Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 02/28/2026 6:09:11 AM PST by MtnClimber
Here’s something nearly everyone can agree on: healthcare in the United States is too expensive. Private health insurance premiums rise inexorably well above the rate of inflation, and so do the costs of government subsidized healthcare like Medicare and Medicaid. And if you face a big medical issue without insurance, the bills could well come to more than you could ever pay.
So what’s the answer? To the Left, it’s easy: a “single payer” system, sometimes called “Medicare for all.” In simple terms, the federal government pays for all the medical expenses of everybody. The money comes out of the infinite pile of federal loot. No individual ever has to worry about a medical bill. Prominent backers of the “single payer”solution to healthcare costs include the likes of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, as well as organizations like Physicians for a National Health Program.
The flaw in this approach is something that is not intuitive to most people. It is that once the government is paying, no producer has any incentive to reduce the price to attract more customers. That phenomenon is one of the fundamental reasons why over time capitalist societies get richer while socialist societies get poorer.
A great illustration of this phenomenon has occurred in recent months in the situation of the new miracle weight-loss drugs known as the GLP-1 inhibitors.
Here’s some history of the GLP-1s (from a June 2024 article published by Indiana University). The first of the drugs to get approved to go on the market was Ozempic (Novo Nordisk) in 2017. Mounjaro (Lilly) followed in 2022. Like most new drugs that come on the market in the U.S. under patent and after long and expensive development, their prices were initially set very high, basically unaffordable for most people unless insurance would pay for the drug as a medical expense.
The drugs were initially developed to treat type-2 (adult onset) diabetes; but they were soon recognized to have a notable side-effect of helping the patients to lose weight. In short order, doctors started prescribing the drugs for weight loss, and the manufacturers came out with separately-branded versions of the drugs oriented to the weight loss market. Novo Nordisk got its weight-loss version (Wegovy) approved in 2021, and Lilly got its weight-loss version (Zepbound) approved in 2023.
Once the weight-loss benefit was identified, spending on the GLP-1s started to explode. This August 2025 piece from the AMA collects data through 2023. Citing a study that is said to have captured 85% of retail drug spending and 74% of mail-order, the article reports that spending on GLP-1s went from $13.7 billion in 2018 to $71.7 billion in 2023, an increase of over 500%. And it’s fair to assume that increase at a comparable rate has continued since then.
During 2025, with spending exploding, insurers started to balk. One by one they declared that taking GLP-1s for diabetes was a medical issue, but taking them for weight loss was an uninsured discretionary expenditure. These decisions caused considerable gnashing of teeth, as lots of people who thought they were about to be able to lose weight after years of struggle found out that their insurer would not pay. Here’s a piece from PharmExec.com from August 2025, surveying the insurance situation at that time.
More and more insurance carriers are either not covering the medications or are making it more difficult for people that need GLP-1s for weight loss to get it. Previously, insurance carriers were pressured to add the medications to their plans. For example, employers were eager to offer healthcare coverage that included GLP-1s, as it made the jobs more attractive to employees. GLP-1 medications are expensive, costing anywhere from $499-a-month to $1,000-a-month, if not more. A new report from Reuters says that insurance companies are now being more restrictive of the drugs. Also, . . . many [employers] are . . . adjusting plans to drop GLP-1 coverage. As a result, patients taking GLP-1s for weight loss are finding it necessary to pay for the drugs directly, at full price.
If you were to ask Bernie Sanders about this, his immediate answer would be that it proves the case for single-payer health coverage. However, a funny thing happened once large numbers of people had to pay for these drugs with their own money. A price war has broken out among the manufacturers. The Wall Street Journal had the story on February 24, headline “Novo Nordisk to Cut U.S. List Prices for Ozempic, Wegovy by Up to 50%” (likely behind paywall). Excerpt:
Novo Nordisk plans to slash U.S. list prices for its popular weight-loss and diabetes drugs Wegovy and Ozempic by up to half starting next year. Under the changes, both Ozempic and Wegovy will list for $675 a month, effective Jan. 1, 2027. That is half of the current price tag for anti-obesity therapy Wegovy and a 34% cut for diabetes treatment Ozempic. The price cuts also will apply to pill versions of both injections, including one sold as Rybelsus. The reductions escalate a price war with rival Eli Lilly in one of the fastest-growing, most hotly contested categories in pharmaceuticals. (Emphasis added.)
Well, for starters, don’t believe for a moment that Novo Nordisk is going to hold the line on its prices all the way to next January. They’re trying to game as many customers as possible to buy the drug at the high price before it drops. But they are going to have to drop the price much faster than they want to keep from losing the market to Lilly. And by the way, there are reports that lots of other big players, from Pfizer to AstraZeneca to Sanofi, are in the process of jumping into this market.
So what’s going on? Again from the Journal:
Novo Nordisk is cutting its drugs’ list prices for the first time, executives said, especially to reduce high out-of-pocket costs for patients who are enrolled in high-deductible health plans or pay coinsurance that is a percentage of list price.
Sorry, but that’s just spin from the Novo Nordisk executives. This has nothing whatsoever to do with altruism toward the patients, and everything to do with trying to maintain market share in a business that is still very lucrative at much lower prices. There are millions of people out there who can’t afford to pay for these drugs with their own money at $1350 a month, but could pay at $1000/month, or $500/month, or maybe $50/month. As long as there are multiple competitors, the price will continue to drop until all these people can afford the product, at least until the price gets down to the cost of production.
This process is no different than the process that has driven down the price of computers, or smart phones, or flat screen TVs, to a small fraction of where those prices started out.
In the market for healthcare, of which pharmaceuticals are a big piece, the process of price competition is substantially prevented or slowed down due to government intervention and third-party payment. Once the government and/or insurers are paying, the manufacturers know that they don’t need to drop the price to reach additional customers with smaller budgets. The government and insurers can always pay.
Yes I know that there are other factors at play in keeping pharmaceutical prices high, notably long terms of patent protection limiting markets to a single producer. Still, the best way to get the overall level of expenditure on medical care under control would be to minimize the amount of that expenditure that comes from government and insurers. Instead, we generally head in the opposite direction.
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Manhattan Contrarian ping
Yes. Capitalism was driven from health care during WWII.
Because, so often government is the problem.
“Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.”Source: Ronald Reagan Quotes
For health care, bring on market force:
1. Break most hospitals into two highly competitive entities
2. Convert other hospitals into real estate leasing entities with competing surgical suites and nursing wings
3. Separate out drug coverage so hospital systems can run care coverage systems and cut out insurance company overhead and meddlers.
4. Create interstate drug plans that don’t have to pay want the drugmaker wants for every drug. To qualify for exchange listing and federal subsidies, they would have to most (~80% or more) in all important types (large volume recombinant, small volume recombinant, breakthroughs under patent, etc.). Group and exchange plans to offer time-limited vouchers at plan set amounts for out-of-formulary drugs. Voucher plans would have variable premiums. Plans without minimums (or vouchers) could be vended directly to individuals and families.
5. These plans would be all the doctors (and AI) prescribe for formulary drugs with co-pays equal to manufacturing cost
6. Have drug patents limited by government sourced product revenue and overall domestic government health care spending and not by time [so drug companies have an incentive to minimize government health care funding]
7. Require Kirchoff patent collapse to a single entity upon FDA marketing approval of a covered entity
8. reform medical education, breaking down medicine and dentistry into simpler chunks and start it in the first year of college
9. replace most primary care doctoring with AI
(Insurers would pay human doctors to confirm AI diagnosis, orders for expensive tests[MRI, genetic], prescribe radiation imaging[CT, PET, X-ray]/treatment, and voucher/government co-pay drugs. Other human doctor care would be private pay.)
10. Radioisotope-related care would be at international airport centers
When I was young, BC/BS insurance didn’t cover drugs.
Medicare didn’t cover outpatient drugs for decades.
To lose weight, people could eat soup.
The water in the soup would delay absorption.
To lose weight, people could throw out their tablespoons.
The government could ban spoons.
It has nothing to do with “government” per se … but with the basic flaw of third party payments for any transaction.
Of course, though Menton does not mention it specifically, when government pays, it is highly motivated to limit what it is paying for, too. So, the Democrats, which want the government to pay for everything, also want the people to have nothing.
Menton’s many writings on energy cause me to think that this was part of the Democrats’ plan with the Green Energy Scam. The Democrats knew that AI servers and Data Centers would consume large amounts of energy. Being the masters of forcing people to make do with less, their “plan” was to give the reliable and abundant power to AI and to make people make due with the precarious Green Energy sources.
Health Care and Health Insurance are two different things.
Conflating the two is a disservice.
Care is what you get to help you get better. Insurance is what you pay to offset unexpected it catastrophic financial expenses.
Weight loss drugs are not Health Care for most Fat Pill users.
Avoiding obesity in the first place is what health care should promote.
What insurers might do is to have co-insurance through the insurer and not the pharmacist.
To get a $250 drug with a 20% co-insurance would require prior placement of $50 into your insurer account.
Drug vendors would have a harder time gaming such a system.
Great, less protein, less trt, more weakened immune system until all the hat and glycogen be gone?
Diet and exercise gone. Get injected.
“So, the Democrats, which want the government to pay for everything, also want the people to have nothing.”
Ask a divorced father what governments might do.
There is the matter of overtime and the PPACA hourly threshold.
In the 1920s, people with high medical costs simply might have asked the boss for more hours.
Yes, democrats love rationing.
We already have Medicaid, which provides coverage for the disadvantaged, poor, and disabled, while people with jobs or employer insurance usually aren’t eligible, with rules in place to limit costs.
Another retarded Ronald Reagan quote.
What's the solution to the communist insurrection in Seattle, Portland, and Minneapolis, now organizing, not even in secret, for a massive push all over the country when it warms up?
Is it Ayn Rand, or Augusto Pinochet?
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.