Do people 'deserve' universal health care?

[MMI]

And still somehow they are able to make astronomical profits and sell their product in other countries at a great loss.

Do you really believe they sell stuff in other countries at a great loss? I don't.

The stuff they sell in Africa, you'd regard as old-fashioned medicine, long since superceded by something else (or maybe the same stuff in a new package). They made thier pile in the West, but this provides a steady trail income.

And the stuff they give away in Africa is out-of-date medicine that would otherwise be destroyed.

[Thorne]

Do you really believe they sell stuff in other countries at a great loss? I don't.

The stuff they sell in Africa, you'd regard as old-fashioned medicine, long since superceded by something else (or maybe the same stuff in a new package). They made thier pile in the West, but this provides a steady trail income.

And the stuff they give away in Africa is out-of-date medicine that would otherwise be destroyed.

That may be so, I don't know. But even so, what of it? It's a business. That's what businesses do. If you have a product which people need, or want, you make money. Tons of money, if your smart.

[Belgarold]

Do you really believe they sell stuff in other countries at a great loss? I don't.

The stuff they sell in Africa, you'd regard as old-fashioned medicine, long since superceded by something else (or maybe the same stuff in a new package). They made thier pile in the West, but this provides a steady trail income.

And the stuff they give away in Africa is out-of-date medicine that would otherwise be destroyed.

Yes, this is true. I wasn't even considering these 'giveaways' but the stuff they sell in Canada, for instance, is sold at a great deal less because the country will not allow them to sell at too high of a profit.

Thorne, I am not against them making a profit, but there should be a limit on this, yes. And as a follow-on, what the Health Insurance industry does is criminal. You pay your premium and when something happens and you need the insurance the insurance company does all it can to not do their jobs, pay out. And bean counters let people die every day.

How much is enough profit to make on the misery of every day Americans?

[Thorne]

what the Health Insurance industry does is criminal. You pay your premium and when something happens and you need the insurance the insurance company does all it can to not do their jobs, pay out. And bean counters let people die every day.

The insurance companies are another story, and I have little or nothing good to say about them. But consider, if the Feds take over the management of healthcare, a good portion of those insurance companies won't be needed. And all those bean counters will be looking for jobs. With the Feds. Doing the same thing they're doing now!

[SadisticNature]

The accounting of drugs is incredibly difficult.

If you consider the cost of a drug per unit to be:

Total cost of drug including production and research costs / units sold

Then yes companies sell drugs at a loss.

If you consider the cost of a drug to be:

Production cost of one unit (including labour)

then companies generally sell at a profit everywhere.

However, in many cases, drugs are provided to poor countries as part of the 2.5% of revenue that most organizations spend on charity these days (ala Google). Most companies consider this good branding as it makes it harder to attack them on people dying because they can't afford care.

The US has the worst drug prices even though it doesn't have the highest per capita income because most countries are able to negotiate at a national or state/province-wide level for drug prices. A company is far more willing to sell 2,000,000 units of medication at a smaller price than the small number of units that a particular insurance plan or single hospital would negotiate. It's just not worth the companies time to negotiate over a sale of 10 units.

[SadisticNature]

I think the job description changes a little bit.

After all medicare and medicaid are the two most efficient plans in the country, and there are far fewer cases of them aggressively trying to deny care.

For profit insurance is part of the reason costs are out of control. Taking 23% profits, introducing a huge amount of overhead with high level management salaries and benefits, and saying that there will be savings to the consumer is in general quite laughable. There can be other benefits such as diversity of options and varying levels of quality (pay for premium care etc.), but to say that private industry lowers costs is generally erroneous.

[DuncanONeil]

Medicare and Medicaid are far from efficient. Were that truly they would not be hemorrhaging money!
Insurance is part of the reason costs are high, but not all of it, Government regulation is also part of the cause, as well as fear of lawsuit. I question your claim of 23% profits. But even at that level their profits are not the highest rate of return!
As for lowering of costs, private industry can do just that. Providers of insurance are forced to compete for small pools of clients, which increase the level of costs. AN example the flies in the face of your claim is the segment of the health care industry dealing with laser eye surgery. An item not covered by most insurers. Making the payment the responsibility of the customer. Since inception the equipment has improved and the costs have been reduced. What was the cause? Competition! If the customer is not happy with the cost or service they will go to another provider, not possible under most insurance plans.

I think the job description changes a little bit.

After all medicare and medicaid are the two most efficient plans in the country, and there are far fewer cases of them aggressively trying to deny care.

For profit insurance is part of the reason costs are out of control. Taking 23% profits, introducing a huge amount of overhead with high level management salaries and benefits, and saying that there will be savings to the consumer is in general quite laughable. There can be other benefits such as diversity of options and varying levels of quality (pay for premium care etc.), but to say that private industry lowers costs is generally erroneous.

[SadisticNature]

I think the idea that health care is not a right is unique to those countries without universal medicare. Ask almost any Canadian including the vast majority of Conservatives up here and they see it as a right. This is the same in Britain and France where public systems are prevalent.

If the majority of Americans do not see public health care as a basic right then public health-care will likely fail. The current senate bill is so weak I think they'd be better off blocking it and trying again.

As for drug costs in Canada its not that the prices are regulated, its that the government can negotiate for the medications in massive quantities. If every American in the state of California was on the same drug plan and the insurance company running said plan went to the pharmaceutical companies to get a bulk rate negotiated on medications, prices would fall dramatically. The American system is made up of so many tiny pieces, none of which could get good deals and as such costs skyrocket.

My question for conservatives in the states is:

How does it make sense to tax the middle class so heavily they can't pay for health care and then leave them without medical care when they get sick in order to pay for things like Corporate Bailouts (Auto, Banking, etc..) and Foreign Wars (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc..)?

Social Security, Welfare and other such programs are a tiny amount of spending compared to wars and bailouts.