CADsortaGUY
Lifer
I am more for it then not. The price of private health insurance is ridiculous and I may be without it in a few years because of the high prices.
I'm against a universal health care system like the one in Canada.
However we need some kind of supplemental insurance program for WORKING Americans who cannot afford decent healthcare.
It's a damn shame that many WORKING Americans in this country can't afford decent healthcare while at the very same time they pay taxes which are in turn used to send BILLIONS in foreign aid and medical aid to foreigners.
However we need some kind of supplemental insurance program for WORKING Americans who cannot afford decent healthcare.
It's a damn shame that many WORKING Americans in this country can't afford decent healthcare while at the very same time they pay taxes which are in turn used to send BILLIONS in foreign aid and medical aid to foreigners.
If you were a drug manufacturer, what would be your incentive to research and develop new drugs, knowing there's going to be a cap on what you can sell the successful ones for?
I think that's one of the bigest shortcomings of our distant, faceless government. Too many people think the government owes them something.
NO.
i sure as hell don't want to pay for a heart surgery for the fat ass bump down the street or the kid who broke his legs+wrist+ribs+skull+etc when he's skateboarding.
price control of some sort to keep the prices reasonable on drugs should be fine though.
i sure as hell don't want to pay for a heart surgery for the fat ass bump down the street or the kid who broke his legs+wrist+ribs+skull+etc when he's skateboarding.
price control of some sort to keep the prices reasonable on drugs should be fine though.
Staying in business? If you have medicine to sell, you'll at least get the capped price. If you don't have medicine to sell, you will get jack sh!t. Get it?
And yes, maybe the drug companies will have to run leaner and not spend more money on marketing than they do on R&D.
Wrong. You'll just sell existing drugs, and skip the mega expensive R&D. So much for progress, if our resident socialists get their way.
You are assuming the drug companies preffer to go out of business rather than sell at capped prices. Then why are they doing business outside the US where prices are capped?
It sure isn't going to Doctors...
It's going to the insurance comp[anies, it's going to the f'ing tort lawyers (Like you buddy Edwards!), it's getting eaten up in overhead and regulations mandated by congress
the only hope for that is Bush in a second term with a republican majority in the House and 60 republican senators...the Democrats will fight to the last lawyer/man to defend the lottery/tort system.
The other problem is the public erosion in respect for physicians...
why do you think tort lawyers are so successful..they have bred mistrust in a culture of victimhood into the american public..
grandpa died....it wasn't the boozing, the cigarettes, and the fall down the stairs late at nite, it was the doctors fault for not "making him better"..you wouldn't believe the crap that goes on..I got sued by a patient for a successful outcome to surgery!....
it's a joke, and it's not going to get fixed in my lifetime..to many lawyers...make me a goverment employee..and then it's PAYBACK TIME..i'll give you top-notch care, just don't p!ss me off or be a trial lawyer....or your gonna be waiting in line "a long time"
What do you surgest as a form of tort reform. The only thing that anyone has been able to come up with is caps on damages which to me is a really bad idea. The other option suggest was making the losers pay the winners court cost. The problem with the second is it gives people with deep pockets even more of an advatage in the courts because not only can they out spend you to win but then you would have to pay for their 17 lawyers and 27 experts.
Health care is an important subject but Universal Healthcare would be far too costly. What I think many people fail to realize is the size of America. It isn't that difficult for a country the size of Germany (Population roughly 81 Mil.) or France (Population roughly 61 Mil.) to offer National Healthcare. America's population currently stands at roughly 293 million people.
We couldn't support Universal Healthcare without completely bankrupting this country in a very short span.
It would make what GW is doing to us now look like chump change
We couldn't support Universal Healthcare without completely bankrupting this country in a very short span.
It would make what GW is doing to us now look like chump change
How about a "goverment run" system like workman's compensation for medical malpractice "claims"...a "elected/selected" panel determines the payment doctors make into the system...the panel determines "payouts" to those who file complaints...
goverment provided malpractice insurance....Yea Haw! that's what THIS conservative is in favor...you get compensated...by the same political system that decides what my services are worth (everything today is based on medicare reimbursement, which i certainly have no control over)
i'm sure the trial lawyers will scream bloody murder if you try to diminish their chances at winning the lottery..oops, i mean their malpractice case!
trial lawyers place a hugh unseen tax on society..for the glib promise of "protecting the public" from "bad doctors", they cause doctors to relocate (out of pennsylvania for exampe) because malpractice premiums cost morte than you can earn! They cause physicians to avoid "difficult" situations because malpractice cases are filed because of bad outcome, not bad medicine...not every patient can be "saved" or every problem "fixed" inspite of flawless care.
Doctors are the target of the last "great buffalo hunt" , and the trial lawyers aren't going to stop until you don't have access to a doctor anymore...
what do you imagine is going to happen if all doctors become defacto goverment employees?
i'm going to avoid difficult cases
i'm not going to be available 24/hrs day
don't get huffy with me, or i'll just send you to another doctor who has a 3 month waiting list.
your not going to "free unlimited high quality health care"....
your going to get a system with rules, regulations, waiting lines, budget shortfalls, patients will have even less autonomy or authority than they do now...
if you believe that "medicare" should be extended to everyone (goverment pays, but does not employ doctors)...most doctors will go out of business, because medicare payments are so low that office expenses and malpractice premiums cannot be covered...doctors aren't going to work for less than nothing.
the guy who fixes my refrigerator gets paid more than i do for spending the same amount of time with a patient....
your auto mechanic probably gets paid more as well.
I did NOT say they'd prefer to go out of business, I'd said they'd simply stay in business selling drugs already on the market, and skip R&D.
GOVERNORS OF THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM FOR HEALTHCARE
ADDRESSING THE INNOVATION DIVIDE
- ...But the conventional wisdom driving this
debate?Europe profits, the US pays?is
wrong. Our analysis shows that the social
and economic costs to Europe, in the form
of delayed access to drugs, poorer health
outcomes and lower investments in research,
make the model anything but free.
You don?t have to dig deep to see the stress
points. Swiss-based Novartis decides to relocate
its R&D to the US. Pfizer threatens not to
launch certain drugs in France because of
concerns regarding price levels and spillover
risks. Foreign governments such as Australia
feel pressure from the US in trade negotiations
to increase drug prices. Empowered by the
Internet, patients and physicians create new,
nearly instant demand for the best medicines.
And FDA commissioner Mark McClellan
becomes the US government?s critic-in-chief
of the ?free rider? model, calling it ?unfair
and unjust? for Americans to bear a disproportionate
share of drug costs.
...It?s conceivable that the US government could
impose price controls similar to those in
European countries. Our 10-year projection
shows pharmaceutical spending per capita
in the US becoming twice that of Europe, and
growing from 2% to 3% of US GDP. Faced
with this situation, the US government might
decide to fund only the US portion of pharmaceutical
innovation. The industry would be
forced to reduce its investment in R&D and,
with it, the number of new drugs it creates...
That's absurd. They'll go out of business once the drugs go off patent. So they have no choice but to innovate, price caps or not.
"They'll go out of business once the drugs go off patent."
They can make money manufacturing and selling them, the same as anyone else can! You clowns want to take the profit out of patenting drugs, so in the end, nobody will develop or patent ANY drugs! They'll just resort to manufacturing... period.
They can make money manufacturing and selling them, the same as anyone else can! You clowns want to take the profit out of patenting drugs, so in the end, nobody will develop or patent ANY drugs! They'll just resort to manufacturing... period.
I don't want to take profit out of patenting drugs. I want to take monopoly profits out of patenting drugs.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter