If you could provide arguments for either side.. that would be great!
2007-02-28 01:05:21 · 9 answers · asked by mervelash 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No.
Why should ANY price controls be imposed in a free market?
2007-02-28 01:15:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
The free market has been the best way to get great products/services to people at the best price.
Two examples
1) The Soviet Union. Free health care, perscriptions. Not really known for their cutting edge developments. Why? The profit was controlled so people didn't want to take the risk and do the hardwork. U.S no price control, not free and we have some of the best and brightest working on new drugs. Are wealthy people are investing their money (taking a risk) to create the new drugs. Which sounds better to you?
2) Eye surgery is one of the greatest advancements in modern medicine. We are now able to restore many peoples sight to the quality they had when they were young. Insurance and the government don't fund this. What is the result? The quality of the surgery has improved, the cost has dropped and many of the doctors performing this surgery are offering financing options. I am looking at the surgery for myself and my doctor offers 0% interest if I want to make payments.
Price controls don't work. Look at what price controls did for Nixon.
PS: Paul B if they are so cheap to make why don't you make them and give them away at a real low cost? Oh you don't have THAT much money? Okay then buy stock in the drug companies with your HUGH profits you can pay for peoples drugs...what? You don't think you will make enough money. Hmmmm...strange. Seems your theory is falling a part.
2007-02-28 01:17:31 · answer #2 · answered by sfavorite711 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
They shouldn't. Logically, no person has a proper to drugs. The industry costs drugs and the different products to pay for examine, distribution, advertising, et cetera. the fallacy the place the government is in contact is that why they are able to regulate the fee, they are able to no longer administration costs. So whilst the industry says that there is not any way that a product may be made on the fee the government needs, the product disappears from the industry. case in point: Flu vaccine. Hilary Clinton pushed by using value controls interior the early 90s. previously she pushed it by using, there replace into practically a dozen flu vaccine makers interior the U. S.. on the instant, there are none. organizations bypass foreign places on a regular basis because of the fact the employer environment here will become so riddled with bureaucratic interference that they have no determination. organizations exist to make a earnings, era. Any inferred criminal accountability a employer has to the community or to grant products for loose is ridiculous. different than for all that, the very theory of government value controls are un American. you may denigrate company united statesa. all you desire, yet we might all be extra suited off if we thanked them on occasion.
2016-12-18 12:19:31 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here is the problem.
We all want the new mircale drugs to cure our favorite diease.
The reality it takes money.
Now drug companies are in it to make money.
If they come up with a drug they do have to recover the cost of R&D and plus the cost of drugs that never make it to market.
Factor in the cost of law suits too.
Here we are.
A new drug comes to market and it cost a lets say 80 bucks a pill.
They know if a few years it will go genertic and they will lose money making it. So they have a very small window to recover the cost.
It case of Merck they saw a problem with Vioxx and pull and people got so happy sue big pharma. The result yea you stuck it to big pharma but the results people lost jobs and the first line item to be cut in big pharma is R&D.
So no new drugs.
I have yet to see any government program to help a problem when it comes to control.
I say let the free market go.
2007-02-28 01:45:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
In the history of the world there has never been an example of price controls that worked. They ALWAYS hurt more than they help; more times than not hurting those that they were implemented to help.
You can look no further than controls on housing cost in the US and in Europe to see the devastating consequences of these measures.
Also examine the food price controls in India and South America several times in the past and note the famines that resulted.
Addn: And if this is for a economics test, please ignore Paul B's answer. He has absolutely no grasp of even basic economics.
2007-02-28 01:16:18 · answer #5 · answered by Time to Shrug, Atlas 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No! We have a free market economy. First it's prescription drugs, next it is gas and before you know it we will have a stagnate semi-socialist economy much like the France.
2007-02-28 01:09:55 · answer #6 · answered by JHE123 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely!
It doesn't cost all that much to make them anyway and the Federal Government - contrary to popular belief actually funds the Drug companys research, etc. by giving them tax breaks and grants!
So the bottom line is that the people who need these drugs the most are being screwed by Bush and his Republican corrupt corporate cronies in his Administration!
2007-02-28 01:11:12 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Well, I do think it is rediculous that the citizens of the United States are paying for other countries to have lower cost medicines.
2007-02-28 01:09:01 · answer #8 · answered by mamasquirrel 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
i dont think so..it would drive away competition
2007-02-28 01:12:42 · answer #9 · answered by boricua_lilly 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋