That’s an argument for having the government pay for drugs, not for changing the process by which the drugs are developed. From the supply side, either private sector innovation works or it doesn’t.
According to IDC, North America spends $750 billion a year on IT, twice as much as it does on pharmaceuticals. People would save a lot of money if those costs came down. Can we do that by having the government come in and regulate the price of computers and IT contracts? Profits may go down, but that would be okay, because we’d get the same IT products and services for cheaper, right? Why don’t we do that?
We don’t do it because when it comes to less emotionally charged issues, we think clearly. We know that if we did that, talent and capital would leave for greener pastures, and that would compromise innovation.
According to IDC, North America spends $750 billion a year on IT, twice as much as it does on pharmaceuticals. People would save a lot of money if those costs came down. Can we do that by having the government come in and regulate the price of computers and IT contracts? Profits may go down, but that would be okay, because we’d get the same IT products and services for cheaper, right? Why don’t we do that?
We don’t do it because when it comes to less emotionally charged issues, we think clearly. We know that if we did that, talent and capital would leave for greener pastures, and that would compromise innovation.