Hall of Shame - May Induce Rants

32 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
Let's hear it for Costco! (This is just mind-boggling!)

Make sure you read all the way past the list of the drugs. The woman that signed below is a Budget Analyst out of federal Washington , DC offices.

Did you ever wonder how much it costs a drug company for the active ingredient in prescription medications? Some people think it must cost a lot, since many drugs sell for more than $2.00 per tablet. We did a search of offshore chemical synthesizers that supply the active ingredients found in drugs approved by the FDA. As we have revealed in past issues of Life Extension a significant percentage of drugs sold in the United States contain active ingredients made in other countries.

In our independent investigation of how much profit drug companies really make, we obtained the actual price of active ingredients used in some of the most popular drugs sold in America .

Celebrex:100 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $130.27
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.60
Percent markup: 21,712%


Claritin:
10 mg
Consumer Price (100 tablets): $215.17
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.71
Percent markup: 30,306%


Keflex:
250 mg
Consumer Price (100 tablets): $157.39
Cost of general active ingredients: $1.88
Percent markup: 8,372%


Lipitor:
20 mg
Consumer Price (100 tablets): $272.37
Cost of general active ingredients: $5.80
Percent markup: 4,696%
Error! Filename not specified.

Norvasc:
10 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $188.29
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.14
Percent markup: 134,493%


Paxil:
20 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $220.27
Cost of general active ingredients: $7.60
Percent markup: 2,898%


Prevacid:
30 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $44.77
Cost of general active ingredients: $1.01
Percent markup: 34,136%


Prilosec
: 20 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $360.97
Cost of general active ingredients $0.52
Percent markup: 69,417%


Prozac:
20 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets) : $247.47
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.11
Percent markup: 224,973%


Tenormin:
50 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $104.47
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.13
Percent markup: 80,362%


Vasotec:
10 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $102.37
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.20
Percent markup: 51,185%


Xanax:
1 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets) : $136.79
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.024
Percent markup: 569,958%


Zestril:
20 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets) $89.89
Cost of general active ingredients $3.20
Percent markup: 2,809%


Zithromax:
600 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $1,482.19
Cost of general active ingredients: $18.78
Percent markup: 7,892%


Zocor:
40 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $350.27
Cost of general active ingredients: $8.63
Percent markup: 4,059%

Zoloft:50 mg
Consumer price: $206.87
Cost of general active ingredients: $1.75
Percent markup: 11,821%


Since the cost of prescription drugs is so outrageous, I thought everyone should know about this.

It pays to shop around! This helps to solve the mystery as to why they can afford to put a Walgreen's on every corner. On Monday night, Steve Wilson, an investigative reporter for Channel 7 News in Detroit , did a story on generic drug prices gouging by pharmacies.

He found in his investigation that some of these generic drugs were marked up as much as 3,000% or more. So often we blame the drug companies for the high cost of drugs, and usually rightfully so.

But in this case, the fault clearly lies with the pharmacies themselves. For example if you had to buy a prescription drug, and bought the name brand, you might pay $100 for 100 pills.

The pharmacist might tell you that if you get the generic equivalent, they would only cost $80, making you think you are saving $20. What the pharmacist is not telling you is that those 100 generic pills may have only cost him $10!

At the end of the report, one of the anchors asked Mr. Wilson whether or not there were any pharmacies that did not adhere to this practice, and he said that Costco consistently charged little over their cost for the generic drugs.


I went to the Costco site, where you can look up any drug, and get its online price. It says that the in-store prices are consistent with the online prices. I was appalled. Just to give you one example from my own experience I had to use the drug Compazine which helps prevent nausea in chemo patients.

I used the generic equivalent, which cost $54..99 for 60 pills at CVS. I checked the price at Costco, and I could have bought 100 pills for $19.89. For 145 of my pain pills, I paid $72.57. I could have got 150 at Costco for $28.08.

I would like to mention, that although Costco is a 'membership' type store, you do NOT have to be a member to buy prescriptions there as it is a federally regulated substance. You just tell them at the door that you wish to use the pharmacy, and they will let you in.

I am asking each of you to please help me by copying this letter, and passing it into your own e-mail, and send it to everyone you know with an e-mail address..
  • Profile picture of the author Lou Diamond
    Hello,
    I do understand that the markup is tremendous, but nowhere does the author state any costs that are involved in the manufacture and the development of such drugs.
    Signature

    Something new soon.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2054298].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author KenThompson
      Originally Posted by Lou Diamond View Post

      Hello,
      I do understand that the markup is tremendous, but nowhere does the author state any costs that are involved in the manufacture and the development of such drugs.
      I used the generic equivalent, which cost $54..99 for 60 pills at CVS. I checked the price at Costco, and I could have bought 100 pills for $19.89. For 145 of my pain pills, I paid $72.57. I could have got 150 at Costco for $28.08.
      Whatever they are, evidently 19.89 satisfies someone, somewhere.

      Whaddya think, Lou?

      Excellent point.

      Edit: I'm mightily relieved the FTC is chasing down those evil citizens making
      outrageous income claims on those awful websites. What are they called?
      Affiliate websites? Is that it?

      Edit part deux: Pat, this didn't induce a rant, but I did experience slight nausea.

      Edit part trois: I logged back in just to write this. The other day I was sitting in
      my favorite Italian eats place enjoying something, don't remember. The owner keeps
      the TV on. I bet I saw half a dozen commercials for... well, read the list above.

      Fascinating, those commercials are. I believe I was eating a slice of pizza, and I
      got to wondering if all those cigarette commercials were really that bad? Sure, you
      may or may not get whatever from smoking. Maybe. (no crying about the fabled
      second hand smoke.) Anyway...

      The thing that got me debating that in my head, whilst enjoying my pizza, had to do
      with all the various, inconsequential ways in which all those life-saving legal drugs
      can accidentally kill you.

      I'm sure you've read the labels. I always get a semi-hearty, just semi, laugh when
      I'm driving and hear a commercial... not for cigarettes... but rather for these life-saving
      drugs. The kinda unfunny part is when they talk really fast at the end about how taking
      those life-saving drugs may inadvertently really, really... really screw you up.

      Hell... that stuff to make your cholesterol go down can make you impotent, maybe
      destroy your liver or at least knock the hell out of it. Perhaps shave a decade off its
      useful life span. You might fall off the john a la Elvis due to over-exertion. Stone cold
      dead with a Field & Stream magazine clutched in your hands.

      That would suck.

      But The Marlboro Man? Forget it. He's one dangewous individuwal.

      I feel better, now. It's 4 AM. Good night, Pat.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2054329].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Quote:
        Originally Posted by Lou Diamond
        Hello,
        I do understand that the markup is tremendous, but nowhere does the author state any costs that are involved in the manufacture and the development of such drugs.

        Quote:
        I used the generic equivalent, which cost $54..99 for 60 pills at CVS. I checked the price at Costco, and I could have bought 100 pills for $19.89. For 145 of my pain pills, I paid $72.57. I could have got 150 at Costco for $28.08.
        Originally Posted by KenThompson View Post

        Whatever they are, evidently 19.89 satisfies someone, somewhere.
        It is astounding that someone on a MARKETING site would say such a thing. The research costs, etc..., go from NOTHING to MILLIONS of dollars. The original drugs are usually on the high side, generics are on the low side. And costs vary.

        As for costco, they make money EVEN if they break even, because of the membership. They cut corners on display, stocking, shipping, etc... They can get better bargains because of THAT, bulk, larger packages, and exclusivity. So to compare them in the first place is silly. Accrdoing to what I saw and heard, assuming all were telling me the truth, Perhaps 60% of a given printer'setail cost was from ONE distributer. I found a way to make a deal and cut that to about 50%, and was told I could cut it to about 30%. But Software generally goes like this:

        1. Manufacturer
        2. Distributer
        3. Seller.

        The distributer should be making the least profit, since their real costs are lower. Anyway, that distributers cost, supposedly the only one selling it at the time, was SO high that I couldn't beat a competitor's price, or even come CLOSE, even if I made NO profit!

        and was this WITH insurance, or without? Was it on a club plan? And the term generic i thrown around a LOT. There are at least three companies that make "generic" warfarin. Prices vary. For all we know, costco may even have cut a special deal with one or something.

        It is crazy, when airlines earlier fixed prices, etc... people went into a fit, and the government got involved. Today, a whole lot of things happen all over.

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2055216].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author KenThompson
          Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

          It is astounding that someone on a MARKETING site would say such a thing.

          Steve
          You are easily astounded, Steve. I'm sure all the pharmas appreciate your support.

          But thanks and always nice to hear from you.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2055513].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
            I was wondering how you would respond to that since I thought you made an excellent point. Your response was with a lot more grace than I would have been able to muster. ;-)

            Originally Posted by KenThompson View Post

            You are easily astounded, Steve. I'm sure all the pharmas appreciate your support.

            But thanks and always nice to hear from you.
            Signature
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2058402].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kurt
              Originally Posted by garyv View Post

              I agree w/ that in theory. However, in real life, profit drives innovation. It's the thought and reality of huge profits that drive people to invent and come up w/ cures.
              Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio View Post

              But hey - if there's no profit, there's no reason to continue being in business, is there

              Mike
              For some reason, I don't think massive profits were what motivated Jonas Salk or the guys that discovered penicillin.

              IMO, it's very dangerous to run health care on the same basis we do for running a business. Somewhere along the line we Americans decided it was better to be greedy than to do good things.

              I read a report a while back...In the 70's and earlier, the number one reason people gave for the reason they became doctors was to help people. But since the 80's, that changed...Now the number one reason people choose to become doctors (by far) is to make money.

              This concept that we need to make money as motivation to help others is a fairly new occurance and wasn't the way it used to be.
              Signature
              Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
              Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2058526].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                For some reason, I don't think massive profits were what motivated Jonas Salk or the guys that discovered penicillin.
                You would be correct. But Jonas Salk wasn't a business person.

                Don't be discouraged...there are still MANY people who do things for the greater good. Even in the drug industry. In fact, I know quite a few personally.

                But profit IS the reason these companies are in business. Like it or not, profit DOES also drive innovation. Profit - even in the health care business - is not ALL bad.

                Mike
                Signature

                Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059366].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author garyv
                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                For some reason, I don't think massive profits were what motivated Jonas Salk or the guys that discovered penicillin.

                IMO, it's very dangerous to run health care on the same basis we do for running a business. Somewhere along the line we Americans decided it was better to be greedy than to do good things.

                I read a report a while back...In the 70's and earlier, the number one reason people gave for the reason they became doctors was to help people. But since the 80's, that changed...Now the number one reason people choose to become doctors (by far) is to make money.

                This concept that we need to make money as motivation to help others is a fairly new occurance and wasn't the way it used to be.
                I agree w/ you Kurt, however greed has always been a motivation in our history. For good or bad it's what has driven us forward (and sometimes backwards as well). It wasn't the need to help people that enslaved thousands of china-men to build our railroad system. It also wasn't the need to help people that had us enslaving other men to harvest our crops. While greed can be a bad thing, it doesn't always have to be.

                But greed has always been there. Just do a quick study on how many of the richest moguls in history made their money. Most were very innovative, but you'd be surprised at how ruthless many of them were as well.

                Personally, I'd love to live in a world where everyone wanted to pay thousands of dollars and spend 8 extra years of their life in school, just out of the want to help other people. But that's not the world we currently live in. So I'm more than happy to pay someone for their time, knowledge, and yes innovation.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059380].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                  Thank you Gordon Gekko. By the way, now days the word "Chinese" is preferred over Chinamen.

                  Originally Posted by garyv View Post

                  I agree w/ you Kurt, however greed has always been a motivation in our history. For good or bad it's what has driven us forward (and sometimes backwards as well). It wasn't the need to help people that enslaved thousands of china-men to build our railroad system. It also wasn't the need to help people that had us enslaving other men to harvest our crops. While greed can be a bad thing, it doesn't always have to be.

                  But greed has always been there. Just do a quick study on how many of the richest moguls in history made their money. Most were very innovative, but you'd be surprised at how ruthless many of them were as well.

                  Personally, I'd love to live in a world where everyone wanted to pay thousands of dollars and spend 8 extra years of their life in school, just out of the want to help other people. But that's not the world we currently live in. So I'm more than happy to pay someone for their time, knowledge, and yes innovation.
                  Signature
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059560].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author garyv
                    Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                    Thank you Gordon Gekko. By the way, now days the word "Chinese" is preferred over Chinamen.
                    Thanks for the lesson in political correctness Janet Napolitano, but I referred to them as china-men because that phrase links them to and is notorious w/ railroad slavery. Yes they were Chinese. But the phrase was used to help emphasize my story.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059592].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
                      One of the biggest opponents of "smoking alternatives" has routinely been big pharma. Ever wonder why? Why is it pharmas lobby strongly (and win) against us being allowed to import our prescriptions from Canada? Is the medicine the same quality? Yes. Is it the same price? Nope.

                      Yes, there are research costs - but much of that research is done with federal grants and subsidies.

                      There are some industries where the profits reported by the corporations clearly indicate overcharging - and pharmaceutical companies top the list...along with big oil.
                      Signature
                      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
                      ***
                      Please do not 'release balloons' for celebrations. The balloons and trailing ribbons entangle birds and kill wildlife and livestock that think the balloons are food.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059661].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
                        Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio View Post


                        After working in the industry for 20 years, I can tell you that there is a lot that goes in to making drugs. But I can also tell you that on average, pharmaceutical companies show much higher profit margins than many other industries.
                        Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

                        There are some industries where the profits reported by the corporations clearly indicate overcharging - and pharmaceutical companies top the list...along with big oil.
                        Yup. Which was noted in my post.

                        I have learned a lot lately about big business "infiltration" into high level of Government, powerful lobby's, etc. Hard to tell anymore where one ends and the other begins...

                        Interesting indeed...
                        Signature

                        Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059927].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                      LOL. How come when you were referring to plantation slavery you didn't use that other racial slur common when referring to blacks to "emphasize" your story? Nice try.

                      Originally Posted by garyv View Post

                      I referred to them as china-men because that phrase links them to and is notorious w/ railroad slavery. Yes they were Chinese. But the phrase was used to help emphasize my story.
                      Signature
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2062835].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KimW
        Originally Posted by KenThompson View Post

        .....The thing that got me debating that in my head, whilst enjoying my pizza, had to do
        with all the various, inconsequential ways in which all those life-saving legal drugs
        can accidentally kill you.

        I'm sure you've read the labels. I always get a semi-hearty, just semi, laugh when
        I'm driving and hear a commercial... not for cigarettes... but rather for these life-saving
        drugs. The kinda unfunny part is when they talk really fast at the end about how taking
        those life-saving drugs may inadvertently really, really... really screw you up.

        Hell... that stuff to make your cholesterol go down can make you impotent, maybe
        destroy your liver or at least knock the hell out of it. Perhaps shave a decade off its
        useful life span. You might fall off the john a la Elvis due to over-exertion. Stone cold
        dead with a Field & Stream magazine clutched in your hands.

        That would suck.


        I cannot for the life of me understand why we even allow drugs commercials on TV. All they do is advocate people becoming their own doctors and doing self diagnosis. They wrer right when back in the 60s they said drugs were going to destroy us. They just named the wrong drugs. It's the "legal" ones that are destroying us. :rolleyes:
        Signature

        Read A Post.
        Subscribe to a Newsletter
        KimWinfrey.Com

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2055487].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Great post!

    The wife was saying the same thing about 3 weeks ago.

    Will save most folks lots of money!

    Will pass on...

    TL
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2054799].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    This is IDIOTIC! OF COURSE the cost of the materials is less! You want to know the REAL cost of materials!?!?!??

    ZERO! ZILCH, NADA, NOTHING!

    That's right, nothing costs ANYTHING! You want water? The planet is about 3/4 water! DUH! You want salt? There is a lot of salt in that water. You want fish? They are in the water! You want soil? HEY, plenty out there! You want aluminum? Plenty out there! You want IRON? Take a magnet to the soil, you'll get plenty. You want GLASS? The beaches are literally COVERED with it! That pristine sand is SILCA(GLASS!!!!!!)!!!!! You want GOLD!?!?!? IT is free ALSO!

    YEP, the products cost NOTHING! OH YEAH, I know.... Let's take WATER, as an example! OK, I want just *****WATER*****, and I will sell it. WHAT is needed?

    1. Get water, FOR FREE!
    2. Clean distilling equipment
    3. Distill water(You have gas(FREE, but nobody will sell it to us for that), and wear and tear(Free raw materials, but we need the products))
    4. Bottle it(Free raw materials, but we need the products)
    5. Label it(Free raw materials, but we need the products)
    6. SHIPPING (Free raw materials, but we need the products/service)
    7. DISTRIBUTION(Free raw materials, but we need the products/service)
    8. FUNDS PROCESSING(Free raw materials, but we need the products/service)

    And for something like drugs you ALSO have LEGAL, LICENSING, CERTIFICATION, TESTING, RESEARCH. And distill water becomes MIX, TEST, PRESS, or some such.

    Do I think we pay WAY too much for drugs? YEP! But the cost of materials is a SMALL fraction of the cost. NOBODY made THAT a secret. IRONICALLY, government intervention by regulations, legal, and taxing probably presents the second highest cost after development! So THEY should talk! OH, and GENERICS have NO license, NO research, NO development, because they are LITERALLY riding the coattails of the name brand!

    And don't forget the cleaning, certification and calibration of the machines! One company, about a year ago, had machines that weren't calibrated properly, and they had to recall drrugs, and were shut down a long time because the tablets were about twice the dosage!

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2054899].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    A lot of the research that takes place is done at state colleges and/or with grant money, Tax payers already do foot the bill for some of the R & D.
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2055174].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      A lot of the research that takes place is done at state colleges and/or with grant money, Tax payers already do foot the bill for some of the R & D.
      The military also does a lot of research. They will do up to a certain point - mostly for feasibility - then will auction off what they have to the pharma's.

      Consider though that the work done to that point is ONLY step one. R&D is pretty expensive to be sure. But even when the pharma's take them over there is still MUCH R&D left to do.

      When small R&D firms work up a potential product, it is done on a VERY small scale with no form of studies as to effectiveness over time, side effects, product stability and so on.

      Before they go into production, they need to be scaled up. Just because something works on a small, 1 KG machine doesn't mean it will work on a production sized 300 KG machine.

      Then there is the stability studies. These take months to years.

      Tableting methods, Coating trials, packaging, warehousing... ALL of these are hugely expensive and take time an resources.

      EVERY piece of equipment involved from start to finish - all expensive. All need to be validated. All of them need periodic maintenance and calibration (which is what I did many moons ago). All of the production protocols need to be validated - including manufacturing, maintenance and cleaning SOP's. calibration SOP's...

      And finally, for every drug that makes it to market there are many that go through the motions but don't make it. That is heavily factored into the cost.

      So, to simply show the cost of active ingredients as a basis of total markup is asinine.

      After working in the industry for 20 years, I can tell you that there is a lot that goes in to making drugs. But I can also tell you that on average, pharmaceutical companies show much higher profit margins than many other industries.

      But hey - if there's no profit, there's no reason to continue being in business, is there

      Mike
      Signature

      Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2056520].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KimW
    I have found Costco to be consistently less expensive for the majority of my medicines than other retail outlets.
    A couple of examples: Omeprazole,which is known as the OTC Prilosac(sp?).
    At a nationwide chain, $10 with insurance.$65 without insurance.
    At Costco without insurance,$13 and change.
    I use a cream every day on my arm where we stick the needles in (15 gauge needles are big and they hurt!), Same situation, chain, $10 with insurance,$40 without insurance, and Costco? $9.
    I can't say it is true for all drugs though. Just this week I hat to get an antibiotic for a sinus infection and treatment vials for a nebulizer. The Costco pharmacist didn't realize I had insurance again and rang those two up for a total of $55. When I explained I had insurance again the cost when down to $10 for both.
    Go figure.
    Signature

    Read A Post.
    Subscribe to a Newsletter
    KimWinfrey.Com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2055463].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author garyv
    Not to condone the markup, but you must also consider that you have to pay an actual pharmacist. This is not a cheap education, and the person you hire literally has people's lives in his/her hand. One mess up could be devastating. Not to mention what insurance must cost to run a pharmacy.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2055492].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by garyv View Post

      Not to condone the markup, but you must also consider that you have to pay an actual pharmacist. This is not a cheap education, and the person you hire literally has people's lives in his/her hand. One mess up could be devastating. Not to mention what insurance must cost to run a pharmacy.
      Yeah, that is another thing, who knows. Apparently at least SOME areas will let ANYONE be a pharmacist in ANY pharmacy as long as a REAL one(credentialed) is there at the time. Some others may want all to be pharmacists. Costco may even have an exemption there, who knows?

      And for insurance? costco cuts a lot of prices and has a lot of volume, and some products are EXPENSIVE, so on a cost per item basis, insurance would be cheaper.

      Ken,

      I ALWAYS said I think they get TOO MUCH! But I am serious! Gold is FREE! The cost is $0! I used to get probably a few grams from a creek near where I lived. If only I had it assayed, etc... It is about $1185USD an oz now! That is $41.87USD/gr! BUT, and here is the rub, HERE is what you have to do:

      1. Find the gold(free)
      2. Have it assayed (Mine was from a creek, and likely pretty pure, but I have no idea how much they would charge.
      3. Have it refined, and hallmarked(This can add several percent to the cost)
      4. Sell it(they often deduct several % from the cost)

      Should I complain that $1185 is too much? I mean I could probably have gotten that much in a few days of panning. Maybe LESS! BUT, don't forget, just the refining, hallmark, and discount could cost say $60! So how much should I ask them to charge? $80? HEY, if it took me 2 days, maybe I could hire OTHERS to do it! THEN, it might cost $120 total! So should I ask them to charge $160!?!? What about pilferage though? You see how crazy this is? BESIDES, the cost to produce the gold never went up just because the price went up. And gold can't really drop below the price to get it. At least it couldn't be sustained.

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2055526].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Patrician
    I know it must sound socialist and believe me I am diametrically opposed to that BUT I really do not feel that our health/survival should have anything to do with PROFIT. It should be a birthright to eat and to be healthy.

    Charge for the actual cost to make something and all the other costs associated - it should be distributed BY NOT FOR PROFIT AGENCIES.

    period.

    I have a friend that died a few years ago - Chemotherapy almost killed her outright - She found pills that were working for her but Medicare would not pay for them ($1000 a month) for a person living on Social Security. They would however pay for $10,000 outpatient chemo -

    There is NO LOGIC there other than if she could afford the pills she might still be alive.

    Sounds almost like genocide of the poor to me.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2056135].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author garyv
      Originally Posted by Patrician View Post

      I know it must sound socialist and believe me I am diametrically opposed to that BUT I really do not feel that our health/survival should have anything to do with PROFIT. It should be a birthright to eat and to be healthy.

      Charge for the actual cost to make something and all the other costs associated - it should be distributed BY NOT FOR PROFIT AGENCIES.

      period.

      I have a friend that died a few years ago - Chemotherapy almost killed her outright - She found pills that were working for her but Medicare would not pay for them ($1000 a month) for a person living on Social Security. They would however pay for $10,000 outpatient chemo -

      There is NO LOGIC there other than if she could afford the pills she might still be alive.

      Sounds almost like genocide of the poor to me.
      I agree w/ that in theory. However, in real life, profit drives innovation. It's the thought and reality of huge profits that drive people to invent and come up w/ cures. If we left the payment of such things up to the government, they'd be constantly searching for ways to cut the budget, and thereby limiting innovation. Almost every advancement you can think of in medicine, technology, etc - is born out of a desire for profit.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2056205].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by Patrician View Post

      I know it must sound socialist and believe me I am diametrically opposed to that BUT I really do not feel that our health/survival should have anything to do with Profit. It should be a birthright to eat and to be healthy.

      Charge for the actual cost to make something and all the other costs associated - it should be distributed BY NOT FOR PROFIT AGENCIES.

      period.

      I have a friend that died a few years ago - Chemotherapy almost killed her outright - She found pills that were working for her but Medicare would not pay for them ($1000 a month) for a person living on Social Security. They would however pay for $10,000 outpatient chemo -

      There is NO LOGIC there other than if she could afford the pills she might still be alive.

      Sounds almost like genocide of the poor to me.
      You are right APPARENTLY, but you HAVE to charge a profit to pay all the employees, developers, etc... If you don't pay them, the stuff won't be produced.

      PERIOD!

      Do I think that $1000 for pills is too much? YEP! HEY, I paid about $300 a month before I got generic. And what are they? Well, the more expensive one is RAT POISON! And I have to take about 5mg. That is SO small that it would be easy to get the dose wrong in the mixture and, to make it easy to take, you need filler. and they try to make pills look unique. One way is through color. It uses an ALUMINUM dye. I would like to get rid of THAT. Anyway, part of my cost there is even funding a COLLEGE, believe it or not! I'll even PROVE it:

      WARF - Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation

      The drug I take is a coumARIN! I Capitalized that because it is a suffix added to a drug name to show its class. Put them together, and WHAT do you have? WARFARIN!

      WARF - Societal Contributions

      Over the years, WARF's activities have made a profound, positive impact upon the health, safety and welfare of humankind. In addition to Steenbock's advance, the roster of UW-Madison discoveries patented and licensed by WARF includes:


      Dale Wurster, August 1959. Photo courtesy of UW-Madison Photo Archives.
      Karl Paul Link's discovery of coumarin, the basis for Coumadin®, the most widely prescribed blood thinner for treating cardiovascular disease, and its counterpart, warfarin, still the most widely used rodenticide worldwide
      HECK, my FATHER went there! I have a relative they must have liked, since they named a building after her. And TODAY, I am paying part of my prescriptions cost to support them for OTHERS.

      Anyway, Coumadin is the name brand I was originally FORCED to take. Warfarin is the one I take now. BUT, as the document states, coumadin is just warfarin. I guess they say warfarin is a rodentcide(RAT POISON), so calling coumadin "the most widely prescribed blood thinner for treating cardiovascular disease" sounds that much better. Have to keep the big bucks coming in.

      See, there are a LOT of costs in these pills you just never see. And look at how big this ONE little thing is....

      Since its founding in 1925, WARF has:
      Processed approximately 6,000 inventions created by UW-Madison faculty and staff
      Obtained 1,900 U.S. patents on these inventions
      Completed over 1,600 license agreements with companies all over the world
      Given $990 million to the UW-Madison to fund research, programs and initiatives
      HEY, I feel for you and your friend. I feel for ME also. My life would likely have been a LOT better with a few minor improvements to the system when I was born.

      All I am saying is that you can't simply blame the drug companies. Hey, remember when those idiots at that company with a "patent" that was neither unique or specific or even ever implemented, almost shut down every blackberry EVERYWHERE!? And blackberry had to pay ALL that money and go to ALL that trouble defending it? THAT is the kind of thing that REALLY makes drugs EXPENSIVE!

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2056244].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author KenThompson
      Originally Posted by Patrician View Post

      It should be a birthright to eat and to be healthy.
      But it's not, Patrician, and it shouldn't be.

      No one can argue against that.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2062939].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    Kurt,

    Like I implied, a lot of the profit may not even have gone to the people that TRULY invented it. HECK, even WANG came up with a theory that may have seemed a little impractical, etc.... BUT, when he built a computer company around it, and started being profitable, the COLLEGE came after him, because he wrote about the idea in a college paper! So HE was being sued because HE came up with the idea earlier. Even WARF might do the SAME thing!

    And those TV commercials, and industry rag papers, samples, and fancy packaging, DON'T come cheap.

    All I have been arguing about is using generic prices, low wholesale membership store prices, and ingredient costs to determine what the product should sell for. And, obviously, making NO profit is impractical. Even STORES want a profit, and spoilage, stocking, real estate, and other costs, pretty much mean they have to get a profit.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059067].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KimW
    All through history there have been many great inventions and discoveries from many great men whose ultimate end was not profit.
    Knowledge for knowledge's sake is not an unknown concept.
    Signature

    Read A Post.
    Subscribe to a Newsletter
    KimWinfrey.Com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059470].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author garyv
      Originally Posted by KimW View Post

      All through history there have been many great inventions and discoveries from many great men whose ultimate end was not profit.
      Knowledge for knowledge's sake is not an unknown concept.
      Very true. This world could use a resurgence of people that aren't driven solely by profit. But for a quest of knowledge and good will.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059532].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by KimW View Post

      All through history there have been many great inventions and discoveries from many great men whose ultimate end was not profit.
      Knowledge for knowledge's sake is not an unknown concept.
      Yeah, but that still isn't too common. And they got money or necessities from SOMEWHERE! Still, if you are willing to pay $.30 for the "active ingredient", are a few pennies for the actual discoverer/inventor REALLY too much?

      Besides, if s/he were the MOST prolific and altruistic developer everywhere, then denying any income would mean he or she would have to ALSO work somewhere else, and you would lose a chance for the great treatment YOU might need one day!

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2059566].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Patrician
    Ken - Are you on Zen?

    I am not going to get religious
    because I can't because it's political.
    I can ALWAYS argue.
    You can't take that away.
    Why would you want to.
    OK and to agree to disagree,
    if it isn't then it should be.

    fubar
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2063004].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Tunnah
      My brother is a bio-chemist that has worked at a high level with drugs companies for a number of years. I can tell you companies invest millions..and sometimes billions on developing new drugs. That's why there's a huge difference in price to make and cost charged. The generic drugs are drugs that use the formula after thae patent runs out on protection. The idea is that the drug company makes their money for a few years then it's an open market.

      Rich
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2063390].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by Patrician View Post

      Ken - Are you on Zen?

      I am not going to get religious
      because I can't because it's political.
      I can ALWAYS argue.
      You can't take that away.
      Why would you want to.
      OK and to agree to disagree,
      if it isn't then it should be.

      fubar
      When I was a kid, I had access to PROPERTY! PROPERTY I COULD USE! That meant I could fish, if I wanted, but it ALSO meant I could GROW anything I wanted.

      It was nice to be able to grow carrots, tomatoes, lettuce, etc... It would be nice if THAT were a right. It really should have been. Outside of old families, some communities set to do that, people that buy property where they can do such things, you just can't do that.

      Some places now sell seed kits to practically plant a farm on an acre. Well, I only have half an acre, and there are covenants that complicate things. 8-( When I was younger, I only used about 100SF for my little farm, but that was as a nicety, treat, and hobby, not to actually live. I MAYBE had an acre available, but you have to have places for the driveway, etc... 8-( Ironically, some POOR communities now have community farms.

      Outside of THAT, and basic knowledge for care, WHAT should be a "RIGHT", especially on a not for profit basis?

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2063392].message }}

Trending Topics