|
Post by jonda1974 on Jun 25, 2015 20:42:34 GMT
I'd be interested in seeing the percentage of actual profit made on prescriptions in the Pharmaceutical company. They are so regulated that their overhead is astronomical, it's why drugs are so much more expensive here than in the rest of the world. I was married to a pharmaceutical rep. My first husband worked for Sandoz. Let me tell you, that company wasted and threw buckets of money at doctors and reps. Yearly vacation conventions for the reps. Electronics gifts. It was a real eye opener. The profits ARE astonomical. If you believe they aren't making money hand over fist, you have bought the huge cock and bull story they have fed you. The first and most important step, IMO, in making health care reasonable for all IS regulating pharmaceutical costs, because Big Pharm has proven they aren't willing to do it themselves. I understand what you are saying, but exchange Sandoz for Walmart, If Walmart were to take their profits and provide yearly vacation conventions for their sales force, electronic gifts, etc. We would commend them for taking care of their employees and building a loyal company culture. I honestly didn't know what the percentage of profits was, but to me in the long run that isn't really the bigger issue. We cannot put caps on profits. That's nationalization, not freedom. I also wasn't talking about actual dollar amounts, but percentages. Because dollar amounts of course are going to be huge simply because of the customer base. Something that costs $1 but costs .90 to make, they are only making a 10% profit regardless of how many they sell. If they only sell 10, well that's not astronomical, but if they sell 10,000 it may be considered astronomical, when in reality, they are still only making the same percentage of profit.
|
|
|
Post by Regina Phalange on Jun 25, 2015 20:43:05 GMT
The ACA may not set the prices, but with insurance companies being required to provide all of this "free" stuff, how else should it be paid for? Premiums HAVE to go up to pay for all the "free" stuff.
But the companies are still making money and tons of it. In fact we were given back money three times last year due to them making our premiums too much and their ratio being too high. So I don't buy this one bit. We have to have basic coverage for every citizen. It should be one of our top priorities. Right. I posted about an article I read yesterday about five big insurance companies that have BILLIONS of dollars in their surplus accounts and are still increasing premiums.
|
|
|
Post by jonda1974 on Jun 25, 2015 20:43:40 GMT
GAJenny - I think ultimately that was the ideal. They never wanted it to reduce costs, they never wanted it to actually work and be sustainable. They wanted it to be a financial burden on enough people so that Single Payer would be enacted. It was a ploy by the government to take away our health care choices. Can I ask what you mean by "take away our choices?" What choices do we have? Right now we have the semblance of choice with the exchanges. Once that fails and we are all forced to go into the single payer plan, we won't have choices. We'll be told what we get.
|
|
|
Post by foolana on Jun 25, 2015 21:11:08 GMT
Businesses who make decisions about our health care? Businesses who have the authority to override our doctors about what is best for our life and health? Why should any corporation make money by refusing medications and treatments that our doctors want us to have but refuse because it doesn't fit into their business model? Why should people DIE because Anthem/Cigna/USHealthcare et al care more about the almighty dollar than they do about their customers? Making profits by refusing life-saving care is despicable and disgusting. There is truly something wrong with you if you think that's okay, jonda1974. Holy sh!t. Businesses who make decisions about our health care. Businesses who have the authority to override our doctors about what is best for our life and health. Government who makes decisions about our health care. Government who has the authority to override our doctors about what is best for our life and health. Its really trading one enemy for another, opposite sides of the same coin, and neither have the individual's best interest at heart. Exactly how does the ACA make medical decisions for us? Do tell.
|
|
|
Post by foolana on Jun 25, 2015 21:14:43 GMT
I have to wonder if you were so distrustful of our government when one of your own was in the White House? If you want to know what it's like to live without any semblance of government, feel free to move to Iraq and let us know how it is there. If you live long enough to tell the tale, that is.
|
|
|
Post by foolana on Jun 25, 2015 21:15:56 GMT
Can I ask what you mean by "take away our choices?" What choices do we have? Right now we have the semblance of choice with the exchanges. Once that fails and we are all forced to go into the single payer plan, we won't have choices. We'll be told what we get. We are told what we get. BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.
|
|
|
Post by foolana on Jun 25, 2015 21:19:45 GMT
I was married to a pharmaceutical rep. My first husband worked for Sandoz. Let me tell you, that company wasted and threw buckets of money at doctors and reps. Yearly vacation conventions for the reps. Electronics gifts. It was a real eye opener. The profits ARE astonomical. If you believe they aren't making money hand over fist, you have bought the huge cock and bull story they have fed you. The first and most important step, IMO, in making health care reasonable for all IS regulating pharmaceutical costs, because Big Pharm has proven they aren't willing to do it themselves. I understand what you are saying, but exchange Sandoz for Walmart, If Walmart were to take their profits and provide yearly vacation conventions for their sales force, electronic gifts, etc. We would commend them for taking care of their employees and building a loyal company culture. I honestly didn't know what the percentage of profits was, but to me in the long run that isn't really the bigger issue. We cannot put caps on profits. That's nationalization, not freedom. I also wasn't talking about actual dollar amounts, but percentages. Because dollar amounts of course are going to be huge simply because of the customer base. Something that costs $1 but costs .90 to make, they are only making a 10% profit regardless of how many they sell. If they only sell 10, well that's not astronomical, but if they sell 10,000 it may be considered astronomical, when in reality, they are still only making the same percentage of profit. Whaaaat? Awesome attempt at deflection but it makes no sense.
|
|
back to *pea*ality
Pearl Clutcher
Not my circus, not my monkeys ~refugee pea #59
Posts: 3,149
Jun 25, 2014 19:51:11 GMT
|
Post by back to *pea*ality on Jun 25, 2015 21:31:29 GMT
The insurance company lobbyists were silent during the "Affordable Care Act" debates/arguments because they knew in the end, it would be another windfall for them. They are writing policies for people who cannot afford insurance and the rest of us are subsidizing it in premium increases which the middle class can ill afford.
As the architect of Obamacare said - "Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage," "Call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass."
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Jun 25, 2015 21:33:05 GMT
Typical partisan nonsense. Why don't you blame Republicans for letting corporations get away with charging whatever the hell they want and paying no taxes? It's easier to make stuff up and blame Obama.
ETA: By corporations, in the post, I mean health insurance companies who make more in profits by charging more and denying health care.
Businesses making profits...how wrong… I don't think healthcare should be a for profit business.
|
|
|
Post by M~ on Jun 25, 2015 21:41:23 GMT
This is an interesting article on Pharma company profits from the BBC, published November 2014.
Pharm company profits.
Eye opening to say the least.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 25, 2015 21:46:24 GMT
I was married to a pharmaceutical rep. My first husband worked for Sandoz. Let me tell you, that company wasted and threw buckets of money at doctors and reps. Yearly vacation conventions for the reps. Electronics gifts. It was a real eye opener. The profits ARE astonomical. If you believe they aren't making money hand over fist, you have bought the huge cock and bull story they have fed you. The first and most important step, IMO, in making health care reasonable for all IS regulating pharmaceutical costs, because Big Pharm has proven they aren't willing to do it themselves. I understand what you are saying, but exchange Sandoz for Walmart, If Walmart were to take their profits and provide yearly vacation conventions for their sales force, electronic gifts, etc. We would commend them for taking care of their employees and building a loyal company culture. I honestly didn't know what the percentage of profits was, but to me in the long run that isn't really the bigger issue. We cannot put caps on profits. That's nationalization, not freedom. I also wasn't talking about actual dollar amounts, but percentages. Because dollar amounts of course are going to be huge simply because of the customer base. Something that costs $1 but costs .90 to make, they are only making a 10% profit regardless of how many they sell. If they only sell 10, well that's not astronomical, but if they sell 10,000 it may be considered astronomical, when in reality, they are still only making the same percentage of profit. The difference is that health care, IMO, should be a right, not a privilege. Walmart isn't making its profits off of the illness of the people, whereas Pharmaceuticals are. I, when it comes to health care, AM okay with regulating profits made by pharmaceuticals and insurance companies - it is an issue where I feel that the needs of the many definitely trump the ability of a few to make big $$$ off of them. Capitalism failed the American people in both of these industries due to the greed of the people running them. It is one thing when Walmart profits off of selling cheap t-shirts, that people's lives and well-being do not depend on, and quite another when Pharmaceutical companies profit by selling drugs that people need in order to live and/ or be healthy and charge whatever they want to.
|
|
|
Post by jenis40 on Jun 25, 2015 21:54:42 GMT
My evidence is anecdotal and comes from the ag chemical sales side. An ag chem sales rep made high 5 figures to 6 figures in Montana 15 years ago which is a very high salary for that state. My DH worked for a fertilizer and chemical sales company so he was in constant contact with these guys. They doled out jackets, caps etc constantly. I didn't have to buy a new coat for 10 years we had so many. Of course they all said Monsanto etc on them. My DH was taken on three fishing trips in two years (Canada and salmon fishing off the coast). They took us to Las Vegas to watch the NASCAR race. This was all in the two years he worked there while we were married. DH always said chemicals sold for much less in Canada, same chemical different name. The American farmer usually paid more. Some chemical companies are also involved with pharmaceuticals as well (Novartis is one, I think there are more).
All this to say that chemical sales and pharmaceutical sales are very similar and there is a lot money thrown around to try to get ag sales people and doctors to "sell" their products. I wonder if this business model (which I think is very common in the sales industry) was modified, what would that do to reduce the price of drugs? I've never worked in sales so this system seems odd to me. Maybe someone who has more experience can shed some light.
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Jun 25, 2015 22:19:33 GMT
I also wonder how many people have coverage, but because high premiums and high deductibles are STILL not going to the doctor and getting the medical care they need because they don't have the money. I have put stuff off...in fact I put off a routine visit to my cardiologist last year because I didn't want to spend the money on what I assumed would be a routine, follow up visit. I finally went in September (after my deductible was met) and learned that I had aFib. I'm glad I met my deductible in September and finally went to the doctor. This doesn't make sense to me. Why did you have to wait until you met your deductible to see your cardiologist? Seeing this doctor earlier in the year means you would met your deductible earlier than Sep. Your out of pocket cost would be the same for the year. Am I missing something here?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:09:25 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2015 22:21:34 GMT
Because of ACA our premiums have gone up to the point we can't afford to pay for them! We have to, but now we are limited on everything else we pay for. We went down to one car, cut out my cell phone and can barely put food on our table. We make "too much" money for any kind of government assistance, yet we have to go to the food bank once a month to help offset what we can't afford. We have internet because my son's charter school pays for a good portion of it. Because the government looks at what DH makes BEFORE anything is deducted from his paycheck it doesn't account for the extremely high insurance premiums we have and we can't get any assistance. Thankfully DH job is aware of the increase and has helped us in a way. We get an HSA card that they put money onto every pay period. So that helps us get through our deductible period and pays for any other medical expenses we may have, but it doesn't put food on our table. But if you get your insurance through your DH's company - how is it the ACA's fault that you don't have adequate insurance? It's his company that decides what insurance plan they are willing to pay for, and it's the insurance companies that decide what kind of plans they are going to offer. Because we are forced to take his insurance and insurance companies know this. We cannot be without insurance...so the rates increased drastically. I am fully blaming ACA for this. He has great insurance, that hasn't changed in the 10 years we've had it..but now we can't afford it...or should I say now we can't afford to put food on our table because of it.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:09:25 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2015 22:29:37 GMT
But if you get your insurance through your DH's company - how is it the ACA's fault that you don't have adequate insurance? It's his company that decides what insurance plan they are willing to pay for, and it's the insurance companies that decide what kind of plans they are going to offer. Because we are forced to take his insurance and insurance companies know this. We cannot be without insurance...so the rates increased drastically. I am fully blaming ACA for this. He has great insurance, that hasn't changed in the 10 years we've had it..but now we can't afford it...or should I say now we can't afford to put food on our table because of it. Well you are EXTREMELY lucky that your insurance didn't change in 10 years. That is unheard of for most people. Annual increases happened every single year in our jobs way before the ACA. That was just the reality for most people.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:09:25 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2015 22:44:40 GMT
Because we are forced to take his insurance and insurance companies know this. We cannot be without insurance...so the rates increased drastically. I am fully blaming ACA for this. He has great insurance, that hasn't changed in the 10 years we've had it..but now we can't afford it...or should I say now we can't afford to put food on our table because of it. Well you are EXTREMELY lucky that your insurance didn't change in 10 years. That is unheard of for most people. Annual increases happened every single year in our jobs way before the ACA. That was just the reality for most people. He had annual increases...but, they were always small doable increases..that went with his yearly raises and it never really seemed like we were losing much more out of our pockets. But once ACA came in, the increase jump drastically.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:09:25 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2015 22:47:17 GMT
Well you are EXTREMELY lucky that your insurance didn't change in 10 years. That is unheard of for most people. Annual increases happened every single year in our jobs way before the ACA. That was just the reality for most people. He had annual increases...but, they were always small doable increases..that went with his yearly raises and it never really seemed like we were losing much more out of our pockets. But once ACA came in, the increase jump drastically. Again he was still very lucky, we had large increases in both of our last FT jobs annually. The ACA actually caused the company to shop around and the insurance then went DOWN. But now I am out of work due to my disability and he is a contractor (changing soon) so we are through the exchange once again. But it isn't outrageous like some are saying at all. I wish I knew why there were so many discrepancies. Again it all has a long way to go but I think has made some very good changes for what's required and no more pre-exsisting conditions.
|
|
|
Post by beebee on Jun 25, 2015 22:59:21 GMT
Businesses making profits...how wrong… I don't think healthcare should be a for profit business. In theory, I understand this point of view. But in practice, do you really think if there is not a profit, people and companies will work to develop more and better drugs, devices, etc??
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:09:25 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2015 23:02:54 GMT
I don't think healthcare should be a for profit business. In theory, I understand this point of view. But in practice, do you really think if there is not a profit, people and companies will work to develop more and better drugs, devices, etc?? Non profit doesn't mean people aren't paid though.
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Jun 25, 2015 23:43:36 GMT
I don't think healthcare should be a for profit business. In theory, I understand this point of view. But in practice, do you really think if there is not a profit, people and companies will work to develop more and better drugs, devices, etc?? This is an interesting read for you. Non-profit vs. For-Profit Health Care
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:09:25 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2015 23:49:22 GMT
Well you are EXTREMELY lucky that your insurance didn't change in 10 years. That is unheard of for most people. Annual increases happened every single year in our jobs way before the ACA. That was just the reality for most people. He had annual increases...but, they were always small doable increases..that went with his yearly raises and it never really seemed like we were losing much more out of our pockets. But once ACA came in, the increase jump drastically. Exactly...our premiums went up every year. There's a huge difference in a $10-$12 per paycheck increase vs. a $300 per paycheck increase.
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Jun 26, 2015 0:16:00 GMT
In theory, I understand this point of view. But in practice, do you really think if there is not a profit, people and companies will work to develop more and better drugs, devices, etc?? Non profit doesn't mean people aren't paid though. Why not? There are people out there who research things not for the huge profits they could get, but because they want to find the cure for a disease and save lives. Many medical professionals donate time and effort to do pro bono work. Medecins sans frontieres is FILLED with doctors who choose to work where they are needed because they believe it is a worthy cause, not because they want a ton of money.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:09:25 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 0:26:25 GMT
Non profit doesn't mean people aren't paid though. Why not? There are people out there who research things not for the huge profits they could get, but because they want to find the cure for a disease and save lives. Many medical professionals donate time and effort to do pro bono work. Medecins sans frontieres is FILLED with doctors who choose to work where they are needed because they believe it is a worthy cause, not because they want a ton of money. Oh I agree but I think many people mean that non-profit means that people are working for NO money and that simply isn't the case. They can still get paid a very liveable wage and it can still be a successful job and competitive.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:09:25 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 0:59:52 GMT
He had annual increases...but, they were always small doable increases..that went with his yearly raises and it never really seemed like we were losing much more out of our pockets. But once ACA came in, the increase jump drastically. Exactly...our premiums went up every year. There's a huge difference in a $10-$12 per paycheck increase vs. a $300 per paycheck increase. I feel you pain!! This is exactly what happened with us..I hate it.
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Jun 26, 2015 2:44:55 GMT
Does this mean that for the average family where Obama said premiums would go down by $2,500 year goes into effect? Because my premium went UP by $2,500 so it would be nice if it went down now by $5,000 so my average American middle class family receives what we were promised. I doubt it because someone has to pay for this. What makes the ACA sound good to so many is that people don't have to worry about pre-existing conditions anymore and many are eligible for a subsidy. But for an increasing number of people, health care costs are rising, insurance premiums are rising, co-pays have doubled...while coverage benefits are decreasing. While there are those who are benefiting from the ACA, there's that many more who are finding that the ACA is costing them more. It's costing them more because they're not only paying for their insurance, they're subsidizing someone else's. But I'm not saying anything here that hasn't been said here and on the old board. I sometimes wonder how many people in this country really believe that the government has tons of money in its coffers just waiting to be spent in order to cure all the woes of life. The government has no money but what it has taken from its citizens through taxes. But how many people really care about that fact as long as the programs benefit them? The best answer for everyone is to find ways to lower costs rather than finding someone else to pay for it. Sooner or later, it becomes unsustainable.
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Jun 26, 2015 2:49:18 GMT
The insurance company lobbyists were silent during the "Affordable Care Act" debates/arguments because they knew in the end, it would be another windfall for them. They are writing policies for people who cannot afford insurance and the rest of us are subsidizing it in premium increases which the middle class can ill afford.As the architect of Obamacare said - "Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage," "Call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass."
|
|
|
Post by Skypea on Jun 26, 2015 3:13:48 GMT
Just curious-how many people can now afford the insurance but not afford to go to the doctor due to high deductibles with many of these policies or can'r find a doctor willing to accept their policy? You hear stories all the time about these issues and just wonder if it's only a few people relating their story or if it as widespread as some would like you to believe. I know that the deducible for medicare went up and cost of an appt went up a lot. And it isn't easy to find a doctor who will take medicare either.
|
|
|
Post by Skypea on Jun 26, 2015 4:09:03 GMT
"that company wasted and threw buckets of money at doctors and reps. Yearly vacation conventions for the reps. Electronics gifts. It was a real eye opener. The profits ARE astonomical. If you believe they aren't making money hand over fist, you have bought the huge cock and bull story they have fed you. "
sounds like they are a government agency... I think that's what they are now. doctors too.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 16:09:25 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 4:50:52 GMT
Does this mean that for the average family where Obama said premiums would go down by $2,500 year goes into effect? Because my premium went UP by $2,500 so it would be nice if it went down now by $5,000 so my average American middle class family receives what we were promised. I doubt it because someone has to pay for this. What makes the ACA sound good to so many is that people don't have to worry about pre-existing conditions anymore and many are eligible for a subsidy. But for an increasing number of people, health care costs are rising, insurance premiums are rising, co-pays have doubled...while coverage benefits are decreasing. While there are those who are benefiting from the ACA, there's that many more who are finding that the ACA is costing them more. It's costing them more because they're not only paying for their insurance, they're subsidizing someone else's. But I'm not saying anything here that hasn't been said here and on the old board. I sometimes wonder how many people in this country really believe that the government has tons of money in its coffers just waiting to be spent in order to cure all the woes of life. The government has no money but what it has taken from its citizens through taxes. But how many people really care about that fact as long as the programs benefit them? The best answer for everyone is to find ways to lower costs rather than finding someone else to pay for it. Sooner or later, it becomes unsustainable. I first bitched about the ACA back in January, 2014 when we started paying the higher premiums and higher deductibles...we basically lost the plan that we had the month before...the plan we loved...the plan we wanted to keep. Back then, ACA had not yet had a negative impact on very many people...and I don't remember very many peas posting similar stories.
Times have changed. More and more people are being impacted in a negative way.
As more and more people begin paying more, getting less, and having to make huge changes to their family budget in order to have medical coverage, I think the numbers of people unhappy with the clusterfock that is the ACA are going to do nothing but rise.
Sure, there are always going to be people that will benefit and those people will continue to tell their story about how great it's been for their family.
If I had reduced costs and great care, I'd be sharing my story too.
Nothing is free. Someone is paying for it. More and more someones will be paying for it. Maybe even additional pea someones will be paying for it. It's not the government.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul. The shell game. Whatever you want to call it. It's not free.
|
|
|
Post by lindywholoveskids on Jun 26, 2015 12:02:23 GMT
I am so happy. now maybe this issue can be put to rest.
|
|