RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills

RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

willbeurdaddy -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 6:57:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I make no case for the bill other than health care should never have been allowed to become for profit. The day that you are willing to forego the drugs and treatments that were developed for their profits is the day I'll stop believing youre a hypocrite.

tazzygirl -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 6:59:28 AM)
If your theory is true... what amount of money spurred the discovery of pennicillin? Many of the drugs that have come from the "for profit" generation of health care are now ending up in class action lawsuits because they were pushed out too fast. Makes ya wonder.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:04:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If your theory is true... what amount of money spurred the discovery of pennicillin? Many of the drugs that have come from the "for profit" generation of health care are now ending up in class action lawsuits because they were pushed out too fast. Makes ya wonder. good, penicillin is on your allowed list. I assume you dont need a list of all of those drugs and treatments you'll have to forego. And your second comment sounds like the system is working the way its supposed to.

servantforuse -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:09:39 AM)
If there is no profit motive for making new drugs, there will be no more new drugs. I worked at AT&T for 33 years for one reason. I made money there. Take away the money and you take away incentive to do anything.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:10:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse If there is no profit motive for making new drugs, there will be no more new drugs. I worked at AT&T for 33 years for one reason. I made money there. Take away the money and you take away incentive to do anything. I dont believe in absolutes. Take away the money and you take away 99.99% of the incentive to do anything.

rulemylife -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:15:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse If there is no profit motive for making new drugs, there will be no more new drugs. I worked at AT&T for 33 years for one reason. I made money there. Take away the money and you take away incentive to do anything. So...........the only motivation people have in life is the pursuit of money?

mnottertail -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:23:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse If there is no profit motive for making new drugs, there will be no more new drugs. I worked at AT&T for 33 years for one reason. I made money there. Take away the money and you take away incentive to do anything. Uhhhhhhhhhhh, this just makes me cringe. You don't understand the basic concept of non-profits do you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_organization how can we possibly have reasonable argumentation, with so much ignorance and illogical underpinning? Ron

rulemylife -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:30:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse If there is no profit motive for making new drugs, there will be no more new drugs. I worked at AT&T for 33 years for one reason. I made money there. Take away the money and you take away incentive to do anything. I dont believe in absolutes. Take away the money and you take away 99.99% of the incentive to do anything. Jonas Salk Biography -- Academy of Achievement In 1955 Salk's years of research paid off. Human trials of the polio vaccine effectively protected the subject from the polio virus. When news of the discovery was made public on April 12, 1955, Salk was hailed as a miracle worker. He further endeared himself to the public by refusing to patent the vaccine. He had no desire to profit personally from the discovery, but merely wished to see the vaccine disseminated as widely as possible.

servantforuse -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:38:18 AM)
Things have changed in the last 50 years. It costs 100's of millions of dollars to develope new drugs and get them approved. If there is no profit for private companies to do the research, maybe the federal government will do it.

mnottertail -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:41:53 AM)
Maybe the federal government should do the research and patent the drugs and get licensing fees, it is sort of what they do with liqour.

rulemylife -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:50:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse Things have changed in the last 50 years. It costs 100's of millions of dollars to develope new drugs and get them approved. If there is no profit for private companies to do the research, maybe the federal government will do it. The federal government already does. Do you think all this research is actually done by the pharmaceutical companies? Federal R&D, Drug Discovery, and Pricing: Insights from the NIH However, questions are being raised as to whether or not the current balance is adequate, particularly with respect to drug discovery. The particular nature of health-related R&D and the $15.7 billion federal investment in this area has focused attention on the manner in which the National Institutes of Health undertakes research and development activities. Critics maintain that the need for technology development incentives in the pharmaceutical and/or biotechnology sectors is mitigated by industry access to government-supported work at no cost, monopoly power through patent protection, and additional regulatory and tax advantages such as those conveyed through the Orphan Drug Act. Supporters of the existing approach argue that these incentives are precisely what are required and have given rise to robust pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries.

servantforuse -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 8:03:18 AM)
When the Feds put the insurance companies out of business, they can set their sights on the drug companies. I am sure they will do a much better job developing new drugs than the private sector.

mnottertail -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 8:07:46 AM)
works for me, yanno, the government is pretty fuckin good in technology....look at the military.

Mercnbeth -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 8:10:11 AM)
quote: My profession is nursing. Money is hardly a driving force in that profession. Try again. Try and do what, change your previous answer that your have as you said; "Not only am i interested on a personal level, but also a professional one." I can't argue with a bureaucrat who doesn't see a problem with their union benefits bankrupting the State, selfishness has no counter argument. quote: ORIGINAL: eyesopened But these are real, everyday examples why something has to change. Of course it does. Eliminating the pre-existing condition exclusion, eliminate caps on claims, and set up a 'catastrophic' plan which is specifically earmarked for situations you document. Put insurance back where it belongs, as a stop gap for catastrophe, not as a first response to a paper cut. You don't need a national health insurance program to do that, only legislators without agenda and motivated by personal greed. We don't have them.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 9:04:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: My profession is nursing. Money is hardly a driving force in that profession. Try again. Try and do what, change your previous answer that your have as you said; "Not only am i interested on a personal level, but also a professional one." I can't argue with a bureaucrat who doesn't see a problem with their union benefits bankrupting the State, selfishness has no counter argument. quote: ORIGINAL: eyesopened But these are real, everyday examples why something has to change. Of course it does. Eliminating the pre-existing condition exclusion, eliminate caps on claims, and set up a 'catastrophic' plan which is specifically earmarked for situations you document. Put insurance back where it belongs, as a stop gap for catastrophe, not as a first response to a paper cut. You don't need a national health insurance program to do that, only legislators without agenda and motivated by personal greed. We don't have them. even prohibitions against excluding PXCs need to be carefully crafted to ensure against anti-selection.

rulemylife -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 9:38:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse When the Feds put the insurance companies out of business, they can set their sights on the drug companies. I am sure they will do a much better job developing new drugs than the private sector. Which does not address the issue that the drug companies benefit from government sponsored research for their products. You know, like the swine flu vaccine that conservatives complained about the Obama administration authorizing money for, and are now complaining that there is not enough of it.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 5:57:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse You know, like the swine flu vaccine that conservatives complained about the Obama administration authorizing money for, and are now complaining that there is not enough of it. ORLY. Exactly who complained about it?

rulemylife -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 6:58:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife You know, like the swine flu vaccine that conservatives complained about the Obama administration authorizing money for, and are now complaining that there is not enough of it. ORLY. Exactly who complained about it? Amazingly enough, the person you are trying to defend, among others. You do know there is a search engine on this site? ORIGINAL: servantforuse When will the Obama administration be held accountable for the swine flu debacle ? How in the world can the government run national health care when they can't even distribute a flu vaccine ? If Bush were still in office the left leaning media would be demanding answers. They are also silent on this matter. And by the way, does it really take so much extra time out of your busy life, dealing with important investment managers who talk to major CEO's daily, to do those few extra keystrokes to say "oh, really" instead of "orly"

OrionTheWolf -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:17:12 PM)
Pushed out too fast? We should create a government organization to oversee that, so that we may be protected. These drugs should go through a lot of trials, that are double and triple checked, and then they should come under even more scrutiny by the government before they are approved. Why is that not being included in all this money being spent? quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If your theory is true... what amount of money spurred the discovery of pennicillin? Many of the drugs that have come from the "for profit" generation of health care are now ending up in class action lawsuits because they were pushed out too fast. Makes ya wonder.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: AMA & AARP endorse House health care bills (11/12/2009 7:18:52 PM)
Yeah but at what cost effectiveness is that achieved? quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail works for me, yanno, the government is pretty fuckin good in technology....look at the military.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875