A painless Way to Cut 40 Billion From the Deficit

[Flopper]

Medicare Part D now cost the taxpayers over 50 billion dollars a year. Costs will soon rise to over 60 billion. This program could be changed to save taxpayers over 40 billion a year and allow seniors to get prescription drugs cheaper than what they are paying under Part D.

Prescription Drugs from Canada can be purchased at 1/3 to 1/5 the US cost. I have checked the cost of buying drugs through Canada in lieu of using Part D for my wife, my brother, and myself. We would each save $300 to $800 per year by canceling Part D and just buy through Canada.

There are several reasons why Part D plans costs are so high. Although Medicare pays for the drugs, private insurance companies manage the plans. The insurance companies collect a premium from seniors and take no risk since Medicare pays for the drugs. Medicare does not negotiate any prices for the drugs so prices are retail price, which are more than what most people pay at their local pharmacy. Unless the insurance company negotiates a lower price, the plan is paying top dollar for the drugs. In addition seniors pay a premium to the insurance company plus a deductible and a co-pay for each prescription. Once drug costs reach about $2700 in a year, seniors pay the full cost until their out pocket reaches about $3500.

By changing Part D to eliminate all but catastrophic coverage, which has about a $6,000 deducible and allowing seniors to purchase drugs through Canada everybody wins. Well not quite. The losers are? You guessed it, insurance companies and drug companies.

There is no bill in Congress to make these changes because the drug and insurance lobby will not allow it. They have the votes to block any attempt to cut off this gravy train.

Currently lobbyist for the drug companies are working Congress and the administration to stop all Americans from buying drugs through Canada and other countries which will add billions more to their revenues.

 

[Polk]

It wouldn't save as much money, but we could negotiate prices instead.

 

[Oddball]

Polishing a turd.

Let's get the feds out of the medical care bidness altogether and really bank the savings.

 

[Dot Com]

Thanks Republicans
Medicare Part D - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Former Congressman Billy Tauzin, R-La., who steered the bill through the House, retired soon after and took a $2 million a year job as president of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the main industry lobbying group. Medicare boss Thomas Scully, who threatened to fire Medicare Chief Actuary Richard Foster if he reported how much the bill would actually cost, was negotiating for a new job as a pharmaceutical lobbyist as the bill was working through Congress.[26][27] A total of 14 congressional aides quit their jobs to work for the drug and medical lobbies immediately after the bill's passage.

 

[Susan45]

Medicare Part D now cost the taxpayers over 50 billion dollars a year. Costs will soon rise to over 60 billion. This program could be changed to save taxpayers over 40 billion a year and allow seniors to get prescription drugs cheaper than what they are paying under Part D.

Prescription Drugs from Canada can be purchased at 1/3 to 1/5 the US cost. I have checked the cost of buying drugs through Canada in lieu of using Part D for my wife, my brother, and myself. We would each save $300 to $800 per year by canceling Part D and just buy through Canada.

There are several reasons why Part D plans costs are so high. Although Medicare pays for the drugs, private insurance companies manage the plans. The insurance companies collect a premium from seniors and take no risk since Medicare pays for the drugs. Medicare does not negotiate any prices for the drugs so prices are retail price, which are more than what most people pay at their local pharmacy. Unless the insurance company negotiates a lower price, the plan is paying top dollar for the drugs. In addition seniors pay a premium to the insurance company plus a deductible and a co-pay for each prescription. Once drug costs reach about $2700 in a year, seniors pay the full cost until their out pocket reaches about $3500.

By changing Part D to eliminate all but catastrophic coverage, which has about a $6,000 deducible and allowing seniors to purchase drugs through Canada everybody wins. Well not quite. The losers are? You guessed it, insurance companies and drug companies.

There is no bill in Congress to make these changes because the drug and insurance lobby will not allow it. They have the votes to block any attempt to cut off this gravy train.

Currently lobbyist for the drug companies are working Congress and the administration to stop all Americans from buying drugs through Canada and other countries which will add billions more to their revenues.

Excellent post. I have been buying all my meds from Canada for years now. I was so pissed off when they passed that damn drug bill, I refused to join up and looked for alternatives. It works just fine. Just recently I checked out some prices and at Cosco, which I found is among the cheapest, was almost twice as much as Canada.

The new healthcare bill is addressing this problem. Here is a tool that shows how and when the new rules and regs start. I think that some people are going to get back some of the money they lose in the donut hole.

Implementation Timeline - Kaiser Health Reform

Did you know that Bush said he would veto the drug bill if it allowed negotiations with the program and the drug companies? All I have to do is think about that and I get mad.

 

[Polk]

Polishing a turd.

Let's get the feds out of the medical care bidness altogether and really bank the savings.

I love the magical thinking on display around here.

 

[Oddball]

Occam's razor, pal.

 

[Polk]

Occam's razor, pal.

Occam's razor cuts against your argument.

 

[Antiderivative]

Here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/171937-gary-johnsons-advice-to-republicans.html

 

[auditor0007]

Medicare Part D now cost the taxpayers over 50 billion dollars a year. Costs will soon rise to over 60 billion. This program could be changed to save taxpayers over 40 billion a year and allow seniors to get prescription drugs cheaper than what they are paying under Part D.

Prescription Drugs from Canada can be purchased at 1/3 to 1/5 the US cost. I have checked the cost of buying drugs through Canada in lieu of using Part D for my wife, my brother, and myself. We would each save $300 to $800 per year by canceling Part D and just buy through Canada.

There are several reasons why Part D plans costs are so high. Although Medicare pays for the drugs, private insurance companies manage the plans. The insurance companies collect a premium from seniors and take no risk since Medicare pays for the drugs. Medicare does not negotiate any prices for the drugs so prices are retail price, which are more than what most people pay at their local pharmacy. Unless the insurance company negotiates a lower price, the plan is paying top dollar for the drugs. In addition seniors pay a premium to the insurance company plus a deductible and a co-pay for each prescription. Once drug costs reach about $2700 in a year, seniors pay the full cost until their out pocket reaches about $3500.

By changing Part D to eliminate all but catastrophic coverage, which has about a $6,000 deducible and allowing seniors to purchase drugs through Canada everybody wins. Well not quite. The losers are? You guessed it, insurance companies and drug companies.

There is no bill in Congress to make these changes because the drug and insurance lobby will not allow it. They have the votes to block any attempt to cut off this gravy train.

Currently lobbyist for the drug companies are working Congress and the administration to stop all Americans from buying drugs through Canada and other countries which will add billions more to their revenues.

The whole drug thing is a mess. We subsidize those in other countries who receive the same drugs at much lower prices. It's time to tell the drug companies that we will only pay what other countries pay. If they need to make more money, then they need to charge more in other countries rather than fleecing Americans for every penny of their profit.

I have no problem with the drug companies making money, but I do have a big problem with Americans subsidizing the rest of the world when it comes to those drugs and the companies that sell them.

 

[Oddball]

Occam's razor, pal.

Occam's razor cuts against your argument.

Wrong-o...Occam's razor doesn't need 2,500-page pieces of legislation to shake it out.

 

[Polk]

Occam's razor, pal.

Occam's razor cuts against your argument.

Wrong-o...Occam's razor doesn't need 2,500 page pieces of legislation to shake it out.

It takes a much more complex explanation to explain how moving toward a freer market in healthcare will reduce costs, when the most free market systems in existence also have the highest costs.

 

[Antiderivative]

It takes a much more complex explanation to explain how moving toward a freer market in healthcare will reduce costs, when the most free market systems in existence also have the highest costs.

Wrong. Our HC is heavily regulated, not a free market system.

As Ron Paul poignantly claims, HC is the only industry in which you need coverage for every day check-ups. This goes against the concept of insurance. Insurance is supposed to be for catastrophic claims, not routine check-ups.

The market is not working since government will not let it.

 

[Flopper]

The problem goes far deeper than just the Medicare Part D. Most of the drug company revenues in the US go to profits and research. The same exact drug that you pay a $100 for in the US, customers in other countries are paying $25 or $30. In effect, Americans are paying most of the research and developmental cost for new drugs plus most of the drug company profits. Thanks to drug company lobbyist and the FDA, the rest of the world enjoys low drug cost while we foot bill.

Nearly half of the prescription drugs you buy in the US are manufacture abroad. The only difference between the drug bought in the US and a foreign country is the box and the price.

 

[Polk]

It takes a much more complex explanation to explain how moving toward a freer market in healthcare will reduce costs, when the most free market systems in existence also have the highest costs.

Wrong. Our HC is heavily regulated, not a free market system.

As Ron Paul poignantly claims, HC is the only industry in which you need coverage for every day check-ups. This goes against the concept of insurance. Insurance is supposed to be for catastrophic claims, not routine check-ups.

The market is not working since government will not let it.

Did I say it's a completely free market at the moment? No. I noted that the national markets which are the most free are also the most expensive.

 

[Charles_Main]

Medicare Part D now cost the taxpayers over 50 billion dollars a year. Costs will soon rise to over 60 billion. This program could be changed to save taxpayers over 40 billion a year and allow seniors to get prescription drugs cheaper than what they are paying under Part D.

Prescription Drugs from Canada can be purchased at 1/3 to 1/5 the US cost. I have checked the cost of buying drugs through Canada in lieu of using Part D for my wife, my brother, and myself. We would each save $300 to $800 per year by canceling Part D and just buy through Canada.

There are several reasons why Part D plans costs are so high. Although Medicare pays for the drugs, private insurance companies manage the plans. The insurance companies collect a premium from seniors and take no risk since Medicare pays for the drugs. Medicare does not negotiate any prices for the drugs so prices are retail price, which are more than what most people pay at their local pharmacy. Unless the insurance company negotiates a lower price, the plan is paying top dollar for the drugs. In addition seniors pay a premium to the insurance company plus a deductible and a co-pay for each prescription. Once drug costs reach about $2700 in a year, seniors pay the full cost until their out pocket reaches about $3500.

By changing Part D to eliminate all but catastrophic coverage, which has about a $6,000 deducible and allowing seniors to purchase drugs through Canada everybody wins. Well not quite. The losers are? You guessed it, insurance companies and drug companies.

There is no bill in Congress to make these changes because the drug and insurance lobby will not allow it. They have the votes to block any attempt to cut off this gravy train.

Currently lobbyist for the drug companies are working Congress and the administration to stop all Americans from buying drugs through Canada and other countries which will add billions more to their revenues.

So possibly Driving American Drug Companies out of Business is what you call Painless?

 

[whitehall]

You tip your political hand when you say "there is no bill in congress". Democrats might be in the minority but they can still produce a bill. The truth of the matter is that the Medicare D issue promoted by the Soros's liberal propaganda machine is camouflage to take focus away from the real issue which is the 3,000 page monstrosity called Obamacare.

 

[Antiderivative]

It takes a much more complex explanation to explain how moving toward a freer market in healthcare will reduce costs, when the most free market systems in existence also have the highest costs.

Wrong. Our HC is heavily regulated, not a free market system.

As Ron Paul poignantly claims, HC is the only industry in which you need coverage for every day check-ups. This goes against the concept of insurance. Insurance is supposed to be for catastrophic claims, not routine check-ups.

The market is not working since government will not let it.

Did I say it's a completely free market at the moment? No. I noted that the national markets which are the most free are also the most expensive.

IOW, you agree with me while covering your behind with semantics.

Got it.

 

[Polk]

Wrong. Our HC is heavily regulated, not a free market system.

As Ron Paul poignantly claims, HC is the only industry in which you need coverage for every day check-ups. This goes against the concept of insurance. Insurance is supposed to be for catastrophic claims, not routine check-ups.

The market is not working since government will not let it.

Did I say it's a completely free market at the moment? No. I noted that the national markets which are the most free are also the most expensive.

IOW, you agree with me while covering your behind with semantics.

Got it.

It's not semantics. You're looking at the process as an on/off switch, which is faulty.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Thanks Republicans
Medicare Part D - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Former Congressman Billy Tauzin, R-La., who steered the bill through the House, retired soon after and took a $2 million a year job as president of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the main industry lobbying group. Medicare boss Thomas Scully, who threatened to fire Medicare Chief Actuary Richard Foster if he reported how much the bill would actually cost, was negotiating for a new job as a pharmaceutical lobbyist as the bill was working through Congress.[26][27] A total of 14 congressional aides quit their jobs to work for the drug and medical lobbies immediately after the bill's passage.

Republicans?


It was Obama's deal with Big Pharma which made it so we could not get lower priced meds from Canada:


Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In White House Deal With Big Pharma

It says the White House agreed to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government's leverage to bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada -- and also agreed not to pursue Medicare rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements.

Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In White House Deal With Big Pharma