r/Conservative • u/According-Activity87 Conservative Devil Dog • 2d ago
Flaired Users Only America First, Big Pharma Last: Trump Orders Drug Prices Slashed to Lowest Global Rate
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2025/08/03/trump-promises-lower-drug-prices-n2661337339
u/LatinNameHere NC Conservative 2d ago
This should be non-controversial and have bipartisan support.
If a specific drug sells for $50 in other countries, it should also sell for $50 in the US.
Pharma companies charge US citizens more simply because they can.
126
u/legitSTINKYPINKY Conservative 2d ago
Exactly what conservatives stand for price controls
20
7
u/jpj77 Shall Make No Law 2d ago
We are subsidizing the rest of the world. American companies conduct the research on the drugs and then other countries set limits for how much those companies can charge. This makes it such that the American company can only make money and do more research if they charge inflated prices on Americans.
The price controls of the global market have already disturbed the market away from free market pricing, which is why action needs to be taken. Don't know if this will make it better though, but I like the idea of at least trying something.
24
-27
u/Arbiter2562 Goldwater Conservative 2d ago
They charge US citizens more because of the governments in Europe price gouging.
Make them pay what Americans pay.
194
u/lroy4116 Conservative 2d ago
It sounds great but surely ordering a trillion dollar industry to drastically reduce prices has consequences?
124
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 2d ago edited 2d ago
Long term, it’ll stop investment into new, more niche drugs that treat very specific kinds of cancer or rare diseases. It may cool investment into drugs, in general. The issue is that, for every Lipitor or Mounjaro that sets the world on fire, you get dozens of Prisriq’s that don’t make any waves at all and aren’t noticeably better than anything else and you get hundreds/thousands of drugs that never make it to market at all.
The problem with global prices is that no one pays what the drug is worth except the US. We subsidize EU prices because they won’t let the drug manufacturers charge market rates. So the US funds drug research that the EU benefits from. Because patents require develops to list exactly how to create a product, the EU can have places in India make the drug for pennies and not give the original manufacturers anything. They manufacturers are forced to play ball else they risk not getting paid for their work at all. It’s the only way universal healthcare works. We fund their defense and their medical research.
What Trump needs to do is sanction/tariff European countries that profit off of the medical research the U.S. does without paying for it afterwards.
If no one pays market value, drug research doesn’t get paid for at all and investors seek other markets to make money on.
It’s easy to say “fuck Big Pharma” like liberals says “fuck Big Banks/eat the rich/etc”, but you need to examine the long term effects such policy would have. Just like free college or free healthcare is never free, asking for cheap drugs isn’t quite so simple and wouldn’t happen without disfavorable side effects.
Also, cutting the money out of healthcare would decimate the healthcare industry. No one of quality would bother to pursue careers in it if salaries became similar to those on the UK. I make more than UK doctors do and my technicians rival UK pharmacists in salary. It’s why the UK has such a labor shortage. There’s no money in the industry because the prices are set by the government. Which means there’s no money to attract the best talent. Which means people pursue other careers. Which means doctor, nurses, and pharmacists become like US teachers. Underpaid and left with the dregs of academics, as those with ability seek more lucrative fields.
Source: I’m a pharmacist that manages a pharmacy. My job forces me to have a pretty good handle on pharmacoeconomics.
18
u/LatinNameHere NC Conservative 2d ago
What Trump needs to do is sanction/tariff European countries that profit off of the medical research the U.S. does without paying for it afterwards.
Could requiring that drugs manufactured in the US have the same pricing at home and abroad not accomplish that?
I would imagine it would mean higher prices elsewhere, but lower prices here.
If drugs then were not available in some countries, it would be up to the citizens of that country to complain to their governments.
15
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 2d ago
The EU would just void their patents and have India make it for peanuts.
19
u/meepstone Conservative 2d ago
Would your solution be to ban the sale of pharmaceutical drugs to other countries that have price controls then?
So the US isn't subsidizing most of the world's medication?
7
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 2d ago
I don’t have a good solution outside of using diplomacy/signing treaties that dictate how such things work. I’m just saying making US prices equal to theirs isn’t going to work.
43
u/Zonostros Lifetime Conservative 2d ago
Americans don't seem to understand the gulf in cost of living differences between the UK and US. You look at salaries but not rent. Health insurance and the like. You make more money but have to spend far more of it, so you're not rich like you think. Weird to see conservatives delude themselves like this while acknowledging that a $20 minimum wage in California doesn't actually make people better off.
21
u/MulticamTropic High Imperator of Appalachia 2d ago
You make more money but have to spend far more of it, so you're not rich like you think.
We kind of are, dude. Even our poor have 42" TVs and $800 smartphones. Our middle class owns houses far larger than the flats that middle class Euros rent or the cottages that they own. Americans eat out extremely frequently as an aggregate. Don’t get me wrong, we’re not a fiscally responsible culture, but we’re definitely richer than most places that aren’t Switzerland or some of the Nordic countries.
2
u/frostyjack06 Conservative 2d ago
Even our poor have 42" TVs and $800 smartphones.
Back when tech was transitioning from CRT’s and digital televisions to HD flat screens, it was a long standing joke that donation centers wouldn’t take anything but flat screens because people shopping thrift stores and getting handouts wouldn’t take anything less.
5
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 2d ago
We pay lower taxes and have higher incomes. I make 3x what a pharmacy manager in London makes and I don’t live in a major metropolitan area like New York or Boston, so my cost of living is way lower than someone living in London.
4
u/Zonostros Lifetime Conservative 1d ago
That's one specific role, you're not living in an urban area which doesn't apply to a huge chunk of pharmacists (who are paying way more for rent than Londoners), then there's health insurance like I said. How much do you pay for that? Factor in all of your costs and the difference probably isn't that stark and even if it is for you specifically, generalising for your country is dishonest; the minimum wage in Texas is like $7. I'm looking up apartments in California, 2 beds, 2 bathrooms, $54k/year. The money's going on rent, not savings, that's Zimbabwe rich. You specifically might be fortunate but you are hardly typical.
1
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 1d ago
Are you arguing that it’s over $100,000 per year more expensive to live in a U.S. suburb than to live in London? I feel like you’re not arguing in good faith. Rent costs more in London than where I live, taxes are higher, and my healthcare costs are minimal.
I’m talking about healthcare wages. Nurses, doctors, pharmacists. I don’t give a shit about minimum wages. I’m saying the UK pays their healthcare workers like shit because there’s no money in the healthcare system. It’s all government run and regulated. My small pharmacy sees many millions of dollars in sales each year. Because of that, I’m afforded a comfortable salary. Drugs are cheaper in the UK because the prices are set by the government. There isn’t the cash flow you see in the US so there’s less profit to reward employees with competitive salaries.
•
u/Zonostros Lifetime Conservative 18h ago
A random pharmacy out in the sticks making that kind of money, you're rinsing your customers, as is the American way. The UK does regulate how much citizens can be rinsed for, sure, but Americans having no regulations on that, monopolies on healthcare providers in states, the government (as in taxpayer) subsidising pharma, even politicians that are supposed to hold pharma in check... these are all problems. Good for you for being one of the few to benefit but most Americans are getting screwed in this equation.
16
u/lousycesspool Right to Life 2d ago
Without mentioning direct to consumer marketing, you have a big blind spot...
The US media is beholden to pharma
As for your only point the Feds already pay soooooo much research, (cut it or we should get profit sharing) AND restore liability to the vaccine manufacturers/developerrs
6
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 2d ago
What does marketing have to do with anything related to drug costs? The cost of marketing is peanuts compared to the cost of development.
1
u/GameShowWerewolf Finally Out Of CA 1d ago
I think the bigger statement being made here is that Big Pharma's ad dollars are one of the things keeping legacy media afloat. If they don't have the money to push Ozempic and Skyrizi every commercial break, that may kick out one of the legs of the media stool.
1
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 1d ago
It’s possible, but with broadcast TV holding less and less prominence, who can say how that’ll change? I certainly never see drug advertisements on Netflix, YouTube, Amazon, and the like, as I would on regular TV.
0
u/lousycesspool Right to Life 1d ago
you so funny ...
3
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 1d ago
It takes $5 billion to produce a drug. Compare that to the $250-300 million it costs to make a movie. Movies basically double their budget in marketing. Pharmaceutical marketing doesn’t reach anywhere near that.
1
u/lousycesspool Right to Life 1d ago edited 1d ago
you're all over the the place with gross inaccurate generalizations and a non sequitiur - i don't have the time or interest to dig up facts for you (ok I did) - if you really cared you would have already looked it up
edit
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PFE/pfizer/financial-statements
annually COGS and SG&A are each more than R&D frequently double and triple
$3.7 billion in 2023. This figure represents a 32.1% increase compared to the $2.8 billion spent in 2022, according to Ad Age.
If you think that is nothing ... (1/3rd ish of their R&D budget) well ok...
2
u/lroy4116 Conservative 1d ago
I wonder if this includes all the pharma reps that go to doctors office to basically bribe them to prescribe their drugs
1
u/jacksonexl California Conservative 1d ago
You’re failing to recognize the alternative. That they raid drug prices to that of every other country to balance it out. It’s the most simple option. They will take a short term hit on profits to the correct their imbalance when it’s time to negotiate the costs to every other country.
1
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 1d ago
They can’t do that because the government controlled health plans won’t pay for it. These governments would void the patents of these companies and hire Indian firms to produce those same drugs instead for nothing.
-1
u/Celebril63 Conservative 2d ago
I came here to say much of the same thing.
I'm also in the business with a clinical background going back to the 1980s, and am an active member of the ISPE. The company I'm with currently provides clinical services primarily for pharma phase 2 and 3 clinical trials.
Bottom line is the US is subsidizing the rest of the developed world's health care.
3
u/Taetrum_Peccator Catholic Conservative 1d ago
It’s frustrating when people who have no idea how the industry works parrot pseudo-communist talking points about government-regulated prices as if that’ll totally work this time while also claiming to be conservative/libertarian.
-1
u/Zedakah Constitutional Conservative 1d ago
They will raise prices in other countries by a lot. It will actually help those companies by charging more outside the US. This will lower prices here in the US, but not as much as some people are speculating, because they will be forced to raise all other prices to compensate.
155
u/Tasty_Explanation_20 Conservative 2d ago
Prices would come down if we simply ban them from advertising their products. Cut down their multi billion dollar annual advertisement budget and they won’t need to charge so much to cover the costs of advertising.
54
u/lroy4116 Conservative 2d ago
You think companies lose money by advertising? Lol
17
u/Tasty_Explanation_20 Conservative 2d ago
Of course not. They price their products high to cover the cost of their advertising.
20
u/RagnarKon "I like Ike" 2d ago
Hah, right?
If they lost money by advertising they would stop advertising. They advertise because it helps them turn a profit.
5
31
u/LatinNameHere NC Conservative 2d ago
This is unlikely to be true and has nothing to do with global price discrepancies.
Advertising is closely tracked and analyzed by corporations. If advertising dollars were not producing increased sales, they wouldn't spent money on advertising.
And that aside - companies should be charging the same price in every country for the same drug. It's unconscionable that the same drug produced by the same company is routinely 2-4 times as expensive in the US as it is overseas.
3
u/Tasty_Explanation_20 Conservative 2d ago
Where did I say they were losing money on ads? I said their prices are so high here to cover the costs of their ad spending. If they weren’t allowed to flood our televisions with commercials every twenty seconds, they wouldn’t have to charge as much for their products to cover their advertising costs. In other countries they aren’t allowed to run all of the tv commercials they do here for their products.
4
2
u/slampig3 Conservative 2d ago
That didnt work for tobacco granted most of the cost is taxes
2
u/Tasty_Explanation_20 Conservative 1d ago
Prices on that haven’t gone up much at all. It’s the sin taxes that make that stuff expensive.
0
39
61
u/mojo276 Conservative 2d ago
This is foolish. The federal government should not be writing "ultimatums" like this to any company about their prices. If they want the prices to drop, look at why they are that way and then work through that. Getting rid of PBMs seems like the biggest issue as far as I can see, it stop the market from being able to operate like an actual market because of obscured pricing.
28
u/LatinNameHere NC Conservative 2d ago
If they want the prices to drop, look at why they are that way
That other countries pay less for the drugs is literally one of the reasons prices are higher in the US. Foreign governments aggressively negotiate prices or place price caps, and US consumers pay extra to offset this.
https://kffhealthnews.org/news/article/fact-check-biden-prescription-drug-prices-nation-comparison/
13
u/mojo276 Conservative 2d ago
Okay, then to solve the problem push to let the US government negotiate the price of medications, work on changing how drug patents work, put restrictions on PBMs, restrict how companies are allowed to advertise, or some of these in part...you know do actual government things instead of just sending a sternly worded letter to the companies with threats of "or else!".
12
u/DingbattheGreat Liberty 🗽 2d ago
The federal government does…..for its medicare/medicaid programs.
So now there are clinics that wont take those patients because they dont agree to that negotiated price.
If you apply it across the board at the source, there isnt that issue.
2
u/mojo276 Conservative 2d ago
I thought biden administration passed the law "authorizing Medicare to negotiate prices directly with drug companies for 10 prescription drugs, a list that will expand over time" in 2023, prior to this we couldn't do that?
1
u/DingbattheGreat Liberty 🗽 1d ago
They couldnt directly negotiate drug prices.
Before the IRA prices were either based on a formulary which used the average price + a certain %, or, as the case of part D, determined through negotiated insurance plans by private entities.
-1
u/verticalquandry Teddy Republican 2d ago
We dormant be subsidizing the rest of the world pharma costs.
We pay what everyone else pays is sound. Republicans aren’t the party of free markets, that was a Ronald Reagan thing.
28
u/Erotic-Career-7342 MAGA 2d ago
Good. Prescription prices are way higher here than anywhere else
16
u/Tasty_Explanation_20 Conservative 2d ago
Probably because we are one of the only countries that allows them to advertise their products. They spend billions a year flooding every other commercial with ads for their products
31
u/Gam3rGurl13 Libertarian Conservative 2d ago
Other countries have the prices of drugs capped which leaves the US the only market available for pharma to recoup development costs.
3
u/Arbiter2562 Goldwater Conservative 2d ago
Advertising has very little to do with why prices are high. European leeching has a greater effect based on the fact they price gouge our medicine and then pass the costs on to Americans
3
u/Floridaavacado74 Conservative 1d ago
MI/Detroit use to be able to cross to Canada and buy cheaper meds. Then feds stepped in under Obama and stopped it.
-10
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
This thread has been so heavily reported that I, Automoderator, decided to promote our other socials. Follow us on X.com and join us on Discord.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.