Who's behind the attacks on a health care overhaul?

reply to post by TheAssociate

I know that Big Pharma is basically backing the Obama plan now, though I am puzzled as to why.

But all of your alternative sources have to do with the drug industry.

My question was about proof that the insurance companies are going to benefit from the bill in its present form. Maybe they're counting on the government option not passing, leaving the field to them?

reply to post by Sestias


When you think about the drug industry cutting a deal for lower priced drugs. It must mean they expect to be making more drugs.

To keep their profits steady: lower price = more product

It's the only way to keep their profit margins. Why would they be able to make more drugs.

One reason could be they know drugs will be given to manage illness instead of curing it.

That's one reason I can think of.

[edit on 18-8-2009 by Strictsum]

reply to post by Sestias


Never said all. Just said a the majority (over 50%). It's not a secret the GOP's highest vote tally comes from older people, while the Dems take the younger people.

TheAssociate

Thanks for the links.. I have been saying since the beginning that the Big Pharma nd Ins co's are behind this bill.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I know that Big Pharma is basically backing the Obama plan now, though I am puzzled as to why.

As of right now there are many ailments not covered by INS as pre-existing. Those people often don't get medication. The GOV only covers certain meds through Medicare to older people..

The Gov plan would basically make affordable to the general populace perscription drugs.. while it sounds great, yay, pills for all! .. The Gov would be paying a premium price.. the Pharma would see sales shoot through the roof and profits that will only be described as "obscene"..

INS companies support the plan because it's not SOCIALIZED MEDICINE.... It's FASCIST MEDICINE. The Health care is NOT free, it's an actual policy, with a premium, based on income. The INS companies would be charging the premium through a Government subsidized program. Basically 50 million people would be forced into a plan over night. Can you say "Kaching" .. while 50+ million will get government subsidized pills.

Are there benefits to the people? Oh ya, big benefits. Is there a huge loss for the people? A mega one actually.. most important being the National Debt, Taxes and government restrictions on health care practices, pricing etc..

As far as "Who's gunna pay for it?" .. Obama says anyone making $250k or more a year. That's maybe 12% of the working population. Probably less than that. The Middle class (making under 250k a year) is by far the largest tax provider. the Lower Class is by far the largest. How can the small minority afford the entire majority? They can't.. simple mathematics and economics say the tax plan doesn't work..

Besides.. remember when Bush said "Tax cuts for all" .. specifically the middle class? Who got the tax cuts? The rich did.

So you say you will tax the rich... who will get taxed?

The middle class will.

To sum it all up as far as presenting a bill that actually benefits us.. the Gov could do much, much, much, much better.. if they really cared anyways.

reply to post by Amarillowave

Health care costs are ALREADY about 19% of our GNP.

Health insurance policies ALREADY limit the amount and cost of care people receive.

Ability to pay ALREADY limits the cost and amount of care people receive.

True, under national health insurance reform, chiropractors and some alternative medicines would likely not be covered, or elective surgeries like breast augmentation or other non-essential services may have to be paid for out of pocket.

I'm not going to argue that there won't be some difficult choices made under government-sponsored health insurance--that would be disingenuous. But everyone I know who works for the federal government (including my parents) now is satisfied with their coverage. I would trust the fed as soon as I would Blue Cross for my health care expenses.

reply to post by Sestias


www.warwickonline.com... upport+care+reform&instance=home_news_2nd_left

Spokespersons for United Healthcare of New England and Blue Cross Blue Shield R.I. — the state’s two dominant health care providers—say the companies are in favor of health insurance reform that controls costs and improves the quality of care for their members.

Medici also said that health care reform needed to include incentives for doctors to integrate their electronic medical records. The company favors the so-called health information exchange, which would allow doctors and hospitals to communicate electronically, he said.

That's one reason for and example of their support. They favor the ability to legally invade their clients' privacy.

If health care reform wasn't supported by the big businesses who manipulate our legislative process, the proposal wouldn't even be on the table. These people run the show, and they can very easily make legislation appear to favor you over them, when in reality it's quite the opposite.


reply to post by Rockpuck

Thanks for the links.. I have been saying since the beginning that the Big Pharma nd Ins co's are behind this bill.

No problem at all, these people need to be exposed and people need to be made aware they're being played.


TA

[edit on 18-8-2009 by TheAssociate]

reply to post by Sestias


Employer based ins and Gov funded ins is entirely different. Even plans you get from the Federal Government are from private insurance.. the coverage is the same, you just pay less because the Gov has the purchasing power to make it dirt cheap.. The Company still get's kick backs, they are getting paid the full premium, no corporation will offer a service and take a loss on it.

What we need is REFORM .. not overhauling of anything.. punish the Pharma companies, punish the INS companies and start doing something that will help us. Giving us the "government option" which would royally screw over anyone not on a government plan won't be any different than the insurance we have now.. except the Gov will now decide what can and cannot be covered, which would be far more strict than private insurance..

Would you give up your blue cross to go on Medicaid? Course not.. so why would you accept this larger version of Medicaid???

PS Blue Cross /Anthem is a horrible example, they are the most corrupt of the insurance corporations, have the highest premiums and offer the worst coverage.. they are heavily subsidized by the Federal and State governments. When I was an Agent Anthem/ Blue Cross was an inside joke, because 100% of the time we could offer someone with a Anthem policy something for half the price and much better coverage.

This is a long article, but it's mandatory reading to fully understand the situation:

source

The Health Insurers Have Already Won

As the health reform fight shifts this month from a vacationing Washington to congressional districts and local airwaves around the country, much more of the battle than most people realize is already over. The likely victors are insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group (UNH), Aetna (AET), and WellPoint (WLP). The carriers have succeeded in redefining the terms of the reform debate to such a degree that no matter what specifics emerge in the voluminous bill Congress may send to President Obama this fall, the insurance industry will emerge more profitable. Health reform could come with a $1 trillion price tag over the next decade, and it may complicate matters for some large employers. But insurance CEOs ought to be smiling.

No matter what happens, the insurance companies win. You're not 'sticking it to the man' or 'winning one for the home team', you're being played by the insurance and drug companies.


TA

reply to post by TheAssociate

No matter what happens, the insurance companies win. You're not 'sticking it to the man' or 'winning one for the home team',

I disagree. Knocking down a bill which would add 1 trillion dollars to the US deficit, IS a victory for the American people.
This does not mean that health care reform will not happen, perhaps on the second go-round, a much better bill will be written, one which reigns in costs, while increasing enrollment.

reply to post by TheAssociate


According to the link you provided, Blue Cross et. al. didn't commit to any particular version of the health insurance reform bill, just said that reform was needed.

That seems very general and somewhat evasive.

They could withdraw their support at any time if they did not see a benefit in it.

Your entire post is hearsay. This does NOT qualify as Breaking News, or even news. This is the writers opinion. Read the article again, it backs up not one of the statements it presents with anything close to a fact. Nice opinion piece. Maybe I should do one for the Breaking News forum about how Liberals are conspiring to take our guns.

Oh wait.. That one is true..

Poor example I suppose.

Do some damned fact checking before posting links. Your link's content = full of holes.

[edit on 18-8-2009 by ppskylight]

reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Knocking down a bill which would add 1 trillion dollars to the US deficit, IS a victory for the American people.

Agreed. Didn't mean to imply that this bill getting shot down would be a bad thing for the American People. In retrospect I should have said "no matter which form of the bill passes, the insurance companies win."


TA

reply to post by Sestias


Blue doesn't need to support any specific bill (which they can't because there is about 6 of them floating around) because regardless of which bill passes, Blue Cross will get the majority of the US Contracts to bring on people to the Government Plan. They are the largest subsidized insurance company in America.

Any blending of Corporate / Government power = BAD. It's Fascism, plain and simple.

And the bill getting shot down doesn't = something good for the American people, because reform IS needed.. this bill however was a piece of Orwellian fascist garbage. America has tore it apart and threw it back in their faces "Nice try, try again"

Originally posted by Sestias
reply to post by marg6043

 

Obama has said he will only raise taxes on those making 250,000k a year and more. But I tend to agree with you. It's going to be a very expensive program no matter how it's funded and it may well end up taxing middle class Americans, as is Medicare at the present time.

The thing to do would be to tax corporations more but they have the means and the money to fight against it.

From my senator,
“”This program would be
funded, in part, by increasing income tax on the top 5% of earners,
establishing a tax on stock and bond transactions, and a progressive excise tax on self-employment and payroll income.”“

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Sestias

 

Any blending of Corporate / Government power = BAD. It's Fascism, plain and simple.

And the bill getting shot down doesn't = something good for the American people, because reform IS needed.. this bill however was a piece of Orwellian fascist garbage. America has tore it apart and threw it back in their faces "Nice try, try again"

This may surprise you but I agree with you there.

I originally wanted a single-payer plan, but was reluctantly willing to accept a public option on health insurance, even though IMO it's a very poor second. Anytime you get corporations into the mix -- like Medicare Part D and the insurance companies--you get greed and big profits for the corporations, while costs to the government remain high.

I agree that the U.S. can come up with a better plan than any of the versions currently being hashed out, but I fear that if SOMETHING is not passed on this go-around health care reform will be dead for many years to come. We won't have a second chance.

Originally posted by Sestias
reply to post by marg6043

 

Obama has said he will only raise taxes on those making 250,000k a year and more. But I tend to agree with you. It's going to be a very expensive program no matter how it's funded and it may well end up taxing middle class Americans, as is Medicare at the present time.

The thing to do would be to tax corporations more but they have the means and the money to fight against it.

Obama says a lot of things, I thought we would be out of Iraq? I thought unemployment wouldn't go into double digits. Read my lips, no new taxes.

P.S. I was against the "public option" or "single payer" before there was a protest, if I can get paid to have this opinion, then hook me up.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by yellowcard]

Originally posted by yellowcard

Obama says a lot of things, I thought we would be out of Iraq? I thought unemployment wouldn't go into double digits. Read my lips, no new taxes.

Obama didn't say unemployment wouldn't go into double digits. He has made it very clear that we won't be out of the woods yet for about two years, even with the stimulus packages and the fact that a worse depression than might have happened has been averted.

He also didn't say "Read my lips, no new taxes," George H.W. Bush said that.

Obama said he would raise taxes on those making $250,000 or more.

It's true that we are not yet out of Iraq, something he promised to do pronto during his campaign. I am assuming his military advisors have counseled him not to pull out too fast and leave Iraq in a civil war, as happened when we got out of Vietnam.

reply to post by Sestias


Medicare Part D is a PERFECT example of how good intentions turn into chaos. Of course.. it's run by the Social Security Administration, so it's not exactly a surprise..

Fact of the matter is this: To have a socialized medical system that has a chance in hell of working.. you have to outlaw Medical Health Insurance.. something that the US cannot and will not do. It's to much money, to many jobs, to big of an investor in US Debt.

Obama is trying to fix a major problem with two hands tied behind his back.

reply to post by TheAssociate

In retrospect I should have said "no matter which form of the bill passes, the insurance companies win."

Agreed. I don't see how that can lose, unless dems go through with their threat to go ahead with the public option, as is being reported in the news today.

If they do, and if they succeed, then I see a very real chance that it would result in violence in the street, not necessarily from the average American, but as a result of provocateurs led by the Insurance Industry. They would NEVER allow the public option to succeed, as it would INDEED mean the end of private insurance within a matter of years.

What people forget is that the Corporations CONTROL this country, and the economy, and I could EASILY see an assassination plot similar to what developed in the 1930's, when FDR pushed his socialist agenda too far. Only one General stood in the way of a takeover of the US government then.

It could happen again. I'm not sure that Obama is smart enough to understand who his REAL opponents are- it is not the middle class, but the wealthy corporations who would not hesitate to act, to save their own hides.

Obama's advisers think that they are clever, but in reality, they are amateurs who are so blinded by their liberalism, that they can't see the real threat.

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
If it ends up costing more than the current system, then that increased cost is a hidden tax, in itself, since it will have been government instituted.

The idea is that universal public option will be in competition with private insurers and participating providers, which would help keep costs in check.

Fee for service system for doctor visits must go and should be replaced with salary, like in some of the best clinics in the US.

Please join the discussion in the existing thread on this topic found here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Closed.