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

[ghordan]

What a spiel of horse shit. Regulation in pharma comprises 80% of over cost for development of a drug!!! Hahahaha.

A cycle of research and development of some drugs cost around several hundred million to billion dollars and they repeat the process 10+ times until they have it ready for marketing. I have close family members who have worked for Merck and Pfizer that can attest to that. And none of these procedures have anything to do with regulatory compliance.

[HempJammer]

Insurance payments to doctors are based upon two databases for "Fair Pricing" similar to the book used for mechanic. Funny, United Health Care Group purchased both and promise other insurance companies a 16 to 1 return on thier money.

The insurance companies want you to pay 30% out of pocket and above your premiums for any healthcare.

Where are the pharmacies in that???

[Yakko77]

Add to that he cost of advertising the pharma industry bombards us with. Seriously, you can't watch TV for more than 5 minutes without thinking you have a half dozen different ailments.

[DigiLusionist]

64water, there is absolutely no debating that the Congressional Democrats are, by and large, Socialists.

[64water]

Not by any reasonable definition of "socialist." Look it up. Demos and Repugs are both ardent corporatists - govt., at the service of corporate interests - with no public control, input at all, that is what we have now. Obama's and Pelosi's policies are a consistent continuation of Bush's policies - who's policies were consistent with Clinton's and so on right back to at least Reagan.

[badattitude77769]

Deregulation has harmed this country to the max, ask anyone who has worked in the usa for over thirty years, laws and regulations are needed as corporations and even individuals do not respect the environment, safety, their own workers. No one wants big government, but letting money do all the talking does not work.

[paulymars]

yea deregulation worked so well in the financial industry.

[DigiLusionist]

You aren't aware, apparently, that it was government intervention (Fannie Mae, for instance) that demolished our economy.

It wasn't deregulation. In fact, research what the Democrats did in 2004-2006 to keep Fannie Mae from being regulated by the Republicans.

Keywords: Dodd, Barney Frank, and just about any other Socialist Congressional Democrat.

[64water]

That's complete rott. The current banking/financial disaster can be traced directly to the repeal of Glass/Steagall act of 1999 - i.e., deregulation. Also, the complete lack of regulation of the dirivitives markets as well as unregulated hedge funds. Dodd, Frank and other Demos helped dismantle regulatory restrants, so how that makes them socialists, I guess only you know.

It's both Dem's and Repub's who deregulated, but it was Sen. Graham (repug) who wrote the most damaging legislation.

[DigiLusionist]

It was the forcing of banks to make loans to people unable to repay that led to the derivatives market of which you speak. An entirely new commodity was created as a result. No one thought to regulate that. Or, didn't care.

Either way, I will agree it is the failing of both parties. However, it is galling that Speaker Pelosi would say, "The Democratic Party is not responsible."

The Free Market hasn't been free in decades; either through environmental regulation or political intereference.

[64water]

The total value of loans to low income buyers that went into default is a tiny fraction of the total banking mess. Those loans could have been payed off at face value for a tiny percentage of the bail outs. Claiming the banks we're victims after they have received over ten trillion dollars in unaccounted for funds in bail outs and then blaming the poor who we're lured into sketchy loans, which in any case account for an insignificant portion of the problem, is disingenous at best.

[youpick4me]

Why do people feel "regulation" is a good thing?

"it makes products safer"

-As libertarians we really need to address this issue. We can't deny the fact that people feel safer knowing that someone is "making sure" that products aren't poisonous. If we could elucidate how regulations hinder safer products we can win the argument.

If we want to get rid of regulations then we need to argue and prove that they don't make us safer.

What prevents producers from using poisonous ingredients?

[TajiTJ]

I love how people just say regulate it, as if they have any clue what needs to be regulated or how it effects the people who are trying to do good and don't need regulated.

[64water]

Are you implying that pharma co's are trying to do good? Now that's funny. You might want to cut back on that prozac.

[DigiLusionist]

64water, of course pharmaceutical companies want to do good. They also want to make money.

It takes millions to develop drugs. FDA regulations and requirements drive up the costs astronomically.

My wife works at a pharmaceutical company. I worked there for a while.

Not one of the average Americans who worked there were rubbing their hands, laughing maniacally, saying, "Now we're gonna stick it to the sick and infirm!!!"

[64water]

Sorry, but the track record of pharmaceutical companys suggests strongly that they are interested only in profits, not in curing or healing the sick. The reason there is an "alternative" medicine boom is in part due to the abysmal failure of big Pharma to heal. And to ad insult to injury they overcharge for their ineffective, dangerous drugs. Having prozac and other dangerous drugs showing up in our ground and drinking water is just one more reason why these companies need to be regulated.

[countryhorsefive]

Yes, they could deregulate the health care and pharmaceutical industries the way they deregulated the financial markets and the banks. What a brilliant idea.

Well, maybe not.

[TajiTJ]

Huge difference, even making the link is stupid.

[64water]

No, the link is quite to the point. The deregulation of the financial markets has been an unmitigated disaster. If anything, completely deregulating the pharma industry could have even worse consequences. Unnecessary, unsafe, not properly tested, over-priced, over-hyped drugs are a menace to society, the environment, and the economy.

[OpenCarryNH]

Just because the FDA approves a drug doesn't mean I'll take it if a doctor says I need to... every drug the doctor wanted to put me on I researched and decided it wasn't for me and found non-pharmaceutical created drugs to resolve the issue. I dropped my cholesterol in half and didn't take the lipator stuff the doctor said I had to take. He thought the drug worked so well until I told him I never filled the 'script and did my own research and lowered it.

[Skeptic121]

Ask anyone in the pharmaceutical industry about 21CFR11. It costs more to comply with these regulations than to test drugs for safety. Supposedly FDA wants to guard against cheating. In science, they guard against cheating by replicating each others' work. FDA could do likewise and send samples to independent labs for testing to make sure they get the same result. But that would be too easy!

Instead, 21CFR11 imposed ridiculous paperwork burdens. Beyond ridiculous, beyond bad jokes. Insanity.

[Skeptic121]

21CFR11 stands for

Chapter 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations part 11.

[gingermax]

If you want to cut health care costs, eliminate health insurance. They only pay out 15 cents of every dollar collected. They force the doctors to have a team of clerks whose only job is to harangue the insurance companies until they pay out . It costs the govt $2 to spend $1, so keep them away from it. Have people pay cash only and deduct the cost from the net taxes they pay.That will force the govt to use their power to lower the costs of pharmaceuticals. Nobody will go to the ER unless needed

[64water]

What a freaking idiot. Does this nimrod really think that the pharmaceuticals would pass on possible savings to the consumers? It's lack of proper regulation that's caused the price gouging. Big pharma is free to charge whatever they want, and enjoy one of the highest profit margins of any industry - much of it on the back of govt. sponsored research. Can't wait for unregulated, non-tested, GMO, nano-tech, spider gene spliced lettuce on the shelves at Kroger - unlabeled of course.

[64water]

Yes, just what the U.S. needs, more unsafe, poorly tested, of dubious value, over-priced, t.v. over hyped , side-effect laden drugs. Big pharma, now there's an industry that can be trusted to act in societies best interests. Some of the libertarian positions are so over-the-top stupid that you have to wonder if they are being promoted to discredit the better political positions they have, i.e., anti-war, anti central bank - or maybe some libertarians are really this reckless and stupid.

[ne0nsurf]

all good ideas. deport illegals as well

[Ashencrowe]

Why aren't we talking about deregulating BigPharma? Ummm... Because BigPharma needs it. It seems pretty obvious that we're being used as their guinea pigs. Vioxx comes to mind. Really, they're no different to the Banksters-- let them off the leash, and they'll kill us in earnest, one drug roll-out at a time.

[Hirnlego999]

Well, its not really known what kind of regulations, you wouldn't be able to remove it all since some of it is needed, like testing drugs for instance...

[thug2ryde]

You should make a video clearly saying examples of regulation and ways around it. The articles are semi-confusing and I'm not quite sure I understand all of it.

[RCinPAWA]

Good luck trying to reduce government regulation.

[miserkocho]

why not just drink turpentine, eat plutonium and smoke Monsanto weed ???? get it over with.

[mindrapeart]

the answer to that question is EUGENICS.