6thGen
Beach Fanatic
They have the same incentive they had before - profit - just a shorter time period of monopoly on it. Perhaps a compromise could be that the government could use generics or get a major discount while the general public still pays for name brand.
I realize that developing and testing new drugs is a costly process, but would love to hear stats from someone in the know (skunk, rapunzel) as to the profit margin/marketing costs for drugs. The stories of insane marketing that I hear from local pharmaceutical reps are ridonkulous.
Providing a lower cost option sooner is not forcing something on the marketplace. If folks who can afford it don't want the generic, they don't have to choose it. Isn't that the whole idea of the free market system you're always touting?
Here's a chart that might show how profitable drug companies are in general. I used Eli Lilly and Merck, because those are the first two that popped in my head. I'd love to find a composite if someone has one. Stock prices are driven by earnings, so this should give you a hint as to how well drug companies currently perform against the Dow and S&P. MRK and LLY are flat over 5 years, while the S&P and Dow are up considerably.
Providing a lower cost option sooner is not forcing something on the marketplace, it is taking something away from the marketplace. It takes away incentive to produce and innovate new drugs, and thus the drugs themselves.
Last edited:

but, wouldn't ya'll agree?