Pat's Thoughts Volume 59: "Your total is $247.43, please."

Alright, so I'm at CVS today waiting to get a prescription. I'm sitting there and they call a lady up. She was a black lady. I'm going to guess she was in her 40's. She looked like an average person, you know, middle class type. So she gets called up and the pharmisict asks her for $247.43 for her prescriptions. I was stunned.

So I'm wondering, "Why?" Why is a no better than a middle class person paying so much? I'm sure she has kids and a family to support.

Many politicians often bring up morals and how they believe they're going down the drain. They wonder why people deal drugs, why people steal, why people sell their bodies for sex. They accuse the above mentioned things of being 'morally wrong.' So tell me this: Is it 'morally right' to make someone pay such outrageous prices for medication? In some cases, they need this medication to live.

Oh, hours got cut this month and they can't pay it, so they go to the hospital where they some times die. If they survive, they're in even more debt than before.

Is that 'morally right?'

Now, I'm sure most of you are already thinking, "Great, he's gonna hit us with his free health care idea!" Well, no, I'm not. This is how I see it. The 10 % of America who is rich and controls 95 % of our profits, shouldn't they be the ones who should pay these prices? After all, that's pocket money for some people.

If low income people and people in the middle class received more benefits on all forms of health care, than I guarantee you politicans who criticize morals would see a drop in crimes. Until next time. -Pat

Pat, what you wrote might not necessarily tell the whole story. How many prescriptions did she get? How long are they supposed to last her? I picked up prescriptions for something I had a while ago that cost me over 70 for one prescription but lasted 6 months.

Also, we don't know what kind of insurance she had. Is it one where she has to lay out the money and then submit the bills for reembursement?

Also not all pills are covered under healthcare, were these necessary pills or maybe an extra strength diet or erectile disfunction pill (for her husband)

So just because someone paid $240 for pills does not necessarily mean something is wrong.

It looked like one prescription. And I don't know how long it should last her, but that's not the point I'm trying to make. Let's say that she's not covered by insurance and she has a heart condition. It's been done. And you shouldn't have had to pay $70. That's too much money.

Don't know, but I'm sure there are people who don't have insurance and that's not right.

I agree, but I'm just using this is an example. Some pills that aren't necessary shouldn't be fully covered, but this could've been heart meds for all we know.

And what about my question on morals?

But $70 is not too much money when you think about it. I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem with me spending $10 a month on pills but because I spent it all at once it seems like too much.

I didn't address the rest of your post because I didnt read the rest of your post. But I will respond when you don't use the word must and an !. Thank you

Yes I would, unless you're part of that 10 % I was talking about.

What about your question on morals?

Well let me talk a look:
Looking at your example as if she needed the pills to live, then no she shouldn't be paying that much.

State hospitals provide healthcare (although sometimes not that great) for people who can't afford it. Do I agree with that? NO, BUT having government run hospitals would only make things worse. So I really can't see a solution to that question.

Making the top 10% pay for things that others don't have to is no different than not allowing blacks or women the right to vote. It's discrimination either way. So no I don't agree with that

See Pat, I think the problem is that you look at communism and socialism and on paper it's perfect. But human error or whatever you want to call it causes it to be horrible. Free healthcare sounds great, but when you look at people I've talked to who have to wait in line for hours on end and hope that the doctors don't reach their limit for the day before they get to them or that they have to wait months for a surgery it doesn't sound so great.

Unfortunately, the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. No way they'd pay ANYTHING to anyone else! They're excuse "well I've earned/worked for it" which could be true and justifable in a way, but still you have to consider the value of a human life. I hope I'm alive to see something done about the health-care system in America and as usual I agree with Patrick

considering america is supposedly richer then canada i'd almost think you guys could use free health care...lol. but honestly i think that most wealth is inharited...so its very hard for many people to say they worked for it. im not ready to give examples...only ones from here in canada...the mervish family..the thompson family...etc. but im sure its the same in the states.

First of all Pat I hope you are ok since you had to pick up a perscription. That said:

Pat don't you think that some of the blame needs to go to the drug companies themselves?

I just thank God that my husband has the benifets that he has for serving in the Military for 20 years.

I really don't understand why there is so much objection toward government provided health care as long as there is an option to go to a private hospital. This system is used in many countries. Rich who want to get topnotch doctors, hospitals and medications go to the hospital and doctor of their choice to pay extra and get extra. Those who can't afford this can get the health care they need at hospitals run by government. It is certainly better than dying because you can't afford health care.

Mig, I kind of agree with you about drug companies, but government can make a change there. I had to take a prescription a few months ago to get a beclamethazone spray. It cost me $8. Then this month I took my prescription to another drugstore and they charged me $1 for the same spray. It turned out that the first time I was given a product made in France and this time it was made in India, hence the difference in the price. The insurance company would only cover 50% of the price of the Indian product so I had to pay the extra amount on my own when I was given the French product.

If government take this matter into their hand and provide the cheaper medication, there could be a choice for those who can't afford to pay extra amounts of money on medications. BTW, the only difference I really noticed between the two sprays was between the plastic sprayer, the French one is cuter, but they are having the same great effect on my coughing.

Pat, first off, you're making a prejudiced assumption about the woman just by appearance. Not only that, you're making assumptions about how much money she probably has.

"Oh, a Black woman can't have money -- charging her $250 is ridiculous!"

Now, don't get me wrong - prescription medications are ridiculously overpriced! BUT - that's not my point, nor apparently yours.

You looked at someone, and ASSumed her situation. Because she was Black?

NOT what I expect from a tree-hugging liberal, to tell you the truth. :p

$250 may be a lot for YOU, but how could you just assume it's a lot for anyone else?? She could have more money in the bank than you'll ever have, how do you know (without making assumptions)?



So, stop wondering WHY, and tell us what her reaction was, and how she handled it.

Perhaps you have yet to be truly "stunned" about anything, apparently. :p

Everyone made some good points here, but the bottom line question, I think, is

"Should people - in general; forget Pat's possibly faulty example - have to pay more than they can afford to for necessary prescription drugs?"

Answer, IMO: "No"

I don't know about other states, but New Jersey has a program to assist people with prescription drug costs, based on their income. I'd be surprised if Pennsylvania doesn't as well.

Wrong! Communism doesn't work, socialism does.
Here in Belgium, the socialists have been in power since 1900 (not always, but half of the time, and in a coalition) and we have great social security.
I's suggest to try it in the USA, but since you don't have a party that is pro social security over there, and knowing about the long history of loving freedom, I don't think it will ever become reality. A pity...

I don't think they should. It is a shame that some people have to choose between eating or buying their medicine.

My POV is these drug companies need to be held accountable for the high prices of perscriptions. Also I believe that there are some doctors who are writing unnecessary prescriptions for people because they get a kickback from these drug companies. They need to be held accountable also. Just my 2 cents.

That's nothing, my medication costs £14 per bottle...and I still have to buy the tonic water....Boom Boom

Why should someone be charged more money for something because they happen to make more money? Isnt that a form of discrimination?


DS

Wrong! Communism doesn't work, socialism does.
Here in Belgium, the socialists have been in power since 1900 (not always, but half of the time, and in a coalition) and we have great social security.
I's suggest to try it in the USA, but since you don't have a party that is pro social security over there, and knowing about the long history of loving freedom, I don't think it will ever become reality. A pity... [/b][/quote]Well Enzo, rather than saying "WRONG!" which really does nothing to move the conversation along and only makes people defensive (just figured I'd give you a tip on your choice of debating styles) why not tell me what you think is the basic flaw of communism?

Why should someone be charged more money for something because they happen to make more money? Isnt that a form of discrimination?


DS [/b][/quote]They aren't charged more money for the same thing. They choose to get better doctor and medication of their choice, so they would pay more. The idea of cheaper health care, which can be in lower quality, is for those who can't afford better health plans.

If we were to check out the financials of the big drug companies we'd see that they make an obscene amount of money. I also believe that only 35% of the population has some form of medical benefits. Bottom line: socialized medicine seems to be an avenue to explore....quickly and earnestly.

I have to use eye drops to ward off glaucoma. The doctor changed my subscription. The new stuff: 3 tiny bottles, which last about 4 months - $210, with insurance $20. Somethings wrong with this picture.

Actually Afs, Patrick made a blanket statement that the rich SHOULD be charged more money for their prescription purchases. Nothing to do with the kind of coverage that the rich may have. His statement clearly resonates that they should be charged more money for that same prescription based on their financial status.

I for one am not happy with the direction that healthcare has taken in this country. It's a disgrace. The Healthcare companies are just out of control with their premiums. And then when a claim is entered, they look to raise your premiums. The doctors themselves are just charging outrageous fees because they are paying loans and paying high malpractice insurance, hence back to the insurance companies.

But I think that the real culprits are the Law firms and the legal end of the civil system where so many frivolous lawsuits and malpractice suits are filed. These civil cases are IMO, the cause of this domino effect which always seems to trickle down to the consumer and the working man. The citizen is the one who always seems to wind up paying for everyone elses thievery and scams.

But it is also unfair to try and make someone who happens to become a financial success in life, pay more money for a product just because they happen to have more money.

And on the other side of the same coin, it is not fair that someone should be penalized, because they are NOT financially stable, with inappropriate healthcare. The types of heathcare that are provided to a sick person should NEVER be based on ones financial status, be they rich, or they poor.


Don Cardi

Pat has some valid points. Drug coverage is non-existent for many in this country, even those who are insured, especially the elderly. My mother, for example, takes medication for diabetes, blood pressure, her heart, her high cholesterol, and blood thinners. Her bills are hundreds of dollars per month. There is some relief through a NYS program, but she has to spend a fortune beforehand in order to qualify. It's a disgrace. And the new Medicare drug plan is very, very expensive, and also provides little relief.

However, I must disagree with Pat's point that the rich should pay. Damn right they earned it (or at least inherited it), so they should be allowed to keep it. And while I agree that the drug companies are profitable, they take on all the risk of developing a new drug and spend billions on research and development. While many are outraged that companies charge $2 a pill for something that costs them pennies to make, remember that only the SECOND pill costs them pennies. The first pill cost them billions.

The solution? I'm not sure. I don't believe that socialized medicine is the answer, but I'm not sure what is.

Well, then what you suggest they should do when they can't afford the golden standard health plans? Should they wait and die?

I know I wouldn't mind to get cheaper drugs made in another country and be checked on by a doctor who is not as good as expensive doctors if I have no other option. This is how things works, you get as much as you pay.

At lease this is the way here, and I really prefer it to what I experienced in the US. If I have a simple cold, I can go to a doctor who isn't that expensive, while I visit a more expensive and experienced doctor if I have a more important problem.

Afs, you miss the whole point I am trying to make.


I never suggested that someone who cannot afford healthcare should wait and die. :rolleyes:

There shouldn't be such things as golden standard healthplans. Health care should be affordable for ALL.

I was pointing out that everyone, no matter what their financial status is, deserves the best healthcare that there is! And they shouldn't be denied access to good doctors because those doctors choose to only participate in the elite healthplans. It's not fair that only rich people should be given the best care. One's financial status should have absolutely nothing to do with the kind of care that they are given when it comes to healthcare.

My point is that we are ALL human beings, equal human beings, and therefore we all should be treated equally when it comes to our health and our well being.


Everyone should be receiving the best healthcare.


Don't you agree?


Don Cardi

Even terrorists, rapists, and members of the ACLU?

Just kidding.

Even terrorists, rapists, and members of the ACLU?

Just kidding. [/b][/quote]Well MAYBE the members of the ACLU.


Don Cardi

DC, Life isn't fair but we can make it better. Poor can't afford to get the best health care that rich want to have, but they shouldn't be denied what they can pay for and is fairly safe. That's what I can agree with. You didn't say they should wait and die, but when they can't pay for their medications, they would.

There are some ideals that suggest human beings are equal and should be treated equally. But then there is reality and practical ways that things work out. I'm tending to be more practical, that's all.

quote:

---

Originally posted by J Geoff:
Pat, first off, you're making a prejudiced assumption about the woman just by appearance. Not only that, you're making assumptions about how much money she probably has.

"Oh, a Black woman can't have money -- charging her $250 is ridiculous!"

Now, don't get me wrong - prescription medications are ridiculously overpriced! BUT - that's not my point, nor apparently yours.

You looked at someone, and ASSumed her situation. Because she was Black?

NOT what I expect from a tree-hugging liberal, to tell you the truth. :p

$250 may be a lot for YOU, but how could you just assume it's a lot for anyone else?? She could have more money in the bank than you'll ever have, how do you know (without making assumptions)?