high prices can mean high profits which lead to higher executive comp which leads to higher prices
-
-
-
That’s part of it, no doubt. But that doesn’t mean forcibly lowering CEO salaries would put a dent in drug prices.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
R&D? Or, marketing disguised as R&D? How about buying companies which already spent a good portion on R&D and claiming the purchase as such?
-
I don’t know the specific breakdown. The figure I used is the headline number from legally required disclosures. But, for argument’s sake, let’s say $1-$2 billion of R&D spending doesn’t actually go to research or development. Even then, the total still dwarfs executive salaries.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
...and 1.4 Billion on advertisig. Would agree, though, that the executive pay and company profits for health insurers is driving increasing premiums...along with GOP sabotage. Much of the executive compensation is tied to stock value, so you can see where this is going.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The CEO's incentive is to have the largest flow of money possible. Then outrageous compensation can be justified as "industry standard percentage". It's not causative, but it is related to the poor system of incentives.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.