Kamala Harris 2020

[ChiTownDoc 21102]

13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

lol @ this "the pharma industry is extremely corrupt, but it's SLIGHTLY different from the way you're portraying it" bullshit

I guess if there's a law, then bribing doctors doesn't happen. That's how laws work, they make things go away.

Lol.  Again -  nobody said pharma isn’t corrupt.  But they’re not bribing doctors on any large scale dumbass.  You’re fucking hilarious because you have to be an expert on everything.  I can assure you, your dumbass knows less than BamaGirl and I about this topic.  But keep talking out of your ass - that’s your go to move.  

[Bama Chick 28596]

I guess if there's a law banning guns then guns disappear. That's how laws work, they make things go away.

See how dumb that sounds?

There’s plenty of legitimate reasons to rail against the pharma industry but when you pull out the old “bribing doctors” trope it undermines your position.

There’s no need to use myths when the actual truth is bad enough.

[bad_teammate 13133]

It just gets worse!

 

[henrygandorf 29179]

what a weirdly specific policy initiative to introduce 72 hours before a debate where she already has a target on her back.

[ChiTownDoc 21102]

7 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

I guess if there's a law banning guns then guns disappear. That's how laws work, they make things go away.

See how dumb that sounds?

There’s plenty of legitimate reasons to rail against the pharma industry but when you pull out the old “bribing doctors” trope it undermines your position.

There’s no need to use myths when the actual truth is bad enough.

Shhhh, he’s on a roll. 

You know unions are corrupt as fuck in this city and were hard wired directly to the mobs.  Nobody doubts they’re the main reason this state is going bankrupt.  We should just get rid of all unions too, right?  🙄

[bad_teammate 13133]

Y'all need Anastasis in here to form the Medicrew Power Trio to defend the honor of the industry!

[Js1 85136]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Y'all need Anastasis in here to form the Medicrew Power Trio to defend the honor of the industry!

Please no

[6th Street 6357]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Y'all need Anastasis in here to form the Medicrew Power Trio to defend the honor of the industry!

Time to take the L on this one son. You were thoroughly schooled by two people who are directly tied to the industry. 

[bad_teammate 13133]

Just now, 6th Street said:

Time to take the L on this one son. You were thoroughly schooled by two people who are directly tied to the industry. 

There's no L to take. Drug companies spend more on advertising and bribing doctors than they do on R&D. The fact that legislation has driven some of the 2nd part underground doesn't change the truth of what I said.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Advertising? Probably.

Now please define bribing doctors for the class.

And why do you insist on lumping those two things together? They have nothing to do with one another.

The advertising of prescription medication is to drive demand from the patient end of the equation. It has absolutely nothing to do with influencing doctors.

[bad_teammate 13133]

They are both strategies that involve spending money to increase sales. That's why I mention them together. Not complicated.

[Message Board User 12389]

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

They are both strategies that involve spending money to increase sales. That's why I mention them together. Not complicated.

It may not be complicated but it’s disingenuous as hell.

Comparing advertising, which every money making entity from Fischer Price to Pfizer to The University of Texas Football Program does to an illegal activity is over the top, even for you.

Seriously, I’ve worked for some of the biggest names in pharma and this myth of doctors being bribed or bought for prescriptions doesn’t happen on this massive scale that’s parroted as a talking point.

Are there isolated cases, especially with some privately owned companies like Perdue? Sure.

But pharma companies also give out a shitton of free samples and coupons and run multiple indigent patient programs.

I had more pressure on me and was incentivized more for pushing the discount coupons and getting docs to sign up indigent patients than I ever was told to spend more money.

A budget of $1,000 per month for office meals to cover a territory of 200 doctors isn’t bribing shit.

And there’s no benefit to the companies to bribe individual docs for scripts anyway. The volume of patients for one doc doesn’t justify the ROI.

As I said, you want to be rail on the pharma companies about only caring about sales and not patients AND be accurate?

Look into their relationships with PBMs and formulary managers. THAT is where the “bribery” is taking place and fucking over patients AND doctors.

[bad_teammate 13133]

7 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

It may not be complicated but it’s disingenuous as hell.

Comparing advertising, which every money making entity from Fischer Price to Pfizer to The University of Texas Football Program does to an illegal activity is over the top, even for you.

 

"How DARE you defame the good names and reputations of massive corporations, SIR!"

Quote

Seriously, I’ve worked for some of the biggest names in pharma and this myth of doctors being bribed or bought for prescriptions doesn’t happen on this massive scale that’s parroted as a talking point.

The Pharma Defender has logged in

Quote

But pharma companies also give out a shitton of free samples and coupons and run multiple indigent patient programs.

What if the pharma companies just sold the drugs at a very affordable price in the first place so free samples, coupons, and indigent patient programs were unnecessary? What if those same pharma companies didn't lobby incessantly against universal healthcare programs?

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

All of those things you just described are propaganda tools used by vampires to defend their vampirism.

There's nothing more valuable to a boss than a serf who will not only serve the bullshit to the public, but eat it themselves and say it's tasty.

[bad_teammate 13133]

 

[Js1 85136]

Damn I miss that show 

[Bama Chick 28596]

What if the pharma companies just sold the drugs at a very affordable price in the first place so free samples, coupons, and indigent patient programs were unnecessary? What if those same pharma companies didn't lobby incessantly against universal healthcare programs?
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
All of those things you just described are propaganda tools used by vampires to defend their vampirism.
There's nothing more valuable to a boss than a serf who will not only serve the bullshit to the public, but eat it themselves and say it's tasty.

Jesus fuck off you self righteous bag of stale air.

I don’t work in pharma any longer and I like how instead of owning up to being wrong about something you insult and deflect from the thing you were wrong about.

While also ignoring me calling pharma companies evil and pointing out where the real abuse is in the chain of drug company > pharmacy wholesaler > insurance company > doctor > prescription > patient > pharmacy.

But, no your fragile male know it all superiority complex can’t allow you to admit you spouted off some bullshit myth. And when two of us called you out, you played your greatest hits!

So, again, fuck you. You were wrong about something.

[bad_teammate 13133]

I've been wrong about a lot over time, but when I said "These scumbags spend twice on advertising/bribing doctors that they do on research." I was 100% correct.

It's true.
It's documented.

And I didn't even mention their lakes of money spent on lobbying to prevent lower drug pricing. (The coupons and free samples you mentioned are also attempts to fight drug pricing regulation, by the way; they aren't noble efforts to help sick people. Drug dealers are nice people for offering free samples, too, right?)

You can call me whatever you want and that's cool. But don't lie about reality to defend one of the most evil industries in the country. That's uncool. Just say I'm an asshole and you hate me. That's a lot simpler and doesn't involve cheerleading murderers.

[bad_teammate 13133]

Anyway, back to the shitty candidate this thread is about...

Medicare for All, but dumber.

Just killing it right now, Kamala.

I think the point of a 10-year phase-in vs. a 4-year is that it gives the lobbyists and insurance companies a more sporting chance to kill it.

bUt We AlReAdY hAvE mEdIcArE aDvAnTaGe

 

 

Edited July 29, 2019 by bad_teammate

[Js1 85136]

If you’re going to tweet criticism, maybe not your chosen candidate’s campaign manager? V neutral 

[bad_teammate 13133]

Kaiser Health News

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Health insurers that treat millions of seniors have overcharged Medicare by nearly $30 billion the past three years alone, but federal officials say they are moving ahead with long-delayed plans to recoup at least part of the money.

Officials have known for years that some Medicare Advantage plans overbill the government by exaggerating how sick their patients are or by charging Medicare for treating serious medical conditions they cannot prove their patients have.

Getting refunds from the health plans has proved daunting, however. Officials with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services repeatedly have postponed, or backed off, efforts to crack down on billing abuses and mistakes by the increasingly popular Medicare Advantage health plans offered by private health insurers under contract with Medicare. Today, such plans treat over 22 million seniors, more than 1 in 3 people on Medicare.

Now CMS is trying again, proposing a series of enhanced audits tailored to claw back $1 billion in Medicare Advantage overpayments by 2020 — just a tenth of what it estimates the plans overcharge the government in a given year.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is what the garbage candidates wish to preserve, a system in which powerful capital forces rip off the taxpayer for life-necessary goods and services and use a fraction of that stolen money to bribe/lobby representatives to continue allowing it.

Better?

[Celery Man 20888]

sorry, but Simpson’s references get me every time

[Js1 85136]

Maybe we take the Harris plan and the Bernie plan (also the "I'm with Bernie" Liz plan) and meet in the middle.

Except the Bernie Bros will shout that down. 

[bad_teammate 13133]

Having better plans and values is cheating, sexist, and probably racist. Fuckin' Bernie Bros.

[bad_teammate 13133]

 

[huge 3789]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

 

might be your best post on this or any other site

[Js1 85136]

I'm pretty sure Ole Joe thought he was gonna get one over on Harris for TRYING TO KILL OBAMA'S SIGNATURE ACHIEVEMENT but then she drops her plan which is immediately endorsed by Obama's hand-chosen architect of the ACA. 

[Hank Kingsley 20721]

Kamala co-sponsored Bernie's single payer healthcare bill, gave off the impression for months that she was with Bernie on M4A, then drops her own healthcare policy with private insurance intact and still calls it "Medicare For All".  Savage. 

Personally I'm not critical of her plan (I admittedly do not have enough knowledge of the healthcare system to argue details), but that's a snake move on her part. 

 

 

[Hank Kingsley 20721]

Bernie responds

 

[bad_teammate 13133]

37 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I'm pretty sure Ole Joe thought he was gonna get one over on Harris for TRYING TO KILL OBAMA'S SIGNATURE ACHIEVEMENT but then she drops her plan which is immediately endorsed by Obama's hand-chosen architect of the ACA. 

Kathleen Sebelius?

Kathleen Sebelius and Bill Frist digging for the Medicare Advantage gold (10/24/17)

---------------------------------------------

Keep this on your radar: My colleague Bob Herman reports Devoted Health, a new insurance company that will only sell Medicare Advantage plans, just raised $62 million, according a new financial disclosure. The startup will start selling Medicare Advantage plans in 2019.

The players: Some big names are backing Devoted Health: Former HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist are on the board. Todd and Ed Park, brothers who both worked at electronic health record and billing company athenahealth, are the co-founders; they also recruited Venrock’s Bob Kocher as chief medical officer.

Get smart: Medicare Advantage is where the big money is. The ACA marketplaces grab a lot of headlines, but they are a blip on the radar when compared with the hundreds of billions of dollars tied up in private Medicare plans and care for seniors.

---------------------------------------------

I am SHOCKED that grifters who are wanting to profit heavily from this plan support it.

Just bowled over.

It's inspirational, really.

[Js1 85136]

You're not even worth engaging.  Bernie talking points, engaged. 

[bad_teammate 13133]

You can cry "Bernie Bro!" all you want, but at some point you should develop a set of values and ideas that are coherent and expressable.

[Anastasis 23398]

17 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

While also ignoring me calling pharma companies evil and pointing out where the real abuse is in the chain of drug company > pharmacy wholesaler > insurance company > doctor > prescription > patient > pharmacy.

Most of the entities in the healthcare supply chain are operating at low single digit margins.  There are of course two exceptions: Pharma/devices and corporate hospitals. Only two of the entities in your chain have a vested interest in downward pressure on expenditures (payers, patient). The entities with vested interest in increasing expenditures, again Pharma and Hospitals. Maybe providers and pharmacy to a limited extent, but not really. The former benefits when cost effective care is administered in a contracting context that promotes value and outcomes, the latter benefits from high margin generics when cost effectiveness motivates prescribing. Which leaves us really with hospitals and pharma.  There are clearly areas that should be addressed wrt PBM practices, and numerous other areas up and down the chain, but maybe we start with the groups running 20-40% margins instead of deflecting to the ones running 3-9% margins. 

 

[Anastasis 23398]

58 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Kathleen Sebelius?

Kathleen Sebelius and Bill Frist digging for the Medicare Advantage gold (10/24/17)

---------------------------------------------

Keep this on your radar: My colleague Bob Herman reports Devoted Health, a new insurance company that will only sell Medicare Advantage plans, just raised $62 million, according a new financial disclosure. The startup will start selling Medicare Advantage plans in 2019.

 The players: Some big names are backing Devoted Health: Former HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist are on the board. Todd and Ed Park, brothers who both worked at electronic health record and billing company athenahealth, are the co-founders; they also recruited Venrock’s Bob Kocher as chief medical officer.

 Get smart: Medicare Advantage is where the big money is. The ACA marketplaces grab a lot of headlines, but they are a blip on the radar when compared with the hundreds of billions of dollars tied up in private Medicare plans and care for seniors.

 ---------------------------------------------

I am SHOCKED that grifters who are wanting to profit heavily from this plan support it.

 Just bowled over.

It's inspirational, really.

M4A that does not include MA is simply not politically viable. 1 in 3 medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in a private MA plan.  You are not going to take away an option that has very high satisfaction ratings without political backlash that normal politicians are going to be able to tolerate. The outcomes, both clinically and in terms of healthcare costs are better in MA compared to FFS Medicare for the most medically complex members. The reality is that Medicare is not what Bernie is really talking about at all when he talks about Medicare for all.  It is something totally different when you get down to the nuts and bolts. 

[Js1 85136]

More like Canada’s system? 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

More like Canada’s system? 

 

According g to Forbes magazine last year over 1 million. Canadians had to wait excessive amounts of time for medical care resulting in over $1.9 billion in lost wages and other insured costs.  A country with far less population that the US, just about 10% of our current population.  Or is Forbes just lying to protect the status quo ?

From June 11, 2018. Forbes magazine

Canada's single-payer healthcare system forced over 1 million patients to wait for necessary medical treatments last year. That's an all-time record.

Those long wait times were more than just a nuisance; they cost patients $1.9 billion in lost wages, according to a new report by the Fraser Institute, a Vancouver-based think-tank.

Lengthy treatment delays are the norm in Canada and other single-payer nations, which ration care to keep costs down. Yet more and more Democratic leaders are pushing for a single-payer system -- and more and more voters are clamoring for one.

Indeed, three in four Americans now support a national health plan -- and a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds that health care is the most important issue for voters in the coming election.

The leading proponent of transitioning the United States to a single-payer system is Sen. Bernie Sanders, Vermont's firebrand independent. If Sanders and his allies succeed, Americans will face the same delays and low-quality care as their neighbors to the north.

[bad_teammate 13133]

He's here! WOO!

15 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

M4A that does not include MA is simply not politically viable. 1 in 3 medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in a private MA plan.  You are not going to take away an option that has very high satisfaction ratings without political backlash that normal politicians are going to be able to tolerate.

Anastasis: Political Reality Knower

Quote

The outcomes, both clinically and in terms of healthcare costs are better in MA compared to FFS Medicare for the most medically complex members.

I will go ahead and accept this without citation or specifics... so... what about for the 99% of patients?

Quote

The reality is that Medicare is not what Bernie is really talking about at all when he talks about Medicare for all.  It is something totally different when you get down to the nuts and bolts. 

People don't care that the Medicare Advantage benefits come from a for-profit institution. They just care about getting the benefits.

 

[Celery Man 20888]

14 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

According g to Forbes magazine last year over 1 million. Canadians had to wait excessive amounts of time for medical care resulting in over $1.9 billion in lost wages and other insured costs.  A country with far less population that the US, just about 10% of our current population.  Or is Forbes just lying to protect the status quo ?

From June 11, 2018. Forbes magazine

Canada's single-payer healthcare system forced over 1 million patients to wait for necessary medical treatments last year. That's an all-time record.

Those long wait times were more than just a nuisance; they cost patients $1.9 billion in lost wages, according to a new report by the Fraser Institute, a Vancouver-based think-tank.

Lengthy treatment delays are the norm in Canada and other single-payer nations, which ration care to keep costs down. Yet more and more Democratic leaders are pushing for a single-payer system -- and more and more voters are clamoring for one.

Indeed, three in four Americans now support a national health plan -- and a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds that health care is the most important issue for voters in the coming election.

The leading proponent of transitioning the United States to a single-payer system is Sen. Bernie Sanders, Vermont's firebrand independent. If Sanders and his allies succeed, Americans will face the same delays and low-quality care as their neighbors to the north.

Forbes.com article from an unpaid blogger

[Anastasis 23398]

weird did my response just disappear into the ether?

Apparently so. 

21 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I will go ahead and accept this without citation or specifics... so... what about for the 99% of patients?

The reality is that the end of the distribution drives healthcare expenditures.  Top 1% about 1/4 of all healthcare expenditures.  Top 10% ~2/3 of all expenditures. Optimizing care for the most medically complex should be the focal point to turn the trend in our NHE. Of course, if all you are interested in is the political banter you don't have to approach the subject from a population health perspective.  You can just throw out M4A slogans and DSA twitter posts with no basis in health care financing reality and declare victory. 

Edited July 29, 2019 by Anastasis

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

8 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

Forbes.com article from an unpaid blogger

Ahh, I just looked at the Forbes title.  Does that make it wrong or just not officially verified/vetted ?

[bad_teammate 13133]

*furiously pounds TRUMP in the voting booth because I DEMAND to keep doing donut hole calculations as my wife dies in my arms*

[Js1 85136]

 

[Celery Man 20888]

Ahh, I just looked at the Forbes title.  Does that make it wrong or just not officially verified/vetted ?

I’m not old enough to know what the deal used to be with Forbes or interested enough to know why they’re doing what they’re doing with the brand, but Forbes.com articles are about a step up from livejournal blog posts (is that a thing still?)
https://www.joshsteimle.com/writing/how-being-a-forbes-contributor-works.html

[Brisketexan 104670]

54 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

According g to Forbes magazine last year over 1 million. Canadians had to wait excessive amounts of time for medical care resulting in over $1.9 billion in lost wages and other insured costs.  A country with far less population that the US, just about 10% of our current population.  Or is Forbes just lying to protect the status quo ?

From June 11, 2018. Forbes magazine

Canada's single-payer healthcare system forced over 1 million patients to wait for necessary medical treatments last year. That's an all-time record.

Those long wait times were more than just a nuisance; they cost patients $1.9 billion in lost wages, according to a new report by the Fraser Institute, a Vancouver-based think-tank.

Lengthy treatment delays are the norm in Canada and other single-payer nations, which ration care to keep costs down. Yet more and more Democratic leaders are pushing for a single-payer system -- and more and more voters are clamoring for one.

Indeed, three in four Americans now support a national health plan -- and a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds that health care is the most important issue for voters in the coming election.

The leading proponent of transitioning the United States to a single-payer system is Sen. Bernie Sanders, Vermont's firebrand independent. If Sanders and his allies succeed, Americans will face the same delays and low-quality care as their neighbors to the north.

Let's presume that the data in there is correct (setting aside the arguments, let's just look at the data).

A certain percentage of their population had to wait on medical treatments.

A certain percentage of their GDP was lost in terms of lost wages because of that.

In a vacuum, those stats are meaningless, as what the piece would purport to do is COMPARE the Canadian and US systems.  So, how do they COMPARE?  Because if the argument is "single-payer ain't perfect," no shit, Sherlock.  The question is whether it's better than what we have here.

For example, EVERY Canadian has coverage, but 1 million Canadians had to wait for care.  Compare that to the US:

Quote

The number of uninsured nonelderly Americans decreased from over 44 million in 2013 (the year before the major coverage provisions went into effect) to just below 27 million in 2016. However, in 2017, the number of uninsured people increased by nearly 700,000 people, the first increase since implementation of the ACA. 

Translation:

2.7% of Canadians had to wait for medical care.

8.3% of Americans have no coverage at all.

These are relevant comparisons.  I'd rather wait for medical care than not get it at all, right?

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

17 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Let's presume that the data in there is correct (setting aside the arguments, let's just look at the data).

A certain percentage of their population had to wait on medical treatments.

A certain percentage of their GDP was lost in terms of lost wages because of that.

In a vacuum, those stats are meaningless, as what the piece would purport to do is COMPARE the Canadian and US systems.  So, how do they COMPARE?  Because if the argument is "single-payer ain't perfect," no shit, Sherlock.  The question is whether it's better than what we have here.

For example, EVERY Canadian has coverage, but 1 million Canadians had to wait for care.  Compare that to the US:

Translation:

2.7% of Canadians had to wait for medical care.

8.3% of Americans have no coverage at all.

These are relevant comparisons.  I'd rather wait for medical care than not get it at all, right?

If the data is accurate the dollars, patients waiting periods, and % of loss wages would increase in a country that has 350 million, (Canada has + or - 37 million).

That $1.9 billion in lost wages would be a much larger figure/%  here in the states.

How many millions of people here now, have deductibles at $5,000 and $10,00 levels (which might as well not be insurance for many who would never be able to cover that yearly out of pocket deductible without major financial ramifications).

Increasing the number of people with healthcare is not going to make those statistics better. The more people you have in a system the less efficient it becomes.  There's no way a universal healthcare system will work without massive tax payer costs, and eventually longer waiting periods, and lesser quality care unless the providers are mandated to cost ceilings. (SEE: The VA.).

Edited July 30, 2019 by Onboard 2.0

[BradInATX 9208]

6 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

If the data is accurate the dollars, patients waiting periods, and % of loss wages would increase in a country that has 350 million, (Canada has + or - 37 million).

I don't think you understand how percentages work.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, BradInATX said:

I don't think you understand how percentages work.

Is it going to be the same extrapolated % for a nation of 37 million compared to a nation of 350 million ?

[BradInATX 9208]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Is it going to be the same extrapolated % for a nation of 37 million compared to a nation of 350 million ?

All else being equal, of course it would. That's how numbers work.

Edited July 30, 2019 by BradInATX

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, BradInATX said:

All else being equal, of course it would. That's how numbers work.

I'd agree, on a piece of paper or calculator, but we're talking about people running a system that's 10x larger than Canadas.  

[BradInATX 9208]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'd agree, on a piece of paper or calculator, but we're talking about people running a system that's 10x larger than Canadas.  

Sure. And we'll probably have 10x the support staff to administer the program, 10x the tax revenue, 10x the healthcare professionals, etc.

Obviously they won't be exactly that, but the things that drive wait times are going to be things like demographics, quality of our healthcare professionals vs. Canada, etc. I have no idea whether we'd be better or worse - just calling out that saying "well, we'll obviously be worse than Canada's percentage because we're bigger" is silly. We'd probably be worse because we're an unhealthier nation. Or because we're a country where half the population does things like demonize a president who wants to spend money on preventative care up front, in order to save money in the long run. And vote in politicians who make sure that doesn't happen.

Edited July 30, 2019 by BradInATX