It looks like the Democrats may be experiencing a change of heart on their campaign platform to give the Medicare program the power to negotiate drug prices with the pharmaceutical industry maybe the Big Pharma's lobbyists "laid down the law" to the big shots in the Democrat Party in Washington that if they moved on this issue they would have a whole big bunch of additional opponents in the next election cycles and these pharmaceutical industry opponents big checking accounts could prove very hurtful to Democrat prospects in 2022 and 2024. I hope the Democrats don't cave to the pressure the days need to end where the American people foot the bill for pharmaceutical research for the World, it needs to end where America pays significantly more for pharmaceuticals that other developed countries! Although I would not like to see the pharmaceutical industry get the shaft in this Medicare arrangement like many healthcare providers maybe put a floor on the pricing Medicare can seek on individual pharmaceutical prices maybe have the floor be the pharmaceutical company's cost for the drug plus a twenty-percent profit margin or maybe have the floor be what is the lowest price paid by developed countries that are our major competitors! I don't get those Democrat voices that are clamoring that the Federal government has to spend the money saved in Medicare allowing the system to negotiate drug prices why don't these Democrats try a probably novel idea for them how about not touching those savings so as sure up the system because today if nothing is done in Medicare in five years Medicare Part A the Hospital Insurance part will be insolvent that means in five years either seniors will have to pay more in premiums or workers will have to get a bigger deduction out of their paycheck to fill the financial hole in Medicare why not leave this new savings in the system so as to push out this date where these groups will have to pay more? The American people hear a lot of rhetoric amongst Democrats about lowering the age of Medicare but the American people don't hear much mention of the conditions under this would be done to limit the burdens these changes would cause and that is critical!. If this idea is pursued it should not weaken the finances for seniors currently and in the future eligible and enrolled in the system, The newly eligible Americans and the Federal government should pick up this tab; meaning in part, the newly eligible should be paying a higher premium or whatever the fee on Medicare seniors is called and the Federal government should try to make the cost on these newly eligible commensurate with what that these Americans would pay if they were still in the ACA individual insurance exchanges; further because Uncle Sam is going to pay the shortfall between the newly eligible costs and the projected costs pursuant to an actuarial analysis eligibility for the expansion of the Medicare program should be income based like only those with a household income under 150K would be eligible, in addition the Federal government should proceed carefully with this program the country doesn't need more major financial bleeding befalling it so it would probably be prudent to initially lower the age to 62 and see the financial ramifications of that policy change for five years! Democrats seem poised to dramatically increase funding for Community Colleges across the nation so as to provide free education for those people attending these institutions of higher learning, generally speaking that is a great move it will make a difference in reducing young Americans that graduate from college from having crushing student debt levels, some people that have advocated for this basic idea have suggested that it be done in a manner where the student still has to pay like $350 or $400 per semester the rationale being if something is free people don't' appreciate it as much if they have to pay for it and making the tuition this low in most cases is readily affordable and if these students appreciate the educational opportunity more they will take better advantage of the opportunity and thus get a better education which would help the country's economy be stronger because eventually these students get out into the work force and hold jobs in the nation's economy!
Yes, it makes Democrats look like terrible hypocrites, but personally I could never see the economic logic in this idea of using government to use their collective monopoly purchasing power to lower drug prices. To assume government could do that assumes that a monopoly power exists in the pharmaceutical industry. I think we have to break this down and analyze it into two separate categories: generic drugs and drugs that have patents on them. For generic drugs, the question is why isn't there already another company providing them cheaper. For patented drugs, that's kind of only a short-term fix. A patent is supposed to reward the pharmaceutical industry and create an incentive for them to develop new drugs. Yes, sure, you can change the terms of the game in the middle of the game, but ultimately that will have an effect on how that other player continues to play the game thereafter. I mean you almost might as well just make patents for pharmaceuticals not last as long, that would have a very similar effect to what you are trying to do here. Going back to generic drugs, if there is no real monopoly by private companies there, basic economics tells us that if you try to artificially set the price lower it's going to create a shortage. Obviously in this case, since the drug is often considered an essential item, you're not going to get an actual shortage but a shortage within the Medicare paid system. Then many people are going to be forced pay completely out of pocket to get those drugs. It wouldn't end up saving money; it would just reallocate the total costs to consumers differently, in a seemingly random way. I don't mean to derail your thread, since I am bringing up a deep issue, but what you are discussing is entirely predicated on this theory that Medicare can use collective bargaining power to lower drug prices.
In my view that's a stupid overly simplistic idea. It's easy to say you will just solve the problem by raising the age, but we all know that's going to end up targeting seniors at random, since some of them at that age will need it. Maybe they should bring in some mathematicians to come up with some ideas that would actually be logical. A more sensical idea might be to cut the reimbursement rate at all levels. Say from 80% to 65%. Or cut reimbursement rates in a graduated approach based on age, where someone who is 65 might only get a reimbursement rate of 60%, while someone who is a few years older gets a 70% reimbursement rate, and those much older get to keep the current 80% rate.
That's almost certainly going to either require more government spending, painful sacrifices, or a very intelligent well thought out series of plans that do not consist of simple ideas. The last one is likely not going to happen. I'm not saying it can't theoretically happen, but let's just be practical and realistic about it. Government, as a collective consciousness, is just too stupid to implement any idea / policy decision / logic that is not simple. A creative solution is needed that is actually logical. That solution probably is not going to be simple. Everyone is looking for easy knee-jerk reactions to problems, letting their automatic instincts and emotions guide their search for a solution. I predict they're going to throw seniors over the side of the ship. The cuts will weaken the finances of seniors. It will seem to them that there is no other choice. Eventually they will have to address the issue, since the current setup is not fiscally sustainable.
The OP ranges from being unreadable to being very challenging to read. Maybe it was created by dictating it to a cellphone and punctuation was ignored, as was sentence ends and capitalization. What I DID get out of it was not valid spew. But I'll say this: I will be VERY disappointed if Medicare remains unable to negotiate drug prices. And I also believe the advertising of prescription drugs should be outlawed.
