The Affordable Care Act

[piece-itpete]

Ike I mentioned China because our policies do not exist in a vacuum.

Pete

[whell]

Originally Posted by icenine

2.2 Million on the echanges
3.9 million in the Medicare expansion

so almost 6 million people covered now

..and you're dreaming if you think those numbers are real. LOL

[mpholland]

If the government wants to subsidize something, how about subsidizing the research and development so that it can't be used as an excuse to keep drugs and treatments so damn high. "Hey look, we have a new drug to keep you alive, but your life will be miserable because if you don't give us our price, you will die". How about figuring out how to keep medicine affordable instead of figuring out how to pay the exorbitant costs. How about highly taxing the huge pharma profits to subsidize insurance. How about......? There are all kinds of solutions, they just need to be figured out. That is what this country used to be great at. I'm not quite sure WTF happened to that.

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

But how does someone working for minimum wage buy insurance? Dear God is this country so damn miserable that they will not look after their own people. I have had the misfortune to meet come chaep bastards in my time, but this. . . .

...as soon as you calm down, check your facts. Most of these folks need not buy insurance. They would be eligible for Medicaid.

[whell]

Originally Posted by mpholland

If the government wants to subsidize something, how about subsidizing the research and development so that it can't be used as an excuse to keep drugs and treatments so damn high.

What, the billions spent to fund the NIH don't count?

[mpholland]

Originally Posted by whell

What, the billions spent to fund the NIH don't count?

There are better ways. I was actually meaning directly subsidizing pharma so that the taxes on the products could be justified as in "the people" paid for the R&D on the drugs so the profits should be returned to them. The best medical minds aren't the ones owning the pharma companies, they are the ones working for them.

[whell]

Originally Posted by mpholland

There are better ways. I was actually meaning directly subsidizing pharma so that the taxes on the products could be justified as in "the people" paid for the R&D on the drugs so the profits should be returned to them. The best medical minds aren't the ones owning the pharma companies, they are the ones working for them.

I'd suggest taking a long look at the FDA's impact on the cost of getting drugs to market. Now, before some folks read this and start to hyperventilate, I'm not suggesting that we dispense with the FDA, nor allowing the "evil" drug manufacturers to market their products however they want. However, the cost of getting pharmaceuticals through the FDA's approval process has had the net effect of creating a legalized drug cartel. Since there are relatively few companies that can subsidize the hefty costs of drug trials, mandated internal controls, etc., we've limited the number of companies that can sustain the cost of bringing new drugs to market. That inflates prices and decreases competition and innovation.

[Rajoo]

All we need to do is to allow importation of pharmaceuticals as we do everything else from China. Well the FDA won't have any of that of course.

[merrylander]

Get rid of the four or five wholesellers, it is the middlemen who jack up the prices.

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Get rid of the four or five wholesellers, it is the middlemen who jack up the prices.

That's frankly not true. There are relatively few brand name drug manufacturers, but a large number of secondary / generic manufacturers. Wholesalers/distributors provide a valuable service connecting retailers with the multitude of domestic and international suppliers. If the retailers had to deal with that complexity, their costs of procurement would likely rise.