Its a symptom of a horrifying lack of medical coverage and care in this country. If it actually becomes incredibly successful it will embody the same perverse incentive structure as Intuit -- to remain successful they would be best served by lobbying against universal healthcare and affordable medicine in general so their offerings remain valuable. In the same way Intuit lobbies against simplifying the tax code. Every time this happens it further entrenches the existing nightmare.
Medicine in this country needs wholesale reform, not coupon clipping for insulin.
[edit] Coupon clipping for life saving medicine is apparently as good an S-1 as it would be a Black Mirror episode.
Why is coupon clipping for food (without which you starve and die) not a problem?
One of the biggest problems with healthcare today is a lack of price transparency, and GoodRx appears to offer that. Most healthcare systems in the world operate on price transparency, and as long as that's the case, there should always be a need for the services GoodRx offers.
> Why is coupon clipping for food (without which you starve and die) not a problem?
The government already does an awful lot to make food affordable in the US, including subsidizing corn to well below the cost of production via continuous re-authorization of the Farm Bill.
Then there's food banks, and SNAP. Both of which should be expanded.
The government does absolutely nothing to make drugs affordable. At all.
> Most healthcare systems in the world operate on price transparency, and as long as that's the case, there should always be a need for the services GoodRx offers.
Most healthcare systems in the world operate by having the government form a bulk buying organization and negotiating the price of drugs down to a fraction of what Americans are forced to pay even in places without socialized prescription drug coverage.
The reason drugs in Canada are cheap is because the provinces negotiate the prices, not because they socialize the costs. There is very limited socialized prescription drug coverage in Canada. So when the government permitted re-importation of drugs from Canada, they basically refused to negotiate themselves and wanted to instead rely on Canadian provinces to negotiate on their behalf. Nutty.
One way of solving this would be to have Medicare negotiate the price of all drugs in the US.
[edit] There's lots of comprehensive solutions, and none of them involve coupon clipping.
> The reason drugs in Canada are cheap is because the provinces negotiate the prices, not because they socialize the costs.
This is false. The reason they are cheaper in Canada is that the federal government sets the prices based on average price in a list of comparable countries and forces the manufacturers to follow it.
Yes, the government negotiates with the manufacturers, sets the price, and if they don't come to an agreement the drug cannot be sold in Canada. That's in line with what I said. Fine, it may need an overhaul, however, it's dramatically more functional than the literally nothing the US does.
> Well, thanks to the government, there's socialized food for those in need, in the form of food banks and SNAP.
Yes. Why can't we have the same for prescription drugs?
> Most healthcare systems in the world operate by having the government form a bulk buying organization and negotiating the price of drugs down to a fraction of what Americans are forced to pay even in places without socialized prescription drug coverage.
This isn't true. Switzerland operates on an entirely private insurance model. Ditto the Netherlands. Singapore (which enjoys the lowest per capita health expenditures and some of the best outcomes) is almost entirely driven by transparent pricing and regulations. Germany uses public-private hybrid model. In France, the NHI operates on a reimbursement model, where you still buy drugs at a pharmacy and shop around by price.
The Canadian model is great, but it's not nearly as efficient as Singapore's.
> One way of solving this would be to have Medicare negotiate the price of all drugs in the US.
It's not the only way, you can also just institute price controls. Monopsony negotiation is in-effect the same thing.
(addressing your edit)
> The government already does an awful lot to make food affordable in the US, including subsidizing corn to well below the cost of production via continuous re-authorization of the Farm Bill.
> The government does absolutely nothing to make drugs affordable. At all.
Yes, all of what you said is correct there, and yet you still have a world where you shop for food on the basis of transparent pricing and sometimes even take advantage of coupons. Just like regulations and welfare co-exist with market pricing with food, so too can it exist with prescription drugs. Even in a world where the government offers direct subsidies on drugs, there is a place for GoodRx and its model.
> [edit] There's lots of comprehensive solutions, and none of them involve coupon clipping.
But that's just not true. GoodRx would, for example, do very well in Singapore, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Germany.
Switzerland also enjoys some of the best health outcomes, though. Unlike America, Switzerland has the highest average life expectancy, the lowest infant mortality, some of the best cancer outcomes, and respiratory illness outcomes. Switzerland is an often used example because they actually get something for what they pay, unlike America.
That’s not true at all. Most coupons are for any type of grocery at a store, usually promotional in nature for new products or stores.
I use coupons for all sorts of basic needs, like free ride share rides (transportation), clothing, groceries (or grocery delivery), etc. I even use promotional pricing to pay less in monthly rent in Brooklyn. Food, clothing, transportation, and shelter are not frivolous expenditures, they are basic necessities.
I won’t starve or go homeless without the coupons, but they let me save money every month, which I can use for other stuff like video games or stocks or other activities. This is good for consumers.
The difference between your description of your experience and mine is that mine is inclusive while yours is exclusive.
You are making a claim (a quite bold one at that) that coupons are only used for "luxury" food. While I don't deny that there exists coupons used for luxury food, I am making the inclusive claim that they are also commonly used for ordinary food, based on my own experience.
Unlike me, you are attempting to prove a negative — that people do not use coupons for every day basic purchases — based solely on your own experience. The burden of proof for your claim is far greater than the burden of proof for mine.
I never doubted that it was based on what you see. It seemed rather clear to me that you were attempting to refute the idea of comparing coupons for medicine with coupons for food — with the claim that "most food coupons are for luxury foods.", based on your experience.
I responded that coupons are used for all sorts of basic necessities, and not just "luxury"/"junk" food, and as such I have no problems with using coupons for basic necessities. This is based on what the coupons I see can be used for. It literally doesn't matter what your experience is, because you seem to think that your experience renders coupons "only for luxury", and I'm refuting that with my own experience, potentially even exposing you to how someone else might live their life. This shouldn't be difficult for you to accept.
While I agree, in the short term, the existence of GoodRx is probably better than not. It's expanding access to prescription drugs, even if in a sub-optimal way. Perfect is the enemy of good.
But heroin doesn't solve your homelessness problem at all unless you mean by killing the takers but that is very different from providing medicine affordably to people. What did I miss?
GoodRx doesn’t solve affordability either it papers over it by giving a small handful of people access to affordable prices, while putting themselves in a position to lock in the status quo — ultimately solving nothing for everyone.
The discounts GoodRx provides could be providing life-sustaining drugs to people who otherwise couldn't afford them, that's definitely solving somebody's problem.
If it empowers them to keep perpetuating the current system like intuit perpetuates the complexity of the current tax system, did we really win in the macro?
fwiw I was paying twice as much for my rx's until I brought how expensive they were with my doctor and he said to check GoodRx. I may be naive, but I had no idea the different prices pharmacies charge. I ended up getting a 450 mg Rx split into two 300 mg and 150 mg rx's as it was cheaper (the 300 was actually cheaper than the 150). I agree that this is a terrible system and needs to be fixed, but GoodRx did save me money.
I guess you are you saying that I and others should pay more money for our prescriptions? Do you have any idea how expensive many prescriptions are? People with serious chronic illnesses already have a tough enough time with expenses in the U.S. and blaming them for lack of medical reform is disheartening to hear.
> “ I guess you are you saying that I and others should pay more money for our prescriptions?”
Yes, I am saying that. If you are interested in saving money and not being beholden to corporate interests and regulatory capture that cause you big costs and restrict you from medical care you may need, you should pay more money today and avoid helping GoodRX to have lobbying power.
From a purely self-interest / money saving perspective, you should spend more and be happy that your extra spending today is buying you valuable units of GoodRX-goes-away.
If you are only willing to avoid GoodRX if someone else subsidizes a lower price for you, then you are acting against your own self-intetest.
The point is that if you think paying a lower price now is good or necessary, you are hurting yourself and others. You should stop focusing on the lower up front price and take actions that don’t hurt yourself or others.
Asking others to subsidize a lower price for you is a rhetorical deflection. It’s not connected to a greater point, it doesn’t prove anything, it doesn’t compromise the other person’s position if they are unwilling to subsidize your lower price, and it doesn’t address the issue - your desire to do anything for a lower price in the short term is directly antagonistic to your own self-interest and cost savings in the medium term.
Finally, I am willing to pay towards that cost for you - please tax me more and provide universal medical care for all. Are you voting for single payer universal healthcare? Are you vocally supporting candidates who will enact that policy? If you want me to pay for your prescription prices to be lower, I will absolutely do it via taxation and universal healthcare.
> Finally, I am willing to pay towards that cost for you - please tax me more and provide universal medical care for all. Are you voting for single payer universal healthcare? Are you vocally supporting candidates who will enact that policy? If you want me to pay for your prescription prices to be lower, I will absolutely do it via taxation and universal healthcare.
No, they are saying that laws around drug pricing should be designed so that prices would be the similar to what GoodRX achieves, with no opportunity for profit left.
Whether that is possible is of course an open question, but laws that impact drug pricing should encourage the source suppliers (manufacturers and wholesalers) to charge close to cost, not to invent prices that maximize revenue extraction from government programs and "discount" prices for other buyers.
Its a symptom of a horrifying lack of medical coverage and care in this country. If it actually becomes incredibly successful it will embody the same perverse incentive structure as Intuit -- to remain successful they would be best served by lobbying against universal healthcare and affordable medicine in general so their offerings remain valuable. In the same way Intuit lobbies against simplifying the tax code. Every time this happens it further entrenches the existing nightmare.
Medicine in this country needs wholesale reform, not coupon clipping for insulin.
[edit] Coupon clipping for life saving medicine is apparently as good an S-1 as it would be a Black Mirror episode.