Trump executive order: US stops foreign healthcare subsidies, cracks down on Big Pharma price gouging

Summary and compilation of the opinions into key topics:

1. Executive Orders vs. Legislation:

• Ineffectiveness of Executive Orders:
  • Many users pointed out that executive orders (EOs) are not laws and have limited power, particularly in affecting private industries like pharmaceuticals.
  • They are seen as directives to federal agencies, not binding regulations for private companies.
  • The comments suggest that pharmaceutical companies are likely to ignore or challenge the EO.
• Need for Legislative Action:
  • There's a strong sentiment that actual legislation, like that attempted by Biden and advocated by some Democrats, is necessary for effective drug price control.
  • The comments highlight the fact that congress had previously given medicare the ability to negotiate drug prices, and then removed it.
• Political Theater:
  • Some view the EO as political posturing, meant to appeal to Trump's base without any real expectation of change.
  • The phrase "Executive orders are basically tweets at this point now" was used.

2. Drug Pricing and Pharmaceutical Industry Practices:

• Price Gouging and High Profits:
  • Users expressed anger at the high profits of pharmaceutical companies and accused them of price gouging.
  • Comparisons were made to other industries, like oil and insurance, also accused of excessive profits.
• International Price Comparisons:
  • Many highlighted the significant price differences between the U.S. and other countries with universal healthcare systems.
  • The argument is that the U.S. effectively subsidizes lower drug prices in other countries due to its higher prices.
• Lobbying and Political Influence:
  • The influence of pharmaceutical lobbyists on politicians was a major concern.
  • Users believe that Big Pharma's financial influence will prevent any real price reductions.
  • The practice of pharmaceutical reps giving gifts, and meals to doctors offices was brought up as a possible corruption point.
• R&D vs. Marketing:
  • The claim that high drug prices are required for Research and Development was countered with the claim that the companies spend more money on marketing.

3. Healthcare System Comparisons and Universal Healthcare:

• Advantages of Universal Healthcare:
  • Users from countries with universal healthcare systems (e.g., Netherlands, Australia, Belgium) shared their experiences of lower drug prices and overall healthcare costs.
  • The ability of single-payer systems to negotiate lower drug prices was highlighted as a major advantage.
• Criticism of the U.S. System:
  • The fragmented U.S. healthcare system, with its many private insurance companies, was seen as a major contributor to high drug prices.
  • The inability for the US government to negotiate drug prices for medicare was discussed.
• Political Polarization:
  • The comments illustrated the deep political divide on healthcare, with Republicans often opposing government intervention and Democrats supporting it.
  • The word “communism” was used many times in the comments, when discussing any kind of price control.

4. Trump's Actions and Motives:

• Skepticism and Cynicism:
  • Many users were skeptical of Trump's motives and believed the EO was a publicity stunt.
  • His past actions and ties to Big Pharma were cited as reasons for distrust.
• Perception of Hypocrisy:
  • Some pointed out the perceived hypocrisy of Republicans supporting price controls when advocated by Trump, after previously opposing similar measures by Democrats.
  • His previous attempts to enact similar policies were brought up, and how they failed.
• Personal Gain:
  • There were many comments that indicated that the users believed that trump was only acting due to personal gain, and or to gain political donations.

Key Themes:

• The ineffectiveness of executive orders in regulating private industries.
• The significant price discrepancies between the U.S. and other countries for prescription drugs.¹
• The powerful influence of pharmaceutical lobbyists on U.S. politics.
• The political polarization surrounding healthcare reform.
• The overall distrust of the motives of the politicians, and of the pharmaceutical industry.