Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Image
    Abandon all sanity, ye who enter here!

Moderators: ᴶᵛᵀᴬ, Omphalos, Freakzilla

User avatar
Orthodox
Posts: 61
Joined: 29 Mar 2010 09:35

Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Orthodox » 07 Apr 2010 21:06

I am not going to base this on whether or not the Healthcare System overhaul is needed, or not. The question I am going to raise is in part due to a story now gaining some very important momentum.

Reuters wrote:The joint lawsuit led by Florida and now grouping 18 states was filed on March 23 by mostly Republican attorney generals.

It claims the sweeping reform of the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare system, pushed through by Democrats in the Congress after months of bitter partisan fighting, violates state-government rights in the U.S. Constitution and will force massive new spending on hard-pressed state governments.

While some legal scholars think the suits will reach the Supreme Court, many agree that the supremacy clause of the Constitution, which puts the powers of the U.S. government above those of the states, will trump the states' arguments.

"We welcome the partnership of Indiana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Nevada and Arizona as we continue fighting to protect the constitutional rights of American citizens and the sovereignty of our states," Florida Attorney General Bill
McCollum said.


18 states have joined together to reject the legitimacy of the bill to trump State and Individual rights by enforcing individuals to have to purchase healthcare or face fines or jail time.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Barack Obama's administration, then what impact will this have on states' rights? Remember, in the Civil War states went to war not over just slavery, but the right to revoke the federal government's influence on state rights; i.e. -- the right to secede from the Union. The consideration from the federal government is that insurance and healthcare is an inter-state commerce, and thus under the jurisdiction of the federal government, just as anything interstate.

There are other states, post this report, that have considered joining the lawsuit, which brings the total to 20. There are still more considering.

I suppose the question is: Do you think that this violates the 10th Amendment? Which essentially makes the case for State Sovereignty.

Read the original story here.
Image
Any road followed precisely to its end leads precisely nowhere. Climb the mountain just a little bit to test it's a mountain. From the top of the mountain, you cannot see the mountain. -- Frank Herbert

A Little Galach
Posts: 172
Joined: 26 Mar 2010 16:37

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Little Galach » 07 Apr 2010 21:17

It'll stand up. I'm no legal scholar, but it'll hold. The ruling summary (or whatever) will scold the mandate, but I doubt very much that they will overturn it.

I wish it were otherwise because of a multitude of terrible parts of the legislation, but I doubt this is getting struck down.

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18164
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Freakzilla » 07 Apr 2010 21:24

1/6 of the US economy is in government hands now, God help us.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

User avatar
Nekhrun
Icelandic Wiener
Posts: 3290
Joined: 10 Feb 2008 16:27

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Nekhrun » 07 Apr 2010 21:34

I don't think it violates the 10th Amendment. If it does we're fucked because a lot of other legislation is up for lawsuits as well. I'm all for it because now we can start adding to it and eventually end up with SIngle Payer Universal Coverage.

I'm not one of those people who thinks that the Government is some kind of ambiguous entity out there to screw us. The government is us.
"If he was here to discuss Dune, he sure as hell picked a dumb way to do it." -Omphalos :character-cookiemonster:

Happy Memorial Day everyone! -James C. Harwood

"Three of my videos have over 100 views."
"Over 500 views for my 'Open Question' video." -Nebiros

A Little Galach
Posts: 172
Joined: 26 Mar 2010 16:37

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Little Galach » 07 Apr 2010 22:16

Nekhrun wrote:I don't think it violates the 10th Amendment. If it does we're fucked because a lot of other legislation is up for lawsuits as well. I'm all for it because now we can start adding to it and eventually end up with SIngle Payer Universal Coverage.

I'm not one of those people who thinks that the Government is some kind of ambiguous entity out there to screw us. The government is us.


Enlighten me as to what the United States Federal Government does well and at a lower cost than a private entity. In addition please name a government project, piece of legislation or institution that does things without exceeding its projected budget.

When you can successfully offer me some examples I will listen to why the government should be more involved in the health care system of this country. Until then, we should explore other ways to make the best health care system in the world less cost-prohibitive.

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18164
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Freakzilla » 07 Apr 2010 22:18

You've got my vote! :D
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

User avatar
Nekhrun
Icelandic Wiener
Posts: 3290
Joined: 10 Feb 2008 16:27

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Nekhrun » 07 Apr 2010 22:30

A Little Galach wrote:
Nekhrun wrote:I don't think it violates the 10th Amendment. If it does we're fucked because a lot of other legislation is up for lawsuits as well. I'm all for it because now we can start adding to it and eventually end up with SIngle Payer Universal Coverage.

I'm not one of those people who thinks that the Government is some kind of ambiguous entity out there to screw us. The government is us.


Enlighten me as to what the United States Federal Government does well and at a lower cost than a private entity. In addition please name a government project, piece of legislation or institution that does things without exceeding its projected budget.

When you can successfully offer me some examples I will listen to why the government should be more involved in the health care system of this country. Until then, we should explore other ways to make the best health care system in the world less cost-prohibitive.

Fire departments, Libraries, Roads, Schools, NASA, I'm also a fan of regulation that provides clean drinking water, clean air, safe food to eat, safe transportation via land, sea and air. I could probably go on given a few more minutes.

The schools I have worked for have not exceeded budget. The district I work for is actually unable to even put up referendums to levy taxes and every year we get by. The services we have in MN that make sure the roads are plowed also work within budget. So does our Light Rail Transit system, which actually brings in more money than was projected by far. I'm quite certain I could go on here as well but I have a feeling that if you already think one way then these examples you've asked for will hardly change your mind. That's fine. At least admit that government does some pretty incredible things that we would not be able to do without out it.

If people don't like it then they can organize and do something about it. I will say it again, the government is us.

We do not have anywhere near the "best heath care system in the world". Our health care system is an embarrassment to one of the most resourceful and lucky countries in the history of the planet.
"If he was here to discuss Dune, he sure as hell picked a dumb way to do it." -Omphalos :character-cookiemonster:

Happy Memorial Day everyone! -James C. Harwood

"Three of my videos have over 100 views."
"Over 500 views for my 'Open Question' video." -Nebiros

User avatar
Orthodox
Posts: 61
Joined: 29 Mar 2010 09:35

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Orthodox » 07 Apr 2010 22:37

I understand the political and emotional positions on healthcare.

But I'd like to make a serious suggestion towards asking whether or whether not this violates states' sovereignty or states' rights as given to them by the 10th amendment.

Do you believe the founding fathers would have intended for the federal government to mandate healthcare to individuals who do not want healthcare? Car Insurance is mandatory because it effects other people. You healthcare is for you, and you alone -- it affects no one outside of you. The only argument that would aside that would be to say that it affects businesses by your absence -- but then you would have to argue that employees who do not have a car to make it to work, should have to have a car, or face fines and/or jail because you don't have a car... just like WHEN you don't have healthcare now.

This is what states are arguing AGAINST.
Image
Any road followed precisely to its end leads precisely nowhere. Climb the mountain just a little bit to test it's a mountain. From the top of the mountain, you cannot see the mountain. -- Frank Herbert

User avatar
Nekhrun
Icelandic Wiener
Posts: 3290
Joined: 10 Feb 2008 16:27

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Nekhrun » 07 Apr 2010 22:46

Orthodox wrote:I understand the political and emotional positions on healthcare.

But I'd like to make a serious suggestion towards asking whether or whether not this violates states' sovereignty or states' rights as given to them by the 10th amendment.

Do you believe the founding fathers would have intended for the federal government to mandate healthcare to individuals who do not want healthcare? Car Insurance is mandatory because it effects other people. You healthcare is for you, and you alone -- it affects no one outside of you. The only argument that would aside that would be to say that it affects businesses by your absence -- but then you would have to argue that employees who do not have a car to make it to work, should have to have a car, or face fines and/or jail because you don't have a car... just like WHEN you don't have healthcare now.

This is what states are arguing AGAINST.

I think if the founding fathers could foresee that we would have the capabilities to offer health care then they would've included it within their plans for this country. The problem is that whether you like it or not, we all pay for it anyway and there are ways of reducing costs by providing accessibility to medical care and preventative care. I don't think the auto insurance analogy is a good one, because we don't have to drive, but at some point we will all be sick and need medical attention. We live in a society where we are affected by the people around us and that is why government programs are necessary.
"If he was here to discuss Dune, he sure as hell picked a dumb way to do it." -Omphalos :character-cookiemonster:

Happy Memorial Day everyone! -James C. Harwood

"Three of my videos have over 100 views."
"Over 500 views for my 'Open Question' video." -Nebiros

User avatar
SandChigger
KJASF Ground Zero
Posts: 14490
Joined: 08 Feb 2008 22:29
Location: "Whatcha having, shoog? Hurry up and order now, I ain't got all day!"
Contact:

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby SandChigger » 07 Apr 2010 23:04

Well, then, individuals who "do not want healthcare" should be responsible citizens and sign and carry small documents with DNR instructions in the event they collapse in public or are involved in accidents.

Otherwise, someone else will have to foot the bill for them in those cases. ;)

User avatar
Omphalos
Inglorious Bastard
Posts: 6636
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 11:07
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California
Contact:

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Omphalos » 08 Apr 2010 00:07

Fuck what the founding fathers would have wanted. They're dead, and I wish that god damn argument would go into their moldering graves with them.

As to what this means for state's rights? Who cares? The states have limited rights anyway, and anything that touches national commerce is fully regulable by the feds. That's been the law for a long time.

User avatar
Nekhrun
Icelandic Wiener
Posts: 3290
Joined: 10 Feb 2008 16:27

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Nekhrun » 08 Apr 2010 07:36

YEAH!
"If he was here to discuss Dune, he sure as hell picked a dumb way to do it." -Omphalos :character-cookiemonster:

Happy Memorial Day everyone! -James C. Harwood

"Three of my videos have over 100 views."
"Over 500 views for my 'Open Question' video." -Nebiros

User avatar
Eyes High
Patience Personified
Posts: 2321
Joined: 22 Jul 2008 15:32
Location: between the worlds of men and make believe

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Eyes High » 08 Apr 2010 10:36

Nekhrun wrote:...

The schools I have worked for have not exceeded budget. The district I work for is actually unable to even put up referendums to levy taxes and every year we get by. ...


Then you are very lucky my friend.

my state has a law that they can't go over budget, but what I see happening there is that our public schools often go w/o some of the basics or either that the teachers and parents have to provide basic items such as crayons, paints, paper, pens, pencils and such....

instead of having jsut two fund raisers a year like I did back in the stone age, they are now having anywhere from 5 to 6 fund raisers a year to purchase books, playground equipments and such. and this is just in the K thru 5 grades I'm speaking of. The busses are old and the route my niece and nephew ride on has had three different buses so far this year. In fact one morning the bus broke down in front of their house and this bus was a replacement bus while the regular one was being repaired.

Every state is different and the income base varies greatly. I agree we need some kind of reform but what concerns me about this bill is that we the people are not being told the truth about it by EITHER party. Give us details, what will happen to those who can't afford to get health insurance, will the government provide it? What will happen to private insurance? What is there to keep companies from no longer offering insurance thru the work place?

the politicians need to give us some honest answers and stop all this sugar coating BS
What fear is there in the night?
Nothing, but that which is in our own imaginations.

User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Thing of Eternity » 08 Apr 2010 12:18

A Little Galach wrote:Enlighten me as to what the United States Federal Government does well and at a lower cost than a private entity. In addition please name a government project, piece of legislation or institution that does things without exceeding its projected budget.

When you can successfully offer me some examples I will listen to why the government should be more involved in the health care system of this country. Until then, we should explore other ways to make the best health care system in the world less cost-prohibitive.



Slow down there partner, the USA has one of the WORST healthcare systems in the developed world. The quality of the healthcare itself is very high, and this is what seems to be confusing Americans, but the system of getting it to people is total garbage compared to the rest of us. Don't make the mistake of confusing the two things, they are very seperate.

We've been through this all before, (plus we're really derailing the conversation that the OP meant to start, he specifically said he wasn't starting a discussion about whether or not the reform was needed) I'm with you guys that the gov generally can't run anything well... but this has already been PROVEN to work better than your private system.

So, maybe your government is just that extra bit incompetent, but if the rest of the developed world has better healthcare systems than you, that might


Also, the whole argument that this will kill the private sector insurance is utter BS - we have private insurance up here in Canada on top of our public healthcare, and they haven't suffered in the least.
Image

User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Thing of Eternity » 08 Apr 2010 12:23

Omphalos wrote:Fuck what the founding fathers would have wanted. They're dead, and I wish that god damn argument would go into their moldering graves with them.


Amen, I'm glad we don't have that argument up here. It's a new country now, it's not the same as it was when they were around, what ever happened to avoiding stagnation, being flexible?

You try new things, if it works you keep it, if it don't you chuck it. The USA tried removing all the regulations from certain markets, and it crashed the economy of the entire planet. The USA has tried this system of almost completely private healthcare, and it's left them with an absolutely embarassing record of care for a developed nation. Time to try a new thing. Maybe it works, maybe it don't, but what you have right now is sure as all hell broken!
Image

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18164
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Freakzilla » 08 Apr 2010 12:36

A Thing of Eternity wrote:The quality of the healthcare itself is very high, and this is what seems to be confusing Americans, but the system of getting it to people is total garbage compared to the rest of us. Don't make the mistake of confusing the two things, they are very seperate.


There's a huge misunderstanding on terms here.

People that have healthcare (otherwise known as the employed) receive excellent care and fear that if we pass laws to provide it to people who either don't want it or don't have it provided by their employer it will cause the quality of care to suffer.

I don't think anyone will argue that the system can't be improved.

This isn't about the healthcare system anyway, it's a massive power grab by the government.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Thing of Eternity » 08 Apr 2010 12:56

Freakzilla wrote:There's a huge misunderstanding on terms here.

People that have healthcare (otherwise known as the employed) receive excellent care and fear that if we pass laws to provide it to people who either don't want it or don't have it provided by their employer it will cause the quality of care to suffer.


That's not totally true, there are endless stories where people have coverage and then the insurance company finds ways to screw them out of their healthcare. The people who don't get screwed, or rejected, yes, they have good health care - IF their insurance companies play along. At the very least that's something that needs to be better regulated.

Also, from what I understand it's no where near as cut and dry as the employed having it and the unemployed not, I've seen some of the prices you guys have to pay (more than it costs us up here to support everyone, including the bums), I'm betting that there are millions of employed people who simply can't afford the coverage but don't qualify for medicare or whatever the current "charity" health plan is.

I understand what you're saying, but the proof is in the pudding. Countries that have some kind of universal coverage have better healthcare records than the USA. I know a lot of the poor health of the US comes from the fact that people are getting 7% of their calories from soda, and are lazy and fat and smoke and drink - but Canada's just as bad for those things, we're a slob country just like you - and our health record is much better than the USA's.

I hate seeing the government mess things up too, but sometimes we have to admit that the private sector can be JUST as bad. They say 40 million americans don't have coverage, but how many of those who do have it are going to be screwed out of it when the time comes? The real number of people who receive inadequite healthcare is going to be much much higher than 40 million.

Freakzilla wrote:This isn't about the healthcare system anyway, it's a massive power grab by the government.


That's a fair enough worry, but it seems like conservative people flip out when Democrats grab power and not when Republicans do the same. I don't think it's about the government grabbing power, I think it's about the OTHER PARTY grabbing power for most people. (Not necessarily for you, I know you're more central)


I totally respect people being worried about this and dissagreeing with it - but sometimes the government has to ram something down people's throats (we didn't always have universal care up here, it was rammed down our throats once upon a time too, people were scared but it turned out to be one of the best things that ever happened to us. The person who did the force-feeding was recently voted the most important Canadian in the history of the country).
Image

User avatar
Eyes High
Patience Personified
Posts: 2321
Joined: 22 Jul 2008 15:32
Location: between the worlds of men and make believe

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Eyes High » 08 Apr 2010 13:23

As far as the states' rights....I don't see how the law suits will stand up. The Fed trumps the states as was mentioned earlier, but shouldn't that mean that the federal government should provide the insurance then and not the states?
What fear is there in the night?
Nothing, but that which is in our own imaginations.

User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Thing of Eternity » 08 Apr 2010 13:32

Eyes High wrote:As far as the states' rights....I don't see how the law suits will stand up. The Fed trumps the states as was mentioned earlier, but shouldn't that mean that the federal government should provide the insurance then and not the states?

I would guess that would make sense, I'm not very up on how that all works for you guys though.

Up here healthcare is actually a provincial thing, we have vastly different healthcare systems from province to province. It all started with one province's leader forcibly instating the program (in our of our most concervative provinces), then everyone else saw how great it was and joined in to varying degrees.

Kinda like what you guys have going with Hawaii.
Image

User avatar
Apjak
Posts: 518
Joined: 30 Jun 2008 12:06
Location: Kansas City

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Apjak » 08 Apr 2010 13:35

Nekhrun wrote:Fire departments, Libraries, Roads, Schools, NASA, I'm also a fan of regulation that provides clean drinking water, clean air, safe food to eat, safe transportation via land, sea and air. I could probably go on given a few more minutes.

I will not bullet point each of your listings here except to say that for the most part, there are laws that keep there from being private versions of most of these things. Some like water, and fire, with good reason, we only need one, and it needs oversight that's accountable to the public. Hell, most roads are built and libraries are run privately anyway, with the bills being paid out by local governments that can only be bothered to pick the lowest bidder for their state mandated budget.

The schools I have worked for have not exceeded budget. The district I work for is actually unable to even put up referendums to levy taxes and every year we get by. The services we have in MN that make sure the roads are plowed also work within budget. So does our Light Rail Transit system, which actually brings in more money than was projected by far. I'm quite certain I could go on here as well but I have a feeling that if you already think one way then these examples you've asked for will hardly change your mind. That's fine. At least admit that government does some pretty incredible things that we would not be able to do without out it.

I work for a public school district, but it is idiotic to say that public schools do anything better than private schools, or even private parents. Private schools usually do a hell of a lot more with a hell of a lot less. Public education is a funding mess, because it's nearly a monopoly that's run by unions. At least I get paid more here, but private school kids get a hell of a better education, but their parents pay me and their private school.

If people don't like it then they can organize and do something about it. I will say it again, the government is us.

I agree, to a point. I believe that our representative democracy has been hijacked by an oligarchy that keeps us arguing over emotional issues that the should need no government regulation. i. e. abortion (huge ass snow job)

We do not have anywhere near the "best heath care system in the world". Our health care system is an embarrassment to one of the most resourceful and lucky countries in the history of the planet.

This is subjective and irrelevant. "Best" or "Embarrassment" are personal emotional statements; my concern from a rational standpoint is that the incentive to innovate will disappear the less privatized things get. You can't measure the drugs and procedures that were never developed. Other than the possible loss of innovations, I feel that the health-care overhaul will be underwhelming.

My concern as voter then is, why has heath-care been Obama's big political baby, when his campaign was all about ending the war in Iraq?
I don't think the author should make the reader do that much work - Kevin J. Anderson
We think we've updated 'Dune' for a modern readership without dumbing it down.- Brian Herbert
There’s an unwritten compact between you and the reader. If someone enters a bookstore and sets down hard earned money(energy) for your book, you owe that person some entertainment and as much more as you can give. - Frank Herbert

User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Thing of Eternity » 08 Apr 2010 13:41

Apjak wrote:
We do not have anywhere near the "best heath care system in the world". Our health care system is an embarrassment to one of the most resourceful and lucky countries in the history of the planet.

This is subjective and irrelevant. "Best" or "Embarrassment" are personal emotional statements; my concern from a rational standpoint is that the incentive to innovate will disappear the less privatized things get. You can't measure the drugs and procedures that were never developed. Other than the possible loss of innovations, I feel that the health-care overhaul will be underwhelming.



That's not how it works, the companies that develope the inovations continue running just fine. Have you ever seen the inovations that come out of Canada? You won't lose anything in that feild trust me, this has been proven over and over in other countries, it's a non-issue.
Image

User avatar
Apjak
Posts: 518
Joined: 30 Jun 2008 12:06
Location: Kansas City

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby Apjak » 08 Apr 2010 14:12

U. S. Based drug developers:

* Abbott Laboratories
* Acorda Therapeutics
* Aderis Pharmaceuticals
* Adolor Corporation
* Alcon
* Alkermes (company)
* Allergan
* Alnylam Pharmaceuticals
* Alza Corporation
* Amgen
* Amylin Pharmaceuticals
* ARIAD Pharmaceuticals
* Avax Technologies
* AVI BioPharma
* Barr Pharmaceuticals
* BioCryst Pharmaceuticals
* Biogen Idec
* Biolex
* Biovista
* Bradley Pharmaceuticals
* Bristol-Myers Squibb
* CancerVax
* Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc.
* Century Pharmaceuticals
* Cephalon
* Ceragenix Pharmaceuticals
* Combe Incorporated
* Cortex Pharmaceuticals
* CoTherix
* Covance
* Covidien
* Cutter Laboratories
* CytoSport
* CytRx
* Danco Laboratories
* User:Dmillin/Allied Medical Supply
* DNAPrint Genomics
* EPIX Pharmaceuticals Inc
* Eli Lilly and Company
* Elorac
* Endo Pharmaceuticals
* Ethicon Endo-Surgery
* Ethicon Inc.
* Forest Laboratories
* GenVec
* Genentech
* Genta (company)
* Gilead Science
* ImClone Systems
* Institute for OneWorld Health
* ISTA Pharmaceuticals
* Ivax Corporation
* Johnson & Johnson
* Kinetic Concepts
* King Pharmaceuticals
* Kinray
* Leiner Health Products
* Mallinckrodt Incorporated
* Martek Biosciences Corporation
* S. E. Massengill Company
* McKesson Corporation
* McNeil Laboratories
* Mentholatum
* Merck & Co.
* Miles Laboratories
* Mylan Inc.
* Myriad Genetics
* Nereus Pharmaceuticals
* Northwest Biotherapeutics
* Norwich Pharmaceuticals
* Nuvelo
* Optimer Pharmaceuticals
* Organon International
* Ortho Pharmaceutical
* Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical
* OSI Pharmaceuticals
* Ovation Pharmaceuticals
* Panacos Pharmaceuticals
* Par Pharmaceutical
* Parke-Davis
* Perrigo
* Pfizer
* Pharmaceutical Product Development
* Prasco Laboratories
* Procter & Gamble
* Proteon Therapeutics
* Purdue Pharma
* Qualitest
* Quark Pharmaceuticals
* Regeneron
* Repros Therapeutics
* Respa Pharmaceuticals
* Rib-X Pharmaceuticals
* Savage Laboratories
* Schering-Plough
* G. D. Searle & Company
* Smith, Kline & French
* Spectrum Pharmaceuticals
* Sterling Drug
* Tanox
* TAP Pharmaceutical Products
* Tec Laboratories
* Teva Pharmaceutical Industries
* The Pharm
* Tiens Biotech Group
* Titan Pharmaceuticals
* Trevena Inc
* Trubion
* Upjohn
* Upsher-Smith Laboratories
* Valeant Pharmaceuticals International
* Ventria Bioscience
* Verus Pharmaceuticals
* Vion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
* ViroPharma
* Vital Pharmaceuticals
* Watson Pharmaceuticals
* West Pharmaceutical Services
* Wyeth
* Zonite Products Corporation


Canada based drug developers:

* Æterna Zentaris
* Angiotech Pharmaceuticals
* Apotex
* Axcan Pharma
* BioMS Medical Corp
* Biovail
* Buckley's
* Cannasat Therapeutics
* Enox Biopharma
* IL Therapeutics
* MDS Inc.
* Novopharm
* PainCeptor Pharma
* Patheon
* Pharmascience


Now, I know that quantity isn't necessarily quality, but I think it still says something.
I don't think the author should make the reader do that much work - Kevin J. Anderson
We think we've updated 'Dune' for a modern readership without dumbing it down.- Brian Herbert
There’s an unwritten compact between you and the reader. If someone enters a bookstore and sets down hard earned money(energy) for your book, you owe that person some entertainment and as much more as you can give. - Frank Herbert

A Little Galach
Posts: 172
Joined: 26 Mar 2010 16:37

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Little Galach » 08 Apr 2010 14:14

I apologize that I wasn't around for the previous bickering surrounding this topic, and to Orthodox for this going away from what he intended. I further apologize for the novel that I am unleashing below.

Nekhrun wrote:Fire departments, Libraries, Roads, Schools

These are state and local services. In practice most of those organizations should be easier to run because they are smaller, even Dune talks about the large organizations and bureacracies (sp?) being ineffecient and cruel. I'm glad these services are running smoothly and on budget in MN, they are not here in IL and elsewhere in the country.

The interstate system is Federal and is run fairly well, although it is majorily funded by fuel taxes which are paid by the users -not by taxes on others.

The federal government became involved in schools with the Department of Education in the late 1970's. Since then the two most notable things about the schools in this country are the quality of public education has declined and the amount of money spent per student has increased. There are other factors that have contributed to the decline in quality, but private institutions out perform public consistently.

NASA

I agree, I'm a big fan. Interesting how that organization is being shunned next to other more politically attractive items in the Federal budget.

I'm also a fan of regulation that provides clean drinking water, clean air, safe food to eat, safe transportation via land, sea and air. I could probably go on given a few more minutes.
I agree here as well. Although the deregulation of industries has led to lower costs and higher quality, like air travel, rail transport and shipping. Note, however, that federal regulation does not prevent there from being food poisoning issues with produce or meats.

The schools I have worked for have not exceeded budget. The district I work for is actually unable to even put up referendums to levy taxes and every year we get by. The services we have in MN that make sure the roads are plowed also work within budget. So does our Light Rail Transit system, which actually brings in more money than was projected by far. I'm quite certain I could go on here as well but I have a feeling that if you already think one way then these examples you've asked for will hardly change your mind. That's fine. At least admit that government does some pretty incredible things that we would not be able to do without out it.
If this is true then Minnesota is the minority among US states. However the examples you have are all local-to-state level organizations and not FEDERAL. Light rail may bring in more revenue than projected, but it is heavily subsidized and not a "free-standing" entity. By and large, the larger an organization the less effecient it is.
I will admit that the federal government can do some amazing things, like blowing up people in Iraq with stealth bombers that take off in Missouri.

If people don't like it then they can organize and do something about it. I will say it again, the government is us.

Many people protested, answered opinion polls with negative responses and are continuing to do so. In fact a majority of Americans did. Many voted for the current president and members of congress to enact change in the current system only to have it conducted in a manner that was different than promised and included language and items (taxes) that were promised not to. If "the government is us" because we voted for our representatives to enact our wishes via their promises...that failed to occur in this case. Many people were sold a bill of goods that turned out to be an unapologetic bag of crap.

We do not have anywhere near the "best heath care system in the world". Our health care system is an embarrassment to one of the most resourceful and lucky countries in the history of the planet.


The care that people receive in this country is the best in the world. The cost of it is too high and the access to it because of that high -and rising- cost is the problem. Rather than make everyone get insurance, raise taxes and "redistribute wealth"
in an overt effort to start the conversion to a single payer system there were other ways to try to attack costs and access. None of those were ever seriously considered and this is a point of anger.



A Thing of Eternity wrote:Slow down there partner, the USA has one of the WORST healthcare systems in the developed world. The quality of the healthcare itself is very high, and this is what seems to be confusing Americans, but the system of getting it to people is total garbage compared to the rest of us. Don't make the mistake of confusing the two things, they are very seperate.


I agree. That is why the governor of Ontario flew to the US to get treatment. It's the best quality in the world (which I said) but has too high a cost (which I also said). Attacking the high costs and their causes is the best way to solve that issue and make going to a doctor as affordable as many other essential parts of our lives. Taxing retirement benefits, medical devices, tanning beds and flexible spending accounts in order to redistribute the revenue as subsidies to purchase insurance is not the best method to lower costs.

We've been through this all before, I'm with you guys that the gov generally can't run anything well... but this has already been PROVEN to work better than your private system.

So, maybe your government is just that extra bit incompetent, but if the rest of the developed world has better healthcare systems than you, that might


I missed the proof, and if you have a link to it here please provide it. If it includes survival rates for cancer and other dieseases, life-span expectancy, doctors-per-capita and other measurables I would appreciate it.

Now that all of these countries have their health care issues solved it must mean that they have vibrant, dynamic, growing economies with little unemployment. Which countries fit this description? At what rate are their economies growing and what is their unemployment rate? How has their standing in the world economy changed since their conversion?


Also, the whole argument that this will kill the private sector insurance is utter BS - we have private insurance up here in Canada on top of our public healthcare, and they haven't suffered in the least.
The fact that you require two tiers is an indictment in itself. In my opinion.

To answer Orthodox's question, this will not be overturned.

User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Thing of Eternity » 08 Apr 2010 14:37

Apjak wrote:Now, I know that quantity isn't necessarily quality, but I think it still says something.


Yes, that the US has more than 10 times as many people as us, and has a reasonably proportionate amount of drug developers. Remember too that we buy a lot from US manufactures, and that a massive amount of innovation actually comes out of our Universities rather than the drug corps.

My point is that there will still be plenty of research, because nothing will have changed other than where the money is coming from. It's not like the gov is going to take over and thn shut down the whole operation, that's just not how it works in countries that do this. The government still employs private sectors to make this stuff, they just subsidize the costy for citizens when they need it. The drug company gets the same amount of money.
Image

User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Healthcare Reform: The Rejection

Postby A Thing of Eternity » 08 Apr 2010 14:41

A Little Galach wrote:
We've been through this all before, I'm with you guys that the gov generally can't run anything well... but this has already been PROVEN to work better than your private system.

So, maybe your government is just that extra bit incompetent, but if the rest of the developed world has better healthcare systems than you, that might


I missed the proof, and if you have a link to it here please provide it. If it includes survival rates for cancer and other dieseases, life-span expectancy, doctors-per-capita and other measurables I would appreciate it.


I'll see if I can track down the stats, but yes, Canada thrashes the USA in most of the catagories you just listed, and we pay less overall for our healthcare per-capita than the US does. This is more or less common knowledge, but I will see if I can track something down later today. Maybe do a little looking on your own too of course.

A Little Galach wrote: Now that all of these countries have their health care issues solved it must mean that they have vibrant, dynamic, growing economies with little unemployment. Which countries fit this description? At what rate are their economies growing and what is their unemployment rate? How has their standing in the world economy changed since their conversion?


This statement is just childish, when did I say everywhere else is perfect? I said better, not perfect. As for how is their economy doing? Canada's is far better than yours right now.I don't think that has much to do with our healthcare though, not sure why you brought it up.
Image


Return to “˱”