Especially as they are already cutting thousands of jobs in New Jersey do we really care that they aren’t able to create thousand more jobs in China that just run up the taxpayer bill for the FDA audits and inspections there?

When there are generalized statements about how many jobs this is going to cost and examples put forward about why this isn’t going to work, without alternative arguments as to why we simply must make it work, we should all become suspicious.

Innovations and cures are not built on such thoughts as “no can do”. The statement being made by PhRMA is a glaring red flag to all of us, that PhRMA is not aligned….

In case you haven’t figured it out, when I asked the question I was being sarcastic…

An industry that calculates the inevitable fines it will get for breaking the law and factors it in the cost of goods and breaks the law anyway has a different set of priorities, which probably do not include a pharmacoeconomic approach to really treating illness and cranking up cures for cancers. So, do we really need this “friend”, probably not. I can hardly wait for the restructuring…

We make the rules Altex, we as in “we the people”, if we want to do these things we can.

The short answer is pretty straightforward:

In the short term, lower revenues due to significant increase in rebates in Medicare and Medicaid (in the house bill) will yield job cuts directly as pharma companies adjust cost structures to lower revenue. In the long term (and more importantly), lower expected ROIs on new products and declining IRRs will yield less investment. Ultimately, the industry will further contract (ie, lose more jobs).

Atlex

When people actually trust oil companies, health insurance companies, and drug companies to look out for their best interests, I think we’ve officially jumped the shark as a country.

One would think that in fact tens of thousands of jobs should be created in an effort to see how to keep up with innovations and still cure cancer while keeping an eye on cost efficiencies…

If a company can knowingly decide to break the law, even when they know that the possible fine is will be in the billions of dollars for doing so, and they still break the law, then we all have to ask where the priorities lie. How could anyone break the law, presume not to pay the fine, then buy up other pharmaceutical companies, lay off thousands of people, put entire county’s of people out of work, yet award inordinate bonuses to the upper echelon’s? Something is fundamentally wrong, and we all have something to say about this. This is our health care dollars. We go to our insurance plans and take out money form the plans we paid into to cover the cost of these drugs, we earmark our money, we do without something somewhere else to be able to provide for health care when we get sick. Yes, we have a right as consumers to decide where it goes, and how it goes.

We all need to challenge PhRMA to enumerate exactly how these jobs will be lost and challenge them to sufficiently substantiate their claims of the necessity of this.

Real management starts when the going gets tough, and if the heads of these companies cannot come up with a way of making in work in light of certain challenges, then are they really qualified to draw the salary, compensations and bonuses with any extras?

Actually, PhRMA is relatively well-aligned with the Senate Finance bill, which should come as no surprise since its “negotiated” deal was with the White House and Finance Chairman Baucus.

Atlex

Beyond that, I assume their position is somewhere between Olympia Snowe and Dick Armey.

Lots of “ball field” there…

The left and their unions and politicians never cease to disgust me. More Viagra for our brothers! It’s a civil right!

No abortions for women though.