Obamacare

[(SWGO)DesertEagle]

Exactly, Obamacare solves the wrong problem. The reason health insurance is so expensive is because healthcare is so expensive.

We don't need enforced insurance, we need cheaper healthcare.

Taxing medical devices and drug imports works against that.

Stop this nonsense with generic drugs taking years and years to come out and then deals being cut so they are really expensive. Stop these ridiculous malpractice suits that make people not want to become doctors (trust me, I knew a lot of pre-med students who were going to become PA's or nurses because being a doctor is really reall expensive. We are going to have a major problem in about 5 years when all of the baby boomers need doctors and there are not enough of them).

The FDA needs to crack down on gouging and backroom deals.

If you must subsidize, subsidize medical device development, don't tax it. Shake up the patent law so the big companies actually have to compete with other companies and INNOVATE. Don't lock up information in expensive journals when it was produced with taxpayer money, make it available to everyone FROM DAY 1.

These are some solutions I would offer.

Insurance is not going to get cheaper just because the government wants it to, it will be forced to go up as medical expenses skyrocket.

Oh, a side note: So many people have had their plans cancelled, and this is only for individual plans. I would think more people have plans through their employers. What happens when the mandate goes into effect for employers? I will answer that question: you think a lot of plans were cancelled now, wait 1 year and see what happens.

[Duel of Fates]

1 year? After the 2014 elections? What a coincidence.

[CommanderOtto]

If you must subsidize, subsidize medical device development, don't tax it. Shake up the patent law so the big companies actually have to compete with other companies and INNOVATE. Don't lock up information in expensive journals when it was produced with taxpayer money, make it available to everyone FROM DAY 1.

Eagle, I don't know man. Although I liked Dread's idea of adding "rate of return" ceilings just like the government does today with other delicate industries, I don't think that changing patent law would be a good idea. Patent law was made to create a "legal monopoly" so that you could benefit from your inventions. And the fact that those medical devices are expensive here in the U.S is not because it is brand new... but because the nature of all the healthcare industry in the U.S is expensive. As I said before, the companies that make medical devices in the U.S are selling those way cheaper in other countries (the same inventions that cost thousands of dollars here). It's not the patent law or the fact that they are new... the problem is bigger than that. That's why the taxing of those devices will at least let the government get some cash. I feel that parties have made this into an issue that is not even worth the trouble. All companies and products should pay some form of tax.

[(SWGO)DesertEagle]

If you must subsidize, subsidize medical device development, don't tax it. Shake up the patent law so the big companies actually have to compete with other companies and INNOVATE. Don't lock up information in expensive journals when it was produced with taxpayer money, make it available to everyone FROM DAY 1.

Eagle, I don't know man. Although I liked Dread's idea of adding "rate of return" ceilings just like the government does today with other delicate industries, I don't think that changing patent law would be a good idea. Patent law was made to create a "legal monopoly" so that you could benefit from your inventions. And the fact that those medical devices are expensive here in the U.S is not because it is brand new... but because the nature of all the healthcare industry in the U.S is expensive. As I said before, the companies that make medical devices in the U.S are selling those way cheaper in other countries (the same inventions that cost thousands of dollars here). It's not the patent law or the fact that they are new... the problem is bigger than that. That's why the taxing of those devices will at least let the government get some cash. I feel that parties have made this into an issue that is not even worth the trouble. All companies and products should pay some form of tax.

It's a massive problem in software, and many people would say in the pharmeceutical area as well.

I'm not saying abolish patents, but I do think they don't need to cover such a long term.

[[NH]Mr.Yankovic]

Success stories? Failures? How has it affected you so far?

Last year for my family coverage it was $392 per month of which $350 was covered by my company. Now it is $1180 of which my company covers $380. That'll be $800 per month EXTRA out of pocket and all the basics of my policy will be the same. Due to this expense we decided that only I will be covered by this policy and that we would "shop" the exchange for the wife and kid. So that we have some sort of coverage for the wife and kid, we took out an accident policy as a rider to my insurance plan at an extra but lesser expense. This is three weeks now and I still can't get logged into the website to "shop". When I do get onto the site I already know that my family will NOT get a subsidy because a plan is offered by my employer. Therefore we will get to pay full price if we can ever get on the website. So far, NO ONE where I work has taken the family policy because NO ONE can afford it and basically they have all said screw it and will be going "uncovered" this coming year.

So here is what I see. Last year people with jobs had insurance and people with no jobs may have had insurance or may not have had it. This year people with jobs have lesser and/or more expensive insurance and people with no jobs have more insurance with no cost or a "subsidized" cost. So now the people who work have to work a little harder so they can have less in an effort to provide more for those who don't work. Good system.

On a SWGO Forum.....

[CommanderOtto]

If you must subsidize, subsidize medical device development, don't tax it. Shake up the patent law so the big companies actually have to compete with other companies and INNOVATE. Don't lock up information in expensive journals when it was produced with taxpayer money, make it available to everyone FROM DAY 1.

Eagle, I don't know man. Although I liked Dread's idea of adding "rate of return" ceilings just like the government does today with other delicate industries, I don't think that changing patent law would be a good idea. Patent law was made to create a "legal monopoly" so that you could benefit from your inventions. And the fact that those medical devices are expensive here in the U.S is not because it is brand new... but because the nature of all the healthcare industry in the U.S is expensive. As I said before, the companies that make medical devices in the U.S are selling those way cheaper in other countries (the same inventions that cost thousands of dollars here). It's not the patent law or the fact that they are new... the problem is bigger than that. That's why the taxing of those devices will at least let the government get some cash. I feel that parties have made this into an issue that is not even worth the trouble. All companies and products should pay some form of tax.

It's a massive problem in software, and many people would say in the pharmeceutical area as well.

I'm not saying abolish patents, but I do think they don't need to cover such a long term.

just a note. I understand what you are saying. I just think it's not good to change it at all since it is a known fact that the U.S is the BEST in patent law and protection versus all the countries in the world. Places that are up and coming like China, India or Brazil simply SUCK at patent law... and that's why many people who make inventions abroad simply come here to the U.S to patent it here, even though it was invented abroad. So, just pointing that out. The reasons that push prices up in healthcare is the problem, thus, pushing up prices in medical inventions as well. Sad, but true.

[ProfessorDreadNaught]

Eagle, I don't know man. Although I liked Dread's idea of adding "rate of return" ceilings just like the government does today with other delicate industries, I don't think that changing patent law would be a good idea. Patent law was made to create a "legal monopoly" so that you could benefit from your inventions. And the fact that those medical devices are expensive here in the U.S is not because it is brand new... but because the nature of all the healthcare industry in the U.S is expensive. As I said before, the companies that make medical devices in the U.S are selling those way cheaper in other countries (the same inventions that cost thousands of dollars here). It's not the patent law or the fact that they are new... the problem is bigger than that. That's why the taxing of those devices will at least let the government get some cash. I feel that parties have made this into an issue that is not even worth the trouble. All companies and products should pay some form of tax.

Otto, I'm getting a vibe here that you don't know what you are talking about. I say that because in the same post you are for legal monopolies and eager for the government to collect more money with taxes. Finally, you say that the reason a medical product is more expensive in the US is because all health care in the US is expensive.

I have a feeling you haven't read anything but these forums on the subject and had little or no life experience with the topic. You've probably never invented a product and tried to sell it. Own your own business and tried to buy health insurance for you and your family. You've probably never had to deal with doctors and hospitals without insurance and have to plan and pay for the birth of your child using out of pocket cash. Nor deal with the IRS in an audit and explain a deduction for a Lactation consultant or the cost of a medical pump as legitimate medical expenses.

First, understand that taxes are bad. ALL taxes are bad. Learn that. Accept it. It is Truth.
Another Truth is, Life is sacrifice and pain. We HOPE it is balanced with enough Joy and Love to make it all worth while, but there are no promises.
We tolerate being taxed because its often the least painful sacrifice to get things we want. Street lights, roads, sidewalks, national defense, police firefighters, etc. but it should not be used willy nilly lest the government lose the moral authority to be our government. Remember, "No taxation without representation" was a slogan good enough for rebellion and war.

Taxes NEVER make something cheaper. Our goal is to reduce health care costs. A replacement hip in this country costs thousands of dollars more than one manufactured in another country. There is no difference in the product other than where it is sold. The reason the cheaper product cannot be sold here in competition with the expensive product is because a 20 year patent applies to the product and regardless how many times over the inventor recouped their R&D costs, they are protected from competition in this country until that patent expires. This is a legal monopoly and is an example of why monopolies in this country are not tolerated.

Taxing it (as Obamacare does) does NOT fix the problem. It only makes it worse.

[CommanderOtto]

Eagle, I don't know man. Although I liked Dread's idea of adding "rate of return" ceilings just like the government does today with other delicate industries, I don't think that changing patent law would be a good idea. Patent law was made to create a "legal monopoly" so that you could benefit from your inventions. And the fact that those medical devices are expensive here in the U.S is not because it is brand new... but because the nature of all the healthcare industry in the U.S is expensive. As I said before, the companies that make medical devices in the U.S are selling those way cheaper in other countries (the same inventions that cost thousands of dollars here). It's not the patent law or the fact that they are new... the problem is bigger than that. That's why the taxing of those devices will at least let the government get some cash. I feel that parties have made this into an issue that is not even worth the trouble. All companies and products should pay some form of tax.

Otto, I'm getting a vibe here that you don't know what you are talking about. I say that because in the same post you are for legal monopolies and eager for the government to collect more money with taxes. Finally, you say that the reason a medical product is more expensive in the US is because all health care in the US is expensive.

I have a feeling you haven't read anything but these forums on the subject and had little or no life experience with the topic. You've probably never invented a product and tried to sell it. Own your own business and tried to buy health insurance for you and your family. You've probably never had to deal with doctors and hospitals without insurance and have to plan and pay for the birth of your child using out of pocket cash. Nor deal with the IRS in an audit and explain a deduction for a Lactation consultant or the cost of a medical pump as legitimate medical expenses.

First, understand that taxes are bad. ALL taxes are bad. Learn that. Accept it. It is Truth.
Another Truth is, Life is sacrifice and pain. We HOPE it is balanced with enough Joy and Love to make it all worth while, but there are no promises.
We tolerate being taxed because its often the least painful sacrifice to get things we want. Street lights, roads, sidewalks, national defense, police firefighters, etc. but it should not be used willy nilly lest the government lose the moral authority to be our government. Remember, "No taxation without representation" was a slogan good enough for rebellion and war.

Taxes NEVER make something cheaper. Our goal is to reduce health care costs. A replacement hip in this country costs thousands of dollars more than one manufactured in another country. There is no difference in the product other than where it is sold. The reason the cheaper product cannot be sold here in competition with the expensive product is because a 20 year patent applies to the product and regardless how many times over the inventor recouped their R&D costs, they are protected from competition in this country until that patent expires. This is a legal monopoly and is an example of why monopolies in this country are not tolerated.

Taxing it (as Obamacare does) does NOT fix the problem. It only makes it worse.

I am sorry Dread, but you are wrong. taxes aren't bad all the time. I know what I am talking about. I am studying Economics. I don't study Health Economics and I could always be wrong with some stuff, but I know much more about it than most people. Taxes might cause "market inefficiencies" but people keep asking the government for more stuff... and they need to pay for it somehow. Obamacare might suck, but Americans voted for it and they have to pay for it. Hell, it sucks to pay taxes, but the government has to pay bills. Anyway, adding a tax to it is insignificant in the whole problem of healthcare. You are right, they will get more expensive for us, but the price will just go up regardless of a tax or no tax. Finally, I don't know why you said what you said, but I have a life and I do pay taxes and I do pay medical bills just like you.... and I have also worked with patent law myself.

There is no difference in the product other than where it is sold. The reason the cheaper product cannot be sold here in competition with the expensive product is because a 20 year patent applies to the product and regardless how many times over the inventor recouped their R&D costs, they are protected from competition in this country until that patent expires. This is a legal monopoly and is an example of why monopolies in this country are not tolerated.

patents are a legal monopoly, regardless of your or my opinion and a beneficial one. People who study Economics or International Trade know this. Patents are an essential part of any economy and they exist in most countries, very similar to patent law in the U.S. There are some differences, but believe me, the U.S is not the only place where patent law gives protection from competition for several years. In fact, if i'm correct, Brazil's patent law protects inventions for 20 years from competition... and medical devices are still cheaper there than here. My point is, changing patent law won't change the rising healthcare costs.

Finally, you say that the reason a medical product is more expensive in the US is because all health care in the US is expensive.

well, sort of. But there are some issues in the whole nature of the industry that simply make it different to other industries. It doesn't work like the commodities market or the labor market... I wish I could explain the whole thing here, but it is too long and it took me a whole semester to get to the point where I could understand it well. One thing for sure though... medical devices are not more expensive here in the U.S than in other countries because of "patent law". What I do know is that your idea of "rate of return" ceilings have been applied before and for good reasons (where I somewhat agree with you), but in other situations, not patent law lol.

Anyway, I don't want to push the topic of the thread in another direction. I said what I needed to say... you guys can go on with politics.

[NiteRunner81]

3. The problem American's need fixed is NOT skyrocketing insurance rates. That's the effect, not the cause. Health care COSTS are the cause. The solution is a mixed bag of increasing government involvement in some areas and eliminating it in others.

OMG we agree on something...

[(SWGO)DesertEagle]

3. The problem American's need fixed is NOT skyrocketing insurance rates. That's the effect, not the cause. Health care COSTS are the cause. The solution is a mixed bag of increasing government involvement in some areas and eliminating it in others.

OMG we agree on something...

That makes many of us.