It is not an accident that "it" (flu vaccine shortage) has happened again. Government has set itself up as a monopsony buyer, to keep costs down. They did this in Poland, in the 1980s. Set the price of pork at 5 cents per pound. Of course, there was no pork, but golly was that nonexistent pork cheap!
So now no one can make money making vaccines. Hardly a big mystery that no one does make vaccines. Maybe we can force people to go out to the countryside for reeducation camps, and then shoot them if they won't work for the common good. Grubby, greedy capitalists.
This from Dec 9, 2003 WSJ. Note that like causes produce like effects.
Where's My Flu Shot?
A few weeks from now, when the country has run out of flu vaccine and people want to know why, we suggest they knock on the doors of Senators Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Lincoln Chafee. Perhaps the three Republicans can explain when they intend to honor their promise to hold an open debate about the tort liabilities facing vaccine makers.
The only two suppliers of flu shots reported Friday that supplies are running out. The Centers for Disease Control is now urging health-care providers to reserve the shots for those most at risk. That leaves millions worrying that someone in their family might be next to die from a bad case of flu.
The reason for today's shortage -- as well as seven previous preventive vaccine shortages since 2000 -- is that there are just five vaccine makers. This lack of suppliers is partly thanks to Hillary Clinton, who as first lady turned government into the majority buyer of vaccines and pushed prices so low as to make business unsustainable. (This price-control approach, we'd note, is what Democrats would now like to inflict on the new Medicare drug program.)
But just as worrying to manufacturers is an explosion of class action lawsuits. Vaccine makers are supposed to be protected from suits by 1986 legislation, but tort lawyers have found loopholes and filed more than 200 cases. The Republican leadership fixed this by including a liability provision in the Homeland Security legislation of a year ago. That is, until Ms. Snowe, Ms. Collins and Mr. Chafee objected to its "dark of the night" insertion and forced Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist into repealing it.
In return for their victory, the Senators promised an open debate on broad liability reform within six months. That would have been ... June. But the Senate canceled a markup on a reform bill in April and the Senators have gone quiet. Apparently, making sound vaccine policy isn't as politically rewarding as preening before the media by standing up to "special interests" (vaccine makers). So what's your solution for the flu-shot shortage, Senators?
3 comments:
Did you really think up that title?
Well, I thought so.
But Google reveals dozens of earlier uses.
At least of "Deja flu": felt this sick before.
My use is a LITTLE different, but obviously (sigh) not truly original.
Two thoughts:
1) Why is a "public need" an adequate rational to control distribution and set prices. For example, the cost of housing has doubled in many areas in the past few years. Housing is a public need, so are people who make a killing when they sell evil and should be regulated? Of course one could seek a buyer who is not making windfall profits, unlike the flu situation where the only seller is the gob'mint or the gougers. But I think the point is still valid, at what point do you regulate a market for the "public good"?
2) If rationing is rational, then how is rational defined? For example, why give preference for the elderly, they are statistically more likely to expire anyway. Wouldn't it be more "rational" to give preference for the young and middle-aged who are the most productive in society (in an economic sense). Why isn't Billary out there telling old people that they should be last in line, rather than first?
Anyhoo- I'd be interested to know if this stands up to your scrutiny.
Post a Comment