Universal Health Care Reform in the United States

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

The US does often lead the way in pioneering and expensive experiemental surgery. But for 99.999% of cases, that's not what they need.

---

Indeed. From what I've read, annual spending of medical research into cancer treatment in the U.S. is a tiny fraction of what is spent on similar research into sexual performance enhancing drugs :mark:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Competition and the free markets at work. Ain't it great?

---

What does competition and free markets have to do with British Rail?

BTW Passenger Air travel is much cheaper and more efficient than rail. The only reason it is cheaper in some countries is because it is subsidized by governments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

The problem is some generics just aren't as good. My wife takes losec for her acid reflux. The generic that the doctors keep trying to make her accept doesn't seem to work as well as the original Losec. The pharmaceutical industry is the biggest profitteering crooks in the whole medical system, and their manipulation of formulas for various drugs and the generic market is riddled with issues....

For the most part generics do the job, but there are issues....

---

Generic and brand name drugs are identical. The reason that the brand name drugs are more expensive is because the recouperation of multiple years of research and development is included in the cost. Drug companies are provided a limit on the patent life of the drug, generally 10 years or so, during which time they are the exclusive providers. Once the patent period has expired other companies simply copy the drug formula and sell it at a much cheaper cost, since they have no legacy of R&D to pay for. There are dozens of drug companies (e.g. Apotex in Canada) that do just this, i.e. perform no R&D what so ever while waiting for others’ patents to expire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

ummmm That would be me if I had the money to swing it.. :)

---

Ditto :mark:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

What does competition and free markets have to do with British Rail?

BTW Passenger Air travel is much cheaper and more efficient than rail. The only reason it is cheaper in some countries is because it is subsidized by governments.

---

British railway system was privatised which lead to a disaster. Google it. Passenger air travel is also much more harmful to the environment than rail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeansBeansBeans

Not to my mind.

If the cost of travelling by train is so expensive that people take the option of flying via a foreigh country to save money, something is badly wrong.

---

Yes something is wrong with the trains. They are run inefficiently, or too many regs, something. Why should the government subsidise that mess? If they can't compete with air travel, then perhaps it's time for the train to go the way of the horse and buggy.

Not that I have anything against train travel. I just think that if someone can come up with a cheaper, more efficient, etc. means to do something (or sell a product) they should be allowed to. And the more expensive, less efficient, et. product or service needs to either addapt or go away.

You know, Capitalism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

Sarcasm, hopefully.

---

So you don't like free markets?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

What does competition and free markets have to do with British Rail?

BTW Passenger Air travel is much cheaper and more efficient than rail. The only reason it is cheaper in some countries is because it is subsidized by governments.

---

VOP, I think we're on the same page. Maybe my post wasn't clear. I'm for competition, and against government subsidise(sp?).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

British railway system was privatised which lead to a disaster. Google it. Passenger air travel is also much more harmful to the environment than rail.

---

So the government needs to step in and prop up a less efficient, more costly system just so you can feel "green"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

So the government needs to step in and prop up a less efficient, more costly system just so you can feel "green"?

---

Isn't that what being green is all about?
That smug, pretentious feeling one gets when one abandons logic and embraces group think.