I'm not sure a great deal of competition actually exists. Patents are the issue I think. The reasoning given is the same as it is in this post - it costs money to research and develop the drugs, so companies need to protect their product to prevent smaller companies from producing it and cutting into their profit.
In that sense, less regulation would probably reduce prices of some drugs, but would also mean less research. Perhaps the solution is to implement a form of tax. Kill chemical patents and force the companies to spend a certain portion of their profit on research.
I'm not sure a great deal of competition actually exists. Patents are the issue I think. The reasoning given is the same as it is in this post - it costs money to research and develop the drugs, so companies need to protect their product to prevent smaller companies from producing it and cutting into their profit.
In that sense, less regulation would probably reduce prices of some drugs, but would also mean less research. Perhaps the solution is to implement a form of tax. Kill chemical patents and force the companies to spend a certain portion of their profit on research.
I'm a huge free market proponent and I agree this system is not working. It is worth pointing out however that this is not a true free market system. They're many regulations that muddy the water.
Are more regulations the answer or less? Less regulation could lead to competition leading to lower prices. More regulations could lead to less drugs being developed.
I do not claim to know.