I really hate all the pharma ads on TV. Now I have an even better reason to abhor them. (h/t Digby)
Meanwhile, Representative Jerrold Nadler, Democrat of New York, has introduced a bill called the Say No to Drug Ads Act. It would amend the federal tax code to prevent pharmaceutical companies from deducting the cost of direct-to-consumer drug advertisements as a business expense.
“You should not be going to a doctor saying, ‘I have restless leg syndrome’ — whatever the hell that is — or going to a doctor saying, ‘I have the mumps,’ ” Mr. Nadler said in an interview. “You should not be diagnosed by some pitchman on TV who doesn’t know you whatsoever.” […]
Hello? They’re getting a tax cut for pushing drugs? And, make no mistake, that’s exactly what they’re doing. Half the time I’m not even certain of what their little purple pill does. All I see are high happy people running through fields. And my favorite ads always end with… Tell your doctor.
Tell your doctor? Shouldn’t that be the other way around? Shouldn’t your doctor be telling you? And can anyone tell me what other companies receive a subsidy to advertise? No wonder reforming health care is such a battle. One side gets all the breaks.
It’s really funny how money and influence works. If you take a survey everyone says that money has a big influence but that it doesn’t influence me, personally, only those other guys. When you do surveys you do find that freebies and advertising have a big effect.
Yeah — tell your doctor.
My wife is alive because of one of those ads which described a combination of symptoms she had.
Our family doctor blew off her suggestion — based upon your argument about “diagnosis by pitchman.”
We changed doctors (something ObamaCare won’t let us do) and got the tests (something else ObamaCare won’t let us do) and found out she had the condition in question. She went straight to the hospital the afternoon the test results came in — and into ICU that evening.
Sheesh, you’re such a drama queen, RWR. Maybe you should have spent the time researching your choice of doctor, or… when the doctor ignored you, you should have left – immediately. Isn’t this common sense? And I’m not saying that patients shouldn’t be their own advocates – they should.
But given you didn’t address my point about subsidies I guess you’re okay with that.
I’m sorry RWR but
Those are lies. Do Republicans even remember we already have government healthcare options – they’re called Medicare, Medicaid and the VA system.
I’m sorry your wife had a crappy doctor. I think patients definitely should be strong advocates and I hope that the internet will make it easier to search by symptoms (I think it’s getting a lot better). Diagnosis is still a bit of a crapshoot and I personally don’t want to depend on having a disease that will make a lot of money for a pharmaceutical company.
So true, UI. But all Republicans have left are lies. They have no plan to fix health care, or the economy, or the two wars they forced us into. All they have is drama. They are the Lindsay Lohans of politics.
Remember — under the legislation that currently exists you will be ASSIGNED your doctor, not get to choose your doctor. And you will be permitted what tests a government bureaucrat decides are reasonable — no appeal.
Pandora – Sometimes doing nothing is FAR better than having the government “fix” the problem.
And pandora — we have “no plan” to fix health care because we disagree with you regarding whether or not the system as it exists is broken. And a great many of us believe that allowing the business cycle will fix the economy’s problems without massive government intervention.
Believe it or not, “leave it alone” IS a plan.
Yes, we know the Republicans plan is the status quo. Republicans are the party of no, the “can’t do” party, the change is scary party. We get it. It’s also a party that relies on lies.
Lie
Oh, and UI, I am aware of the broke Medicare system, the broke Medicaid system, and the low quality VA system. None of them are models I want to emulate. Neither are the systems of Canada and the UK, where we find government rationing of medical care that is easily accessible in this country.
under the legislation that currently exists you will be ASSIGNED your doctor, not get to choose your doctor. And you will be permitted what tests a government bureaucrat decides are reasonable
This is Not True.
And since the bill actually exists, you might want to bolster your argument with the exact verbiage (not cherry-picked bits of wrong that anoni is trying to peddle) from said bill that makes your case.
Yes, countries with better healthcare statistics than the U.S. They are obviously hellholes.
Oh, BTW, please save your grandma from the hell of Medicare. Buy her insurance on the open market. Let us know how that works out.
How long do you wait for an MRI in the USA? Compare that wait time with the UK and Canada. Ditto CAT scans.
Both grandmothers are dead, asshole.
I love the way the Right trashes medicare and the VA. You’d think if they really felt this way they’d make their case to seniors and vets. Hmmm… I wonder why they’re so silent.
And RWR is trashing Medicare and deflecting with the questions re: wait times because he can’t answer the question I asked him.
Comment by Rhymes With Right on 28 July 2009 at 9:54 am:
“Oh, and UI, I am aware of the broke Medicare system, the broke Medicaid system, and the low quality VA system. None of them are models I want to emulate.”
RWR,
When (if you are not already) eligible for Medicare, good luck getting your fellow Medicare recipients to write their congressmen to have “the broke Medicare system” emulate the “free” market model.
I’m sorry for the loss of your grandmother. Your parents or you then. I have no idea how old you are.
So the wait time for an MRI is what we should judge our systems by, then? How about all the people in the U.S. who can’t get MRIs at all because they have no insurance. That’s called rationing.
The VA has been chronically underfunded. Talk to Bush about that one.
The U.S. spends 16% of GDP on healthcare, more than any other country in the world and we insure less people. Administrative expenses make up 40% of insurance company costs and only 2% of Medicare costs.
Republicans argue government can’t do healthcare but government also does it too good and it’ll put private insurance out of business. There will always be private insurance. Medicare has supplementary plans.
The GOP wants the status quo. The status quo has the U.S. at 37th in the world in health outcomes at the most expensive costs. It has 50 million people who are uninsured and countless others that are underinsured. It throws sick people out of the hospital if they can’t pay, it has insurance company execs decide what treatments you get and it limits your choices of doctors and hospitals. A “pre-existing condition” will make you ininsurable and you’re very likely to go bankrupt if you or a family member gets ill with cancer. That’s what Republicans want to protect.
Actually, UI, the argument is not “it can’t do it but it will do it too good.”
The argument is that government is the 800-pound gorilla in the room, the one that has the capacity to undercut the private sector in price because all it has to do is make up the difference between the money taken in from premiums with a tax hike on everyone.
If I run a business, I have to cover my costs (and make a profit) with the price I charge. Government does not — it can compete with me by selling for less than cost and funding the difference through a tax on everyone (including me — thereby forcing me to raise my prices to subsidize my competition). Assume the two products are comparable — folks would choose that cheaper, subsidized product. For that matter, even if my product were superior, it is likely that many folks would still choose the under-priced subsidized product because of cost.
Now, consider health insurance. Most people don’t really get to directly choose their insurance — their employer does through the options it offers (example — I have three choices with one company through my employer. I’d still rather have the HMO we had three years ago than any of the three PPO options we have now.). If employers flock to the cheaper plan (knowing that their employees will pay the difference in income taxes), then the private companies will fold.
Amazing, isn’t it, that the “uninsured” number changes daily with no citation. One day it is 45 million. Then 47 million. You say 50 million. Why not 437 trillion uninsured?
But if you look at the number of uninsured — about 1/4 are those who are eligible for medicaid but haven’t signed up. Another group are those who have the option of getting health insurance but make an economic choice not to buy it. When you get down to it, the actual number of truly uninsured are about 10-12 million. We could put them into Medicaid for significantly less than this plan will cost per person — without killing the system that currently exists.
Republicans argue government can’t do healthcare but government also does it too good and it’ll put private insurance out of business. There will always be private insurance. Medicare has supplementary plans.
It’s not that they do it “too good” it’s that the private sector cannot compete with government. How do you compete with an entity that has unlimited resources, can print it’s own money, is essentially immune to market risk, and simultaneously makes the rules for those it is competing against? The government doesn’t compete within the free market, they rule by fiat and the threat of government sanction, regulation & taxation.
By the way — this might interest you.
He’s advising Obama’s closest aide — and Obama himself.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07242009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/deadly_doctors_180941.htm
The number changes because it’s going up. Do you really want to go there, status quo defenders?
Public schools have not put private schools out of business but have made this country great because everyone gets an opportunity for an education.
“If employers flock to the cheaper plan (knowing that their employees will pay the difference in income taxes), then the private companies.
Bingo. What incentive do employers have to offer private insurance if they can simply dump employees on the public option and have the government (taxpayers) pick up the tab?
As of 1/1/2008:
Source
“The number of uninsured Americans has increased 22 percent since 2000, at which time 38.4 million people lacked health insurance.”
And does that control for population? The US population increased over that 8 year period, so natural the number of uninsured would also increase.
Bush actually did a great job reforming the VA. It is not perfect, but the marks the VA gets from patients and the IG is a lot higher. It is better managed and better funded. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0501.longman.html
U.S. population change (from the Census Bureau):
So advertising is now only a legitimate business expense if the government agrees that you should be allowed it. What is next ? Car companies cannot advertise cars that get under 40 mpg ? Cereal manufacturers can advertise shredded wheat but not frosted mini wheats ?
Based upon the numbers used, three million people have lost insurance in the last three weeks. Doesn’t speak well for the Home’N’Change. . .
Pandora,
What subsidy?
What tax cut?
“So advertising is now only a legitimate business expense if the government agrees that you should be allowed it.”
Television advertising of pharmaceuticals was banned for many years. Spending on pharma has soared since it was lifted. I would prefer going back to a straight ban.
pandy, did you and cassy fail accounting together?
Anoni-poo, did you not follow the link? I did blockquote the important parts for you.
If his handlers aren’t feeding him something wrong to say, anoni is quite lost in normal conversation. Don’t expect much of him.
apparently Digby was in your accounting class too.
from the link:
“and here’s the part where I revise and extend my remarks, as the deduction under discussion is about business expenses and not a straight tax deduction. Maybe I should put a big blinking banner at the top of this one saying IGNORE”