupt to some degree. The idea that we can eliminate that through deregulation is BS. Good rules limit corruption. Bad rules not so much but the market needs rules.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crovash]

You know he didn't say he wanted unregulated capitalism. The point is that corrupt government leads to corrupt results, it's not that capitalism fails so much as the people overseeing it are corrupt (much the same as what happens with socialism and communism).

Fair enough. So, since you are the translator here, what do you think he does want? For everyone involved to be nice and honest with each other?

[Crovash]

What’s unregulated capitalism? Barter? It’s a myth. When people don’t like the regulation the pretend all regulation is bad and the market is some intrinsically good naturally occurring thing. When they like the regulations it’s no longer govt interference. It’s a myth.

What it comes down to is this: I am against government interference until I want it.

[fingerbang]

Do you think the Market can exist without rules? Like its a pure and naturally occurring thing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wasn't even talking about rules, lol. Astrazeneca doesn't need your tax dollars to come up with a vaccine, plain and simple.

[fingerbang]

Have we anointed you the resident libertarian yet? We should. You’re a great libertarian. Even if you don’t want the label.

I've consistently referred to myself as somewhat of a libertarian.

[Scoots]

What’s unregulated capitalism? Barter? It’s a myth. When people don’t like the regulation they pretend all regulation is bad and that the market is some intrinsically good naturally occurring thing. When they like the regulations it’s no longer govt interference its part of this organic market. It’s a myth. I think Finger definitely buys into the myth.

You are right powerful people will always be corrupt to some degree. The idea that we can eliminate that through deregulation is BS. Good rules limit corruption. Bad rules not so much but the market needs rules.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it's more that people on one side see someone complain about poor regulation and assume that what they want is NO regulation when that is pretty much always not the case.

[Scoots]

Fair enough. So, since you are the translator here, what do you think he does want? For everyone involved to be nice and honest with each other?

I think the idea is that drug companies can see a market of billions of customers and exploit it without being paid to do so.

[ewing]

I wasn't even talking about rules, lol. Astrazeneca doesn't need your tax dollars to come up with a vaccine, plain and simple.

Fair enough. I made an assumption about where you were drawing your conclusions from

Still you are saying vaccine development would progress at the same speed w/o public funding. I don’t think that is plain and simple. Why do think that? There are a lot of ways to make money in that industry. Why would aggressively self funding a race to develop a vaccine definitely be one they would pursue? Isn’t it true that they might lose?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk