prescription drugs

[Alan L.]

Scruffy the fact remains that you did manage to pay the $800 and provide health insurance coverage to your family. You didn't drink, smoke, or snort it up. When I see people that choose not to have medical insurance, saying that the government should give it to them while they go down and spend their money on booze and cigarettes, I think they loose much credibility. I wish there was a solution, but the majority of the ones doing without could have medical insurance if they could get their priorities straight.

Alan L., TX

 

[Wingnut]

Al
not all organ receipents are old or rich

that wasn't really my point ... more along the lines of
a) death is inevitable
b) putting it off is very expensive ... not necissarily to the rich ... my taxes pay for it too
c) I ahppen to believe ... now ... that it's unethical

my views have changed 180 degrees from where they were when I was young ... mainly because now I'm older and (supposedly) wiser and much more experienced ... and because I spent 2 years watching an incredibly sick wife put up with the doctor's "heroic" efforts to keep her going (and in constant pain) ... while she tried several times to spare me and others from having to continue dealing with it ... after one unsuccessful attempt to end it ... the authorities even arrested her!
I have a completely different perspective on life now ...

too bad that common sense ain't

 

[ERNIEB]

Scruffy, Yes, but. What about employers who just don't want to offer their employees insurance. What about employers with only one or two employees? And, as AlanL points out, what about those who dont want to work, or who would rather spend thier money on beer and cigarettes?
So now in the land of the free, we will make employers provide health insurance. Make people work, and include their families on their insurance. Finally, we will have them show proof of health insurance before they can buy alcohol or tobacco.
OK, but what about the insane, who could care less about what laws are passed, and runaways, throw away children, and so on.
What we really get down to is National health insurance. Since we taxpayers are going to have to fund it, why not take one more step and go to socialized medicine?

Ernie

 

[scruffy]

Ernie, don't quote me on this, but I believe the laws currently mandate employers to provide insurance for employees if they have more than 5 employees. Those that have less currently are not required to provide benefits. My thought and personal opinion only, is that through co-ops (have dealt with them before) even a self employed person can wheel and deal on much better rates simply by joining and creating a 'block' of buyers.
I am not advocating a National Insurance per se, but rather a coalition of buyers strengthening their bargaining position.
I have gone the self insured route, as well as the insured route, but I must admit, the self insured route can sink you in a hurry when it comes to catastrophic illnesses.

 

[utahmule]

I am enjoying a good quality of life today only because of an expensive, new drug. Enbrel, a designer drug for Rheumatoid Arthritis, is the only thing that stopped crippling damage. Anything that would hamper development of other "wonder drugs" for all the other awful diseases is not good.

 

[ERNIEB]

Scruffy, I'm self employed, but I'm lucky that I get pretty good coverage thru my wife's employer, the kids too. The coalition idea would seem to be the most reasonable. I just think their is always going to be a group of "have nots" that the "haves" are going to have to foot the bill for. Either by taxes, or by paying $10.00 for an asprin while in the hospital.
Just as a note, my mother is on secure horizons, and pays out of pocket $68.00/month for her meds. It is easily within her budget, but I'm sure she would rather spend it on Bingo or scratch-off tickets/w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

Ernie

 

[scruffy]

The last time I checked the price of tylenol when I was in the hospital, it was @$15.00 per. Unreasonable price to be sure. I understand their price structure, but it sure don't make it easier to swallow! When the medical profession bills my insurance for various treatment, i.e. one chemo-therapy treatment bill will be in excess of 15 grand, but the negotiated amount falls in around 9 grand. It seems to be billed at an exorbitant rate, so that the negotiated rate is more feasible to all. When I was doing the self insured rate, there was no negotiated rate at all, it was simply pay it or be sued....not good. Seems the rate should be set at firm figure for all.

 

[GlueGuy]

Hospital cost structures are a difficult subject. My cousin is a doctor, and is having a real hard time with the latest HMO shenanigans. I suppose the $15 tylenol would be easier to swallow if they charged a 50% markup for it, and added the appropriate amount for the "support services". Fact is that hospitals are expensive. Good news is that we spend (on average) a lot less time in them than we used to.

When my Dad was sick, the $1000/month medications was with his insurance. If he hadn't had insurance it would have bankrupt him within a year.

The GlueGuy