Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have the best possible health insurance package through my "VERY PRESTIGIOUS" Employer, and I paid $600.00 as co-pay for a routine yearly check-up and a few lab tests (I think it was 4 or 5 of them).
What's the point of paying health insurance premiums ??
For most people up to about 40-50, routine annual checks ups are not very useful, and essentially a luxury. But $600 is too much. Half that IMO if you need annual reassurance.
Pharma needs to profit, and the risks and costs of new drug introduction are very high. Usually there are ways to get these very expensive meds to those in need but without the funds for full retail price. Thinking along the lines of making HC delivery more like a utility may provide some direction in where to compromise and go with this dilemma.
A better idea is to reduce the costs of bringing a drug to market. Repeal Kefauver-Harris and let you and your patent decide on effective treatment.
A better idea is to reduce the costs of bringing a drug to market. Repeal Kefauver-Harris and let you and your patent decide on effective treatment.
Or we could just force them to reduce to their prices to the same prices that they sell the drugs at in other first world countries like Canada and the UK. If they refuse, don't allow them to be sold in the U.S. until they comply. No reason we should be paying 3x more here.
You're not considering how much of a bite your paycheck is taking for your employer sponsored insurance. Between that, and co-pays, and deductibles, and the slowing rise of your salary... I suspect the #s would come to about the same. The difference is a single payer system eliminates the need for a middle man like an insurance company that needs to make a healthy enough profit margin to be worthwhile to shareholders.
Of course I considered the cost of what we pay for health care. That was the whole point of the comparison. The only real people benefiting from single payer healthcare are the 10% that don't get their insurance from the government or their employers. You might want to actually read what I wrote in its entirety (which includes multiple posts) before replying.
Admittedly, in reading through a few more posts on this thread, it's amazing to me how much BS is spewed on the Internet. There are so many disingenous statements, I don't even know where to start. I did find the comment regarding life expectancy to be the biggest joke, since organizations like the World Health Organization seem to think its okay to include car fatalities and homicides to judge the success of medical care and its relation to life expectancy.
There is no sense in regurgitating all the facts that have put these misnomers to bed. People that believe in single payer healthcare are just like a religious cult. There's nothing you can say to them to change their minds so it's not worth arguing about. They are simply a group of close minded, intellectually rigid people.
Last edited by Independentthinking; 04-10-2017 at 10:36 PM..
Which is why we need a law that forces them to post and publish prices.
Additionally, a law that no medication can be sold for more in the US than anywhere else in the world. (What the pharmaceutical companies charge that is)
I agree, but the conservatives will cry, "Government Regulation" and "Free markets"!
Those of us who have insurance through our employer were only moderately harmed by Obamacare, with the exception of people who kept their children on insurance to age 26 who benefitted. The ones who got really screwed were the successful self-employed.
I pay about $300 a month with $25 dollar copays ,$75 for specialists. $15 maximum for prescriptions.
My boyfriend is a successful self-employed person, who employs several others in a hard-hit area of rural upstate NY. He couldn't have gotten health insurance before the ACA due to severe IBS (which he now manages with diet, but cost a lot of money and doctor's visits until he got an accurate diagnosis after years of pain). The ACA happened before he started his business, and was a huge reason why he was able to do so.
Plenty of self-employed people were going without because of pre-existing conditions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
