Jump to content

A Simple Health Care Plan.


Reagan

Recommended Posts

People upset about the aca that are not concerned with medical and pharmaceutical prices are ignorant.  The pharmaceutical companies have been giving big payoff money to republican and democratic politicians for a long time. A bottle of pills that the Canadian pay $5 for, may cost $400 in the USA due to these no good sellout muth......politicians 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, nappyroots said:

People upset about the aca that are not concerned with medical and pharmaceutical prices are ignorant.  The pharmaceutical companies have been giving big payoff money to republican and democratic politicians for a long time. A bottle of pills that the Canadian pay $5 for, may cost $400 in the USA due to these no good sellout muth......politicians 

So what's your fix?

You want the crooked politicians to reign in the big bad drug companies...what's the fix?

What would you do about a $5.00 unregulated drug brought into the country that kills folks because it wasn't tested?

You would be the first one screaming about it...come on, what's your fix?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/2/2017 at 10:18 PM, LumRaiderFan said:

So what's your fix?

You want the crooked politicians to reign in the big bad drug companies...what's the fix?

What would you do about a $5.00 unregulated drug brought into the country that kills folks because it wasn't tested?

You would be the first one screaming about it...come on, what's your fix?

Overpriced drugs that are used for cancer and other chronic illnesses are way overpriced and politicians ignore it because they are being paid off. If they wanted to help working folks and the elderly, fix the healthcare system, stop supported big healthcare business. be a hero for the people FIX healthcare  problems. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, new tobie said:

Overpriced drugs that are used for cancer and other chronic illnesses are way overpriced and politicians ignore it because they are being paid off. If they wanted to help working folks and the elderly, fix the healthcare system, stop supported big healthcare business. be a hero for the people FIX healthcare  problems. 

I've asked you this before and you conveniently ignored my question. I'll try again. Why, I don't know because you will spout this crap again even after refusing to answer the question.

How much do pharmaceutical companies spend on R&D? Have you ever did any research on a particular drug to see what the profit margin is? Don't forget to factor in the salaries of the researchers, the equipment and overhead costs, the drug development, the extensive testing for FDA approval, the marketing costs, and especially don't forget the health insurance costs under Obamacare for all of the employees. Now let's say the government starts limiting the profits on drugs. How many investors will invest on new drugs? Would you be willing to invest your money on something that costs millions to develop but cannot receive even an equal return on your investment? And once you develop a new drug, should you be able to recoup your investment money before another company steals your idea and creates a generic drug? Do you think research on new drugs will be severely damaged by legislation setting a price limit on drugs? Or do just like to parrot what your Liberal leaders tell you to believe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, new tobie said:

Overpriced drugs that are used for cancer and other chronic illnesses are way overpriced and politicians ignore it because they are being paid off. If they wanted to help working folks and the elderly, fix the healthcare system, stop supported big healthcare business. be a hero for the people FIX healthcare  problems. 

Be a hero and fix it how...Obamacare???

You seem to think the fed gov, and only the fed gov, can be the hero and "fix" the healthcare system (that wasn't broke).

Guess what, when they stepped in to "fix" the healthcare system, my coverage got worse and my premiums went up.

No thanks, that kind of hero and help, I can do without.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Englebert said:

I've asked you this before and you conveniently ignored my question. I'll try again. Why, I don't know because you will spout this crap again even after refusing to answer the question.

How much do pharmaceutical companies spend on R&D? Have you ever did any research on a particular drug to see what the profit margin is? Don't forget to factor in the salaries of the researchers, the equipment and overhead costs, the drug development, the extensive testing for FDA approval, the marketing costs, and especially don't forget the health insurance costs under Obamacare for all of the employees. Now let's say the government starts limiting the profits on drugs. How many investors will invest on new drugs? Would you be willing to invest your money on something that costs millions to develop but cannot receive even an equal return on your investment? And once you develop a new drug, should you be able to recoup your investment money before another company steals your idea and creates a generic drug? Do you think research on new drugs will be severely damaged by legislation setting a price limit on drugs? Or do just like to parrot what your Liberal leaders tell you to believe?

And I'd add a few other bits of info for new tobie.  I looked up the cost for a new drug - 800 Million.  And then you have the cost on many others that failed, from phase 1 to Approval.  Everyone brings up Canada.  I'll bet the vast majority of what folks get from Canada are generic drugs that they didn't have to develop.  A good example of why we pay those prices is antibiotics.  The wonder drug.  Worked great for so many years, but now the bugs have adapted and are getting more resistant.  Some are totally resistant.  Now when you say "wonder drug", we wonder will we develop something that will once again whip the bugs.  If not, someday, in the not so distant future, humanity will be digging mass graves with bulldozers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stevenash said:

Whenever the federal government gets involved, prices go up and quality declines. 

Prices of medication and healthcare services were already out of control, a person with pre-existing conditions would pay higher insurance premiums on top of the high prices. Pubs control all branches of government. Repeal and stop your cronies from making record profits on healthcare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, new tobie said:

Prices of medication and healthcare services were already out of control, a person with pre-existing conditions would pay higher insurance premiums on top of the high prices. Pubs control all branches of government. Repeal and stop your cronies from making record profits on healthcare.

Who is going to spend the money on R&D and the manufacture of new drugs if they can't make a profit? I noticed you ignored mine and REBgp's post on this...which were replies to your post. Why don't you invest in healthcare so you can make and sell your drugs at a negative profit of your manufacturing costs. What? You won't do it? Nobody else would either, causing the destruction of our whole healthcare system. What solution can you offer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Englebert said:

Who is going to spend the money on R&D and the manufacture of new drugs if they can't make a profit? I noticed you ignored mine and REBgp's post on this...which were replies to your post. Why don't you invest in healthcare so you can make and sell your drugs at a negative profit of your manufacturing costs. What? You won't do it? Nobody else would either, causing the destruction of our whole healthcare system. What solution can you offer?

Give a person priceless insight into the cost of medicine, and I think it's ignored, or incomprehensible, even with these elementary explanations..  Uncle lol :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Be a hero and fix it how...Obamacare???

You seem to think the fed gov, and only the fed gov, can be the hero and "fix" the healthcare system (that wasn't broke).

Guess what, when they stepped in to "fix" the healthcare system, my coverage got worse and my premiums went up.

No thanks, that kind of hero and help, I can do without.

You must have never been seriously ill, if you believe the health care system in the united states doesn't need attention. If you google countries with the best Healthcare systems, the United States doesn't make the top ten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Englebert said:

Who is going to spend the money on R&D and the manufacture of new drugs if they can't make a profit? I noticed you ignored mine and REBgp's post on this...which were replies to your post. Why don't you invest in healthcare so you can make and sell your drugs at a negative profit of your manufacturing costs. What? You won't do it? Nobody else would either, causing the destruction of our whole healthcare system. What solution can you offer?

The Healthcare industry wants to sell medication period. Someone finds a cure, would probably get cement shoes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
1 hour ago, new tobie said:

This is the hidden content, please
 the only part of the Affordable Care Act that i was concerned with. The republicans care more about erasing Obamacare than they do about people. Getting rid of the pre-existing clause is a bummer for pre-existing condition patients. 

Don't try to project your hate on Republicans. Most aren't as cynical as you. If you want examples of people that don't care about other people and are full of hate, just pick out any Liberal to analyze. You know nothing about Republicans. Spout your negative stereotypes elsewhere. It's getting old and tiresome. On second thought, your feeble rants are what keep this board entertaining. Please continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined


  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...