American Economics Thread

[SamuraiBlue]

well done ... it seems Japan is the best then .. no wonder so little suicide in Japan

Another one liner, from a troll very predictable.

 

[antiterror13]

Another one liner, from a troll very predictable.

are you ok?

 

[Equation]

Mandatory health insurance and relationship with labor unions actually goes hand in hand.
In Japan, companies pays more or less 1/3 of mandatory health insurance of their employee and dependents, the nation 1/3 and the remaining 1/3 by the individual. The companies gains tax breaks from paying their part and insurance companies need to provide volume discount to major companies so the whole requires to pay less.
With this kind of scheme with annual check-up as preventive health care you have a more efficient work force with less worries for the employees resulting to a less pressful labor union since they have less to argue about.

Just curious is there a rule of some kind to prevent over charging or continuous rising of insurance cost in Japan? IMO health insurance in America is a mess because it allowed the insurance company to operate as a corporation looking after the self interests and profits of the firm NOT the people.

 

[Equation]

One per centers... two per centers... three per centers... four... all terms that started talking about the US. The only reason why they displaced it to China is to distract Americans from seeing the corrupt elite of the US. It happens every time something embarrassing that counters the US is perfect, never do wrong, always does right image. Watch when some ugly racist incident happens in the US. All of the sudden shortly after some article comes out about how China is racist. No specific incident but China is a worse racist. I especially like the article after all the recent police shooting scandals where it was reported that in China when Chinese see a black person walking towards them on the street, they cross the street. It's always something Americans do but now it's China so it's automatically worth international attention therefore worse than when they do it. Same with past homophobic attacks. All of the sudden China now has a homophobia problem. The last one was the negative comments on Caitlyn Bruce Jenner and all of the sudden China treats transgenders horribly. When somebody is painted as worse, it excuses their crime so it should be ignored. That's the point.

Yup, we are all starting to get how the US and Western media propaganda machine works. They now try their hands more on social media as well.

 

[vesicles]

Similarly, for pharmaceutical and biotech companies, it makes the most sense to spend their R&D money developing drugs and treatments with super fat margins over those that might treat and benefit far more people, but yield much less profits.

Well, I would have to disagree with that. Of all the major focuses in the health care industry and medical research, majority of them actually goes to poor people. And the rest has absolutely no preference for economic status. Just think about it. Of all the major diseases now prevalent in the developed world, heart diseases and diabetes are on the top of virtually every list you can find. These diseases all have high correlation with poor diet and lack of exercise, something typically found among poor people. Then you have cancer and neurodegenerative diseases, which have no correlation with economic status. People always say diseases are a big equalizer between the rich and poor.

Then let's look at what big pharma focuses on: cancer, heart diseases, diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases. Another huge area of focus for all the big pharma: weight loss, which is another "poor man's disease". What about allergies, which do not distinguish between the rich and poor.

In fact, most big pharma actually mainly focus on the cheap drugs that target as many people as they can. This makes the most business sense.
Any business must pay attention to the market and want to capture as much market share as possible. That means they want to target as many people as they can. It's nothing political, but everything economic.

For big pharma, it is the same game. It's far easier to sell huge quantity of something cheap with lower profit margin than only targeting 1% of the market, no matter how fat the margin it may be... It's the model that has made Wal-Mart and Amazon the super-juggernauts that they are today.

A good example is Aspirin. It's a simple drug that has existed since the late 1800's. Its patent has expired long time ago, which means anyone can make it. It's one of the cheapest drugs that you can find at any drug store, grocery store and super market. Almost everyone takes aspirin. precisely because of these, it has a HUGE market. I've heard a senior executive at a major pharmaceutical company saying that aspirin has a market of hundreds of billions of $. He then went on the said "If you can capture even just 1% of it, it would be huge". That's why virtually every big pharma has some kind of major brand containing aspirin or aspirin-like drugs. In fact, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, to which aspirin belongs (drugs you take for pain, flu, cold, headaches, etc) take up vast majority of resources at virtually all big pharmaceutical companies in the US. And these drugs target everyone...

In fact, I would go as far to say that pharmaceutical industry is one of the few that does not discriminate.

 

[Equation]

Well, I would have to disagree with that. Of all the major focuses in the health care industry and medical research, majority of them actually goes to poor people. And the rest has absolutely no preference for economic status. Just think about it. Of all the major diseases now prevalent in the developed world, heart diseases and diabetes are on the top of virtually every list you can find. These diseases all have high correlation with poor diet and lack of exercise, something typically found among poor people. Then you have cancer and neurodegenerative diseases, which have no correlation with economic status. People always say diseases are a big equalizer between the rich and poor.

Then let's look at what big pharma focuses on: cancer, heart diseases, diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases. Another huge area of focus for all the big pharma: weight loss, which is another "poor man's disease". What about allergies, which do not distinguish between the rich and poor.

In fact, most big pharma actually mainly focus on the cheap drugs that target as many people as they can. This makes the most business sense.
Any business must pay attention to the market and want to capture as much market share as possible. That means they want to target as many people as they can. It's nothing political, but everything economic.

For big pharma, it is the same game. It's far easier to sell huge quantity of something cheap with lower profit margin than only targeting 1% of the market, no matter how fat the margin it may be... It's the model that has made Wal-Mart and Amazon the super-juggernauts that they are today.

A good example is Aspirin. It's a simple drug that has existed since the late 1800's. Its patent has expired long time ago, which means anyone can make it. It's one of the cheapest drugs that you can find at any drug store, grocery store and super market. Almost everyone takes aspirin. precisely because of these, it has a HUGE market. I've heard a senior executive at a major pharmaceutical company saying that aspirin has a market of hundreds of billions of $. He then went on the said "If you can capture even just 1% of it, it would be huge". That's why virtually every big pharma has some kind of major brand containing aspirin or aspirin-like drugs. In fact, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, to which aspirin belongs (drugs you take for pain, flu, cold, headaches, etc) take up vast majority of resources at virtually all big pharmaceutical companies in the US. And these drugs target everyone...

In fact, I would go as far to say that pharmaceutical industry is one of the few that does not discriminate.

Now if only they could make Epipen cost as much as aspirin, instead of blaming it on the health care provider.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[B.I.B.]

Now if only they could make Epipen cost as much as aspirin, instead of blaming it on the health care provider.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Many years ago when my dad was a young lad, his doctor told him that medical insurance was a rip off and he would be better off putting the premiums into a managed investment account.The accrued money should go a long way in meeting any medical costs aging brings with it.
He took the doctors advice and for many decades, the fund returned an average of 16% to him.
Unfortunately, he became afflicted with a middle age disease that affects most middle-aged men.........."menoporsche" and the money has now gone.

 

[vesicles]

Now if only they could make Epipen cost as much as aspirin, instead of blaming it on the health care provider.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Sounds like a classic case of "why monopoly is bad"...

Many years ago when my dad was a young lad, his doctor told him that medical insurance was a rip off and he would be better off putting the premiums into a managed investment account.The accrued money should go a long way in meeting any medical costs aging brings with it.
He took the doctors advice and for many decades, the fund returned an average of 16% to him.
Unfortunately, he became afflicted with a middle age disease that affects most middle-aged men.........."menoporsche" and the money has now gone.

Unfortunately, there is no cure for "menoporsche"... Maybe give him a dose of "ice-cold stare by the wife"...

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Just curious is there a rule of some kind to prevent over charging or continuous rising of insurance cost in Japan? IMO health insurance in America is a mess because it allowed the insurance company to operate as a corporation looking after the self interests and profits of the firm NOT the people.

Yes, first of all there is market pressure and mechanics of insurance that keeps premium low. Basically if every man, women and, child is listed as an insurance holder then you have a very large denominator for the policy so even if someone seriously requires a major operation it will be a relatively small numerator which will keep premiums low.
Second the government regulates the cost of each treatment based on how many are administered annually and then given points based on cost so any treatment acquired at any hospital will be the same through out the nation.

Very socialistic I know and the US would probably not accept this kind of heavy hand but it does keep treatment at affordable price keeping insurance premiums low. Of course there is a flip side to everything I would not say it is the best system in the world but it does work to keep cost down.

 

[Blackstone]

Yes, first of all there is market pressure and mechanics of insurance that keeps premium low. Basically if every man, women and, child is listed as an insurance holder then you have a very large denominator for the policy so even if someone seriously requires a major operation it will be a relatively small numerator which will keep premiums low.
Second the government regulates the cost of each treatment based on how many are administered annually and then given points based on cost so any treatment acquired at any hospital will be the same through out the nation.

Very socialistic I know and the US would probably not accept this kind of heavy hand but it does keep treatment at affordable price keeping insurance premiums low. Of course there is a flip side to everything I would not say it is the best system in the world but it does work to keep cost down.

Socialized medicine with "single payer" system is not doable right now, and I'm not sure if it'll be doable anytime soon. At least I hope I don't see it in my lifetime anyway. Private groups in America, on the other hand, have systems you speak of. One if FaithShare; a Christian insurance group where people share the medical costs per your description of Japan's system.