I'm gonna have to step in on this one.  I'm almost physically restraining myself from a couple other points, too.  Hiku, let me know if I'm stepping on your toes. 

The drug price inflation isn't mainly because Medicaid is paying for it; in many cases it's because there's only one manufacturer of a particular drug or solution.  When the choice is "pay up or literally die" most people are going to pay up unless they are unable to.  The solution, I suppose, would be for big government to get its fingers out of patent protection on those drugs and treatments.  Then the magic of the free market could drive prices down.  Is that what you're advocating? 

Even if the above wasn't true, private insurance is about twice as common as government insurance according to this.  Your "government-induced lack of incentive" claim needs further justification in light of this, especially because if private insurance was able to keep the drug prices down people would switch to it, solving the problem for you and them. 

They will have to lower the price if people can't afford it. It is much more profitable to make it cheaper and have someone use the drugs over the long haul than to let them die right away and not make money for the next 20-30 years.  Also, the pills are cheap to make and can be made by any country. Resulting in "black markets" or people buying drugs from a foreign country. India and China are already doing this. The U.S. patents for these drugs pretty much tells everyone how the drug is made and U.S patents only apply to the U.S. This is partly why drugs are cheaper in some cases in other countries because some countries will just make it and sell it themselves. So these companies whether or not they want to have to keep it at a cheap price or people will look elsewhere.

We have the Daddy federal government to blame for expensive drugs because they will pay these companies and keep handing them money.

The government should control drug prices period.  Its obvious that given ni rescruction a drug company will share 3000 for a 30 day supply of a medication. They is cases all of our premiums to rise regardless of whose paying.  

The government, the citizens representing themselves,  should do something about it as it is the only entity that can.

Nothing else even begins to solve the problem and you guys will be arguing forever. 

You're not getting it.  Let me give you a hypothetical example.  Let's say there's a drug that people need to live.  The drug manufacturer doubles the price.  90% of the people on the drug can afford it, the other 10% die.  The company makes 0.9x2=1.8 times as much money as before.  Go capitalism! 

The government is supposed to look out for the whole public body; companies only have to look out for enough people to maximize profit.  That usually means they have a profit incentive to let a minority of people slip through the cracks.  When that means they don't get a fancy Iphone, fine.  When it means people die of preventable diseases, I happen to think it's a lot less okay.  Maybe you disagree. 

California's mail-in ballots have been pouring in, to the detriment of Orange County Republicans. Districts 39 and 45 have been called for the Democrats, leaving the historically conservative county with zero GOP representatives. Nationwide, the Dems have a net gain of 37 seats per NYT, with five races too close to call.

For those of you thinking, "I wonder what that number would've been without gerrymandering," here's an analysis of the 2012 through 2016 elections: https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/publications/Extreme%20Maps%205.16_0.pdf

Between Massachusetts, Maryland, and Illinois (the three states where Dems had full control of the post-2010 maps), the blue team got an extra 1 to 4 unearned seats.

The similarly-situated Republican states (thirteen total) gave the GOP 11 to 30 extra seats, with Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania way out of whack with their statewide popular votes. Ohio was also terrible, but to a slightly lesser extent.

This cycle, Pennsylvania went from a 13-5 R delegation after 2016 to a 9-9 delegation thanks to court-ordered redistricting, better reflecting the popular vote. In Michigan, where the GOP enjoyed a 9-5 advantage even when Democrats received more votes in 2012, Dems had to beat them 54-46% just to get half the seats. In Ohio, the Democrats got 47% of the two-party vote, but only 25% of the seats (4 D, 12 R). And in North Carolina, the Democrats' 1.5% victory statewide flipped zero seats, resulting in 10 R, 3 D. However, they expanded their lead on the state Supreme Court, 5 D to 2 R, so the current gerrymander probably won't be in place in 2020.

Election update: One race has still not concluded, North Carolina's 9th congressional district. The state Board of Elections (4 Democrats, 4 Republicans, and 1 independent) has not certified the results due to allegations of election fraud. With all votes counted, Republican Mark Harris leads by about 900, but things get strange in Bladen County, where he won over 60% of absentee ballots even though only 19% were requested by Republicans. At the center of it is Leslie McCrae Dowless, a local campaign worker, who directed the alleged collection of those ballots against state law and apparently filled them out for Harris or discarded ballots for his opponent.

There's much more to it, as documented here:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-the-heck-is-happening-in-that-north-carolina-house-race/

And apparently the Constitution gives the House of Representatives final say on seating Harris. So, stay tuned!

After four days of hearings in the uncalled 9th District race in North Carolina, the state elections board has called for a new election after finding significant evidence of an illegal ballot harvesting scheme paid for by Mark Harris, the Republican candidate.

Harris' own son, John, an attorney, testified he had warned him early in the race to avoid McCrae Dowless, the ringleader of the operation, because of suspicious vote totals in previous races he'd worked on.

https://www.wral.com/after-harris-admissions-a-new-election-in-9th-district/18208305/

----------------------

The email produced by the attorney representing Harris' campaign showed Harris reaching out to Judge Marion Warren about procuring Dowless' help. Dowless worked for another candidate, Todd Johnson, who nearly swept Bladen County's absentee ballot totals in 2016, and Harris refers to that victory in his email.

"On the other issue of your gracious offer to meet me in Bladen County and spend a day connecting me to the 'key people' that can help me carry that part of the county in a future US House NC-9 race," Harris wrote to Warren on March 8, 2017. "You know the political and financial connections better than anyone else I would know, including the guy whose absentee ballot project for Johnson could have put me in the US House this term, had I known, and he had been helping us."

https://www.kcbx.org/post/email-shows-nc-gop-candidate-sought-out-operative-accused-illegal-ballot-scheme

Normally, a new race would feature the same two candidates, but the legislature changed the law last December to re-do the primaries as well. I'm glad the crooks got caught!

Final midterm update: North Carolina's special elections for the 3rd and 9th House districts came and went. In the 9th, the Democrats' 2018 candidate was back, while the GOP nominated a new fellow, who led his party to victory by 2%, improving on the 0.3% margin in the fraudulent election, but still about 10 points less than Trump's back in '16. The 3rd (and much more Republican) district held an election to replace its late GOP representative, who died back in February. The Republican won by 24 points, which was roughly Trump's margin. There's no 2018 comparison, as the Dems did not field a candidate last year.