Can Any Rightwinger Give Me A Solid Argument Why Private Industry Instead Of Government Should Run..

[bripat9643]

This post ^^^ explains why you're an asshole and a bigot, not only is it a non sequitur, it is a failed effort to convince anyone but for your echo chamber pals, that you ever post anything honestly or of substance.

I post about screenings and you respond with a post about vaccinations and I'm guilty of writing a non sequitur?
Quit tryng to deflect from your obvious stupidity. It's failing and makes you look even dumber. Are you suffering from Alzheimers?

**** off Rabbi, some screenings are also very cost effective and can detect disease early, which ignored can be very expensive to treat if treatment is delayed.

My post had nothing to do with the types of screening your limited attention span can comprehend, since many such procedures are even controversial among medical professionals. But some are common and not the least bit controversial and do save lives, money and are less intrusive to the patient. For example, finding diabetes early prevents amputations by educating the patient on proper nutrition and excercise while providing medical tools to aid in the the control of blood sugar.

Is Rabbi really as stupid as he presents, or is he simply willfully ignorant because he is desperate for attention and a parrot of right wing propaganda?

Defkecting from your own deflection to cover your stupidity by repeating baseless allegations and unsupported statements.
Just how stupid are you, again?

My "baseless allegations" are spot on as true, aided by probative evidence provided by you each time you post. Now, **** off and grow up.

Yawn. You've got nothing. Absolutely zero. I think maybe your Billy000's sock you're so ******* stupid.

I doubt that. Rdean is the only one in this forum dumber than Wry Catcher.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I post about screenings and you respond with a post about vaccinations and I'm guilty of writing a non sequitur?
Quit tryng to deflect from your obvious stupidity. It's failing and makes you look even dumber. Are you suffering from Alzheimers?

**** off Rabbi, some screenings are also very cost effective and can detect disease early, which ignored can be very expensive to treat if treatment is delayed.

My post had nothing to do with the types of screening your limited attention span can comprehend, since many such procedures are even controversial among medical professionals. But some are common and not the least bit controversial and do save lives, money and are less intrusive to the patient. For example, finding diabetes early prevents amputations by educating the patient on proper nutrition and excercise while providing medical tools to aid in the the control of blood sugar.

Is Rabbi really as stupid as he presents, or is he simply willfully ignorant because he is desperate for attention and a parrot of right wing propaganda?

Defkecting from your own deflection to cover your stupidity by repeating baseless allegations and unsupported statements.
Just how stupid are you, again?

My "baseless allegations" are spot on as true, aided by probative evidence provided by you each time you post. Now, **** off and grow up.

Yawn. You've got nothing. Absolutely zero. I think maybe your Billy000's sock you're so ******* stupid.

I doubt that. Rdean is the only one in this forum dumber than Wry Catcher.

As expected, a loyal member of the echo chamber ^^^ offers nothing beyond support for an ad hominem, posted by one of his pals.

 

[bripat9643]

**** off Rabbi, some screenings are also very cost effective and can detect disease early, which ignored can be very expensive to treat if treatment is delayed.

My post had nothing to do with the types of screening your limited attention span can comprehend, since many such procedures are even controversial among medical professionals. But some are common and not the least bit controversial and do save lives, money and are less intrusive to the patient. For example, finding diabetes early prevents amputations by educating the patient on proper nutrition and excercise while providing medical tools to aid in the the control of blood sugar.

Is Rabbi really as stupid as he presents, or is he simply willfully ignorant because he is desperate for attention and a parrot of right wing propaganda?

Defkecting from your own deflection to cover your stupidity by repeating baseless allegations and unsupported statements.
Just how stupid are you, again?

My "baseless allegations" are spot on as true, aided by probative evidence provided by you each time you post. Now, **** off and grow up.

Yawn. You've got nothing. Absolutely zero. I think maybe your Billy000's sock you're so ******* stupid.

I doubt that. Rdean is the only one in this forum dumber than Wry Catcher.

As expected, a loyal member of the echo chamber ^^^ offers nothing beyond support for an ad hominem, posted by one of his pals.

I never pass up an opportunity to insult a numskull like you or rdean.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Defkecting from your own deflection to cover your stupidity by repeating baseless allegations and unsupported statements.
Just how stupid are you, again?

My "baseless allegations" are spot on as true, aided by probative evidence provided by you each time you post. Now, **** off and grow up.

Yawn. You've got nothing. Absolutely zero. I think maybe your Billy000's sock you're so ******* stupid.

I doubt that. Rdean is the only one in this forum dumber than Wry Catcher.

As expected, a loyal member of the echo chamber ^^^ offers nothing beyond support for an ad hominem, posted by one of his pals.

I never pass up an opportunity to insult a numskull like you or rdean.

I've noticed, I've also noticed that's all you contribute, well, other than right wing propaganda which you parrot from other sources.

That you're not too bright is an understatement, something easily understood by your support of the callous conservative agenda. Since you will ask, their agenda is Anarcho-Capitalism, at least those who are not supporting the Plutocrats (and they may be less bright than even you).

 

[The Rabbi]

**** off Rabbi, some screenings are also very cost effective and can detect disease early, which ignored can be very expensive to treat if treatment is delayed.

My post had nothing to do with the types of screening your limited attention span can comprehend, since many such procedures are even controversial among medical professionals. But some are common and not the least bit controversial and do save lives, money and are less intrusive to the patient. For example, finding diabetes early prevents amputations by educating the patient on proper nutrition and excercise while providing medical tools to aid in the the control of blood sugar.

Is Rabbi really as stupid as he presents, or is he simply willfully ignorant because he is desperate for attention and a parrot of right wing propaganda?

Defkecting from your own deflection to cover your stupidity by repeating baseless allegations and unsupported statements.
Just how stupid are you, again?

My "baseless allegations" are spot on as true, aided by probative evidence provided by you each time you post. Now, **** off and grow up.

Yawn. You've got nothing. Absolutely zero. I think maybe your Billy000's sock you're so ******* stupid.

I doubt that. Rdean is the only one in this forum dumber than Wry Catcher.

As expected, a loyal member of the echo chamber ^^^ offers nothing beyond support for an ad hominem, posted by one of his pals.

Awww butt hurt much?

 

[Andylusion]

"Founded in 1945, Kaiser Permanente is one of the nation’s largest not-for-profit health plans, serving approximately 9.5 million members, with headquarters in Oakland, Calif. It comprises": - See more at: Kaiser Permanente Share Fast Facts Fast Facts about Kaiser Permanente

Do you know the difference between a "for-profit" and a "not for profit", company? Forget the stated, ideologue difference... do you know what the practical functional, difference is?

Trick question. There is no difference. Not in practical functionality. The one structural difference, is that a not-for-profit company, can't have public shareholders. But beyond that, there is no real difference. Both have to have profit. Both have to sell goods, for a price, higher than their cost. Both have highly compensated executive staff.

Bernard J Tyson, CEO of Kaiser Permanente, collected $2.3 Million dollars in salary according to tax filings.

Seems rather familiar.

Econtalk, had an interview with the CEO of a non-profit hospital chain in the mid-west. The first thing the CEO said, was they have to make a 20% profit. It's not different than a for-profit company.

Again, the only structural difference is, non-profit companies can't have public shareholders. Meaning, that if they want to expand, they can't sell stock in the company, to raise capital, to expand. Instead, all the capital to expand, must come from the profits off of premium payers.

Not-for-profit, companies are not the socialist utopia that the left claims. Most are completely ignorant of how little difference there is.

Worse, Kaiser Permanente, is actually made up of dozens of separate 'for-profit' companies.

Gee, so it seems you equate KP with those hospitals who pay shareholders, thus are we to conclude my point was a distinction without a difference? Well, I don't.

KP isn't perfect, but it doesn't have death panels nor, given the post by boss, isn't "Marxist Socialism". Let's be clear, I used KP as an example, one which might work on an individual state level and even a national level - covering every citizen - but for the profit motive which governs health care in America
today.

That so many who post here equate pragmatic problem solving with Marxism is proof of at least two things: 1) the right wing is composed of parrots who have never thought panotically on this issue, and 2) greed and self serving individuals support & post the propaganda which inculcates parrots into voting against their own best interests.

A caveat to these points is a society which values universal (well most of us) voting rights needs to be informed and educated sufficiently to have a handle on issues as important as health care. I wonder how many know of and understand Chargemaster?

Only a very small mind, would assume that everyone who dares to disagree, must have been influenced by propaganda.

If that's really your view, then why bother posting on here, when automagically everyone who has a different view is brainwashed, thus a waste of your time to talk to?

Doesn't matter what you equate KP to, or not. The fact is, all hospitals have to make a profit, or they cease to exist. That's simply the reality of it, whether you agree with that, or not.

Nor does this have to do with KP being perfect. If there are people involved........... it's not perfect.

Further, your claims about others equating problem solving with Marxism, doesn't prove anything you say. If a system is Marxist in nature, then that's what it is. If I only eat vegetables, I am by definition, a vegetarian. For me to only eat vegetables, and then mindlessly claim that all those who accuse me of being a vegetarian, are really all just self serving, brainwashed, greed Vegan ideologues, is ridiculous.

Again, that's the realm of a very tiny mind.

The reality is, a system is Marxist, if it is based on a system that Marx pushed. The problem there, is that Marxism doesn't work, and never has.

That's why single payer, 'equality' based health care system are terrible. 3 year long waits for basic treatment. People placed on waiting lists, and then deleted. Low survival rates, and so on.

Chargemaster really wouldn't even be relevant, if we actually had a free-market Capitalists based system. Many of the problems in our society, are caused by government intervention, that prevents free-market solutions from happening. This is one of them.

In a pure free-market Capitalist system, where customers paid for services out of their pocket, all of those hidden fees would disappear. You have two hospitals, and both hospitals posts prices, because like anything else people buy, they want to know how much it is going to cost.

Well, if one hospital had a dozens hidden fees, and the other did not, it wouldn't be long before the one with the fees, started having a shortage of customers. The system would self correct.

But of course we have a system, promoted by our government, where the only real customer, is the employer who signs the contract for the business group insurance policy. Thus the patient walks into a hospital not knowing, or caring, what anything costs. Leaving it all to the insurance company.

The only other customer, is government itself through Medicare and Medicaid, which the patients equally don't care, and neither does government, because it's the tax payer that's screwed.

Only the uninsured like me, and those with private plans, actually take the time to consider prices and where they can find quality treatment at a cheaper price.... because we're paying for it.

In all of your words one very important fact is missing - the human element. Consider too, the costs of an epidemic in the US, or worse the pandemic nealy 100 years ago. Is the private sector prepared or even capable of taking on such an event.

No matter how diligent a person maybe, finding he cheapest treatement is not always possible, and in a completely free market doing so may lead one to a charlatan who kills them. A risk I wouldn't take for me or my family.

Preventative care isn't expensive, vaccines made for disease such as polio and other communicalbe diseases have a very high benefit to cost ratio. Catching disease - heart, cancer, diabetes, etc.) early is less expensive to treat and less impactful on the patient.

For profit and not for profit differ, both pay salaries and benefits to employees, both upgrade facilities and equipment, etc. but only one pays stock holders and, one must presume, sees the bottom line equally with services provided and more often frames policies by this metric.

Where I grew up we had a public sector health center a block away - I remember going there with lines of neighbors to get a sugar cube laced with medicine developed by Dr. Salk whose reasearch was founded by the H. of Rep. Committee on Scientific Research.

Today research such as that done by Salk is done with the advice and permission of lawyers to better protect the investment of stock holders and secure massive profits for future discoveries by patents. There is a place for both private sector and public sector participation in the world of health care, but profit can sometimes be evil, if evil is the conscious result when life saving medicine is sold at prices beyond the means of the patient.

The human element. Sounds like Atlas Shrugged. You should read that.

The private sector is more prepared than you think, but less prepared than you want.

By default, the private sector is reactive to prices, due to supply and demand. As demand for X product goes up, prices go up, thus causing more supply to be delivered.

After Katrina, areas without power had a high demand for ice, to keep their refrigerators cold. As a result, a group of guys rented a refrigerated truck, got some chain saws to cut fallen trees, and loaded the truck with ice, and sold the ice for $12 a bag.

Ironically, government does it's best to prevent the free-market private system from providing during emergency situations. After selling ice for a day, the police showed up, and said they were violating gouging laws, and as a result, the no one could get any ice anymore.

Similarly, a store in the Katrina zone, paid extra money to have gas power generators shipped in, and sold them at a loss. For doing this, the store was condemned, threatened, and the owner said he was never do anything like that again.

So the free-market capitalist system does respond to crisis, but is largely attacked for it.

Let's talk specifically about a health crisis for a second.

In this specific case, you are in fact, absolutely right. The private market has no ability to help in such cases...... because of government.

In the 1950s, when the Polo Vaccine was created and sold, cutting Polo rates by 90%, the R&D time from testing to retail, was merely 2 years.

The Polo vaccine was brought to market privately, sold and administered privately, and everyone made a profit, and the public was better off.

Today, Prevnar, the top vaccine given to children, required 14 years to get to market.

Additionally, in the 1950s, doctors paid a few dollars for each vaccine, and charged customers out of pocket, $10 to $15 for each.

Vanishing vaccinations Opinion The Register-Guard Eugene Oregon
Today, very few vaccines are paid for out of pocket. Instead, 60% of all vaccines are purchased through the government, which pays a fraction of the free-market price. Doctor reimbursements for vaccines are extremely low, from the government, and insurance companies. A Harvard survey showed reimbursements at between 40% to 100% of cost. None showed a profitable reimbursement. As a result 40% of doctors no longer offer vaccinations. No profit, no service. Welcome to the real world.

Equally, prices across the supply industry are extremely low, even while the cost of producing vaccines has drastically increased.

And that in turn has resulted in most companies leaving the market. No profit, no vaccines. The NNII reports from the massive shortages of 2006:
Vaccine Supply and Shortages - Immunization Issue

There is only a single US producer of MMR, PCV7, varicella vaccine and now TIV. (all the others left the market)

Two of the four influenza vaccine manufacturers during 2000 either withdrew from the market entirely or experienced substantial production delays leading to both a shortage in the supply of vaccine and problems distributing the vaccine equitably to all providers. (why would they leave the market if they could make a profit? Because they couldn't make a profit)

Problems in complying with industry manufacturing standards (called “current Good Manufacturing Practices” or cGMP)—which evolve over time—is not uncommonly a cause for vaccine to not reach the market, including the current influenza vaccine shortage. For example, failure to assure compliance with cGMP led to the problems with influenza vaccine supply in 2000, noted above. (government regulations and controls imposed on the manufacturers killed production)

In 2000 there were four manufacturers of inactivated influenza vaccine, one of whom left the market. There were two producers last year and there is but one this year. (4 manufactures down to 1)

So why are the government, and insurance companies, cutting preventative medicine?

Quite simply, because preventative care is a net negative. Not a positive.

As an individual, that may seem a good trade. $25 Vaccine, verse thousands of dollars if you get the illness not vaccinated. I get that.

But the problem is, to the government or an insurance company, it's not a net savings. To vaccinate 100 people, would cost more than treating the 10 individuals who might get the flu.

First, it doesn't make you illness proof. A portion of those vaccinated will still get the illness. But you are also shelling out thousands of dollars for people who never would have gotten the illness even without the vaccine. Nearly all vaccines cost more, than the cost of treating people who get sick.

Between the fact that government had drastically increased the cost of making vaccines, and the fact government has nearly eliminated profit from vaccines, the answer to your questions is no, the private sector can not possibly handle a real health crisis today. Not a chance.

Of course, neither can government. That's why every time there is a big flu outbreak, there are massive shortages of vaccines.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Founded in 1945, Kaiser Permanente is one of the nation’s largest not-for-profit health plans, serving approximately 9.5 million members, with headquarters in Oakland, Calif. It comprises": - See more at: Kaiser Permanente Share Fast Facts Fast Facts about Kaiser Permanente

Do you know the difference between a "for-profit" and a "not for profit", company? Forget the stated, ideologue difference... do you know what the practical functional, difference is?

Trick question. There is no difference. Not in practical functionality. The one structural difference, is that a not-for-profit company, can't have public shareholders. But beyond that, there is no real difference. Both have to have profit. Both have to sell goods, for a price, higher than their cost. Both have highly compensated executive staff.

Bernard J Tyson, CEO of Kaiser Permanente, collected $2.3 Million dollars in salary according to tax filings.

Seems rather familiar.

Econtalk, had an interview with the CEO of a non-profit hospital chain in the mid-west. The first thing the CEO said, was they have to make a 20% profit. It's not different than a for-profit company.

Again, the only structural difference is, non-profit companies can't have public shareholders. Meaning, that if they want to expand, they can't sell stock in the company, to raise capital, to expand. Instead, all the capital to expand, must come from the profits off of premium payers.

Not-for-profit, companies are not the socialist utopia that the left claims. Most are completely ignorant of how little difference there is.

Worse, Kaiser Permanente, is actually made up of dozens of separate 'for-profit' companies.

Gee, so it seems you equate KP with those hospitals who pay shareholders, thus are we to conclude my point was a distinction without a difference? Well, I don't.

KP isn't perfect, but it doesn't have death panels nor, given the post by boss, isn't "Marxist Socialism". Let's be clear, I used KP as an example, one which might work on an individual state level and even a national level - covering every citizen - but for the profit motive which governs health care in America
today.

That so many who post here equate pragmatic problem solving with Marxism is proof of at least two things: 1) the right wing is composed of parrots who have never thought panotically on this issue, and 2) greed and self serving individuals support & post the propaganda which inculcates parrots into voting against their own best interests.

A caveat to these points is a society which values universal (well most of us) voting rights needs to be informed and educated sufficiently to have a handle on issues as important as health care. I wonder how many know of and understand Chargemaster?

Only a very small mind, would assume that everyone who dares to disagree, must have been influenced by propaganda.

If that's really your view, then why bother posting on here, when automagically everyone who has a different view is brainwashed, thus a waste of your time to talk to?

Doesn't matter what you equate KP to, or not. The fact is, all hospitals have to make a profit, or they cease to exist. That's simply the reality of it, whether you agree with that, or not.

Nor does this have to do with KP being perfect. If there are people involved........... it's not perfect.

Further, your claims about others equating problem solving with Marxism, doesn't prove anything you say. If a system is Marxist in nature, then that's what it is. If I only eat vegetables, I am by definition, a vegetarian. For me to only eat vegetables, and then mindlessly claim that all those who accuse me of being a vegetarian, are really all just self serving, brainwashed, greed Vegan ideologues, is ridiculous.

Again, that's the realm of a very tiny mind.

The reality is, a system is Marxist, if it is based on a system that Marx pushed. The problem there, is that Marxism doesn't work, and never has.

That's why single payer, 'equality' based health care system are terrible. 3 year long waits for basic treatment. People placed on waiting lists, and then deleted. Low survival rates, and so on.

Chargemaster really wouldn't even be relevant, if we actually had a free-market Capitalists based system. Many of the problems in our society, are caused by government intervention, that prevents free-market solutions from happening. This is one of them.

In a pure free-market Capitalist system, where customers paid for services out of their pocket, all of those hidden fees would disappear. You have two hospitals, and both hospitals posts prices, because like anything else people buy, they want to know how much it is going to cost.

Well, if one hospital had a dozens hidden fees, and the other did not, it wouldn't be long before the one with the fees, started having a shortage of customers. The system would self correct.

But of course we have a system, promoted by our government, where the only real customer, is the employer who signs the contract for the business group insurance policy. Thus the patient walks into a hospital not knowing, or caring, what anything costs. Leaving it all to the insurance company.

The only other customer, is government itself through Medicare and Medicaid, which the patients equally don't care, and neither does government, because it's the tax payer that's screwed.

Only the uninsured like me, and those with private plans, actually take the time to consider prices and where they can find quality treatment at a cheaper price.... because we're paying for it.

In all of your words one very important fact is missing - the human element. Consider too, the costs of an epidemic in the US, or worse the pandemic nealy 100 years ago. Is the private sector prepared or even capable of taking on such an event.

No matter how diligent a person maybe, finding he cheapest treatement is not always possible, and in a completely free market doing so may lead one to a charlatan who kills them. A risk I wouldn't take for me or my family.

Preventative care isn't expensive, vaccines made for disease such as polio and other communicalbe diseases have a very high benefit to cost ratio. Catching disease - heart, cancer, diabetes, etc.) early is less expensive to treat and less impactful on the patient.

For profit and not for profit differ, both pay salaries and benefits to employees, both upgrade facilities and equipment, etc. but only one pays stock holders and, one must presume, sees the bottom line equally with services provided and more often frames policies by this metric.

Where I grew up we had a public sector health center a block away - I remember going there with lines of neighbors to get a sugar cube laced with medicine developed by Dr. Salk whose reasearch was founded by the H. of Rep. Committee on Scientific Research.

Today research such as that done by Salk is done with the advice and permission of lawyers to better protect the investment of stock holders and secure massive profits for future discoveries by patents. There is a place for both private sector and public sector participation in the world of health care, but profit can sometimes be evil, if evil is the conscious result when life saving medicine is sold at prices beyond the means of the patient.

The human element. Sounds like Atlas Shrugged. You should read that.

I did, I think when I was in the 8th grade. I also read Anthem and The Fountainhead around the same time. Some of her ideas were appealing to me at that age, but even at that age allowing a rapist to become a hero was offensive.

The private sector is more prepared than you think, but less prepared than you want.

Are you sure? Which or what private sector tracks the annual strains of flu, or is it only the Center for Disease Control?

By default, the private sector is reactive to prices, due to supply and demand. As demand for X product goes up, prices go up, thus causing more supply to be delivered.

The Private Sector is reactive to prices? Or is colusion at work and supply limited to increase the profits?

After Katrina, areas without power had a high demand for ice, to keep their refrigerators cold. As a result, a group of guys rented a refrigerated truck, got some chain saws to cut fallen trees, and loaded the truck with ice, and sold the ice for $12 a bag.

Gee, how nice of them.

Ironically, government does it's best to prevent the free-market private system from providing during emergency situations. After selling ice for a day, the police showed up, and said they were violating gouging laws, and as a result, the no one could get any ice anymore.

Gee, why do you believe "gouging laws" exist?

Similarly, a store in the Katrina zone, paid extra money to have gas power generators shipped in, and sold them at a loss. For doing this, the store was condemned, threatened, and the owner said he was never do anything like that again.

Really, have any evidence to prove this is a fact and not an urban legend, or a lie?

So the free-market capitalist system does respond to crisis, but is largely attacked for it.

Attacks are part of the current American ethos. Does the "free market capitalist system" need therapy?

Let's talk specifically about a health crisis for a second.

In this specific case, you are in fact, absolutely right. The private market has no ability to help in such cases...... because of government.

In the 1950s, when the Polo Vaccine was created and sold, cutting Polo rates by 90%, the R&D time from testing to retail, was merely 2 years.

The Polo vaccine was brought to market privately, sold and administered privately, and everyone made a profit, and the public was better off.

Better read the history of the polio vaccine; my family, school mates, neighbors and I all received the vaccine free at the health center in our neighborhood.

Today, Prevnar, the top vaccine given to children, required 14 years to get to market.

Yep, the lawyers want to make sure the vaccine is cost-effective (no suits) and that profits are protected (patents)

Additionally, in the 1950s, doctors paid a few dollars for each vaccine, and charged customers out of pocket, $10 to $15 for each.

Evidence?

Vanishing vaccinations Opinion The Register-Guard Eugene Oregon
Today, very few vaccines are paid for out of pocket. Instead, 60% of all vaccines are purchased through the government, which pays a fraction of the free-market price. Doctor reimbursements for vaccines are extremely low, from the government, and insurance companies. A Harvard survey showed reimbursements at between 40% to 100% of cost. None showed a profitable reimbursement. As a result 40% of doctors no longer offer vaccinations. No profit, no service. Welcome to the real world.

Equally, prices across the supply industry are extremely low, even while the cost of producing vaccines has drastically increased.

And that in turn has resulted in most companies leaving the market. No profit, no vaccines. The NNII reports from the massive shortages of 2006:
Vaccine Supply and Shortages - Immunization Issue

There is only a single US producer of MMR, PCV7, varicella vaccine and now TIV. (all the others left the market)

Two of the four influenza vaccine manufacturers during 2000 either withdrew from the market entirely or experienced substantial production delays leading to both a shortage in the supply of vaccine and problems distributing the vaccine equitably to all providers. (why would they leave the market if they could make a profit? Because they couldn't make a profit)

Problems in complying with industry manufacturing standards (called “current Good Manufacturing Practices” or cGMP)—which evolve over time—is not uncommonly a cause for vaccine to not reach the market, including the current influenza vaccine shortage. For example, failure to assure compliance with cGMP led to the problems with influenza vaccine supply in 2000, noted above. (government regulations and controls imposed on the manufacturers killed production)

In 2000 there were four manufacturers of inactivated influenza vaccine, one of whom left the market. There were two producers last year and there is but one this year. (4 manufactures down to 1)

So why are the government, and insurance companies, cutting preventative medicine?

Quite simply, because preventative care is a net negative. Not a positive.

As an individual, that may seem a good trade. $25 Vaccine, verse thousands of dollars if you get the illness not vaccinated. I get that.

But the problem is, to the government or an insurance company, it's not a net savings. To vaccinate 100 people, would cost more than treating the 10 individuals who might get the flu.

First, it doesn't make you illness proof. A portion of those vaccinated will still get the illness. But you are also shelling out thousands of dollars for people who never would have gotten the illness even without the vaccine. Nearly all vaccines cost more, than the cost of treating people who get sick.

Between the fact that government had drastically increased the cost of making vaccines, and the fact government has nearly eliminated profit from vaccines, the answer to your questions is no, the private sector can not possibly handle a real health crisis today. Not a chance.

Of course, neither can government. That's why every time there is a big flu outbreak, there are massive shortages of vaccines.

Posting more than three paragraphs is way byond the scope if one expects relevant comments. I'll respond above in Red, 'till I get board or dinner is served.

Dinner is served. Later

 

[Wry Catcher]

Do you know the difference between a "for-profit" and a "not for profit", company? Forget the stated, ideologue difference... do you know what the practical functional, difference is?

Trick question. There is no difference. Not in practical functionality. The one structural difference, is that a not-for-profit company, can't have public shareholders. But beyond that, there is no real difference. Both have to have profit. Both have to sell goods, for a price, higher than their cost. Both have highly compensated executive staff.

Bernard J Tyson, CEO of Kaiser Permanente, collected $2.3 Million dollars in salary according to tax filings.

Seems rather familiar.

Econtalk, had an interview with the CEO of a non-profit hospital chain in the mid-west. The first thing the CEO said, was they have to make a 20% profit. It's not different than a for-profit company.

Again, the only structural difference is, non-profit companies can't have public shareholders. Meaning, that if they want to expand, they can't sell stock in the company, to raise capital, to expand. Instead, all the capital to expand, must come from the profits off of premium payers.

Not-for-profit, companies are not the socialist utopia that the left claims. Most are completely ignorant of how little difference there is.

Worse, Kaiser Permanente, is actually made up of dozens of separate 'for-profit' companies.

Gee, so it seems you equate KP with those hospitals who pay shareholders, thus are we to conclude my point was a distinction without a difference? Well, I don't.

KP isn't perfect, but it doesn't have death panels nor, given the post by boss, isn't "Marxist Socialism". Let's be clear, I used KP as an example, one which might work on an individual state level and even a national level - covering every citizen - but for the profit motive which governs health care in America
today.

That so many who post here equate pragmatic problem solving with Marxism is proof of at least two things: 1) the right wing is composed of parrots who have never thought panotically on this issue, and 2) greed and self serving individuals support & post the propaganda which inculcates parrots into voting against their own best interests.

A caveat to these points is a society which values universal (well most of us) voting rights needs to be informed and educated sufficiently to have a handle on issues as important as health care. I wonder how many know of and understand Chargemaster?

Only a very small mind, would assume that everyone who dares to disagree, must have been influenced by propaganda.

If that's really your view, then why bother posting on here, when automagically everyone who has a different view is brainwashed, thus a waste of your time to talk to?

Doesn't matter what you equate KP to, or not. The fact is, all hospitals have to make a profit, or they cease to exist. That's simply the reality of it, whether you agree with that, or not.

Nor does this have to do with KP being perfect. If there are people involved........... it's not perfect.

Further, your claims about others equating problem solving with Marxism, doesn't prove anything you say. If a system is Marxist in nature, then that's what it is. If I only eat vegetables, I am by definition, a vegetarian. For me to only eat vegetables, and then mindlessly claim that all those who accuse me of being a vegetarian, are really all just self serving, brainwashed, greed Vegan ideologues, is ridiculous.

Again, that's the realm of a very tiny mind.

The reality is, a system is Marxist, if it is based on a system that Marx pushed. The problem there, is that Marxism doesn't work, and never has.

That's why single payer, 'equality' based health care system are terrible. 3 year long waits for basic treatment. People placed on waiting lists, and then deleted. Low survival rates, and so on.

Chargemaster really wouldn't even be relevant, if we actually had a free-market Capitalists based system. Many of the problems in our society, are caused by government intervention, that prevents free-market solutions from happening. This is one of them.

In a pure free-market Capitalist system, where customers paid for services out of their pocket, all of those hidden fees would disappear. You have two hospitals, and both hospitals posts prices, because like anything else people buy, they want to know how much it is going to cost.

Well, if one hospital had a dozens hidden fees, and the other did not, it wouldn't be long before the one with the fees, started having a shortage of customers. The system would self correct.

But of course we have a system, promoted by our government, where the only real customer, is the employer who signs the contract for the business group insurance policy. Thus the patient walks into a hospital not knowing, or caring, what anything costs. Leaving it all to the insurance company.

The only other customer, is government itself through Medicare and Medicaid, which the patients equally don't care, and neither does government, because it's the tax payer that's screwed.

Only the uninsured like me, and those with private plans, actually take the time to consider prices and where they can find quality treatment at a cheaper price.... because we're paying for it.

In all of your words one very important fact is missing - the human element. Consider too, the costs of an epidemic in the US, or worse the pandemic nealy 100 years ago. Is the private sector prepared or even capable of taking on such an event.

No matter how diligent a person maybe, finding he cheapest treatement is not always possible, and in a completely free market doing so may lead one to a charlatan who kills them. A risk I wouldn't take for me or my family.

Preventative care isn't expensive, vaccines made for disease such as polio and other communicalbe diseases have a very high benefit to cost ratio. Catching disease - heart, cancer, diabetes, etc.) early is less expensive to treat and less impactful on the patient.

For profit and not for profit differ, both pay salaries and benefits to employees, both upgrade facilities and equipment, etc. but only one pays stock holders and, one must presume, sees the bottom line equally with services provided and more often frames policies by this metric.

Where I grew up we had a public sector health center a block away - I remember going there with lines of neighbors to get a sugar cube laced with medicine developed by Dr. Salk whose reasearch was founded by the H. of Rep. Committee on Scientific Research.

Today research such as that done by Salk is done with the advice and permission of lawyers to better protect the investment of stock holders and secure massive profits for future discoveries by patents. There is a place for both private sector and public sector participation in the world of health care, but profit can sometimes be evil, if evil is the conscious result when life saving medicine is sold at prices beyond the means of the patient.

The human element. Sounds like Atlas Shrugged. You should read that.

I did, I think when I was in the 8th grade. I also read Anthem and The Fountainhead around the same time. Some of her ideas were appealing to me at that age, but even at that age allowing a rapist to become a hero was offensive.

The private sector is more prepared than you think, but less prepared than you want.

Are you sure? Which or what private sector tracks the annual strains of flu, or is it only the Center for Disease Control?

By default, the private sector is reactive to prices, due to supply and demand. As demand for X product goes up, prices go up, thus causing more supply to be delivered.

The Private Sector is reactive to prices? Or is colusion at work and supply limited to increase the profits?

After Katrina, areas without power had a high demand for ice, to keep their refrigerators cold. As a result, a group of guys rented a refrigerated truck, got some chain saws to cut fallen trees, and loaded the truck with ice, and sold the ice for $12 a bag.

Gee, how nice of them.

Ironically, government does it's best to prevent the free-market private system from providing during emergency situations. After selling ice for a day, the police showed up, and said they were violating gouging laws, and as a result, the no one could get any ice anymore.

Gee, why do you believe "gouging laws" exist?

Similarly, a store in the Katrina zone, paid extra money to have gas power generators shipped in, and sold them at a loss. For doing this, the store was condemned, threatened, and the owner said he was never do anything like that again.

Really, have any evidence to prove this is a fact and not an urban legend, or a lie?

So the free-market capitalist system does respond to crisis, but is largely attacked for it.

Attacks are part of the current American ethos. Does the "free market capitalist system" need therapy?

Let's talk specifically about a health crisis for a second.

In this specific case, you are in fact, absolutely right. The private market has no ability to help in such cases...... because of government.

In the 1950s, when the Polo Vaccine was created and sold, cutting Polo rates by 90%, the R&D time from testing to retail, was merely 2 years.

The Polo vaccine was brought to market privately, sold and administered privately, and everyone made a profit, and the public was better off.

Better read the history of the polio vaccine; my family, school mates, neighbors and I all received the vaccine free at the health center in our neighborhood.

Today, Prevnar, the top vaccine given to children, required 14 years to get to market.

Yep, the lawyers want to make sure the vaccine is cost-effective (no suits) and that profits are protected (patents)

Additionally, in the 1950s, doctors paid a few dollars for each vaccine, and charged customers out of pocket, $10 to $15 for each.

Evidence?

Vanishing vaccinations Opinion The Register-Guard Eugene Oregon
Today, very few vaccines are paid for out of pocket. Instead, 60% of all vaccines are purchased through the government, which pays a fraction of the free-market price. Doctor reimbursements for vaccines are extremely low, from the government, and insurance companies. A Harvard survey showed reimbursements at between 40% to 100% of cost. None showed a profitable reimbursement. As a result 40% of doctors no longer offer vaccinations. No profit, no service. Welcome to the real world.

Equally, prices across the supply industry are extremely low, even while the cost of producing vaccines has drastically increased.

And that in turn has resulted in most companies leaving the market. No profit, no vaccines. The NNII reports from the massive shortages of 2006:
Vaccine Supply and Shortages - Immunization Issue

There is only a single US producer of MMR, PCV7, varicella vaccine and now TIV. (all the others left the market)

Two of the four influenza vaccine manufacturers during 2000 either withdrew from the market entirely or experienced substantial production delays leading to both a shortage in the supply of vaccine and problems distributing the vaccine equitably to all providers. (why would they leave the market if they could make a profit? Because they couldn't make a profit)

Problems in complying with industry manufacturing standards (called “current Good Manufacturing Practices” or cGMP)—which evolve over time—is not uncommonly a cause for vaccine to not reach the market, including the current influenza vaccine shortage. For example, failure to assure compliance with cGMP led to the problems with influenza vaccine supply in 2000, noted above. (government regulations and controls imposed on the manufacturers killed production)

In 2000 there were four manufacturers of inactivated influenza vaccine, one of whom left the market. There were two producers last year and there is but one this year. (4 manufactures down to 1)

So why are the government, and insurance companies, cutting preventative medicine?

Quite simply, because preventative care is a net negative. Not a positive.

As an individual, that may seem a good trade. $25 Vaccine, verse thousands of dollars if you get the illness not vaccinated. I get that.

But the problem is, to the government or an insurance company, it's not a net savings. To vaccinate 100 people, would cost more than treating the 10 individuals who might get the flu.

First, it doesn't make you illness proof. A portion of those vaccinated will still get the illness. But you are also shelling out thousands of dollars for people who never would have gotten the illness even without the vaccine. Nearly all vaccines cost more, than the cost of treating people who get sick.

Between the fact that government had drastically increased the cost of making vaccines, and the fact government has nearly eliminated profit from vaccines, the answer to your questions is no, the private sector can not possibly handle a real health crisis today. Not a chance.

Of course, neither can government. That's why every time there is a big flu outbreak, there are massive shortages of vaccines.

Posting more than three paragraphs is way byond the scope if one expects relevant comments. I'll respond above in Red, 'till I get bored or dinner is served.

Dinner is served. Later

 

[Andylusion]

Do you know the difference between a "for-profit" and a "not for profit", company? Forget the stated, ideologue difference... do you know what the practical functional, difference is?

Trick question. There is no difference. Not in practical functionality. The one structural difference, is that a not-for-profit company, can't have public shareholders. But beyond that, there is no real difference. Both have to have profit. Both have to sell goods, for a price, higher than their cost. Both have highly compensated executive staff.

Bernard J Tyson, CEO of Kaiser Permanente, collected $2.3 Million dollars in salary according to tax filings.

Seems rather familiar.

Econtalk, had an interview with the CEO of a non-profit hospital chain in the mid-west. The first thing the CEO said, was they have to make a 20% profit. It's not different than a for-profit company.

Again, the only structural difference is, non-profit companies can't have public shareholders. Meaning, that if they want to expand, they can't sell stock in the company, to raise capital, to expand. Instead, all the capital to expand, must come from the profits off of premium payers.

Not-for-profit, companies are not the socialist utopia that the left claims. Most are completely ignorant of how little difference there is.

Worse, Kaiser Permanente, is actually made up of dozens of separate 'for-profit' companies.

Gee, so it seems you equate KP with those hospitals who pay shareholders, thus are we to conclude my point was a distinction without a difference? Well, I don't.

KP isn't perfect, but it doesn't have death panels nor, given the post by boss, isn't "Marxist Socialism". Let's be clear, I used KP as an example, one which might work on an individual state level and even a national level - covering every citizen - but for the profit motive which governs health care in America
today.

That so many who post here equate pragmatic problem solving with Marxism is proof of at least two things: 1) the right wing is composed of parrots who have never thought panotically on this issue, and 2) greed and self serving individuals support & post the propaganda which inculcates parrots into voting against their own best interests.

A caveat to these points is a society which values universal (well most of us) voting rights needs to be informed and educated sufficiently to have a handle on issues as important as health care. I wonder how many know of and understand Chargemaster?

Only a very small mind, would assume that everyone who dares to disagree, must have been influenced by propaganda.

If that's really your view, then why bother posting on here, when automagically everyone who has a different view is brainwashed, thus a waste of your time to talk to?

Doesn't matter what you equate KP to, or not. The fact is, all hospitals have to make a profit, or they cease to exist. That's simply the reality of it, whether you agree with that, or not.

Nor does this have to do with KP being perfect. If there are people involved........... it's not perfect.

Further, your claims about others equating problem solving with Marxism, doesn't prove anything you say. If a system is Marxist in nature, then that's what it is. If I only eat vegetables, I am by definition, a vegetarian. For me to only eat vegetables, and then mindlessly claim that all those who accuse me of being a vegetarian, are really all just self serving, brainwashed, greed Vegan ideologues, is ridiculous.

Again, that's the realm of a very tiny mind.

The reality is, a system is Marxist, if it is based on a system that Marx pushed. The problem there, is that Marxism doesn't work, and never has.

That's why single payer, 'equality' based health care system are terrible. 3 year long waits for basic treatment. People placed on waiting lists, and then deleted. Low survival rates, and so on.

Chargemaster really wouldn't even be relevant, if we actually had a free-market Capitalists based system. Many of the problems in our society, are caused by government intervention, that prevents free-market solutions from happening. This is one of them.

In a pure free-market Capitalist system, where customers paid for services out of their pocket, all of those hidden fees would disappear. You have two hospitals, and both hospitals posts prices, because like anything else people buy, they want to know how much it is going to cost.

Well, if one hospital had a dozens hidden fees, and the other did not, it wouldn't be long before the one with the fees, started having a shortage of customers. The system would self correct.

But of course we have a system, promoted by our government, where the only real customer, is the employer who signs the contract for the business group insurance policy. Thus the patient walks into a hospital not knowing, or caring, what anything costs. Leaving it all to the insurance company.

The only other customer, is government itself through Medicare and Medicaid, which the patients equally don't care, and neither does government, because it's the tax payer that's screwed.

Only the uninsured like me, and those with private plans, actually take the time to consider prices and where they can find quality treatment at a cheaper price.... because we're paying for it.

In all of your words one very important fact is missing - the human element. Consider too, the costs of an epidemic in the US, or worse the pandemic nealy 100 years ago. Is the private sector prepared or even capable of taking on such an event.

No matter how diligent a person maybe, finding he cheapest treatement is not always possible, and in a completely free market doing so may lead one to a charlatan who kills them. A risk I wouldn't take for me or my family.

Preventative care isn't expensive, vaccines made for disease such as polio and other communicalbe diseases have a very high benefit to cost ratio. Catching disease - heart, cancer, diabetes, etc.) early is less expensive to treat and less impactful on the patient.

For profit and not for profit differ, both pay salaries and benefits to employees, both upgrade facilities and equipment, etc. but only one pays stock holders and, one must presume, sees the bottom line equally with services provided and more often frames policies by this metric.

Where I grew up we had a public sector health center a block away - I remember going there with lines of neighbors to get a sugar cube laced with medicine developed by Dr. Salk whose reasearch was founded by the H. of Rep. Committee on Scientific Research.

Today research such as that done by Salk is done with the advice and permission of lawyers to better protect the investment of stock holders and secure massive profits for future discoveries by patents. There is a place for both private sector and public sector participation in the world of health care, but profit can sometimes be evil, if evil is the conscious result when life saving medicine is sold at prices beyond the means of the patient.

The human element. Sounds like Atlas Shrugged. You should read that.

I did, I think when I was in the 8th grade. I also read Anthem and The Fountainhead around the same time. Some of her ideas were appealing to me at that age, but even at that age allowing a rapist to become a hero was offensive.

The private sector is more prepared than you think, but less prepared than you want.

Are you sure? Which or what private sector tracks the annual strains of flu, or is it only the Center for Disease Control?

By default, the private sector is reactive to prices, due to supply and demand. As demand for X product goes up, prices go up, thus causing more supply to be delivered.

The Private Sector is reactive to prices? Or is colusion at work and supply limited to increase the profits?

After Katrina, areas without power had a high demand for ice, to keep their refrigerators cold. As a result, a group of guys rented a refrigerated truck, got some chain saws to cut fallen trees, and loaded the truck with ice, and sold the ice for $12 a bag.

Gee, how nice of them.

Ironically, government does it's best to prevent the free-market private system from providing during emergency situations. After selling ice for a day, the police showed up, and said they were violating gouging laws, and as a result, the no one could get any ice anymore.

Gee, why do you believe "gouging laws" exist?

Similarly, a store in the Katrina zone, paid extra money to have gas power generators shipped in, and sold them at a loss. For doing this, the store was condemned, threatened, and the owner said he was never do anything like that again.

Really, have any evidence to prove this is a fact and not an urban legend, or a lie?

So the free-market capitalist system does respond to crisis, but is largely attacked for it.

Attacks are part of the current American ethos. Does the "free market capitalist system" need therapy?

Let's talk specifically about a health crisis for a second.

In this specific case, you are in fact, absolutely right. The private market has no ability to help in such cases...... because of government.

In the 1950s, when the Polo Vaccine was created and sold, cutting Polo rates by 90%, the R&D time from testing to retail, was merely 2 years.

The Polo vaccine was brought to market privately, sold and administered privately, and everyone made a profit, and the public was better off.

Better read the history of the polio vaccine; my family, school mates, neighbors and I all received the vaccine free at the health center in our neighborhood.

Today, Prevnar, the top vaccine given to children, required 14 years to get to market.

Yep, the lawyers want to make sure the vaccine is cost-effective (no suits) and that profits are protected (patents)

Additionally, in the 1950s, doctors paid a few dollars for each vaccine, and charged customers out of pocket, $10 to $15 for each.

Evidence?

Vanishing vaccinations Opinion The Register-Guard Eugene Oregon
Today, very few vaccines are paid for out of pocket. Instead, 60% of all vaccines are purchased through the government, which pays a fraction of the free-market price. Doctor reimbursements for vaccines are extremely low, from the government, and insurance companies. A Harvard survey showed reimbursements at between 40% to 100% of cost. None showed a profitable reimbursement. As a result 40% of doctors no longer offer vaccinations. No profit, no service. Welcome to the real world.

Equally, prices across the supply industry are extremely low, even while the cost of producing vaccines has drastically increased.

And that in turn has resulted in most companies leaving the market. No profit, no vaccines. The NNII reports from the massive shortages of 2006:
Vaccine Supply and Shortages - Immunization Issue

There is only a single US producer of MMR, PCV7, varicella vaccine and now TIV. (all the others left the market)

Two of the four influenza vaccine manufacturers during 2000 either withdrew from the market entirely or experienced substantial production delays leading to both a shortage in the supply of vaccine and problems distributing the vaccine equitably to all providers. (why would they leave the market if they could make a profit? Because they couldn't make a profit)

Problems in complying with industry manufacturing standards (called “current Good Manufacturing Practices” or cGMP)—which evolve over time—is not uncommonly a cause for vaccine to not reach the market, including the current influenza vaccine shortage. For example, failure to assure compliance with cGMP led to the problems with influenza vaccine supply in 2000, noted above. (government regulations and controls imposed on the manufacturers killed production)

In 2000 there were four manufacturers of inactivated influenza vaccine, one of whom left the market. There were two producers last year and there is but one this year. (4 manufactures down to 1)

So why are the government, and insurance companies, cutting preventative medicine?

Quite simply, because preventative care is a net negative. Not a positive.

As an individual, that may seem a good trade. $25 Vaccine, verse thousands of dollars if you get the illness not vaccinated. I get that.

But the problem is, to the government or an insurance company, it's not a net savings. To vaccinate 100 people, would cost more than treating the 10 individuals who might get the flu.

First, it doesn't make you illness proof. A portion of those vaccinated will still get the illness. But you are also shelling out thousands of dollars for people who never would have gotten the illness even without the vaccine. Nearly all vaccines cost more, than the cost of treating people who get sick.

Between the fact that government had drastically increased the cost of making vaccines, and the fact government has nearly eliminated profit from vaccines, the answer to your questions is no, the private sector can not possibly handle a real health crisis today. Not a chance.

Of course, neither can government. That's why every time there is a big flu outbreak, there are massive shortages of vaccines.

Posting more than three paragraphs is way byond the scope if one expects relevant comments. I'll respond above in Red, 'till I get board or dinner is served.

Dinner is served. Later

I always go all out when I respond. An answer is either worth giving in full, or not at all.

Or is colusion at work and supply limited to increase the profits?

Collusion is largely impossible in a true free-market capitalist system. If any group creates a price floor, or cuts production, the result would be that it would automatically open the door for a new competitor who would easily undercut them.

The most obvious example is Delta, United, and American Airlines, which all raised their ticket prices in unison. It wasn't long before we started hearing about a small upstart company called Southwest Airlines. SW Air was at one point larger than United, and was about to over take Delta, when all the airlines started cutting their prices to compete with SW Air.

Again, the main actor in allowing collusion, was the government. Wright Amendment of 1979, was a Federal law governing traffic at a single airport terminal, namely Dallas Love Field, which just happen to be the Head quarters of.... Southwest Airlines. The law limited non-stop flights out of the state from Love Field, and the number of gates they could have.

Effectively this Federal law, governing a single airport in Texas, was designed to protect the collusion of the big airlines. Eventually, the law was amended to add states to which they could fly from Love Field, year by year, until this year, the law is nearly all repealed.

Who protected the collusion? Government.

Gee, how nice of them.
Gee, why do you believe "gouging laws" exist?

If the two men in the truck, with the ice, had instead stayed at home (as many people did), and at best donated blood to the Red Cross (as many people did), how would that have helped all those people stranded without any ice, and tons of spoiled food without anything to eat?

Of course it would not have helped at all. Yet you would have said that was a 'nice' thing to do.

Equally, which person is better off in the long run: The person who paid $12 for a bag of ice, and thus has food to eat, or the person protected from gouging, who has no ice, a fridge full of spoiled food, and nothing to eat?

Doesn't matter why there are 'gouging laws'. The results are, people are harmed. The people who beat the police to the guys with ice, had the benefit of getting ice. Those that didn't make it in time, and were "protected from gouging", went home without any ice.

Both of your statements are irrelevant. I'm not interested in intentions. I'm interested in results. Results of policies and positions you push, are bad.

Really, have any evidence to prove this is a fact and not an urban legend, or a lie?

It was Hurricane Fran in 1996. Not sure why I thought it was Katrina.

There are actually dozens of similar stores out of Katrina.

Michael Munger They Clapped Can Price-Gouging Laws Prohibit Scarcity Library of Economics and Liberty
Refers to the guys selling ice.

soundfiledesc
The audio clip is an hour long. At 33 Minutes he talks about the Home Depot which imported a bunch of power generators at 50% over cost, and selling them for only 30% over retail, thus losing money on each generator sold. The Home Depot was protested, and never bough another generator.

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Mississippi Has a Place for Heroes Jail

This story is from Katrina, in which a man purchased 19 generators, rented a U-haul, drove 600 miles to Mississippi, where he was met by police who sent him to jail, and confiscated the generators. Once again, saving people from having electricity from being 'gouged'.

Financial Tip of the Week Price Gouging

More about the guys selling ice.

There are actually numerous sources about the negative effects of gouging laws, and how they harm the public.

Better read the history of the polio vaccine; my family, school mates, neighbors and I all received the vaccine free at the health center in our neighborhood.

Individual health clinics, and doctors, can of course, choose to give out the vaccine for free. Even individual states can choose to purchase the vaccine, and give it away for free. But a state, or an individual doctor or institution, doesn't have the monopoly power of the Federal government, to force down prices, thus causing suppliers to leave the market, even while there are shortages constantly.

Flu vaccines run out in Edmonton Calgary clinics close - Edmonton - CBC News

In Jan of this year, clinics across Canada closed, with no Flu vaccine, in the middle of flu season.

In a free-market system, where prices float on supply and demand, more suppliers would be created, under the incentive of high prices for shortages of flu shots.

Under the government price controlled system in Canada, they only have one supplier, who has no incentive to create more, because prices don't rise. There's more danger that the flu season is light, and the vaccines go unsold. So naturally, better to produce less, and sell out.

Yep, the lawyers want to make sure the vaccine is cost-effective (no suits) and that profits are protected (patents)

First, let me say that I agree the patent system is insane. We need a drastic reform, which isn't likely to happen.

That said, of course the vaccine must be cost effective. If it is not cost effective, then you go out of business.... if you go out of business, there is no vaccine to be sold.

That doesn't mean it requires 14 years, to do that. The reason it takes so long, is because of the insane regulations on the industry that drags out the approval process.

 

[bripat9643]

My "baseless allegations" are spot on as true, aided by probative evidence provided by you each time you post. Now, **** off and grow up.

Yawn. You've got nothing. Absolutely zero. I think maybe your Billy000's sock you're so ******* stupid.

I doubt that. Rdean is the only one in this forum dumber than Wry Catcher.

As expected, a loyal member of the echo chamber ^^^ offers nothing beyond support for an ad hominem, posted by one of his pals.

I never pass up an opportunity to insult a numskull like you or rdean.

I've noticed, I've also noticed that's all you contribute, well, other than right wing propaganda which you parrot from other sources.

That you're not too bright is an understatement, something easily understood by your support of the callous conservative agenda. Since you will ask, their agenda is Anarcho-Capitalism, at least those who are not supporting the Plutocrats (and they may be less bright than even you).

People only laugh when you call them stupid. Everyone who reads your posts laughs at you.

 

[Andylusion]

Yawn. You've got nothing. Absolutely zero. I think maybe your Billy000's sock you're so ******* stupid.

I doubt that. Rdean is the only one in this forum dumber than Wry Catcher.

As expected, a loyal member of the echo chamber ^^^ offers nothing beyond support for an ad hominem, posted by one of his pals.

I never pass up an opportunity to insult a numskull like you or rdean.

I've noticed, I've also noticed that's all you contribute, well, other than right wing propaganda which you parrot from other sources.

That you're not too bright is an understatement, something easily understood by your support of the callous conservative agenda. Since you will ask, their agenda is Anarcho-Capitalism, at least those who are not supporting the Plutocrats (and they may be less bright than even you).

People only laugh when you call them stupid. Everyone who reads your posts laughs at you.

Actually, that's pretty much what I do. I usually have a good chuckle, and then determine if the amusing, but ignorant post, is worth my time responding to. Lately, most of Wry's posts fall under that system.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I doubt that. Rdean is the only one in this forum dumber than Wry Catcher.

As expected, a loyal member of the echo chamber ^^^ offers nothing beyond support for an ad hominem, posted by one of his pals.

I never pass up an opportunity to insult a numskull like you or rdean.

I've noticed, I've also noticed that's all you contribute, well, other than right wing propaganda which you parrot from other sources.

That you're not too bright is an understatement, something easily understood by your support of the callous conservative agenda. Since you will ask, their agenda is Anarcho-Capitalism, at least those who are not supporting the Plutocrats (and they may be less bright than even you).

People only laugh when you call them stupid. Everyone who reads your posts laughs at you.

Actually, that's pretty much what I do. I usually have a good chuckle, and then determine if the amusing, but ignorant post, is worth my time responding to. Lately, most of Wry's posts fall under that system.

I'm so glad you enjoy a good chuckle, and I'd recommend you not respond to my comments. Why? Because we have a totally different world view. You are focused on the things most important to you, and I'm focused on the greatest good for the greatest number of our citizens.

 

[bripat9643]

As expected, a loyal member of the echo chamber ^^^ offers nothing beyond support for an ad hominem, posted by one of his pals.

I never pass up an opportunity to insult a numskull like you or rdean.

I've noticed, I've also noticed that's all you contribute, well, other than right wing propaganda which you parrot from other sources.

That you're not too bright is an understatement, something easily understood by your support of the callous conservative agenda. Since you will ask, their agenda is Anarcho-Capitalism, at least those who are not supporting the Plutocrats (and they may be less bright than even you).

People only laugh when you call them stupid. Everyone who reads your posts laughs at you.

Actually, that's pretty much what I do. I usually have a good chuckle, and then determine if the amusing, but ignorant post, is worth my time responding to. Lately, most of Wry's posts fall under that system.

I'm so glad you enjoy a good chuckle, and I'd recommend you not respond to my comments. Why? Because we have a totally different world view. You are focused on the things most important to you, and I'm focused on the greatest good for the greatest number of our citizens.

Hmmm, no you aren't. You are focused on providing sustenance for parasites, the public interest be-damned.

 

[Chris]

When Taiwan–another country with a strong free-market economy–decided to create a new health care system in the mid-1990s, it studied every existing model. It too chose a model of universal access and universal insurance but decided against having several private insurers, as Switzerland and the U.S. do. Instead it created a single insurer, basically a version of Medicare. The result: universal access and high-quality care at stunningly low costs. Taiwan spends only 7% of its GDP on health care.

Health Insurance is for Everyone Fareed Zakaria

 

[Rotagilla]

population of taiwan- 23,373,515
population of switzerland- 8,000,000

population of the u.s. 330,000,000

Apples, oranges and watermelons.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I never pass up an opportunity to insult a numskull like you or rdean.

I've noticed, I've also noticed that's all you contribute, well, other than right wing propaganda which you parrot from other sources.

That you're not too bright is an understatement, something easily understood by your support of the callous conservative agenda. Since you will ask, their agenda is Anarcho-Capitalism, at least those who are not supporting the Plutocrats (and they may be less bright than even you).

People only laugh when you call them stupid. Everyone who reads your posts laughs at you.

Actually, that's pretty much what I do. I usually have a good chuckle, and then determine if the amusing, but ignorant post, is worth my time responding to. Lately, most of Wry's posts fall under that system.

I'm so glad you enjoy a good chuckle, and I'd recommend you not respond to my comments. Why? Because we have a totally different world view. You are focused on the things most important to you, and I'm focused on the greatest good for the greatest number of our citizens.

Hmmm, no you aren't. You are focused on providing sustenance for parasites, the public interest be-damned.

And you're filled with shit between the ears. Gee, it really is easy to channel you by posting nothing but an insult, why should I make the effort to prove a point to someone like you - a totally brainwashed jerk - when I simply need to respond by calling you a totally brainwashed jerk, a response which works fine.

I firmly believe you are a totally brainwashed jerk and the evidence strongly suggest you're a totally brainwashed jerk, for only a brainwashed jerk would post an avatar flipping off the world.

 

[Wry Catcher]

population of taiwan- 23,373,515
population of switzerland- 8,000,000

population of the u.s. 330,000,000

Apples, oranges and watermelons.

"Which are all fruits, edible and healthy. It seems that the larger the pool, the greater the savings, thus your brilliant and comprehensive response seems a bit faulty

 

[Listening]

As expected, a loyal member of the echo chamber ^^^ offers nothing beyond support for an ad hominem, posted by one of his pals.

I never pass up an opportunity to insult a numskull like you or rdean.

I've noticed, I've also noticed that's all you contribute, well, other than right wing propaganda which you parrot from other sources.

That you're not too bright is an understatement, something easily understood by your support of the callous conservative agenda. Since you will ask, their agenda is Anarcho-Capitalism, at least those who are not supporting the Plutocrats (and they may be less bright than even you).

People only laugh when you call them stupid. Everyone who reads your posts laughs at you.

Actually, that's pretty much what I do. I usually have a good chuckle, and then determine if the amusing, but ignorant post, is worth my time responding to. Lately, most of Wry's posts fall under that system.

I'm so glad you enjoy a good chuckle, and I'd recommend you not respond to my comments. Why? Because we have a totally different world view. You are focused on the things most important to you, and I'm focused on the greatest good for the greatest number of our citizens.

Ah, the humor in these statements.

First, who decides what the greatest good is ?

Second, "the greatest number of citizens" ? What does that mean ? That some will lose because of your choices ?

Third, why does anyone need you focused on the greatest good for them and not yourself ? I hope I am not on your list. I don't want jack didley squat from you.

Keep your good.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

BECAUSE GOVERNMENT ***** UP EVERYTHING THEY TOUCH.

/thread

 

[Boss]

Ah, the humor in these statements.

First, who decides what the greatest good is ?

Second, "the greatest number of citizens" ? What does that mean ? That some will lose because of your choices ?

Third, why does anyone need you focused on the greatest good for them and not yourself ? I hope I am not on your list. I don't want jack didley squat from you.

Keep your good.

You're wasting your time. The liberal believes with all his heart that Obamacare is the best thing for the most people. Like all liberal initiatives, they honestly believe they are helping people. Anyone who opposes them or calls their ideas into question is a parrot, a shill, a hack, or worse. Any fact which contradicts their meme is ignored.