I think self-employed people are largely winners under the ACA, *especially* self-employed people with pre-existing conditions, big winners. Previously I had a hard time getting insurance because, get this, I had high cholesterol, then the policy I did get was in the crazy price range, so now I'm making out like a bandit with the ACA, and that's with zero subsidies. Pre-Obamacare we had one carrier in NH, Anthem, now we have 5 competing carriers. Anthem jacked my rates this year, so I said F-you to them, and went with a much lower cost plan from Harvard Pilgrim. Pre-Obamacare I sucked up the monopoly rate increases from Anthem for years with zero recourse, now I got options. The other thing I like about the ACA is the out of pocket limit of $6850 for the year. So if I sprout 8 tumors, get encephalitis, plus some zika, then my absolute worst case exposure is $6850. Damn I can live with that, my old policy had me on the hook for a lot more than that. I realize many are not benefiting as hoped, but it would be nice if congress could get off their ass and improve the ACA, keep what's working, and fix what doesn't such as drug costs which are getting out of hand.
How about getting rid of ACA all together? Being forced to have health insurance is unconstitutional. Don't have health insurance you get a fine(taxed). Don't pay fine- risk property confiscation or jail. It's really as simple as that.
Cant argue this. I'm glad to hear its worked out well for you...sincerely. I particularly agree with your last statement. The statement could be made that although many people under the ACA don't receive a direct subsidy per se, they are being subsidized nonetheless by wealthier Americans paying higher premiums. However, I understand the concept and the need for empathy, as well as a complete solution for total health care. Both sides of the aisle need to compromise and find an acceptable solution. Maybe regulate and cap Big Pharma and the insurance industries?
Pharma already IS THE MOST REGULATED industry on the Earth. It is THE REASON drugs are so expensive. Placing caps on either pricing or costs will lead to NO pharma at all. Their overhead is outrageous in the process of bringing new, life improving medications to the market. Which, incidentally, would then come to a halt. Are you satisfied with no new advancements?? Therein lies the problem for pharma and society. Then there is the argument of capitalism versus socialism in that pharma context. No easy solutions, kidde, sorry to say. As a former science guy within pharma, I can assure you, if pharma does NOT achieve double digit profits, they close their doors. Getting insurance companies OUT OF MEDICINE is the way to go.
I would respond that you think "intellectual property" is a myth because you never had a good idea, one that is able to make you wealthy. Your socialist way of thinking probably is due to your dependence on substance abuse. If it were not for patents and intellectual property. you would have been dead long ago, death by measles, smallpox, etc. As it is now, you will probably die by "terminal imbecility"!! hahahahahaha!!!!
This was supposed to be a satirical tread. Not a serious conversation about the ACA that was forced down our throats. Made my insurance triple in price and lessen in coverage. If it was for my employer stepping up and paying the difference. I would be paying the fine for not purchasing insurance at the end of the year. Also that in itself is a crock. I am being forced to pay for something. That is not a free market product. I am being forced to pay for something that I should have a choice of whether or not to have it. That's some BS
Wishing somebody to be dead is the supreme form of incompetence on you part, simply because you cannot deal with me. That means, then, you concede I am smarter than you. As for taxing ideas, nobody taxes them until they become an income producing product of one sort or another. If you have income you are probably paying Social Security taxes. So "thank you" for maintaining my pockets full of spending money while my wealth continues to grow, and yours continues to shrink. My generation is wayyyy smarter than yours apparently. And you need not worry about my grand daughter-- she will have a trust fund. Do you?? No, I din't think so..... bwahahahahaha!!! Now, go surfing. If you are in Hawaii still you live in a nice play to be for that. Stop whining and complaining about imbecilities. Grown men shouldn't cry......
The section of any company, pharma or otherwise, that is responsible for marketing, is, unfortunately, full of idiots. They did NOT go to school for science. My position has always been the guys in the science departments of pharma companies would do better at marketing than those with marketing degrees. Pharmas would then NOT be in the trouble they are in. MBA's are, without exception, morons. Overall, pharmas have kept most of us alive.
All I have to do is watch a commercial break on TV to know that Barry's statement about marketers has a kernel of truth.
True, but intelligence is not one of them!! lol As for pharmas....their marketers, whom you claim aren't morons, are the ones that made YOU feel pharmas told the world opiates are non addictive. That has LONG TERM NEGATIVE outcomes for the company, the products, and people. And you think they are not morons?? Common LR, YOU certainly are smarter than that!! Your very own statements hold a contradiction in kind!!
I guess I would defer to Barry on this subject but I never understood big pharma commercials on TV (especially the disclaimer part that makes it sound like you are going to die from taking the pill but it will stop your ____!). The reality is, that Pharma's real marketing occurs between the sales folks and the doctors. The patient is (in most cases) going to take whatever the Dr prescribes. To me, pharma waste a ton of money on TV ads.
No, they are devoid of morals, as you stated, but they are not smart having misguided the market with lies. You see, in the long run, they will be hurt in their careers. In addition, marketers in pharmas are NOT connected to commissions/bonus system directly tied to product sales. So they earned a salary, a good salary, yes, but not so good. And btw, marketers in pharm, rarely move on to other industries. The reason being other industries do not want them. And why?? Because they have been taught, in pharma, to NOT lie because they will get in big trouble with FDA enforcement, Congress, etc. So, once in pharma, other industries seeking great liars, refrain from hiring them. Same goes for sales groups. Strange, but true. I share this with you and all from the vantage point of 35 years of work experience with them.
I agree with you 100%. Going to TV, was, in my opinion, one of the greatest errors pharma ever made. It brought the attention of Congress and their now incessant hearings on pharma. They told Congress they are an easy target for elected officials to whip up re-election votes for them. Plainly stupid. And we tried to tell management exactly that in the early 90's, but they did not listen. Why? Because that time frame coincides with marketing departments assuming the reign of control, board rooms, CEOs....all marketing, whereas prior to early 90s.....MDs made the decisions. Business now felt they had to account to Wall Sttreet. For pharmaceutical companies, Good science is good business, NOT, good marketing.
This reminds me of a movie.... [video=youtube;hUMnR4SnECU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUMnR4SnECU[/video]
You're right it's not a free market product. If you have no insurance and you're having a heart attack do you just curl up and die? No, you call 911, and get your ass to the emergency room, where the hospital then spends a good 30K+ trying to save your ass. If you survive, and don't pay the bill, then bingo, we all end up paying for your sorry uninsured ass. If it were a true free market, then you would be denied all access to healthcare if you did not have health insurance or the immediate cash on hand to pay for it. But, thankfully (IMO) that's not how we roll here in the USA...at least not yet.
The problem lies right in the middle of this statement. $30k. The negotiated prices between insurers and facilities is the problem. ACA does not mitigate the problem...it made it worse. There are a couple of features that are positive but come on....the whole healthcare system is jacked. I'm still paying (supplementing or subsidizing the uninsured in your point), what's the difference. It's one step closer to single payer.....
