Re: OFF TOPIC! FYI


"X-rated Vermonter" <k1xvnospam@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ffbpg3le910a98dt4bhdpeh38rgu2pq622@xxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:31:01 -0400, "Fred Burton" <fburton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


It's none of the government's business. The companies have the right to
charge
whatever they think is proper.

Gee, with you thinking like that, I have some things here I would like
to sell you.

I hope you are not responsible for anything to do with the purchasing
activities of any enterprise, public or private. Doesn't government
have a fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers to control costs?

No.

The government has a resposibility to control its OWN costs. Furthermore,
your argument about the government controlling is hypocritical bull***.
This government spends money like drunken sailors. Where the hell do
they get off telling anyone else to control spending when they don't control
their own?






You totally ducked the point that the Canadian government TOLD, yes, TOLD
that companies that they HAD to sell those drugs at whatever price the
GOVERNMENT set, OR ELSE the Canadian government would have STOLEN
their drug patents.

I would like to see you document this. I guess you have no confidence
in the Canadian legal system to prevent confiscation. If a product is
patented, that means the patent holder has a monopoly. You believe
that the prices charged by monopolies on products essential to the
public health and welfare cannot be price regulated by government?

Suggested reading for you is the US Supreme Court case from 1877,
"Munn v. Illinois".

I suggest to you that the SCOTUS case matters for nothing outside of the
US.

And I don't go chasing crap that posters point me to. If you want me to
consider reading anything, you'd damned well better post it.




"How much is enough when lives are at stake?"

It's none of your damned business!!!

The health and welfare of its citizens is none of government's
business??

The price of products sold on the free market is NOT government's
business, as least so long as people are not being gouged. And I
don't think that the drug companies are within a million miles of
gouging anyone. The "people" doing the gouging right now are
the governments practicing socialized medicine, who force the
drug companies sell their meds for far below market prices under
the threat of theft of their patents by government fiat, which in turn
force the drug companies to raise their prices to everyone else who
isn't buying drugs with government surpressed prices, to make up
the difference.










I take one drug daily, made and developed in Canada. I pay $18/mo for
it.
The same drug (made in the USA), in the USA costs $115. ????

Because AMERICANS have having to subsidize your government
blackmailed, below market prices!!! Along with all of the OTHER
pinko countries that are ripping off drug companies with their black-
mailed, below market prices. WE in the US are PAYING for YOUR
criminally cheap meds!

I assume that you also believe that anyone who takes an airline flight
and pays less than the full coach fare is also a criminal? Perhaps
everyone who uses Priceline should be criminally indicted?

XV, that's a bull*** argument that avoids the real issue. If Canada (for
example) REQUIRED United Airlines (for example) to charge only $10
for any seat on a flight from Canadian cities to any American city, and
THEN United raised its fares for all intra-US flights to cover the loss
incurred by the Canadian forced ticket prices, THEN you'd have a fairly
similar situation ... and I'd say that in this situation that anyone buying
an overpriced United ticket for a flight within the US was SUBSIDIZING
the Canadian below market BY GOVERNMENT FIAT ticket prices.







If the US government is willing to pay anything demanded, what is the
sellers incentive to keep prices reasonable?

Not the issue.



Exactly what is your tie to the pharmaceutical industry?


Absolutely no connection. It's a matter of principle.

Who the hell are YOU to tell the drug companies what they
can charge for their products which are extremely expensive
to create, research, and license? And while the reasons for
the expense of the government safety rules are completely
justified, I think that people like you need a reality check
and need to understand that YOU have to PAY for the costs
incurred by the drug companies so that YOU can have those
safe and effective drugs. You have no right whatsoever
to expect that the drug companies will spend hundreds of
millions or billions of dollars on research and effectiveness
and safety testing by government order, and then NOT pass
that expense on to the consumer.

The drug companies have the 100% right and fiduciary
responsibility to pass on those expenses to the consumer.

And if some governments surpress the drug companies'
ability to get back their R&D and safety testing expenses
with excessively low government fiat pricing, then the
drug companies have the 100% right and fiduciary
responsibility to adjust their pricing structure to the
remainder of their customers who are buying their
products at market prices.

If the US government wants to help out the pricing of
meds, then they should be talking to the countries with
the socialized medicine to get them to raise their drug
prices to proper levels, so that American consumers
of meds won't have to subsidize the consumers of those
same meds in SocMed countries.









.

Loading