Republican with Pre-Existing Condition Thanks Pres. Obama for AFCA

[BenDan]

Brent Brown, a dead man walking .........

gets his health care restored

he's getting better

The Affordable Care Act saved his life

he had never voted for Obama ever

"I did not vote for you. Either time. I have voted Republican for the entirety of my life. I proudly wore pins and planted banners displaying my Republican loyalty. I was very vocal in my opposition to you -- particularly the ACA. Before I briefly explain my story allow me to first say this: I am so very sorry. I was so very wrong.

"You saved my life. My President, you saved my life, and I am eternally grateful.

"I have a 'pre-existing condition' and so could never purchase health insurance. Only after the ACA came into being could I be covered. Put simply to not take up too much of your time if you are in fact taking the time to read this: I would not be alive without access to care I received due to your law. Thank you for serving me even when I didn't vote for you. Thank you for being my President."

good stuff

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/03/03/brents-letter-president-you-saved-my-life

 

[Alnitak]

Medigap is a glaring exception to guaranteed issue. A lot of seniors are finding out the hard way that they can be declined for a Medicare supplement, which is only guaranteed six months before and after signing up for Part B.

 

[evanrick]

how dare Obama go ahead with the pie in the sky idea of Obamacare, shame on Obama for his unrealistic policy positions like healthcare reform.

 

[vidarr]

^indeed. Surprising how much can be done in politics when the American public is paying attention.
Obama was ridiculed, called a socialist (hmm..), obstructed by Congress, and still managed to get ACA passed.

 

[Alnitak]

how dare Obama go ahead with the pie in the sky idea of Obamacare, shame on Obama for his unrealistic policy positions like healthcare reform.

Tye ACA was a centrist approach to health care reform mostly favored by private healthcare corporations. We had the House and 60 senators when we passed it. The public option if you remember was defeated.

 

[Rolyo85]

Tye ACA was a centrist approach to health care reform mostly favored by private healthcare corporations. We had the House and 60 senators when we passed it. The public option if you remember was defeated.

He doesn't remember

 

[evanrick]

He doesn't remember

i remember Hillary criticizing the concept of healthcare reform in the form of Obama's 'hope' rhetoric, would never see the light of day.

thankfully nobody listened to Hillary back then and shes still trying out that same old cynical pandering line

 

[Benvolio]

No one doubted that free health care would be good for some who did not buy insurance. For many others it will result in a degradation in health care, as that have to pay double or triple to give it free to others, and then get in line behind the freebies. Any form of socialism/communism give a free ride to some at the expense of others.

 

[Kabluey]

No one doubted that free health care would be good for some who did not buy insurance. For many others it will result in a degradation in health care, as that have to pay double or triple to give it free to others, and then get in line behind the freebies. Any form of socialism/communism give a free ride to some at the expense of others.

Or at the expense of profit.
Funny how you always forget about profit.

 

[jbrown329]

Or at the expense of profit.
Funny how you always forget about profit.

Healthcare for profit is obscene.

 

[Benvolio]

Healthcare for profit is obscene.

Nonsense. Doctors and nurses have to live, too. Beyond that, the advances in medicines and medical devices would be slower or non existent without profits. Hospitals need profits from some to give charity to others. And where do you think tax money comes from? Corporations and people profit from businesses and jobs and pay the taxes.

 

[Kabluey]

Nonsense. Doctors and nurses have to live, too. Beyond that, the advances in medicines and medical devices would be slower or non existent without profits. Hospitals need profits from some to give charity to others. And where do you think tax money comes from? Corporations and people profit from businesses and jobs and pay the taxes.

Charity is a tax break for profit-making entities.
If those same hospitals stopped providing charity, they'd have to start paying taxes.

Profit is what comes after wages.
Research and development for drugs and devices is disproportionately government and university conducted, unless you're talking about innovations to maximise profit, or lifestyle drugs for erections and weight loss.

 

[Benvolio]

Charity is a tax break for profit-making entities.
If those same hospitals stopped providing charity, they'd have to start paying taxes.

Profit is what comes after wages.
Research and development for drugs and devices is disproportionately government and university conducted, unless you're talking about innovations to maximise profit, or lifestyle drugs for erections and weight loss.

Much of the research is conducted by for-profit drug companies. The clinical trials and obtaining of regulatory approval--costing many millions--, then the developmant and set up for manufacturing all comes from profits on past drugs. Thr money is invested in anticipation of future profits.

 

[Alnitak]

Much of the research is conducted by for-profit drug companies. The clinical trials and obtaining of regulatory approval--costing many millions--, then the developmant and set up for manufacturing all comes from profits on past drugs. Thr money is invested in anticipation of future profits.

That's not profit.

Profit is the amount after the cost of bringing a product to market.

 

[Benvolio]

That's not profit.

Profit is the amount after the cost of bringing a product to market.

The point is that research, deveopment, trials, approval and manufacturing is paid from those hated profits on prior drugs and devices and are motivated by the hope for future profits. When universities do it, the individuals are making money doing the research, often from government grants they have requested and they and the school hope for future royalties. Everybody wants more money and that is at least part of why they do it. One way or another it all comes from prior profits.

 

[cityboy-stl]

^ Everything to you is about making money regardless of anything else. The largest health care organization in this area is non-profit and doing better than all the other for-profit hospitals around, not to mention delivering some of the best health care and education in the world and while also conducting those research and development trials that you think need all that money. All being done non-profit....did you hear me? NON-PROFIT! So don't freaking tell me that medicine requires a profit motive to be successful.

http://www.bjc.org/About-Us/Facts-Figures

 

[Kabluey]

The point is that research, deveopment, trials, approval and manufacturing is paid from those hated profits on prior drugs and devices and are motivated by the hope for future profits. When universities do it, the individuals are making money doing the research, often from government grants they have requested and they and the school hope for future royalties. Everybody wants more money and that is at least part of why they do it. One way or another it all comes from prior profits.

Drug companies spend less on research and development than on marketing.
Stop convincing yourself that overpaying for health is in your benefit.

It's like saying you should be paying double the price for cars that people elsewhere do because the USA subsidises the research and development of the global car market through its demand for cars.

 

[jbrown329]

The point is that research, deveopment, trials, approval and manufacturing is paid from those hated profits on prior drugs and devices and are motivated by the hope for future profits. When universities do it, the individuals are making money doing the research, often from government grants they have requested and they and the school hope for future royalties. Everybody wants more money and that is at least part of why they do it. One way or another it all comes from prior profits.

Where's my hip waders?

Big pharmaceutical companies are spending far more on marketing than research

 

[Benvolio]

Where's my hip waders?

Big pharmaceutical companies are spending far more on marketing than research

So what do you conclude from that? Drug compamies do not develop drugs? Clearly they do. That they should not recover the investment or make a profit? There would be no new drugs in this country. A drug company has a limited time to recover its research and development cost before the patent expires and other companies can make it without having spent those costs. And, by selling a larger volumn, the company can sell at a lower unit price. Advertising is essential if the company is to recover its investment and make the drug available to the public.

 

[opinterph]

… not … profit? There would be no new drugs in this country.

Federal budget plays a significant role.