This is what for-profit healthcare gets you - greed and corruption. Corporations taking over journalism - results: bad Corporations taking over healthcare - results: bad Corporations taking over politics - results: bad Are we seeing a pattern here?
-
-
-
Health care is gradually but steadily being priced out of reach, but even those who are insured and don't really use it pay a steep price. It's been reduced to one of the wealth extraction methods being used by the already-wealthy. How can anyone think 'for-profit'='freedom'?
-
I couldn't agree more. Corps=Very-wealthy pretty much. That's 80-90% of their shareholders. Back when the "shareholders first and only" mentality took over, Big Corps became a threat and with "Citizens United" the threat became an assault. And the R's were behind it all.
-
Go back about 20 years when this all really started to take hold and you see the economic decline of the middle-class begin.
-
I believe it goes back further than 20 years. Have you seen the Powell Memo?http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/ …
-
No, I was not familiar with this. I stand corrected. And thinking about it, it's got to be at least 30-40 years, certainly since Reagan. And I think you may be right, Powell could have been early influence. Thanks for this, very interesting!
-
I had forgotten it myself. It seems to be the seed that was the start of corporations taking care of shareholders above all and the beginning of the decline of the middle class. Many other factors also.
-
I agree. That whole idea turned everything upside down. So glad you mentioned this! I love getting to the root of things. :-)
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
That’s pretty greedy not to mention downright mean to those that could benefit from it. I wonder if McCains healthcare covers the cost of that drug? I’m not trying to be mean but if his insurance covers the drug, that’s the same kind of insurance the American people deserve.
-
His govt issued insurance will cover him fully.
-
Then thats what we should have . We are after all their bosses, so why do the employees get a better deal than the boss.
-
Because they are the ones who vote bills into laws. They aren't going to start working for what they get when they can just give themselves pay raises perks and tax breaks. All while pointing fingers and blaming each other for the countries problems.
-
Never ending cycle. This isn’t how it should be. There needs to be term limits for everyone in government.
-
I agree and their pay raises should be voted on in federal elections.
-
T Can u imagine that every year they vote themselves a cost of living increase ?
-
Yes I can, and we should stop that. I think Trump does want to end it. Can you imagine if we went to our employers and said we’re giving ourselves an increase? We’d be history. Unfortunately they have no one to account to, the constituents should decide if they deserve a pay hike
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
This is the type of "responsible " corporate citizenry we can look forward to in the absence of responsible regulations
-
I can almost guarantee there are no competitors to this drug THANKS to regulations not because of a lack of them
-
Did you read the article? This is one of many such drugs for which FDA has publicly said it will expedite approval for generic competitors, but there are no takers.
-
So, NextSource is making how much profit? And no one wants in on it? K. Very well reported I'm sure.
-
It's actually quite likely that this reflects the real cost for a small company to make something that doesn't sell many units per year. A bigger entity could essentially subsidize it with other operations, but a small one can't.
-
The small company didn't conduct the r&d. Ginormous fixed costs associated with these drugs not a factor. That being said, what you're saying is the other company was taking a loss on them for 40 yrs. Story should be "magnanimous pharma company pays for cancer meds for 40 yrs"
-
IMO the story is that the market when operating "correctly" can lead to outcomes that many consider unacceptable or even immoral. But either way, yes clearly the big company wouldn't have sold this business off if it were a good money-making enterprise.
-
The alternative is that the non-profitable drug doesn't get brought to market in the first place.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.