Pay your fair share of tax - everyone

[sasguru]

I can't be fooked googling, but as I used to be in the industry, I follow it now and then.
And I know that just one company Novartis, not even the largest, spent £10 billion on R&D last year.
That's 1/3 of total US government spending.
So its reasonable to suppose that if we add up the R&D spend of the largest pharmas they would be quite significant.
But you do the research, you're the one who made the ridiculous claim the "US is subsidising the rest of the world". Up to you to prove it.

Actually I found this link, which suggest quite the opposite

"the industry's own studies (and others) show that over the past quarter century, the U.S. has accounted for less than or about the same as its proportionate share of international new drugs, not more and certainly not nearly all (Barral 1996; European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations 2000). "

Does the US subsidize health care in the rest of the world by doing most of the drug research? - Quora

FFS don't know why I bother.
From now I will let the thickos wallow in their own ignorance like pigs in crap

[Robinho]

Actually I found this link, which suggest quite the opposite

Does the US subsidize health care in the rest of the world by doing most of the drug research? - Quora

FFS don't know why I bother.
From now I will let the thickos wallow in their own ignorance like pigs in crap

I don't see any figures.

[Mich the Tester]

1. It is in the insurance companys' interest to keep costs down for their customers. So if it is cheaper to operate earlier or take preventative care it will be done.

2. If you are a more productive person, you can afford more expensive healthcare and thus you can get treatment earlier, and you can get back and be productive earlier. Thus the productivity loss is smaller in total than averaging the treatment time for 2 people.

Much like it makes more sense for a contractor on 50 quid an hour to spend 5 pounds on a taxi which takes 5 mins to get to work, but a receptionist earning 5 pounds an hour would be better spending 2 pounds on a bus which takes 15 minutes.

1. Yes it is, now try explaining that to the insurance companies who have done nothing but add bureaucracy and unnecessary costs to Dutch healthcare by insisting on backward Taylorist approaches to 'quality' and process control. Theory good, practice tulipe.

2. I suppose by your measure a cleaner is less productive than a chef, and in direct terms, yes, she is. However, if the cleaner does a tulipe job, people get infected with nasty germs and die. Luckily the Hong Kong government is not as simplistic as you, and that's why they've provided public healthcare and a welfare system for their citizens.

You are trying to shoehorn everything into your simplistic ideology, much like tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists, where any evidence that doesn't fit their conspiracy is simply more evidence of 'reptilians' sitting around at a Bilderberg conference discussing new ways to rule the world. You are the economic equivalent of David Icke. I suggest you purchase a purple shellsuit at the earliest opportunity.

[OwlHoot]

Actually I found this link, which suggest quite the opposite

Does the US subsidize health care in the rest of the world by doing most of the drug research? - Quora

FFS don't know why I bother.
From now I will let the thickos wallow in their own ignorance like pigs in crap

I admit to not knowing much about healthcare, never having needed any. But isn't the US system bedevilled by their absurdly extortionate compensation culture and consequent astronomical liability insurance?

If we had the same system as them, with strictly limited liability, for both doctors and drug companies, perhaps we would have the best of both worlds.

[sasguru]

I admit to not knowing much about healthcare, never having needed any. But isn't the US system bedevilled by their absurdly extortionate compensation culture and consequent astronomical liability insurance?

If we had the same system as them, with strictly limited liability, for both doctors and drug companies, perhaps we would have the best of both worlds.

It's the fooking free market, it must be good, don't you know?
Haven't you done the 3-minute love-in chant "Free market good, free market good" today?
Napoleon the pig commands you to.

[Robinho]

1. Yes it is, now try explaining that to the insurance companies who have done nothing but add bureaucracy and unnecessary costs to Dutch healthcare by insisting on backward Taylorist approaches to 'quality' and process control. Theory good, practice tulipe.

Do you have any more information about this?

2. I suppose by your measure a cleaner is less productive than a chef, and in direct terms, yes, she is. However, if the cleaner does a tulipe job, people get infected with nasty germs and die.

Bloody hell, talk about going over the top. If a cleaner's job was as life and death as you are making out then restaurants would be very very fussy about who they hired to clean their restaurants because they don't want a lawsuit when they kill their customers. As such, the supply of cleaners able to do a job to the required standards would be rather small, and with a low supply and a high demand this means.... (drumroll!) cleaners would get paid a lot of money!

The reality is you have wildly overstated the life/death job of a clearer and thus wages are quite low.

You can call me simplistic and a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists if you like but yet again i provided logical and intelligent reasons to why your thought process is flawed and all you have really provided in return is insults.

[Mich the Tester]

all you have really provided in return is insults.

Somehow you think you deserve better. That, in itself, is a sign you are a cretin.

[sasguru]

Additionally it's the source of the bulk of research so it effectively subsidises the world's healthcare system.

but yet again i provided logical and intelligent reasons ...

Deluded as well as stupid. It's quite a combo you've got there, Napoleon

[Robinho]

Somehow you think you deserve better. That, in itself, is a sign you are a cretin.

Can i take it as a concession that you agree with the content of my last post?

[Mich the Tester]

Deluded as well as stupid. It's quite a combo you've got there, Napoleon

It's easy to explain why. Rob keeps asking for evidence against his hypotheses. That's all very well, and if we could be bothered, we'd provide it. What he doesn't do, which is essential, is take Karl Popper's advice and actually go looking for evidence that could falsify his ideology. That would be one step toward making him a scientist instead of a deluded cretin in a tinfoil hat .