> Does this make us immoral for "freeloading", because we prefer putting our limited money into cost effective treatments?
It doesn't make you immoral, but it is important in understanding the tradeoffs of suggesting that the US switch to an NHS-style system.
> Also, is it not worth looking at why pharma R&D costs so much? The pharma industry seems to run at a very healthy profit margin compared to most other industries. Maybe the lack of market pressure is allowing the pharma industry to remain fatty? Obviously there's a fear that cutting US pharma revenue would hurt global medical R&D, but I don't see this as being a foregone conclusion. It could just as possibly be market failure and regulatory capture keeping pharma R&D expensive.
They may be doing well, but you may not be seeing all the little pharma companies that die trying. At the end of the day, investors are allocating capital where they think they can get returns. If you reduce the returns of pharma, you reduce the attractiveness of investing there.
I try investing a lot in smaller pharma companies... and they are hammered by the big ones. Not on innovation, but on marketing.
I disagree about NHS type system, that reduces access. A healthy mix is required, though.
A lot of upfront costs are also footed by users and government/non-government funds. And a lot more of those costs are due to government regulation and essential insurance at development.
Pharmaceutics researchers aren't exactly rich, btw. Your dentist probably makes more than many researchers of life saving drugs.
It doesn't make you immoral, but it is important in understanding the tradeoffs of suggesting that the US switch to an NHS-style system.
> Also, is it not worth looking at why pharma R&D costs so much? The pharma industry seems to run at a very healthy profit margin compared to most other industries. Maybe the lack of market pressure is allowing the pharma industry to remain fatty? Obviously there's a fear that cutting US pharma revenue would hurt global medical R&D, but I don't see this as being a foregone conclusion. It could just as possibly be market failure and regulatory capture keeping pharma R&D expensive.
They may be doing well, but you may not be seeing all the little pharma companies that die trying. At the end of the day, investors are allocating capital where they think they can get returns. If you reduce the returns of pharma, you reduce the attractiveness of investing there.