Public Healthcare Option - Compromise Floating Around

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: sciwizam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
So everyone knows the Dems have no more intention of setting pharma prices than the reps do, right? Good, that's out of the way.

I expect the government would offer this option and punish those who opt out.

Yeah, it certainly didn't help when Obama traded that for $80 billion is "savings" over 10 years from the pharmas.

I heard about some "closed" door Whitehouse deals is there any concrete proof of this?

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: b0mbrmanSomehow, I don't see Upper East Side socialites and Wall Street traders making a mad dash for Alabama...

If, as a result of adverse selection and people seeking health care migrating to New York, their taxes increase dramatically, they could start moving. Perhaps they'd choose Texas over Alabama.

As seen in my link, if the working poor want federal handouts coming their way, they'd already do much better -- eight times out of ten -- to move to a red state.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: sciwizam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
So everyone knows the Dems have no more intention of setting pharma prices than the reps do, right? Good, that's out of the way.

I expect the government would offer this option and punish those who opt out.

Yeah, it certainly didn't help when Obama traded that for $80 billion is "savings" over 10 years from the pharmas.

I heard about some "closed" door Whitehouse deals is there any concrete proof of this?

How's this?

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: sciwizam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
So everyone knows the Dems have no more intention of setting pharma prices than the reps do, right? Good, that's out of the way.

I expect the government would offer this option and punish those who opt out.

Yeah, it certainly didn't help when Obama traded that for $80 billion is "savings" over 10 years from the pharmas.

I heard about some "closed" door Whitehouse deals is there any concrete proof of this?

As I understand it. the deal was that current legislation before Congress would not provide for any negotiations on bulk pricing for pharmaceuticals for Part D.

The intimation was that separate legislation would be coming in the next Congress to address the bulk pricing.

There is still the issue of the 'hole'. As part of the new legislation I would imagine a great deal of thought will be given to 'plugging' the 'hole' somewhat ...

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: sciwizam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
So everyone knows the Dems have no more intention of setting pharma prices than the reps do, right? Good, that's out of the way.

I expect the government would offer this option and punish those who opt out.

Yeah, it certainly didn't help when Obama traded that for $80 billion is "savings" over 10 years from the pharmas.

I heard about some "closed" door Whitehouse deals is there any concrete proof of this?

How's this?

That is good for people on Medicare but people not on Medicare will have to eat this.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: inspire

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: inspire

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: ElFenix
link

according to that chart the US .gov already spends more per capita on 'health care' than the Uk .gov and the german .gov.

we're f-ed. we're just totally f-ed.

We also pay 4 times more for drugs then most other countries too.

Ausm, you understand why that is, right? You realize that nothing short of complete socialization of the entire healthcare industry in America will do anything to fix that, right? Obama and the Dems may affect some drop in prices, but we'll still be paying a high premium over other countries. The US of A effectively subsidizes worldwide Pharma R&D.

no. The government (or at least medicare and medicaid) is banned from negotiating prices with pharmaceutical companies, making the largest single market of customers a captive market. Break that ban and you will see a decent drop in price.

mike - explain to how allowing the government to 'negotiate' the price of drugs is not complete socialization of the Pharma market? The feds tell them 'play by our rules or leave' in these 'negotiations'.

As long as Pharma has the option to say no I fail to see the problem.