Cadillac Health Care Plan

[unionman]

Kind of like how the UAW is keeping GM and Chrysler running...
Oh wait... never mind.....

I know an engineer at GM and once he tried to suggest answers to some of the problems GM was having at the time and his boss told him," don't worry the government will bail us out."
Yeah, with that kind of management its all the UAWs fault.People like you crack me up, you just think that every problem that a company has is because of its labor costs. Typical Republican, has an easy answer for everything.

 

[dannyboy]

an engineer at GM and once he tried to suggest answers to some of the problems GM was having at the time and his boss told him," don't worry the government will bail us out."

Typical Republican, has an easy answer for everything.

i would disagree. the above easy answer is the liberal way of solving problems.

you want a good example of the whole problem.

take medications. I have three family members in various areas of the industry, and several good friends as well.

we have medications that we cant get, because they are held up in clinical trials here is the usa. but those very same medications are available over in europe and canada right now. and when they are available here, they will be 2-20 times more expensive than in those other countries.

you libs love to blame it on the drug companies shafting the poor american public by charging them so much more than in canada.

the problem is, the drug companies have had to continue the trials in the usa for all those extra years, which cost them billions to do, so they have to have a way of recouping that money, by increased costs for those drugs.

so who is the one to blame?

well in part, the very american public that decries the more expensive drugs. they want 100% safe drugs and want our gooberment to be in charge of seeing to it. so the gooberment poses all those extra restrictions and testing phases that add many months if not years of testing to each drug that they come out with.

so the ugly truth to our expensive drugs in our country is another fine example of our gooberment taking care of us for our benefit, causing problems, and then offering to fix those problems they caused.

and the libs keep wanting more of the same, too stupid to actually see what is going on, blindly believing our officials when they tell us they can fix our problems, just send them more money, and give them more power.

it is also an indication that the protection by force of those governing from those being governed has taken place, and will increase exponentially in the future.

d

 

[unionman]

I disagree. The main reason these drugs are held up in trials and other countries have them are because of the lobbyist for the drug companies themselves.
Of course you have the government making sure people aren't selling cure all mister feel good syrup

 

[moreluck]

When I think about all the trials OUR drugs are put through, I am reminded of the thalidomide (sp) babies and what horrible mutations were caused by a drug.

 

[dannyboy]

I disagree. The main reason these drugs are held up in trials and other countries have them are because of the lobbyist for the drug companies themselves.

really? and you know this how?

my wife works the front line in clinical trials. she has first hand knowledge of how the system works.

there is one drug in particular that has gone through the testing now three times, only to have to go back per the fda to more trials. the cost on this drug, when it does hit the market in the usa, is going to be 3-4 times of what it sells for in canada, because it is already on the market there.

so why would a company that wants to get this on the market, ask for and pay for delays that would cost it billions of lost revenue?

tell us oh unionman.

d

 

[unionman]

really? and you know this how?

my wife works the front line in clinical trials. she has first hand knowledge of how the system works.

there is one drug in particular that has gone through the testing now three times, only to have to go back per the fda to more trials. the cost on this drug, when it does hit the market in the usa, is going to be 3-4 times of what it sells for in canada, because it is already on the market there.

so why would a company that wants to get this on the market, ask for and pay for delays that would cost it billions of lost revenue?

tell us oh unionman.

d

OK, maybe I don't know, but why has it been sent back three times? What is the drug?

 

[1989]

I know an engineer at GM and once he tried to suggest answers to some of the problems GM was having at the time and his boss told him," don't worry the government will bail us out."
Yeah, with that kind of management its all the UAWs fault.People like you crack me up, you just think that every problem that a company has is because of its labor costs. Typical Republican, has an easy answer for everything.

Look at their balance sheet compared to their peers. That will tell you if their labor force is bleeding money.

 

[dannyboy]

OK, maybe I don't know, but why has it been sent back three times? What is the drug?

the drugs name is classified information. but it is very typical of the way the system works.

as far as why they send it back, for the same reason why people that apply to our gooberment at different levels for different things all get turned down initially. only after going through the process more times, and spending more time and money do they finally approve what ever it is they have the authority to aprove or decline. its a power thing.

one last thought unionguy. you do understand that once a company develops a drug, they patent the drug. then clinical trials proceed to prove the effectiveness of the drug, and that there are side effects that are not too extreme for the benifits that are derived from those drugs.

those patents are for a fixed time, after which anyone can produce the drug without having to pay royalties to the developing company.

so why would a drug company stall the roll out of their drug, when they know the clock is ticking on the time they can actually recoup their development costs?

now, recoup it by only being able to sell it for three years instead of the 8+ years that you planned on, and your cost for the drug to the consumer just went up by 800%

all thanks to the gooberment, who feels it neccesary to, and mandates the producers of hair driers to include the warning, do not use in a shower or bathtub.

i figure if you are that stupid, use it in the shower. you dont need to be in the gene pool anyway.

for sure, i dont need our gooberment to be a mother or father to protect me from everyone and everything.

d

 

[unionman]

the drugs name is classified information. but it is very typical of the way the system works.

as far as why they send it back, for the same reason why people that apply to our gooberment at different levels for different things all get turned down initially. only after going through the process more times, and spending more time and money do they finally approve what ever it is they have the authority to aprove or decline. its a power thing.

one last thought unionguy. you do understand that once a company develops a drug, they patent the drug. then clinical trials proceed to prove the effectiveness of the drug, and that there are side effects that are not too extreme for the benifits that are derived from those drugs.

those patents are for a fixed time, after which anyone can produce the drug without having to pay royalties to the developing company.

so why would a drug company stall the roll out of their drug, when they know the clock is ticking on the time they can actually recoup their development costs?

now, recoup it by only being able to sell it for three years instead of the 8+ years that you planned on, and your cost for the drug to the consumer just went up by 800%

all thanks to the gooberment, who feels it neccesary to, and mandates the producers of hair driers to include the warning, do not use in a shower or bathtub.

i figure if you are that stupid, use it in the shower. you dont need to be in the gene pool anyway.

for sure, i dont need our gooberment to be a mother or father to protect me from everyone and everything.

d

I can't say I disagree with most of your frustration. You have to admit something has to change with our health care system and I wish somebody knew what needs to change to get drugs out faster. I do know that it takes a lot of money to develope these drugs and these companies are trying to recoupe that money when they do have a winner.

 

[trplnkl]

for sure, i dont need our gooberment to be a mother or father to protect me from everyone and everything.

d

I agree that the government goes too far most of the time. Although, when it comes to drug testing, I'm glad there are pretty strict rules that have to be followed. Even with the rules, a few drugs that are more harmful than helpful get through. Money may be part of how they get past the trials, maybe not.

 

[dannyboy]

there are risks to everything we do in life.

what we have to do is compare the risk to the benefits.

if the drug is beneficial to us, and the risk is minimal, then the drug is a good idea.

but if the drug has limited benefit, say reduces the zit count on your face, but damages the heart, then no, the benefits do not outweigh the risk.

there is no drug that is 100% safe for 100% of the people 100% of the time.

the government regs that we have to live by would take a football field of shelves to store. and we add to that library of rules about 5000+ pages a year. many of these regs are written by some faceless nameless do gooder who has no one to provide checks and balances on them. some regs were not a bad idea at first, but they have morphed way out of control in their current form.

you want real healthcare reform? get rid of insurance for every day needs. buy it only for hospitalizations, or drug needs if that is what costs you so much.

most people spend more per year on healthcare insurance than the actual healthcare costs.

then get truth in pricing. no more double standards when it comes to cost. you pay what every body else pays.

get the blood thirsty lawyers out of medical care. too many tests and other things are done, not because a patient needs them, but because the doc or hospital is afraid of lawsuits if they dont.

california is a good example. between illegals and lawyers, healthcare costs to the state would be 65% or more less than it is now with just those two improvements. and yes, you dont get free medical care if you are an illegal. show up for free care, we will detain you and ship you back.

d

 

[beentheredonethat]

. These rich, fat cats, do not understand that union members are the one keeping these mismanaged companies running. QUOTE]

Kind of like how the UAW is keeping GM and Chrysler running...
Oh wait... never mind.....

Yeah, with that kind of management its all the UAWs fault.People like you crack me up, you just think that every problem that a company has is because of its labor costs. Typical Republican, has an easy answer for everything.

Unionman... I just brought all these quotes together, Airbusfxr said that the union members keep mismanaged companies running. I pointed out that it didn't work too well at companies like GM and Chrysler. You take that quote and take that to mean that it's all the fault of the union for the automakers demise.

You are putting words in my mouth, I think lots of issues caused the demise of the auto industry. The auto industry was slow to react to the increases in gas and the want of customers of fuel economy. They didn't see any serious competition and didn't care to make quality cars thinking it would be too expensive. They didn't take advange of economy of scales as much as they should of, for example a few years ago (probably closer to 10 now). Ford bought over 100 different types of radio's for all of it's vehicles. They realized they could get much better cost from the manufacturers if they reduced the number of radio's to just a dozen or so. Also, yes, the cost of union labor put the automotive industry at a competitive disadvantage to other companies from Japan, Korea etc.

As an fyi, I'm not a republican either, I'm an independent. I can guess you aren't a republican by the disdain you have for them in your email. Indpendents don't tend to label folks like you did. Which puts you firmly in the democratic camp, home of Jimmy Carter and "stagflation".



as an fyi, I'm a registered independent. There's parts of both parties that I don't like, and usually end up voting for the one who I think will hurt the country the least.

 

[unionman]

. These rich, fat cats, do not understand that union members are the one keeping these mismanaged companies running. QUOTE]





Unionman... I just brought all these quotes together, Airbusfxr said that the union members keep mismanaged companies running. I pointed out that it didn't work too well at companies like GM and Chrysler. You take that quote and take that to mean that it's all the fault of the union for the automakers demise.

You are putting words in my mouth, I think lots of issues caused the demise of the auto industry. The auto industry was slow to react to the increases in gas and the want of customers of fuel economy. They didn't see any serious competition and didn't care to make quality cars thinking it would be too expensive. They didn't take advange of economy of scales as much as they should of, for example a few years ago (probably closer to 10 now). Ford bought over 100 different types of radio's for all of it's vehicles. They realized they could get much better cost from the manufacturers if they reduced the number of radio's to just a dozen or so. Also, yes, the cost of union labor put the automotive industry at a competitive disadvantage to other companies from Japan, Korea etc.

As an fyi, I'm not a republican either, I'm an independent. I can guess you aren't a republican by the disdain you have for them in your email. Indpendents don't tend to label folks like you did. Which puts you firmly in the democratic camp, home of Jimmy Carter and "stagflation".



as an fyi, I'm a registered independent. There's parts of both parties that I don't like, and usually end up voting for the one who I think will hurt the country the least.

I believe most independents voted for Obama but now they are voting the other way in Massachusetts. I am an Independent too in some ways because I agree with the smaller government philosophy and I don't like wasteful spending. I don't know anybody that does.
The main reason I don't like Republicans is because they are so narrow minded and stubborn. That is one of the things I hated most about Bush and one of the reasons I like Obama. If you are not open minded to debate even if you feel strongly against something. In my opinion, You are not a smart person.

 

[island1fox]

I believe most independents voted for Obama but now they are voting the other way in Massachusetts. I am an Independent too in some ways because I agree with the smaller government philosophy and I don't like wasteful spending. I don't know anybody that does.
The main reason I don't like Republicans is because they are so narrow minded and stubborn. That is one of the things I hated most about Bush and one of the reasons I like Obama. If you are not open minded to debate even if you feel strongly against something. In my opinion, You are not a smart person.

Unionman,
Is that the reason the healthcare "debate" is behind closed doors ?
No Republican's, no Independents, and only a few select Democrats ---deciding the biggest law in American History --sounds fair and open minded !!!
Then again --I would agree that President Obama is very educated ----but that does not make him fair or smart !!!

 

[unionman]

Unionman,
Is that the reason the healthcare "debate" is behind closed doors ?
No Republican's, no Independents, and only a few select Democrats ---deciding the biggest law in American History --sounds fair and open minded !!!
Then again --I would agree that President Obama is very educated ----but that does not make him fair or smart !!!

It all goes back to that Stubborn Republican additude I was talking about. All the Republicans, not most but every single one wanted nothing to do with fixing our health care system so now they are not involved and its Obamas fault? I think not.

 

[dannyboy]

It all goes back to that Stubborn Republican additude I was talking about. All the Republicans, not most but every single one wanted nothing to do with fixing our health care system so now they are not involved and its Obamas fault? I think not.

and that quote shows how narrow minded and stuborn you are in this thread, and probably in real life.

they have proposed several health care reform plans, non of which involve the gooberment take over. several of the plans have real merit, and would go a long way in fixing the problem of healthcare.

but the dems, behind closed doors, want a gooberment take over. period. and are willing, behind those closed doors to make what ever deals needed to give them that power.

and you call that open minded and enlightened?

i call it criminal.

so no, i dont believe you to be an independent. you are too far left for even the dems.

d

 

[1989]

It all goes back to that Stubborn Republican additude I was talking about. All the Republicans, not most but every single one wanted nothing to do with fixing our health care system so now they are not involved and its Obamas fault? I think not.

If my car has broken hose leaking out coolant. I'm going to get a new hose and fix it. If I put in a new engine, exhaust system, and wiper blades, I will still be leaking coolant.

 

[unionman]

If my car has broken hose leaking out coolant. I'm going to get a new hose and fix it. If I put in a new engine, exhaust system, and wiper blades, I will still be leaking coolant.

We don't have to debate it any more. Big business won, healthcare and pharma company stocks will go higher while hospital stocks will go lower today.

 

[island1fox]

It all goes back to that Stubborn Republican additude I was talking about. All the Republicans, not most but every single one wanted nothing to do with fixing our health care system so now they are not involved and its Obamas fault? I think not.

Unionman,
I am also an Independent that truly believed Obama was going to change things for the better.
With his great speeches --He bamboozled me --his word.
He is a typical old school politician and I will work to get him out of office in 2012.
Having Tort Reform, and the 1300 insurance companies in full competition across state lines in the free market have been proposed by the right. Also a one page add on --stating no person can be dropped by insurance companies and you cannot be turned down for pre-existing conditions.
I believe if obama truly wanted Health care reform --he would take these ideas from the right --take the best ideas from the left --and the American people would support him and the bill.
Obama --like you--use the same talking points --the right has NO ideas.
They have many --you and him just will not compromise for the good of the entire country !!!
Even in the change I just proposed --there are left and right ideas --that many in the middle would gladly support !!!

 

[moreluck]

Just got notification that my health ins. will be raised $300 a month.....that'll be $1400 a month now. When we shopped for health ins. (back in 2000) we got with a group and got what we thought was a reasonable rate and it has been increased yearly to where it is now.

Be very careful when leaving, retiring or whatever that you have planned for health care etc.