Americans subsidize drugs for the rest of the world.
Americans subsidize drugs for the rest of the world.
Top 10 pharma companies, 5/10 are US (2 UK, 2 Swiss, 1 French).
4 of the top 6 for profit margins (from 43%(!) to 19%) are US (Merck is the only outlier, 9th, at 10%).
4 of the top 5 for Sales and Marketing Spend (both on raw dollars and as a percentage of revenue) are US.
3 of the bottom 5 for R&D spend (as a percentage of revenue) are US.
I think I see a little fat that can be trimmed in the name of our so-called subsidization...
http://www.eucope.org/lib/downloads/basic_facts_about_the_eu...
>4 of the top 5 for Sales and Marketing Spend (both on raw dollars and as a percentage of revenue) are US.
>3 of the bottom 5 for R&D spend (as a percentage of revenue) are US.
Say that $1 of marketing increases profits (exclusive of that $1) by $1.01. And you can do it 5 billion times before the effects cancel. In that case, it looks like virtually all of your money went to marketing, and yet there's no fat that can be trimmed.
Ventolin inhalers are apparently available over the counter in pharmacies in the UK - where does the government enter into that?
> if I went to the Doctor it would be free
probably reduces what people are willing to pay.
[NB Prescription charges aren't the same throughout the UK and where you do pay there is a long list of people who are exempt from paying]
This keeps being said, but I've never seen any support for it.
It's probably true to say that Americans subsidise the massive advertising budgets.
Complete nonsense. I see this regurgitated again and again with nothing to back it up and it falls apart under the slightest inspection.
One of the Quora answers [1] to this question has lots of evidence and ultimately boils down to mostly marketing budgets (drugs are advertised directly to consumers here in the US and not elsewhere).
[1] https://www.quora.com/Does-the-US-subsidize-health-care-in-t...
Don't believe this one second. It's just self-serving nonsense to justify overcharging Americans.