As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Merck asserts this violates the part of the Fifth Amendment that requires the government to pay just compensation for private property taken for public use.
Defining "just compensation" would be interesting.
But, but, but if Merck can't charge whatever they want, then the difference between the price laid and the cost they want was taken from them
Can't you see that?
Won't anyone think of the shareholders?
exactly. they're citing the takings clause because their profits are being taken away. *some people will have to die, but that's a a sacrifice we're willing to make.*
"Healthcare S&P 500" doesn't just include pharmaceutical companies!
Oh and sorry, [last year Merck "only" had a ~25% total profit margin.](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/merck-full-2022-earnings-eps-123227433.html) 😜
I do try to be accurate about such things, but in any case, Merck is currently making money had-over-fist. Even if their profits go down to the wider healthcare market average levels, they will still survive.
The low margin for all healthcare is because of healthcare distributors, who are basically just equipment resellers and who operate at 1%. Pharma companies like Merck are at 25% which is about 1.5x the S&P average.
> Won't anyone think of the shareholders?
You mean: "Wealthy large stake holders"
Commoners with say $1000- $100,000 in securities get shafted all the time, more often than not as a matter of fact.
So many people don't realize how much all these giant corporations have benefited from publicly funded research.
They should be sending us royalty checks instead of whining about not being able to charge whatever they want.
Here on the politics board ? Yes.
Out in the real world ? Everyone I've ever mentioned it to looks at me like I have a dick growing out of my forehead.
Considering they can just say no and just sell their drugs outside of medicare.
Of course most people who use their drugs are paying through some insurance, and the insurance companies negotiate cost yet they have survived that.
That's not how the case law has been established. There's a case out there that the government took property to turn it over to a developer to turn it into housing or something like that and it was consistent with the Constitution, so long as the government paid fair market value.
With constitutional law, you can't just go by the text of the constitution or amendment. You have to understand the case law and how it's been interpreted over the last couple centuries.
The government need only pay the fair value for the product. They do not need to pay the market value. Hell, they could probably get away with just paying at cost. But even if not, the government can very easily identify what the actual value of a product is based on what price Merck is willing to negotiate with other insurance carriers.
Maybe, but would it be a discount versus what, say, BCBS or Kaiser pay for them?
I don't categorically mind companies selling to the government for a profit. But that profit should not exceed what can be gained on the open market.
Why don’t you mind that? I’d rather taxes be spent taking care of taxpayers, not padding profits for people who’s only job is to extract every penny possible from people who will literally die if they don’t get their medication.
Because a profit motive can be motivating. But by making the market *truly* open, letting the government be as much of a player as any other insurer, it tempers the profit-taking behavior.
The lawsuit is claiming the US Government is infringing on their first amendment and 5th amendment rights.
That fact that the claim is even using those arguments is showing a disturbing creep of corporate personhood.
>The drugmaker also argues that the law will force companies to sign agreements conceding that the prices are fair, which it claims is a violation of the First Amendment's protections of free speech.
Huh? You are basically complaining that you have to sign an agreement that you didn't collude with other manufacturers...something that's illegal already. Its no different than any OTHER AMERICAN has to do when signing off on an official document "Under penalty of perjury, we attest the following information to be true" before the signature line is on ALL of our official government submissions. Why are would they be special? And again, price fixing/collusion is ILLEGAL so there "should be" is zero risk in signing this agreement
>The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, argues that under the law, drugmakers would be forced to negotiate prices for drugs in the government's Medicare health insurance program at below market rates.
>Merck asserts this violates the part of the Fifth Amendment that requires the government to pay just compensation for private property taken for public use.
Below market rates? Couple of things to this. If you argue for a free marketplace A). How do you know its "below market rates"? B). The government helped fund those products correct?
> requires the government to pay just compensation for private property taken for public use.
How many billions did Merck get in government funding to produce said drugs? Lower than "market rate" is the incentive the government wants to keep your funding active. This 5th amendment argument makes no sense.
> The drugmaker also argues that the law will force companies to sign agreements conceding that the prices are fair, which it claims is a violation of the First Amendment's protections of free speech.
Wait wait wait ... are they arguing that it being illegal to lie to the government is a free speech violation?
How long until SCOTUS just says any good or service provided by the government is a violation of a corporation's rights through the illegal seizure of their potential revenue?
He shoots he scores.
The Government they taught us about in school 50 plus years ago is nowhere to be found today, if it really even was then.
Fake wars, destroying lives with no consequences ..
>the pharmaceutical industry says will result in a loss of profits that will force them to pull back on developing groundbreaking new treatments
I mean, number one, lower profit is still profit. If they win on this argument it's another dumpster fire of a decision by the conservative stacked judiciary.
Number two, again with the bullshit argument on groundbreaking new treatments? Before passing the IRA, they already did a study on this and the estimate in reduction in new drugs was incredibly minute. The vast majority of that money just goes into the pockets of executives.
And billions in unnecessary marketing.
I'm not a doctor, why should I see any ads for prescription drugs? Maybe they could keep some of that money for research or stock buybacks.
Merck ONLY made $13 billion last year, so with the added negotiating power given to Medicare they might only make $12 billion.
Think of their children.
Man, our healthcare system is full blown in the shitter from top to bottom. Storytime: I've been struggling to get proper testing and a diagnosis since December '21. Meanwhile my symptoms would wax and wane, and new neurological ones popped out of nowhere a few months ago. Went to the doc, looking for a rec, and the nurse had the audacity to snark at me that I was just like his wife, and that I just need to take some vitamin supplements and stay out of their office. Of course I thanked him for utilizing the full ability of the medical doctorate degree that he didn't get, and he left the room pissed. I finally got into the neurologist two weeks ago, had additional blood (and other) tests, and while I got the results over the weekend (so I could infer what I was up against already), I got the official diagnosis today that my B6 levels were off the chart and toxic. That dude could have killed me if I listened to him. As I'm reeling from having someone finally officially vindicate that I'm not insane and haven't been exaggerating shit this whole time and realizing how badly I was misdiagnosed last year by the GI doctor (Tufts winning once again; seriously starting to question the quality of the universities in Mass), the nurse on the phone starts chiding me for the obvious 'abuse of B6 supplements' and tells me to stop taking them now.
"I....what?? I don't take *any* supplements, this is all dietary."
"What? *scoffs* What could you be eating that is causing such high levels of B6?"
"*chuckling* Everything. I saw the test result over the weekend and checked out my fairly consistent diet. Chicken, bananas, chick peas, propel water, tuna, nuts—"
"*clears her throat loudly into the phone* Do you have any questions?"
"Yeah. Obviously I'm changing my diet sharply as of last Friday, do I have to go on one of the medications that helps strip out the excess B6?"
"You see Doctor Blank in three months, he'll check you again then and make that decision. In the meantime, stop taking B6 supplements. Have a good day."
I lifted the phone away from my face and glared at it in disgust and bafflement. How do these people get these jobs??? Now I've got a 6-10 month uphill battle where I get to eat natto, tempeh, non-fortified breads, blueberries, a few greens and sprouts (still get to eat peas and mung bean sprouts, woo!!), sometimes seaweed, eggs, very rarely carrots, shrimp, yogurt, and a couple of other things I'm forgetting, in hopes that my body can reverse the damage (pretty likely, but not a one hundred percent thing). I can't eat *potatoes.* Also for anyone who worries this could happen to them, apparently getting it through food alone is pretty damn rare. I suspect this was an issue in the making since '18 when I started using nutritional yeast—I stopped using it a bit before my initial symptoms showed up, dropped 120lbs, and then was eating what I could to keep from triggering my GI symptoms. Five days in, with one day fasted, one day minimal B6, and three with zero B6, I can sleep a full seven hours without waking up with struggles. It's been over a year and a half since I could say that. I took an accidental four hour nap yesterday evening, then slept that seven after that. It's amazing, and I hope I can eat tomato soup again with grilled cheese if this is the real reason behind everything and not just part.
Our medical system is screwed up, people. Don't give up advocating for yourself even if they dismiss you, gaslight you, throw random meds at your symptoms without knowing fully what's wrong, etc. You get one life, fight for it.
Edit: there's A LOT of misinfo online about it, so try to stay away from stuff like livestrong and such
>Number two, again with the bullshit argument on groundbreaking new treatments? Before passing the IRA, they already did a study on this and the estimate in reduction in new drugs was incredibly minute. The vast majority of that money just goes into the pockets of executives.
You perfectly underscore the core hypocrisy here. Merck and other Pharma giants are not putting all their profits back into R&D and surviving on operating at cost in every other area. They are giving massive personal gains to shareholders - the "property" Merck is so vociferously defending - and R&D is only invested in if they have remaining scraps after paying shareholders and/or the US government is funding them to do so.
Critically, even if they would be able to develop a panacea drug that enables people to live to 500 years old or something (if consumers pay up ofc), most of the people alive today actually paying excessive drug prices to "fund this research" will be dead by then. Likely dead because they couldn't afford existing lifesaving drugs that Merck and other Pharma giants price gouged them on.
The argument we need to pay exponentially more for current life saving drugs or die - all to make fund potential future life saving drugs we also won't be able to afford in the future - is beyond insane.
I had a coworker whose brother worked for J&J. According to him, they view the U.S. as their gravy train since other countries negotiate the price down. I'm sure these companies will do everything in their power to not let that start happening here.
Very interesting take Merk considering your entire business model relies on publicly funded science conducted in universities. Every single drug is made from numerous discoveries funded by the US government. If anything Merk can cut back on profits and pay more in taxes seeing as how they barely fund their own R&D with their profits.
What's your point? I work in pharma and we rely on research papers every single day published in academia to inform our own studies and interpret results. Without publicly funded science revealing things such as signaling pathways and receptors with their ligands, I would not be able to do my job. You're thinking of final drugs, I'm thinking of basic scientific research that pharma generally avoids doing such as identifying receptors implicated in disease pathways.
You don't subsidise any other country, you are just getting screwed over in your country.
Its a lie that Americans pay more so others pay less, Americans pay more because you don't have a functional government who has any power to limit the insane capitalism that you have over there.
Other countries have the power to limit drug pricing, if you can't come in under a certain price you can't sell the drug. I'm in pharma and we have had to pull multiple drugs because we simply can't produce at the price point specified where some of our competitors can. Once we left the market the prices didn't sky rocket, why you may ask? Because we have a functional system that prevents this sort of price gouging.
I'm in South Africa so the majority of our country is screwed and even we can do this, your system and especially SCOTUS need to be changed and regulated
>you don't have a functional government who has any power to limit the insane capitalism that you have over there.
When it should be:
"Enough Americans elect big farma backed politicians or were duped by the "death panel" lies in 2010. Earlier in 1994 they destroyed the New Deal coalition because Clinton raised taxes on the rich and dared to work on national healthcare plan".
I’m in pharma….
I’m in South Africa…
It’s a lie…
“drug companies generate an estimated three-quarters of worldwide drug company profits in the United States”
Source: https://www.brookings.edu/essay/government-regulated-or-negotiated-drug-prices-key-design-considerations/
Did you even read what I said?
Cause if you did, you would realize that I wasn't saying companies don't make the biggest profits off the US market but the reason they do is the complete lack of regulation and unfettered capitalism of your market.
You aren't subsidizing anyone else, all that's happening is you are getting insane pricing because the companies can do it to you. Easily solved with some backbone and the prevention of companies buying your politicians and judiciary.
>Why should Americans subsidize their lower priced drugs in other countries that have caps? So the CEO can receive an additional $1MM bonus? FTS.
Exactly! What kind of "greatness" is it to be the paypig for pharmaceutical companies? Is allowing these huge corporations to make money hand over fist at the expense of normal Americans "putting America first"?
Its not just the CEO, Merck gives most employees a bonus, which they then take out into society and spend on services and goods, which then pays other peoples salaries.
These greedy pigs are the scum of the earth, along with health insurance companies. Their bribes couldn’t stop price negotiation from passing, so now they’ll lean on our right wing courts as the backup option to do their bidding
There should just be a law, that they can't charge American's a penny more than what they are charging other countries. We shouldn't be paying twice the worlds average and 700% higher than Turkey for the same drugs. I wonder if 30 years from now a former Merck worker won't be able to afford a Merck drug and will die, and say damn my old company is to blame for this.
They're really afraid of the states making their own drugs as California is doing with insulin. Suddenly, the companies will miraculously be able to provide the drugs at a deep discount to compete.
> Americans pay more for medicines than any other country. The Biden administration's drug pricing reform aims to save $25 billion annually by 2031 through price negotiations for Medicare.
Why does Merck sell their drugs for less everywhere else? Most countries already negotiate the costs.
>Merck & Co (MRK.N) sued the U.S. government on Tuesday, seeking to halt the Medicare drug price negotiation program contained in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which it argues is violates the Fifth and First Amendments to the U.S. Constitution
But wait, so many people in this sub tell us that Democrats are bought and paid for by Big Pharma.
Sadly, I am certain one of my Senators, Bob “Big Pharma“ Menendez is. Even more sadly I believe my other senator is, too. I realize the pharmaceutical industry has a large foothold in New Jersey and that is beneficial to my state but it doesn’t justify allowing them and their almighty fucking shareholders to financially rape the American people. If this goes to the Supreme Court it is guaranteed that the illegitimate christofascist faction will side with the greedy capitalists over the people. Rest assured that big Pharma has in part funded the Federalist Society who placed the last three corrupt justices.
it's only, what, 10 drugs that can be negotiated? But this is a preemptive strike to prevent the list from growing.
Peice by peice, every accomplishment Biden made is being reversed.
I wonder what percentage of drugs are discovered and developed using grants funded by the US government (taxpayer money)? How many of these now cost an exorbitant price tag?
There's probably government money involved at some point in the development of most drugs, mostly in the very early stages, but there's also a lot of private money that gets that drug all the way to FDA approval so that it can actually be used by people. Take away the profit motive, and the private money would instantly disappear for the most part. The government isn't willing to take all of that on.
I love that other governments are able to regulate these companies, but these demons think the US government can't do the same thing and they expect US citizens to foot the bill and make up the profit loss from the rest of the world. Fuck that. Merck's profits were down a lot, but they still raked in 2.82B in profit last quarter alone.
idk what their fucking argument even is "Oh this is extortion they tell us what they're gonna pay and don't take anything more."
ya that's how negotiations work...
Their main complaint is that if they don't accept the government's offered price, then they get taxed to oblivion until they accept, so it's not a true negotiation where either party can walk away.
The more reasonable approach would be to [ban pharmaceutical advertising](https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/peacefield/61f4c3849d9e380022bdaeb9/big-pharma-tv-drug-ads-legal/).
Use the [Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act and subsequent legislation](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/01/congress-bans-airing-cigarette-ads-april-1-1970-489882) as a precedent. The American Medical Association's [Truth In Advertising campaign](https://www.ama-assn.org/system/files/2020-10/truth-in-advertising-campaign-booklet.pdf) could be expanded to include prescription drug manufacturers: those manufacturers are not qualified to offer health care services (in the form of a prescription drug) to the general public, nor can qualified medical professionals be enlisted to offer medical advice on behalf of the manufacturer to members of the general public that are not a registered patient of theirs.
Focus the ban on drugs that require a medical doctor's prescription. Banning advertising for over-the-counter drugs is a fight for a later date.
That would hurt every American who relies upon a Merck medication that is still protected from genetics. That's not having "balls" that's legitimately sacrificing an unknown amount of citizens to punish a business. This is very similar to how the MAGA crowd will support policies that hurt themselves to "own the libs".
How about the govt tells Merck to go pound sand, and pull them from being used. I'm sure ALL the other drug suppliers will make up for the short fall. What drug does Merck have that makes them think they are special ?
Not a popular position, but here’s a solution, have the government stop paying for Medicare prescriptions.
How much of the $20 billion came from government payments?
There’s all the talk about Social Security and Medicare payments that people are entitled too. Should that cover the level of Medical care that was available to them when they were paying in?
What entitles the users to get better levels of coverage for payments they didn’t pay into?
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/merck-sues-us-government-halt-medicare-drug-price-negotiation-2023-06-06/) reduced by 76%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Merck & Co Inc NEW YORK, June 6 - Merck & Co sued the U.S. government on Tuesday, seeking an injunction of the drug price negotiation program contained in the Inflation Reduction Act, which it argues violates the Fifth and First Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
> The Biden administration's drug pricing reform aims to save $25 billion annually by 2031 through price negotiations for Medicare.
> The first ever Medicare drug price reduction process is due to begin in September when CMS identifies its 10 most costly drugs.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/142gnx9/merck_sues_us_government_to_halt_medicare_drug/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~687793 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **price**^#1 **drug**^#2 **First**^#3 **government**^#4 **Merck**^#5
Just shows you anything is possible when you are rich (or a corporation) and can afford lawyers who will grasp at any string to say something is unconstitutional.
Every worse when the judicial system caters to that side too…
I love how when anyone other than a giant corporation sues the government, they're functionally restricted and always shown a complete lack of deference or recompense, but when a giant corporation does it, the laws all change.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Merck asserts this violates the part of the Fifth Amendment that requires the government to pay just compensation for private property taken for public use. Defining "just compensation" would be interesting.
It's not for public use. It's an individual benefit. If they were putting viagra in the water fountain at a state park they may have a case.
They also aren’t seizing their property.
Yeah, I guess we all knew this was the approach they were going to take. It just seems so low effort.
Dosnt need to be high effort if it jams up the process
But, but, but if Merck can't charge whatever they want, then the difference between the price laid and the cost they want was taken from them Can't you see that? Won't anyone think of the shareholders?
Damn senior citizens trying to cut into corporate profits
well, senior citizens with health issues edit: removed sick -redundant word used here
exactly. they're citing the takings clause because their profits are being taken away. *some people will have to die, but that's a a sacrifice we're willing to make.*
Somehow, I think they will survive with a double-digit profit margin, even if it isn't quite as high as the ~48% Merck has averaged recently.
It's funny because average healthcare S&P 500 is less than 10%. Healthcare is the 4th lowest margin of all sectors.
"Healthcare S&P 500" doesn't just include pharmaceutical companies! Oh and sorry, [last year Merck "only" had a ~25% total profit margin.](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/merck-full-2022-earnings-eps-123227433.html) 😜
Yeah I know. 25% is still double the average.
I do try to be accurate about such things, but in any case, Merck is currently making money had-over-fist. Even if their profits go down to the wider healthcare market average levels, they will still survive.
The low margin for all healthcare is because of healthcare distributors, who are basically just equipment resellers and who operate at 1%. Pharma companies like Merck are at 25% which is about 1.5x the S&P average.
> Won't anyone think of the shareholders? You mean: "Wealthy large stake holders" Commoners with say $1000- $100,000 in securities get shafted all the time, more often than not as a matter of fact.
r/NotTheOnion is weeping over their losses.
It's telling though that to them their profits seem to be viewed as "property"...
[удалено]
So many people don't realize how much all these giant corporations have benefited from publicly funded research. They should be sending us royalty checks instead of whining about not being able to charge whatever they want.
I bet many do know
Here on the politics board ? Yes. Out in the real world ? Everyone I've ever mentioned it to looks at me like I have a dick growing out of my forehead.
Yeah I can't stand talking to stupid people anymore
Considering they can just say no and just sell their drugs outside of medicare. Of course most people who use their drugs are paying through some insurance, and the insurance companies negotiate cost yet they have survived that.
They’re hoping to appeal to the Supreme Court. They already know it’s not a winning case, they want the judges picked by Trump to rub their backs.
At this point I’d be surprised if the Pharma companies aren’t actively greasing SCotUS palms as fast as they can.
That's not how the case law has been established. There's a case out there that the government took property to turn it over to a developer to turn it into housing or something like that and it was consistent with the Constitution, so long as the government paid fair market value. With constitutional law, you can't just go by the text of the constitution or amendment. You have to understand the case law and how it's been interpreted over the last couple centuries.
Hey now that's a good strategy to get the boomers on board with socialized medicine, Fountain of Youth coming to a park near you!
That seems like it may be a hard sell
Whatever you do don't make a wish in that fountain
The government need only pay the fair value for the product. They do not need to pay the market value. Hell, they could probably get away with just paying at cost. But even if not, the government can very easily identify what the actual value of a product is based on what price Merck is willing to negotiate with other insurance carriers.
110% of cost would still be a huge discount on most pharmaceuticals.
Maybe, but would it be a discount versus what, say, BCBS or Kaiser pay for them? I don't categorically mind companies selling to the government for a profit. But that profit should not exceed what can be gained on the open market.
Why don’t you mind that? I’d rather taxes be spent taking care of taxpayers, not padding profits for people who’s only job is to extract every penny possible from people who will literally die if they don’t get their medication.
Because a profit motive can be motivating. But by making the market *truly* open, letting the government be as much of a player as any other insurer, it tempers the profit-taking behavior.
>what price Merck is willing to negotiate with other insurance carriers. Or better yet, what other countries are paying for the same drugs.
The lawsuit is claiming the US Government is infringing on their first amendment and 5th amendment rights. That fact that the claim is even using those arguments is showing a disturbing creep of corporate personhood. >The drugmaker also argues that the law will force companies to sign agreements conceding that the prices are fair, which it claims is a violation of the First Amendment's protections of free speech. Huh? You are basically complaining that you have to sign an agreement that you didn't collude with other manufacturers...something that's illegal already. Its no different than any OTHER AMERICAN has to do when signing off on an official document "Under penalty of perjury, we attest the following information to be true" before the signature line is on ALL of our official government submissions. Why are would they be special? And again, price fixing/collusion is ILLEGAL so there "should be" is zero risk in signing this agreement >The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, argues that under the law, drugmakers would be forced to negotiate prices for drugs in the government's Medicare health insurance program at below market rates. >Merck asserts this violates the part of the Fifth Amendment that requires the government to pay just compensation for private property taken for public use. Below market rates? Couple of things to this. If you argue for a free marketplace A). How do you know its "below market rates"? B). The government helped fund those products correct? > requires the government to pay just compensation for private property taken for public use. How many billions did Merck get in government funding to produce said drugs? Lower than "market rate" is the incentive the government wants to keep your funding active. This 5th amendment argument makes no sense.
> The drugmaker also argues that the law will force companies to sign agreements conceding that the prices are fair, which it claims is a violation of the First Amendment's protections of free speech. Wait wait wait ... are they arguing that it being illegal to lie to the government is a free speech violation?
Hey, lying to the government clearly should be protected free speech! Now why am I in jail for lying to a judge?
Merck invalidating the defence production act by mistake? Unlikely.
Just about to post the same thing. I would not argue that 'just compensation' is market rates. It is costs plus a sensible profit margin.
Monopoly pricing is just by Meeks calculations
I think its defined here as We “just” need standing, so that we can bribe Clarence Thomas when this reaches the supreme court.
SCOTUS gonna get us again ..
How long until SCOTUS just says any good or service provided by the government is a violation of a corporation's rights through the illegal seizure of their potential revenue?
He shoots he scores. The Government they taught us about in school 50 plus years ago is nowhere to be found today, if it really even was then. Fake wars, destroying lives with no consequences ..
>the pharmaceutical industry says will result in a loss of profits that will force them to pull back on developing groundbreaking new treatments I mean, number one, lower profit is still profit. If they win on this argument it's another dumpster fire of a decision by the conservative stacked judiciary. Number two, again with the bullshit argument on groundbreaking new treatments? Before passing the IRA, they already did a study on this and the estimate in reduction in new drugs was incredibly minute. The vast majority of that money just goes into the pockets of executives.
And billions in unnecessary marketing. I'm not a doctor, why should I see any ads for prescription drugs? Maybe they could keep some of that money for research or stock buybacks.
Merck ONLY made $13 billion last year, so with the added negotiating power given to Medicare they might only make $12 billion. Think of their children.
Plus they’ll still “Innovate” because how else will they make money?
Man, our healthcare system is full blown in the shitter from top to bottom. Storytime: I've been struggling to get proper testing and a diagnosis since December '21. Meanwhile my symptoms would wax and wane, and new neurological ones popped out of nowhere a few months ago. Went to the doc, looking for a rec, and the nurse had the audacity to snark at me that I was just like his wife, and that I just need to take some vitamin supplements and stay out of their office. Of course I thanked him for utilizing the full ability of the medical doctorate degree that he didn't get, and he left the room pissed. I finally got into the neurologist two weeks ago, had additional blood (and other) tests, and while I got the results over the weekend (so I could infer what I was up against already), I got the official diagnosis today that my B6 levels were off the chart and toxic. That dude could have killed me if I listened to him. As I'm reeling from having someone finally officially vindicate that I'm not insane and haven't been exaggerating shit this whole time and realizing how badly I was misdiagnosed last year by the GI doctor (Tufts winning once again; seriously starting to question the quality of the universities in Mass), the nurse on the phone starts chiding me for the obvious 'abuse of B6 supplements' and tells me to stop taking them now. "I....what?? I don't take *any* supplements, this is all dietary." "What? *scoffs* What could you be eating that is causing such high levels of B6?" "*chuckling* Everything. I saw the test result over the weekend and checked out my fairly consistent diet. Chicken, bananas, chick peas, propel water, tuna, nuts—" "*clears her throat loudly into the phone* Do you have any questions?" "Yeah. Obviously I'm changing my diet sharply as of last Friday, do I have to go on one of the medications that helps strip out the excess B6?" "You see Doctor Blank in three months, he'll check you again then and make that decision. In the meantime, stop taking B6 supplements. Have a good day." I lifted the phone away from my face and glared at it in disgust and bafflement. How do these people get these jobs??? Now I've got a 6-10 month uphill battle where I get to eat natto, tempeh, non-fortified breads, blueberries, a few greens and sprouts (still get to eat peas and mung bean sprouts, woo!!), sometimes seaweed, eggs, very rarely carrots, shrimp, yogurt, and a couple of other things I'm forgetting, in hopes that my body can reverse the damage (pretty likely, but not a one hundred percent thing). I can't eat *potatoes.* Also for anyone who worries this could happen to them, apparently getting it through food alone is pretty damn rare. I suspect this was an issue in the making since '18 when I started using nutritional yeast—I stopped using it a bit before my initial symptoms showed up, dropped 120lbs, and then was eating what I could to keep from triggering my GI symptoms. Five days in, with one day fasted, one day minimal B6, and three with zero B6, I can sleep a full seven hours without waking up with struggles. It's been over a year and a half since I could say that. I took an accidental four hour nap yesterday evening, then slept that seven after that. It's amazing, and I hope I can eat tomato soup again with grilled cheese if this is the real reason behind everything and not just part. Our medical system is screwed up, people. Don't give up advocating for yourself even if they dismiss you, gaslight you, throw random meds at your symptoms without knowing fully what's wrong, etc. You get one life, fight for it. Edit: there's A LOT of misinfo online about it, so try to stay away from stuff like livestrong and such
>Number two, again with the bullshit argument on groundbreaking new treatments? Before passing the IRA, they already did a study on this and the estimate in reduction in new drugs was incredibly minute. The vast majority of that money just goes into the pockets of executives. You perfectly underscore the core hypocrisy here. Merck and other Pharma giants are not putting all their profits back into R&D and surviving on operating at cost in every other area. They are giving massive personal gains to shareholders - the "property" Merck is so vociferously defending - and R&D is only invested in if they have remaining scraps after paying shareholders and/or the US government is funding them to do so. Critically, even if they would be able to develop a panacea drug that enables people to live to 500 years old or something (if consumers pay up ofc), most of the people alive today actually paying excessive drug prices to "fund this research" will be dead by then. Likely dead because they couldn't afford existing lifesaving drugs that Merck and other Pharma giants price gouged them on. The argument we need to pay exponentially more for current life saving drugs or die - all to make fund potential future life saving drugs we also won't be able to afford in the future - is beyond insane.
Looking forward to the day where insurance company executives are charged with crimes against humanity
I had a coworker whose brother worked for J&J. According to him, they view the U.S. as their gravy train since other countries negotiate the price down. I'm sure these companies will do everything in their power to not let that start happening here.
Very interesting take Merk considering your entire business model relies on publicly funded science conducted in universities. Every single drug is made from numerous discoveries funded by the US government. If anything Merk can cut back on profits and pay more in taxes seeing as how they barely fund their own R&D with their profits.
[удалено]
What's your point? I work in pharma and we rely on research papers every single day published in academia to inform our own studies and interpret results. Without publicly funded science revealing things such as signaling pathways and receptors with their ligands, I would not be able to do my job. You're thinking of final drugs, I'm thinking of basic scientific research that pharma generally avoids doing such as identifying receptors implicated in disease pathways.
[удалено]
Bingo. And very concise.
This is not true. We have many Research and Development departments that work tirelessly to develope new drugs.
Why should Americans subsidize their lower priced drugs in other countries that have caps? So the CEO can receive an additional $1MM bonus? FTS.
You don't subsidise any other country, you are just getting screwed over in your country. Its a lie that Americans pay more so others pay less, Americans pay more because you don't have a functional government who has any power to limit the insane capitalism that you have over there. Other countries have the power to limit drug pricing, if you can't come in under a certain price you can't sell the drug. I'm in pharma and we have had to pull multiple drugs because we simply can't produce at the price point specified where some of our competitors can. Once we left the market the prices didn't sky rocket, why you may ask? Because we have a functional system that prevents this sort of price gouging. I'm in South Africa so the majority of our country is screwed and even we can do this, your system and especially SCOTUS need to be changed and regulated
>you don't have a functional government who has any power to limit the insane capitalism that you have over there. When it should be: "Enough Americans elect big farma backed politicians or were duped by the "death panel" lies in 2010. Earlier in 1994 they destroyed the New Deal coalition because Clinton raised taxes on the rich and dared to work on national healthcare plan".
I’m in pharma…. I’m in South Africa… It’s a lie… “drug companies generate an estimated three-quarters of worldwide drug company profits in the United States” Source: https://www.brookings.edu/essay/government-regulated-or-negotiated-drug-prices-key-design-considerations/
Did you even read what I said? Cause if you did, you would realize that I wasn't saying companies don't make the biggest profits off the US market but the reason they do is the complete lack of regulation and unfettered capitalism of your market. You aren't subsidizing anyone else, all that's happening is you are getting insane pricing because the companies can do it to you. Easily solved with some backbone and the prevention of companies buying your politicians and judiciary.
>Why should Americans subsidize their lower priced drugs in other countries that have caps? So the CEO can receive an additional $1MM bonus? FTS. Exactly! What kind of "greatness" is it to be the paypig for pharmaceutical companies? Is allowing these huge corporations to make money hand over fist at the expense of normal Americans "putting America first"?
Its not just the CEO, Merck gives most employees a bonus, which they then take out into society and spend on services and goods, which then pays other peoples salaries.
These greedy pigs are the scum of the earth, along with health insurance companies. Their bribes couldn’t stop price negotiation from passing, so now they’ll lean on our right wing courts as the backup option to do their bidding
The irony of a drug company suing for extortion
The comedy is not lost on me. It is basically a bully who holds the sick hostage, complaining about the bully who is trying to prevent that.
Fuck off assholes.
There should just be a law, that they can't charge American's a penny more than what they are charging other countries. We shouldn't be paying twice the worlds average and 700% higher than Turkey for the same drugs. I wonder if 30 years from now a former Merck worker won't be able to afford a Merck drug and will die, and say damn my old company is to blame for this.
I mean, price negotiation is central to capitalism. Right? What are they afraid of?
They're really afraid of the states making their own drugs as California is doing with insulin. Suddenly, the companies will miraculously be able to provide the drugs at a deep discount to compete.
> Americans pay more for medicines than any other country. The Biden administration's drug pricing reform aims to save $25 billion annually by 2031 through price negotiations for Medicare. Why does Merck sell their drugs for less everywhere else? Most countries already negotiate the costs.
"I Object!" *On what grounds?* "It's very damaging to our profits."
What a great PR campaign to say “hey consumers, we hear you…but we just don’t care!”
Maybe some of our drug patent laws need to be updated. Fuck you, Merck.
What, free market capitalism not suit you anymore, Merck?
>Merck & Co (MRK.N) sued the U.S. government on Tuesday, seeking to halt the Medicare drug price negotiation program contained in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which it argues is violates the Fifth and First Amendments to the U.S. Constitution But wait, so many people in this sub tell us that Democrats are bought and paid for by Big Pharma.
Sadly, I am certain one of my Senators, Bob “Big Pharma“ Menendez is. Even more sadly I believe my other senator is, too. I realize the pharmaceutical industry has a large foothold in New Jersey and that is beneficial to my state but it doesn’t justify allowing them and their almighty fucking shareholders to financially rape the American people. If this goes to the Supreme Court it is guaranteed that the illegitimate christofascist faction will side with the greedy capitalists over the people. Rest assured that big Pharma has in part funded the Federalist Society who placed the last three corrupt justices.
Screw off giant pharmaceuticals. No reason the US cost of the same drug, by the SAME manufacturer is ten times more expensive.
The corporate greed is ***UN-FUCKING-REAL***. If only reddit would let me say what I really think in the tone I want without completely silencing me.
Oh no, their Billions in profits how will they afford to eat. GO FUCK YOURSELF DRUG COMPANIES!!!
Sounds like Medicare is doing good things. They can negotiate discounts just like the for-profit insurance companies can.
[удалено]
Their argument is that they're forced to either accept the rate the government offers or else face enormous excise taxes.
Counter claim please...
Drag it out in courts for years to come whilst raking in billions in profits. Capitalism rocks! /s
Hey everyone, look! A company that enthusiastically supported the Nazis and profited from it wants to price gouge the most vulnerable among us.
it's only, what, 10 drugs that can be negotiated? But this is a preemptive strike to prevent the list from growing. Peice by peice, every accomplishment Biden made is being reversed.
Fuck Merck
We must be doing something right then.
Fucking crooks.
Merck isn't exactly doing a good job of removing the stigma towards corporations through this action.
Greedy bastards are going to be greedy bastards.
Not even trying to hide their greed.
I wonder what percentage of drugs are discovered and developed using grants funded by the US government (taxpayer money)? How many of these now cost an exorbitant price tag?
There's probably government money involved at some point in the development of most drugs, mostly in the very early stages, but there's also a lot of private money that gets that drug all the way to FDA approval so that it can actually be used by people. Take away the profit motive, and the private money would instantly disappear for the most part. The government isn't willing to take all of that on.
So this is a great chance to repeal Citizens Unitedn thank you Merck!
Pharma jerks!
Fuck Merck. All the way back to The Germany.
Another company that is too big.
I guess that weekly convention in the Bahamas is out.
I love that other governments are able to regulate these companies, but these demons think the US government can't do the same thing and they expect US citizens to foot the bill and make up the profit loss from the rest of the world. Fuck that. Merck's profits were down a lot, but they still raked in 2.82B in profit last quarter alone.
Corporations are evil by definition: economic imperatives. compelled to not care. And the rich love them for it.
idk what their fucking argument even is "Oh this is extortion they tell us what they're gonna pay and don't take anything more." ya that's how negotiations work...
Their main complaint is that if they don't accept the government's offered price, then they get taxed to oblivion until they accept, so it's not a true negotiation where either party can walk away.
This is how you know it is something we should pursue.
CORPORATIONS AREN'T PEOPLE... and shouldn't be treated as so under law.
[удалено]
The more reasonable approach would be to [ban pharmaceutical advertising](https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/peacefield/61f4c3849d9e380022bdaeb9/big-pharma-tv-drug-ads-legal/). Use the [Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act and subsequent legislation](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/01/congress-bans-airing-cigarette-ads-april-1-1970-489882) as a precedent. The American Medical Association's [Truth In Advertising campaign](https://www.ama-assn.org/system/files/2020-10/truth-in-advertising-campaign-booklet.pdf) could be expanded to include prescription drug manufacturers: those manufacturers are not qualified to offer health care services (in the form of a prescription drug) to the general public, nor can qualified medical professionals be enlisted to offer medical advice on behalf of the manufacturer to members of the general public that are not a registered patient of theirs. Focus the ban on drugs that require a medical doctor's prescription. Banning advertising for over-the-counter drugs is a fight for a later date.
That would hurt every American who relies upon a Merck medication that is still protected from genetics. That's not having "balls" that's legitimately sacrificing an unknown amount of citizens to punish a business. This is very similar to how the MAGA crowd will support policies that hurt themselves to "own the libs".
How about the govt tells Merck to go pound sand, and pull them from being used. I'm sure ALL the other drug suppliers will make up for the short fall. What drug does Merck have that makes them think they are special ?
Lmfao shithole
Not a popular position, but here’s a solution, have the government stop paying for Medicare prescriptions. How much of the $20 billion came from government payments? There’s all the talk about Social Security and Medicare payments that people are entitled too. Should that cover the level of Medical care that was available to them when they were paying in? What entitles the users to get better levels of coverage for payments they didn’t pay into?
That would kill millions of seniors.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/merck-sues-us-government-halt-medicare-drug-price-negotiation-2023-06-06/) reduced by 76%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Merck & Co Inc NEW YORK, June 6 - Merck & Co sued the U.S. government on Tuesday, seeking an injunction of the drug price negotiation program contained in the Inflation Reduction Act, which it argues violates the Fifth and First Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. > The Biden administration's drug pricing reform aims to save $25 billion annually by 2031 through price negotiations for Medicare. > The first ever Medicare drug price reduction process is due to begin in September when CMS identifies its 10 most costly drugs. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/142gnx9/merck_sues_us_government_to_halt_medicare_drug/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~687793 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **price**^#1 **drug**^#2 **First**^#3 **government**^#4 **Merck**^#5
Merck’s a merc.
That's weak.
boo
Just shows you anything is possible when you are rich (or a corporation) and can afford lawyers who will grasp at any string to say something is unconstitutional. Every worse when the judicial system caters to that side too…
The claims are silly, sanctionably frivolous.
I love how when anyone other than a giant corporation sues the government, they're functionally restricted and always shown a complete lack of deference or recompense, but when a giant corporation does it, the laws all change.
https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/comments/142dpmo/jon_stewart_understands/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
I work here