The question, “Are the citizens of the United States of America getting screwed?” has rumbled around in my noggin for quite some time now, and I’ve gone out of my way to satiate curiosity in two particular areas that affect nearly everyone in this country: Prescription Drugs and Fuel Economy.
Who’s the Fiend?
I know I’m not the only one annoyed with the constant barrage of drug ads during prime-time television (and it was enough suffering through all those embarrassing “enhancement/dysfunction” ads with an adolescent by my side. Oh, to have a DVR five years ago…) Did anyone else take notice, however, that most of those medication advertisements pitch to regular people, not doctors? Why not create the nexus for sales from the generally uneducated, right? Ah, well, that’s another gripe, but the real debate isn’t about devious advertising this time; it’s about something we, as citizens, voters and consumers, should have more control over—pricing.
In case you’ve been under a rock since the dawn of the internet, prescription drugs are cheaper internationally. And, I’m not talking about drugs manufactured over there; I’m talking about drugs made in the good ‘ole USA. Why? Well, for one reason, manufacturers have stated that research and development costs must be offset by countries without price caps that can afford to pay higher prices…meaning, us. If this is true then the United States is paying dearly for other countries’ discounts. Is that fair?
Rather than give a lengthy exposé on why prescription drugs are cheaper outside the United States (here are links for Canada and the Congressional Budget Office. And no, this problem is not a new one!), I’m more interested in why nobody seems willing to do anything about it—especially when faced with the prospect of our government forcing us to buy overpriced healthcare. Wait, overpriced? Absolutely!
Obviously, when drugs cost more than in other parts of the world, and when you delve into the Wide, Wide World of Wacky Medical Equipment Pricing and Service, you will quickly conclude that Healthcare Reform focuses on the wrong “problem”. You see, the pundits in Washington, much to the delight of the pharmaceutical companies I’m sure, posit that we are the problem. Some of us don’t buy health insurance and, when a visit to the ER occurs, they are a burden to the system. All right, I’ll buy that as a valid argument, but it completely neglects the reason the majority of those folks don’t have healthcare in the first place—cost. Whoa…may have opened up a can of worms with all these questions about healthcare costs, but I think the questions are fair. Is it our fault?
I also have another conspicuous discrepancy to query, one that only recently came to light….well, mine, at least.
Motor Heads and Tales
A few months ago, I discovered a car show on BBC America called “Top Gear”. After laughing hysterically at something in nearly every rerun from the previous five seasons (a rare feat these days—seriously, Clarkson, May and Hammond are hilarious!), I began noticing something rather odd. While the presenters usually scintillate the latest European supercar, occasionally they’ll delve into the mundane for us commoners. Instead of Ferrari 430s, Aston Martin DB9s, and Bugatti Veyrons, think Fiat 500s, Minis, and Volkswagen hatchbacks. And, as they do with every model tested, they usually laud the car’s fuel economy. On more than one occasion, I noticed one of the guys citing mileage estimates from European cars that produced astounding numbers. At first, I wrote it off. Okay, the Brits pay ridiculous gas prices and their cars are generally tiny after all. 50 or 60 miles per gallon doesn’t seem particularly outrageous since a Toyota Prius is in that range. 0-60 MPH times take a year, probably. And what about the Volkswagen Golf TDI? You may recall its 1970s predecessor, the Rabbit Diesel, attaining upwards of 56 MPG in its heyday, although you’d do well to climb a hill without getting out and pushing. Just as soon as I had forgotten about it, one of the Top Gear presenters cited an incredible figure for a diesel Volkswagen Polo (similar to a Golf) at over *70 MPG combined…as in combined highway (extra-urban) and city (urban) use. What? Suffice to say, my gears started grinding, and that meant a personal inspection.
Of course, there are many vehicle manufacturers that aren’t available here. Fiat (for now, but I see the 500 is on its way via Chrysler), Vauxhall (GM owned), Alpha Romeo, Peugeot-Citroen, and Renault to name a few, so I’ll stick with the familiar Volkswagen brand for comparisons. As soon as you visit their UK website, and look at the model range, you’ll know you’re not in America any longer. More cars and, more importantly, more engine options. Click on the Golf’s engine selections, for instance. Eleven are available, and if you look at their consumption figures closely, you’ll have a coronary. Well, hopefully not, but you get the point. Apparently, the British take their petrol money more seriously than we do. Do we really like buying more gas? Alas, we love our muscle cars and SUVs as long as gas is cheap, but that’s changing. As it was in the ‘70s, consumers are again looking towards models with fuel consumption in mind—and we’ll sacrifice some horses too. Success stories like the Toyota and Ford hybrids remind us that American demand for low-consumption vehicles is high, yet manufacturers with existing high-MPG models overseas don’t bother exporting or manufacturing them here. Why? Ah, that is the burning question.
So how about it, Internet—are Americans lazy, not whiny enough, or are we simply getting the shaft?
*Note: UK MPG uses an imperial gallon, which is 1.201 US gallons, therefore mileage figures stated in the UK do not directly correspond with US comparisons. Even so, the European models still achieve a much higher MPG rating than their US counterparts. (ex. VW Polo BlueMotion achieves 80.7 MP(imperial)G combined which, converted to US specs, is about 67 MPG combined (city/hwy). Impressive!)
No comments:
Post a Comment