• Yes they should

    Governments must subsidise pharmaceuticals for its citizens as the drug companies have been allowed to grow to powerful under the watch of said government. Now it is time to regulate harder to make sure that this growth stays in check. Health care is out of reach for most of the eroding middle class already.

  • Yes, governments should subsidise pharmecuticals for everyone

    Yes, governments should take an interest in the health of their citizens by subsidising pharmaceuticals. No one should have to struggle to pay for necessary medications or go without them due to the fact that they can not afford them. Good health should not only be for the wealthy. Therefore, in the interest of all of a country's citizens, governments should subsidise pharmaceuticals.

  • Yes, governments should subsidise prescription drugs for all citizens.

    In our advanced medical world where we can cure or medically manage a range of conditions and diseases that used to result in death or a difficult existence, everyone should have access to these life saving medications. Its unfair and inhumane to allow the poor to suffer or die because they cannot afford the same medications as the rich. Nor should people have to choose between medicine and food. Therefore, governments should bear the responsibility of making medications accessible to all citizens.

  • Regulation would be a better approach.

    It would not make sense for the government to provide a direct subsidy. Stricter regulation of cost would be a better control. Canada, for example, does provide single payer health services but has lower pharmaceutical prices due mostly to higher regulation. One of the reasons that health care costs are so expensive in the United States is the strong political messaging against regulation that prevents a more effective outcome from occurring. It is well known that pharmaceuticals are much more inexpensive in other countries without a subsidy.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.