The-Republican-tax-bill-will-end-cancer-treatment-for-Medicare-patients

First off - THIS IS A SOCIAL ISSUE in the USA.

Medicare - that's any of us 65 or older....

If the Republican tax cuts bill becomes law, it will immediately trigger a $25 billion cut in Medicare.

That's because of mandatory spending cuts that will kick in as a result the tax bill’s $1.5 trillion increase to the deficit.

The last time this happened, that Medicare cuts were forced, wasn't that long ago. It was 2013. And as Sarah Kliff reminds us, what happened then was that cancer patients were turned away from clinics, because the clinics couldn't afford the expensive chemotherapy drugs they were administering without Medicare offsetting the c

There is more in the article :

www.dailykos.com...

Bitch about the source all you want - it's the sneekiness/backhandedness of this whole progress that's suspect. Who know what other 'joys' will be found in the evolving plan that they want to vote on before people can assess the consequences.

The only consequence of this bill that is apparent and with everyone in agreement is that the rich will get richer and the rest of us will be damned.

Where's the proof?

a reply to: FyreByrd


LOL, Daily Koz and the link they used was VOX!


Felt dirty clicking on it, but read the entire "Hit Piece" and all that they were going on was an unknown oncologist who had a scary meeting!

Do you have any meat to put on the barren bone, or should we just believe it???

a reply to: FyreByrd

The article says that this happened in 2013 at 1 Clinic that was already in financial distress. I think that article is grasping at straws.

Is that an anti-American anti-trump anti-republican publication?

Can somebody quickly report this thread as fraud and a hoax.? Hard to do on my cell phone.

Title catchy, article no matchy.

originally posted by: FyreByrd
First off - THIS IS A SOCIAL ISSUE in the USA.

Medicare - that's any of us 65 or older....

If the Republican tax cuts bill becomes law, it will immediately trigger a $25 billion cut in Medicare.

That's because of mandatory spending cuts that will kick in as a result the tax bill’s $1.5 trillion increase to the deficit.

The last time this happened, that Medicare cuts were forced, wasn't that long ago. It was 2013. And as Sarah Kliff reminds us, what happened then was that cancer patients were turned away from clinics, because the clinics couldn't afford the expensive chemotherapy drugs they were administering without Medicare offsetting the c

There is more in the article :

www.dailykos.com...

Bitch about the source all you want - it's the sneekiness/backhandedness of this whole progress that's suspect. Who know what other 'joys' will be found in the evolving plan that they want to vote on before people can assess the consequences.

The only consequence of this bill that is apparent and with everyone in agreement is that the rich will get richer and the rest of us will be damned.

A bigger question might be why do chemotherapy treatments that have been around for decades still cost an arm and a leg?

Link

WTH,all this bunch of BS again,where is any proof of this other then some liberal mindless rant,this place has taken a turn for the worse,deny ignorance my ass

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: FyreByrd
First off - THIS IS A SOCIAL ISSUE in the USA.

Medicare - that's any of us 65 or older....

If the Republican tax cuts bill becomes law, it will immediately trigger a $25 billion cut in Medicare.

That's because of mandatory spending cuts that will kick in as a result the tax bill’s $1.5 trillion increase to the deficit.

The last time this happened, that Medicare cuts were forced, wasn't that long ago. It was 2013. And as Sarah Kliff reminds us, what happened then was that cancer patients were turned away from clinics, because the clinics couldn't afford the expensive chemotherapy drugs they were administering without Medicare offsetting the c

There is more in the article :

www.dailykos.com...

Bitch about the source all you want - it's the sneekiness/backhandedness of this whole progress that's suspect. Who know what other 'joys' will be found in the evolving plan that they want to vote on before people can assess the consequences.

The only consequence of this bill that is apparent and with everyone in agreement is that the rich will get richer and the rest of us will be damned.

A bigger question might be why do chemotherapy treatments that have been around for decades still cost an arm and a leg?

Link

Much better question.

But we all know it's how they pay for those new hospital wings.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Wow lol, you are pretty gullible if you believe your own OP.

a reply to: FyreByrd

If this is true. This is Republican Seppuku.

The largest voting block in this country are seniors.

Taking anything away from them will likely result in some serious turn over in Congress.

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: FyreByrd

Wow lol, you are pretty gullible if you believe your own OP.

Why do you think she ran away after posting it.

a reply to: FyreByrd

What did you expect from a republican congress with a clueless, greedy dunce as president.

...Expect destruction and more of it!

a reply to: pavil

Why would a bronchodilater thats been around for decades, and only cost $5 to fill in 2005, cost $140 today?

We have a nation of asthmatics who can't even afford to breathe. All because the government thought the HFCF's in an inhaler puff would destroy the ozone layer, forced a reformulation of delivery, then allowed those psychopathic asshole to repatent it as well.

Thank GOD for government regulation

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: FyreByrd

Wow lol, you are pretty gullible if you believe your own OP.

Why do you think she ran away after posting it.

Even though only a cynical fool would believe this thread, I still reported it and the member to ats management.

a reply to: FyreByrd

If this happened to be true (surely not) it would certainly bring new meaning to the term "Death Panel" wouldn't it?

Anyway, I think when you have a catastrophic illness, the costs are picked up by Medicaid. I think. The thing with that is once you are diagnosed, they make you wait for two years to be approved. Many people have died by that amount of time.

The last time this happened, there wasn't so much abuse of the medical payments. Old people must be informed that when they are old, often the negative effects of chemo wind up ending their lives. I know so many people who were healthy and had cancer, they started treatment and only lived for three months and their quality of life took a dump. I know one woman who is having that done now, she is over seventy, now she can't remember anything or dress herself, she is being checked into a nursing home after a few days in the hospital and the outcome is very poor. If she would have not had the chemo, she would have had another three or four months to enjoy life and then she would just go to sleep and die. She has a slow progressing brain cancer, she may have even had six months. she was not experiencing anything other than a few headaches, it is inoperable and either way she would not live more than six months, something her brother and his wife were told after the treatment led to her cognitive decline and bad side effects with balance. She is a friend of my wife's, they did all sorts of stuff together, involved in stuff like the library and volunteering at the theater. That particular kind of cancer is often tied to eating foods with glyphosate and pesticides used. I have that problem, the enzyme to break them down in my body does not work correctly. My father died of brain cancer. I cut down my exposure to these pesticides and herbicides of that class, and also triclosan can increase my chance of getting it.

In the UK, the doctors discuss the probable outcome with patients before starting treatment, especially with older people. We should do that here.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Where's the proof?

Coming from the least fact-based person on the internet.

a reply to: Willtell

I would expect them to appoint and confirm conservative judges. Hmm, they did.

originally posted by: jtma508

originally posted by: xuenchen
Where's the proof?

Coming from the least fact-based person on the internet.

Ain't the Mud Pit now is it?

I could say the same about you, but I won't. The fact is there are no facts in this OP to back anything in it up! Care to prove me wrong?