Friday, June 11, 2004

Drug prices and the concentration of wealth

Title: AARP: Drug prices soaring
Source: USA Today
Date: May 25, 2004

From the article:
    Prices for name-brand medicines most commonly prescribed for seniors have risen at least three times faster than inflation in the last four years, two groups seeking lower prices said Tuesday.

    The multiyear price increases outstrip the discounts that will be available to seniors beginning June 1 with a new Medicare discount card. The Bush administration predicts savings of 15% or more for those who pay up to $30 a year to participate.
    AARP's study of 155 name-brand drugs found an average price increase of 27.6% over four years ending in December, compared with a 10.4% inflation rate. The average annual increase in 2003 for the most widely used drugs was 6.9%, triple the inflation rate of 2.2%.
Here is the simple fact about drug prices. If you are sick, and a drug company has a patented drug that you need to recover from that illness, then you are in an impossible position as a consumer. In an unregulated market like that in the U.S. the drug company can charge anything it likes. This is especially true if it is a fatal or debilitating disease. It is straightforward extortion. The basic equation is, "if you want to live, you will pay us whatever we ask." The vast majority of the proceeds from this form of extortion go to wealthy shareholders and executives. It is an amazingly powerful way to concentrate wealth: Your money or your life.


At 7:33 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Thought you would like this. create wealth

At 3:46 PM, Blogger Joe said...

To: ALL Branch Ops, Mrrs. Neel
& Kashari
Date: March 29, 2007
Re: Airline Hubs Rigs Plus

I am A concerned citizen & this is an ongoing key qui tam submission. Based on the before identified & below principles, IT is abundantly clear that ALL airlines have been way overcharging all branch episodic & frequent fliers in connection with serving the Republic.
Below is a fluid, draft version highlighting key points. As you peruse IT, keep in mind that all men doing business under the untrue color of authority INTENTIONALLY took on the duty, by choosing to pledge allegiance to stock holders to:

A) Pay as little as possible;
B) Charge as much as possible;
C) Report as little as they possibly can; &
D) Buy at lowest cost possible (slot covers), e.g.


Do you know how the old English feudal system operated? Local lords, local princes made up their own rules, without respect for the law – the creed – the words of the Constitution!
10th Ame & “ALL” Law Is Granted Article 1 Combo

Your president & senators think it’s cute for their local lords to threaten to cut us off from a life necessity, water & electricity, if, e.g., WE you don’t pay the fiddlers for their lazy, good for nothing stock ops, who refuse to account for all ins & outs of all public funds they extort from us, daily!

Do you know how many people have died & will die this winter because they can’t afford the HEAT – same in the summer, because they can’t afford the AIR – the cause of death, by the morticians, cements the breach of duty, cause & effect resulting in passing, literally.

Government anointed “hands off” murder & suffering, calculated, for money, which IS (e) POOLED, SPLIT & SPENT, very quietly, because they know it’s a capital crime:

A) WATER BILL, Inc. 5th Amen taking TAXES;
B) UTILITY BILL, Inc. 5th Amen taking TAXES;
C) TRASH BILL, Inc. 5TH Amen Taking TAXES; &
D) PHONE BILL, Inc. 5th Amen taking TAXES, e.g.

“[D]escribed as a "good source of [extra, free] revenue"-pursuant to a strategy of "maximizing fee [revenue] income."

I never signed a contract for my water bill, did you? Is it a take IT or leave deal? That’s why they calculate to rape you – on all life necessities. Now you know how Donald Trump made & keeps making his huge bullion, based on doing nothing – residual income flow.

“It is based on a … measure reflecting customer's ability to pay, which is totally unrelated to cost, quantity [demand] or quality, which should determine price.”

This is one spike cause of action clause:

“No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.”

“[C]ourts may not interpret where interpretation is not demanded.”

Sherman [Tank] Act, Section 1 provides:

"Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal."

The essence of the contract, the principle in Container, 393 U.S. 333, by telephone line, e-lines know! It is allowed back, times 3.


Furnishing, on request, information, to clip a clause;

A) Nor Pennington Doctrine – paying money to consultants, lobbyists, to lube up senators, to clip a clause; &

B) Contracting, by retainer, to subvert a clause;

C) Contracting, in a settlement, to subvert a clause;

D) Contracting, by putting a signature on an opinion, to subvert a fiduciary DUTY to a clause;

E) FTC, A.G. & DOJ Tom Barnett, e.g., getting paid to clip a clause, by 16720(e) [labor] contract – same with S.E.C.;

F) Subcontracting out ones Article 1, 2 & 3 duties, to local & state 10th Amen Claim Jumpers, Deserters, & Caste System Traders, for a R.I.C.O. money property interest - Cush jobbers; &

G) Aiding & Abetting patent PONZIE SCHEME OPS, fund raisers by fraud – all I.P.O contract fraud.

Furnishing, on request, files, by feds to state, to clip a clause:

“That concerted action is of course sufficient to establish the [contract elements or ] combination or conspiracy, the initial ingredient of a violation of 1 of the Sherman Act.”

The essence of the contract, the principle in Container, 393 U.S. 333, by telephone line, e-lines know! It is allowed back, times 3.


IT is both duplicative & out of alignment - IT is all a huge waste of our time, which is money! I didn’t write the creed, but I did marry her, mom America, & I won’t cheat on her, like they do.


A. --never considered [the direct cost of] supply[ing] … demand as a factor” in … [TAX] price….

“Profits are supra-competitive when they are unrestrained by [direct cost price] competition.”

“It is based on a … measure reflecting customer's ability to pay, which is totally unrelated to cost, quantity [demand] or quality, which should determine price.”

“[D]escribed as a "good source of [extra, free] revenue"-pursuant to a strategy of "maximizing fee [revenue] income."

Sherman [Tank] Act, Section 1 provides:

"Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal."

Matsushita, foremost, explains HOW judgment works in the trust context. It affirms hornbook law that courts are bound to construe the facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, to give the non-moving party the benefit of all reasonable inferences, and to refrain from making credibility calls. It notes, however, that the accuser "must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts."


A. The … electrical equipment cartel … as much as any other … I've ever studied minimized the need for communications.


A. And that is used in identifying and creating specific formulas to maintain our price [trinity] spread with our [spread] competitors.

Q. So-- … tiers are based on V--s' prices, yes?
A. Based on V--s', yes.



"[A] function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger.”

“Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. “

“That is why freedom of speech . . . is . . . protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest. . . .”

There is no room under our Constitution for a more restrictive view. For the alternative would lead to standardization of ideas either by legislatures, courts, or dominant political or community groups."


Basic Breach of duty:

A) Intentional (uninsurable – A crippling pressure point);
B) Reckless; &/OR
C) Negligence (did they act as a reasonable person would – that is the hinge).

Interference with prospective economic gain, common law conversion, under false pretences, & fraud are some things you might want to look into.

Qui Tam

Qui Tam or Whistle-Blower laws have existed in Western cultures for over 600 years. One of the first examples of Qui Tam legislation can be traced back to the Civil War, when Congressional hearings disclosed widespread instances of military contractor fraud that included defective products, substitution of inferior material, and illegal price gouging of the Union Army.

At the urging of Abraham Lincoln, Congress enacted the Civil False Claims Act, including Qui Tam provisions, as a tool to fight fraud. Between 1863 and 1986 the law was seldom used. As a result of 1986 amendments, Qui Tam actions have increased dramatically and have been the most effective and successful means of combating procurement and program fraud. Since 1986, Qui Tam recoveries have exceeded $1 billion with most of the successes involving fraud in Defense and Health Care programs.

The False Claims Act
states that whistle-blowers be rewarded with a percentage of the money that the government recovers as a result of their Qui Tam lawsuits. This provision helps encourage people to assist the government in reducing Medicare fraud; defense fraud and other kinds of fraud despite the effect whistle-blowing might have on their jobs and personal lives.



Under the False Claims Act the government may recover up to three times the amount of money it lost as a result of an executives’ fraud. The whistle-blower's share is calculated based upon the amount the government recovers, not the actual losses.

A number of factors determine how much money a whistle-blower will receive if the government is able to recover money from the defendant. If the government joins the case, the whistle-blower is entitled to (aka, owed) at least 15 percent but not more than 25 percent of what the government recovers.

If the government declines to join the case and the whistle-blower continues with a suit against the defendant, the whistle-blower is entitled to at least 25 percent but not more than 30 percent of the money the government recovers.


This is an ongoing educational whistle-blowing program, in my duty to serve others the exact same principles your executive branch ops taught me in law school. And I have done in straight by the book – to the “T” in fact.


A 4 gig settlement offer of compromise is super reasonable today, under the circumstances, don’t you think? Consider this fact: the California Supreme court composite (Baxter et al) has granted themselves ownership over people’s birth right to serve others, in the profession of law, but not the profession of Medicine, e.g. Is that “delegation” of power to “regulate law commerce” (Article 1) under the 1st Ame banned “establishment” of “moral regulation,” without any owed process, without any speedy trial, without any “counsel” something you think will fly in any forum?
IT is an open & shut classic case of an Article 3 standing-less, barrister witch hunt, aiding & abetting those who have overtly disavowed their vows to America. Adam Smith summed it up:

It is a manifest encroachment on workers liberty (9th Ame), & of those who might be disposed to employ me.

Dan Mogin, an econ major law grad, my first boss, slipped up by saying this:

For ALL our peace of minds he (Bonas) should not be allowed to be a practicing attorney, especially in San Diego County.
No client of mine, all of whom I zealously represent, ever complained!

Rule 3.8 - The [P.O., State Bar & Judge-Ref] prosecutor shall:

(a) Refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause;
Self Defense, Context & legitimate aim - that’s what IT’s ALL about!

Executed on:___________________________
Safeco, Ink.


Post a Comment

<< Home