Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sanders' Proposal Sets a Dangerous Precedent
Townhall.com ^ | April 7, 2016 | Ken Blackwell

Posted on 04/07/2016 7:00:57 AM PDT by Kaslin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

1 posted on 04/07/2016 7:00:57 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Unconstitutional..................


2 posted on 04/07/2016 7:02:19 AM PDT by Red Badger (The Left doesn't like him and the Right doesn't like him, so he must be the right guy for the job...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Unfortunately, price controls, in whatever form, will be necessary for medicines. While the drug companies may be entitled to $50.00 per pill they are NOT entitled to $750.00 per pill.


3 posted on 04/07/2016 7:04:56 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS

they pushed gabapentin for a million off label uses, even though most docs say it’s basically a placebo.

I have read a lot about its mechanism as compared to benzos and the benzos win out every time, regarding anxiety.

As for pain, though I think it was WAY overprescribed, oxy is miles ahead of gabapentin in controlling pain. BTW, big pharma PROMISED they would never push oxy for anything other than cancer.

But we knew that was a lie.

Now that millions are addicted, they come out with suboxone to treat the addictions. Can’t lose that way!!

The only thing that helps my head injury symptoms is klonopin.

Gabapentin, lyrica, and a billion other pills that wer supposed to help did nothing.


4 posted on 04/07/2016 7:09:33 AM PDT by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust conservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Since when has that mattered. 99% of the crap they do is unconstitutional.


5 posted on 04/07/2016 7:10:24 AM PDT by sheana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS

What does the amount that the pill is being sold for have to do with the right of ownership?

CC


6 posted on 04/07/2016 7:10:24 AM PDT by Captain Compassion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS

What does the amount that the pill is being sold for have to do with the right of ownership?

CC


7 posted on 04/07/2016 7:10:39 AM PDT by Captain Compassion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

We don’t have health care.

Too many people aren’t healthy.

All we have is “death delaying”.

Last time I checked, everyone dies. Its just a question of how much money other people are forced to fork over to delay someone else’s death.

From my perspective, I have pretty much nothing saved up for retirement, so why the f#*$ should I pay for someone else’s “health care”?

My retirement plan involves a cinderblock, handcuffs, and the reservoir. When I can’t work anymore, I will put both hands through the cinderblock, snap on the handcuffs, and step off into the reservoir or the (water-filled) quarry. Simple, and neat. (and full-proof)


8 posted on 04/07/2016 7:12:08 AM PDT by baltimorepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dp0622

Hhmmmm...our old dog is on Gabapentin. ..among others....been wondering whether it does any good. I hate that the solution to most physical problems is DRUGS.


9 posted on 04/07/2016 7:12:22 AM PDT by goodnesswins (Alinsky.....it's what's for dinner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS

Why do you believe that the pharmaceutical companies should not be able to set their own prices? I also note that you use the loaded term “entitled”, as opposed to the more frank term “deserve”, which is what you mean.


10 posted on 04/07/2016 7:12:32 AM PDT by MortMan (Let's call the push for amnesty what it is: Pedrophilia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Leftists just do not understand that financial incentive is what drives creation & production of EVERYTHING. Take away the incentive for profit, and the motivation to create & produce evaporates (not entirely, but certainly at large scale). Yes, those medicines are expensive and the manufacturer is making a large profit at the probable expense of patients’ ability to afford them ... but if not for that large profit, there would be no incentive to create such medicines in the first place.

Amid the Left’s fondness for “redistribution of wealth” and “soak the rich” and “consequence-free sex” etc, they fail to see what ISN’T created as a result. They want to optimize what is (to their own flippant preferences), not realizing that in doing so, what is soon becomes replaced by isn’t.
Greedy rich? redistribute! ... why aren’t the productive, well, productive any more?
Consequences to carnal acts? control/abort! ... why is the population shrinking, and the tax base with it?
Medical costs too high? cut their profits! ... why aren’t lifesaving advances progressing?
Idiots. Think “value” just grows on unwatered trees.


11 posted on 04/07/2016 7:13:26 AM PDT by ctdonath2 ("Get the he11 out of my way!" - John Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
The private enterprise argument is irrelevant here because there is no effective price competition in Obama managed health care.

Three conditions for a free market long known by economists:


12 posted on 04/07/2016 7:14:54 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS

Without that $750, they won’t have the incentive (or money) for another $2,000,000,000 in R&D for the next drug.
Hard to quibble about the price of a lifesaving drug that DOESN’T EXIST BECAUSE YOU DISCOURAGED ITS CREATION.


13 posted on 04/07/2016 7:15:10 AM PDT by ctdonath2 ("Get the he11 out of my way!" - John Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This is what PhRMA lobbied for, to give the government control over the industry so that they could leverage monopoly pricing power. They spent tens if not hundreds of millions lobbying for just that - and reaped enormous ill-gotten profits as a result.

The bird has flown, ship sailed, horse left the barn. Sanders’ proposal on one drug is completely insignificant in light of ACA, and Medicare Part D before that.


14 posted on 04/07/2016 7:15:24 AM PDT by thoughtomator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins

I’m sorry. It does NO HARM. Most harmless drug on the market, I think. So I would keep him no it, poor fella. What’s wrong with him/her?

I’ve taken maybe 30,000 pills in my life. Mom was hypochondriac nurse and when pop, who was on a lot of pills, died, she transferred them to me lol.

I probably need 200 my whole life, besides the klonopin, to treat infections etc.

Big pharma made a monkey out of me.

You go to CVS to get blood pressure, cholesterol and heart and diabetes meds and five feet from the counter are six aisles of the worst foods imaginable! lol

But no tobacco allowed!!!


15 posted on 04/07/2016 7:16:29 AM PDT by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust conservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins

> I hate that the solution to most physical problems is DRUGS.

It isn’t. The pharmaceutical culture really doesn’t solve too many health problems, it just puts people on drugs forever.

There’s no profit in a cheap cure, and thanks to the actions of the industry the government would come down like a hammer on anyone who discovered one that undermined a PhRMA profit center.

If someone developed a $1 pill that would cure cancer, do you think it would ever see the light of day?


16 posted on 04/07/2016 7:18:17 AM PDT by thoughtomator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MortMan

Because the $750.00 per pill is not paid for with private money. It is taxpayer money. If they had to rely upon what folks would willingly pay out of their own private pockets they would not get $750 per pill or any sizeable fraction thereof.


17 posted on 04/07/2016 7:18:54 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Captain Compassion

May those who believe in the ridiculous concept of “Free Market,” need with regard to medications required for their sick child, a drug that moves in price from 50.00 to $750.00 per dose. Ownership cannot be used to injure others and that is a doctrine that is a thousand years old.


18 posted on 04/07/2016 7:19:32 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dp0622

She is losing muscle mass, has slow growing cancer, and pain...she’s getting acupuncture too...lol...she’s our last dog...and...she’s old...15.5...but still gets excited about eating and walking.
.so she’s not ready for doggie heaven, yet.


19 posted on 04/07/2016 7:20:46 AM PDT by goodnesswins (Alinsky.....it's what's for dinner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

You are correct...”solution” was wrong word...


20 posted on 04/07/2016 7:22:00 AM PDT by goodnesswins (Alinsky.....it's what's for dinner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson