Bryon Daly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So the claim here is that Americans are almost solely subsidizing the drug
> development costs for the entire rest of the world?
That is an odd way to phrase it. I would have paraphrased part of the article
as,
"Americans are subsidizing drug development costs for other countries." With
subsidize being used in the sense of "to aid or promote".
> And by posting this, I
> assume you think this should remain status quo?
No, in an ideal world I would like to see everyone move towards a more
free system.
> And yet the drug companies still sell those under priced drugs in those
> countries? Can't they just not sell them there if a fair price isn't met?
Drug development is an industry with high fixed costs. Once those fixed,
or sunk, costs have been committed, the drugs are sold for the price that
the market will bear. According to the expert who wrote the article, the
more socialized markets settle on a lower price than the less socialized
markets. If all markets were socialized, then all the prices would be lower.
Then companies would not be able to justify committing the fixed costs
on future development of some drugs, and some drugs would not be
developed.
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
