It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Senate rejects low-cost drug imports

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 



I think this shows who the Senate really cares about......just a hint it's not the average American. They just care who gives the most money for reelection.




posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Yeah, but what you're buying into is the promise of cheap health care when you turn 65, supported by the nation's taxpayers.
A medicare buy in would allow you to get the same care plan at an earlier age. And everyone seems to think Medicare works well if you can figure it out and get yourself past the 'donut hole' elements of it.

But yeah I see your point.

Still anything beats the 1k+ I pay every month for health care.




[edit on 16-12-2009 by kenochs]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by kenochs
 


The "medicare buy-in" thing is a fun concept.

I mean, arent I "buying-in" every week? At least there's a number removed from my pay and claimed to be put into it.

To "buy-in" I'd have to pay more for something I'm already paying for and not using?

The other thing that gets me is that we are continually being warned that the baby boomers will wreck Social Security and Medicare once they start being of the right age, then we try to pass a law that lets the boomers access an already frail plan 10 years earlier. Doesn't make much sense to me financially.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
Doesn't make much sense to me financially.


Not unless the "buy-in" price is a million or so dollars. But if some 55 year-old can afford that he doesnt need to be "buying-in."

Yay gubbamint!



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


Well taking into consideration that most life savings from the hard working baby boomer's has gone with the economic woes, what else is there for the rest of us.

Well the poor still will be uninsured, the hard working will have to pay mandatory health care that they would not be able to afford it.

The elderly will have a cut in the benefits, but still will have to big pharma prices on medicines.

The baby boomers will have to depend on SS and hand me downs, they will move in with the children, hell the adult children are already living in with the parents, yeah America the land of the dream. . . .

Well it seems to me that the only ones winning out of the hoax that has become the health care bill is as usual corporate America

For whom is congress working this days?



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 





Well it seems to me that the only ones winning out of the hoax that has become the health care bill is as usual corporate America

Yes, Marg. that is the bottom line.
This bill is worse than NOI BILL. All it does is FORCE people to buy health insurance from the INSURANCE COMPANIES. They are laughing up their sleeves now. The Senators that voted against drug importation are traitors to the American public. I hope that people remember that, when they go to vote for their senators whenever they are up for re-election.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 

Marg,
We generally tend to disagree on things, but I think you hit it spot on.

Who does this bill help? Does it help me?
I'm not sure, I guess if my premiums fall a little bit, Congress will get to say it's a victory, but I'm not even sure that will happen.

What I see is mandated insurance, with no price controls, and no competition. That just ain't right.

This was the foundation of Obama's presidency (remember the wonky Hillary/Obama debates) and now it is looks to be going up in smoke.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   
When are people going to wake up?

Congress and Corporations do not have the public interest at heart. Heck they don't even have a heart. They don't care about you. When are people going to realize politicians are self serving? You cannot expect them to do something that will actually benefit you unless your interest just happen to lay in the same direction as theirs. Money and Power is all they care about, the welfare of humanity be damned!

edit: I saw this stuff a mile away. How? Easy. Just ask yourself what form would these new laws need to be in to benefit major corporations. Why? Because they are the ones who actually write these laws. Who do you think actually writes these 2500 pages? Nancy Pelosi? Barney Frank? Harry Reid? No these are the ones that the corporations buy off. The politicians are making money on insider trading and day dreaming of ever more power and control.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by 2 cents]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
BTW, if anyone is interested, go to the CSPAN coverage of the Senate right now. A republican senator requested that the Democrats abide by the Obama promise to submit a bill 72 hours in advance before voting on it. When the Democratic leader REFUSED, the Republican then asked, as is allowed by Senate rules, to READ THE ENTIRE 767 PAGES. Got to love it!



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 

hate to be snarky, but I don't gotta love it. Rome burns, they fiddle.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ch1ldofthe70s
Once again we get the shaft.


I wonder if we can sue them for allowing the continued rape of our wallets?


Simply remove yourself from the corporate U.S. Reclaim your strawman and set the record straight. NOTHING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES RELATES TO YOU AND ME. Man created government not to rule but to regulate, not RESTRICT. they can NOT tell us what we will do and what we will consume or where we get it.

Why the hell don't more people wake up.

spiritualeconomicsnow.net...



Read it and wake up already, the sooner we all stop this crap the better off we are. How hard is it to understand that.

Liberty requires responsibilty, that is why most men dread it!!!! George Bernard Shaw

Stop whining and do something about it!!!!!!!!!


[edit on 16-12-2009 by daddio]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   
I'm not for the whole healthcare bill in any way shape or form, but.. if they were actually smart about this all, they would push the public option very heavily, then more or less, with a captured audience, use them as collateral to leverage whatever price they want. so to speak "nexium, eh? tell you what, I'll give you $20 instead of $100, or we're not buying any and you get $0, deal?" That's generally how Walmart does it, and it works for them, why not make it work for us?



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by kenochs
 





hate to be snarky, but I don't gotta love it. Rome burns, they fiddle.

Actually, this is good for the American public. Very few people are happy with this bill, and Obama and the Democrats KNOW that if this bill is NOT approved before the Christmas break, then the Senate has to go home, and LISTEN to their constituents complain about it. They want this passed now, so that opposition is meaningless.
Don't consider this a fire, consider it water to put out the fire.

Obama lied and now must pay for that lie.
No one except the insurance, drug companies, and lobbyists really WANT THIS BILL, as it is. Even Howard Dean says to THROW it away and start over.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
wow, you'd think they want to cut costs/corners and go through with this.

/I've been getting medication in mexico for years since I lost my insurance



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by piddles
 





wow, you'd think they want to cut costs/corners and go through with this.

Yes, you would. Unfortunately, 48 Senators were in the pockets of the Drug companies to VOTE against this amendment. Corruption rules the US government system.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
This sort of decision to me is proof positive that all of us conspiracy nuts are not nuts at all.

Couldn't Obama get around this with signing satements if he so wanted?

It's a shame there are so many low information voters in the states. It's getting that bad over here in the UK. Everyone I've heard talk about Obama here thinks he's the second coming and they always always always say "...but he sorted out the healthcare situation so that everyone has healthcare..."



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by carewemust
 


I agree... First, sending thousands of troops to Afghanistan, and now this...?

What a disappointment!



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by spookfish
 





Couldn't Obama get around this with signing satements if he so wanted?

He certainly could. However, although he voted FOR it, when he was a US Senator, he is now AGAINST it.:
www.medpagetoday.com...

FDA Opposes Drug Reimportation Measure that Obama Once Supported




[edit on 16-12-2009 by ProfEmeritus]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
I'm officially disappointed and lost all hope for this country, OBAMA and all the thieves that run it! No matter who wins at the office, Drug makers and corporate lobbyists always win... We, the people lose! Garbage... Planning my retirement plan to Costa Rica



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by loveispeace
 

projects.publicintegrity.org...


Special Report
Drug Lobby Second to None
How the pharmaceutical industry gets its way in Washington

The pharmaceutical and health products industry has spent more than $800 million in federal lobbying and campaign donations at the federal and state levels in the past seven years, a Center for Public Integrity investigation has found. Its lobbying operation, on which it reports spending more than $675 million, is the biggest in the nation. No other industry has spent more money to sway public policy in that period. Its combined political outlays on lobbying and campaign contributions is topped only by the insurance industry.

The drug industry's huge investments in Washington—though meager compared to the profits they make—have paid off handsomely, resulting in a series of favorable laws on Capitol Hill and tens of billions of dollars in additional profits. [See What the Industry Got.] They have also fended off measures aimed at containing prices, like allowing importation of medicines from countries that cap prescription drug prices, which would have dented their profit margins. Pfizer, the world's largest drug company, made a profit of $11.3 billion last year, out of sales of $51 billion.

The industry's multi-faceted influence campaign has also led to a more industry-friendly regulatory policy at the Food and Drug Administration, the agency that approves its products for sale and most directly oversees drug makers. [See FDA: A Shell of its Former Self]
Top 20 global pharmaceutical corporations

Most of the industry's political spending paid for federal lobbying. Medicine makers hired about 3,000 lobbyists, more than a third of them former federal officials, to advance their interests before the House, the Senate, the FDA, the Department of Health and Human Services, and other executive branch offices.

In 2003 alone, the industry spent nearly $116 million lobbying the government. That was the year that Congress passed, and President George W. Bush signed, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, which created a taxpayer-funded prescription drug benefit for senior citizens.

That figure was not anomalous. In 2004, drug makers upped their reported expenditures on lobbyists to $123 million, a record amount for the industry. Of the 1,291 lobbyists who were listed that year as prepresenting pharmaceutical corporations and their trade groups, some 52 percent were former federal officials.

By adding the benefit to Medicare, the government program that provides health insurance to some 41 million people, the industry found a reliable purchaser for its products. Thanks to a provision in the law for which the industry lobbied, government programs like Medicare are barred from negotiating with companies for lower prices.

Critics charge that the prescription drug benefit will transfer wealth from taxpayers, who provide the funding for Medicare, to pharmaceutical firms. According to a study done in October 2003 by Boston University professors Alan Sager and Deborah Socolar, 61 percent of Medicare money spent on prescription drugs will become profit for drug companies. Drug-makers will receive $139 billion in increased profits over eight years, the study predicts. The Medicare prescription drug benefit starts in 2006.


The above says it all.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join