How to Reduce Healthcare Costs by 80% Overnight (Without Spending $2 Trillion)

[organichik]

Maybe SOME OF THE 40% of uninsured Americans simply don't want your stinking Insurance. Some of us are a lot wiser than you think and can actually live without doctors and drugs.

[DaveDoggOwns]

If you're just going to assume that everyone is too stupid to require third party verification for the safety of drugs or is evil and will knowingly sell consumers harmful substaces then why then do you assume the people in the government are going smart and moral? If the population is stupid and evil then the government is going to be stupid and evil; especially if the government is democratic.

[peroron2000]

85% of the cost of health care is due to "wasteful, unnecessary regulation"? Where does this 85% number comes from first of all, but the next question is what regulation is un-necessary? Does she envision some kind of strange world where anyone can just package up anything they want and sell it? No need to test its effects or publish its ingredients? Like we had in 1900, patent medicines. Baby medicine contained morphine as did many other remedies. Is this the world she wants us to return to?

[ByzantiumCA]

Hmmm ... someone who works for a DRUG COMPANY wants LESS government regulation on DRUGS. Anyone sense a possible conflict of interest there? I love Shelly Roche when she is telling the government to keep HANDS OFF small farmers. But pharmaceutical companies are a whole different breed than small farmers. Drug companies DO NOT need our sympathy or protection. They are doing just fine getting USA strung-out on "medications" and buying congress.

[RealLifeProduct]

Who needs regulation when you can test the drugs on humans and if thousands die then we know the drug doesn't work. I say we just test the drugs on the people who don't want regulation seeing they are so willing to deregulate.

[DaveDoggOwns]

@RealLifeProduct Who needs the free market when you can delay the entrance of drugs and kill hundreds of thousands as a result? For every "regulation" you think is saving people's lives I can name just as many that is resulting in people getting killed because of needless delaying. Also, your arguement assumes everyone is either stupid or evil. If people in the marketplace are stupid and/or evil then why is the gvernment not stupid and/or evil?

[wanealy]

Stupidest video I've seen in years. First off, I would LOVE to see how she arrived at those numbers. Second of all, she asks us to trust her because she works for (wait for it...) the PHARMACEUTICAL industry ?!? Third, her argument assumes that with less regulations, profit making institutions like hers would have an incentive to lower their costs? It assumes that these corporations would voluntarily take the savings they make to lower their prices instead of increasing profits. Right.

[YIRMASTER]

wanealy you're a moron! The point is the prices wouldn't have gotten that high to begin with without state mandates.

BTW, do you know what a state mandate is?

For state legislators, [mandates are] used as a special interest tool to reward lobbyists with a specific mandate and let someone else pay for it"

I wonder why Obama's scratch that, Pelosi's health care plan doesn't address special interest added costs. Some are good but there are many abused and wasteful mandates that drive up cost

[wanealy]

First off, you don't convince someone by calling him a moron before you even lay out your argument.

Second: provide the numbers. Even if you include state mandates, an 80 percent reduction in costs is absurd. And by the way, the study has to be relatively unbiased: if it comes from an industry funded group, I don't buy it.

Third, if you believe Big Pharma is NOT a special interest group, I have some swamp land to sell you

[SuperBlahmaster]

Faux News: empty words.

[goffnett]

I'll take Fox over Ted Turner or the GE cronies at NBC, unfortunately we don't have other options. Fox speaks for Rupert Murdoch, he seems to be the best of the rest of the leftist scumbag that are so simple minded that they want to create a civil war between homosexuals and conservative beauty pageant contestants. A herd of adult men that sound like gossiping old hags. I'll stay with Rupert Murdoch until a better choice is available.

[Rhal95]

Cool. Everyone here seems to see the flaw with this PR.

One of the worst medical problems in America today is all the pharm-advertising convincing everyone they are sick when they are actually doing fine. ( or at worst, need a lifestyle change.)

Real health is free!

[zeitgeisthero]

i know govt is not the answer to everything but saying regulation of drugs is why healthcare is expensive is ludicrous. the pharmaceutical industry is in the top 3 most profitable industries in america. dont tell me govt regulation is why drugs are expensive ! they make a pill for 5 cents and charge 5 dollars for it, 1000 x profit.

and cheap big pharma pill popping is not real "healthcare" anyway.

[ibrox72]

Nobody is talking about it because Ruwart is NOT someone without an agenda. She fails to give a concrete example that someone could verify of how that magical number of 80% was determined, which, given her stutter, was clearly drawn straight out of her ass. You DO talk about it though because you're succeptible to propoganda like this. You claim to represent a new party, but you get all your info from Fox News? That's like saying you're forming a new party based on all the lies from CNN!

[MillionthUsername]

Gov't intervention drives up costs in medicine the way it does in housing, tuition, and everything else. The right of contract has been abrogated, and now we must follow the gov't system so it can enrich its friends at our expense.

People have a natural right to contract, to buy and sell goods and services - health care also. Regulation is just another scheme to redistribute wealth. That's why companies pay millions to lobby.

Free markets lower prices through competition. It's no big mystery.

[kwazi6]

Solution: Deport all nignogs, spickaroos and gods' chosen.

[musclegrab]

Labeling "standards" that hide the truth about the crap available at the grocery store. Its far safer to rely upon Whole Foods to keep dangerous foods out of its stores than to depend on government to keep it out of the country.

Not to mention the fact that people can take chances with their health knowing others will be stuck with the bill (yes, that's you again).

[musclegrab]

Government intervention makes everything more expensive. I kind of doubt that an 80% reduction could be had though.

But its certainly the case that government intervention has stifled incentives for taking care of one's own health.

Government has ruined our food, for example. Subsidizing corn and soy beans at every turn.

[way2muchNFO]

if only people realised they do matter

and the ones that think they do did things that mattered to us,

crazy, your attractive message aside, i'd love to see high res conferencing

real time stuff were like 1993 in the video cam web , it really puts a damper on getting things

faster done, nothing like a face to face in cyberspace where you can actually see the nose hairs

take care

eric

[lenny380]

easy-because lawyers want their cut of healthcare (and everything else)

[DaveIrie]

Nah LaRouche sucks, he's anti-cannabis legalization

[WellnessMafia]

Awesome

[ENJOYOURMATRIXX]

what else would you expect from the pharma industry? they have been poisoning us for years! now that we are so drug they are going to steal even more money!

[thomaserossi]

FDA is a sham. They tried to force Cheerios to remove their "heart smart" advertisements because Cheerios isn't a drug. It had nothing to do with the fact that Cheerios reduces cholesterol levels, because it does. The reason is the FDA changed their qualifications.

General Mills refused on account that it was the FDA that allowed them to advertised as "heart smart" in the first place.

Welcome to fascism!

[JRserver]

So if we just remove regulation on drug companies, what's to stop them from just charging whatever they want?

[thomaserossi]

Bwahahaha! You're kidding right?

Do you want to buy an aspirin for $1 million dollars? Sounds like you're willing to do that. Sounds like you're willing to pay for anything that anyone offers.

How about you work for one penny an hour? Sounds like you're willing to work for a penny an hour.

Companies can only charge what people are willing to pay. Gas prices dropped during the tail end of the Bush administration, not because Bush is an economic genius...

Basic Economics by Sowell

[lambedan]

LOL.

Thats like asking why anyone can't just charge whatever they wan't for a product or service.

You can charge what you want but people just won't buy it.

[Arginine88]

because the government has contracts with hundreds of big corporate pharmaceutical companies. This is big prophet for "Them". Us being healthy is bad business. Hence we live in a "Corporatocracy". Can some one please tell me at what point in time government was a good thing for the people? Government should only deal with war, but they do not need to start them. Taxes are a double negative for us. Wake UP!

[KARStarla]

I must admit you have to be right, they are discussing "codex alimentarius" right now in Rome, including banning all vitamins, NOW if that dont raise a red flag for folks who believe they want you well nothing will. It will be implimented Dec of this year 2009... stock up on vitamins and burry them in air tight time capsul. They will be as illegal as heroine

[shizont]

But wait, there's more! Insurance is mor eexpensive than it shold be because insurance companies are exempt from anti trust legislation. HR 1583 seeks to remove that protection. Also, procedures "paid for" byinsurance are over p[riced because the consumer of the service is removed from the purchase of th eserivce. Medical services NOT covered by insurance (cosmetic surgery, LASIK) have come down in price while those covered by insurance rise at greater than the rate of inflation.

[oilhammer04]

Yes, the government creates problem then they tell us they have just the thing to fix it. Same thing with the lending industry . . . . the government interferes with the Community Reinvestment act, etc., then the Democrats tell us we need more regulation (after they wrecked the industry). The government runs the schools which produce so many ignorant people who can't understand the root causes to problems, so they are easily persuaded to vote for an ignorant candidate who talks cool.

[printo69]

We dont need the FDA, they just hinder advancements in the pharmaceutical industry, not promote them. With non-profit 3rd parties like USP or Gold Standard, verifying the claims by drug companies can be done. Also pharmacists (which is what I am) would play a stronger role in the drug market. A pharmacist would not dispense medication unless he is sure of what the drug does, because theyre liable. So drug companies would have to go through 3rd parties & provide lit if they want to sell drugs

[goldgrif]

then you would have again like you have with doctors pharma companies will peddle to them

[collegeboy477]

if regulation was left to private companies than theyd be CERTAIN to make sure their drug was safe, cuz at the fist sign of dangerous side effects theyd get sued and loose all credibility. Instead the FDA offers this false banket of safety by backing drugs which atleast casuse: drymouth, stomachpain, uperresperatoryinfections, drowsyness, and vomiting.

I think we should audit the FDA's reports

[Chainedorlo]

There would also be private consumer regulatory agencies done for a for-profit basis, like the UL of modern times, except done for all aspects.

[zqueenbean]

While there are increased costs due to regulation, I do not buy what the doctor is saying. The pharma industry knows what they can get for their drugs and they do make a profit, and they spend millions (or more) on advertising and lobbying the gov't. And, which regulations should be lifted? The ones that say drugs must be tested for safety and efficacy? Standards for testing have already been lowered in an effort to bring new drugs to market faster.

[RMMHS4RP]

I have to say that this blew my mind, too. This word needs to get out.

[sonatadude]

She is absolutely right. Unfortunately Obama wants to regulate it even more, plus carbon taxes will be implemented all for the sake of a global warming scheme that is designed to loot the public without any proof there will be a change in climate. It's Obamageddon 2012

[vention4wh]

Less regulation? They don't even follow the regs that are out there. For example, the big aids hemophiliac medication scandal. Bayer and other big pharma companies, after dragging their feet for a year or two had to stop selling their aids infected medication in the US, so what did they do? They sold it in 3rd world countries. They should have burned it! No telling how many people died from their greed. If it weren't for the regs, they'd still be selling it. Relaxing the regs isn't the answer.

[2xtream]

Eugenics

[mrJOEmann]

no one talks because the media is owned my big pharma, no one talks because they get paid to be quiet,

look in to hemp seed as a nutritional addition. It has amazing properties.

CHeers

[ChrmdLabradorite]

Excellent find. Thanks for sharing.

[TheSomeguy6978]

That is awesome....I'm gonna remember that.

[PersianPaladin]

This is important.

[Tychicuss]

Well, I will be talking about it!!

Thanks for sharing Shelly!

[Frequencitee]

Wow Shelly! Very positive response from her and she's a Libertarian. Love it!

[bdc03]

She's a real azz kicker i saw her during the libertarian convention in 2008 that got hijacked by neocon bob barr who isn't even libertarian at all

[DaveIrie]

Yeah that sucks. I would have voted libertarian were it not for him. It could have been a big year for the party riding the wave of Ron Paul's campaign.