# BC Medicare payments will be reduced in January.



## Shalimar (Sep 14, 2017)

Our new provincial govt just announced that as of January 1st, 2018, BC medical premiums will be cut by fifty percent! Yay! We have a healthy provincial budget which will enable this to occur without raising taxes. Seniors and people with young families will be delighted at the news.


----------



## Warrigal (Sep 14, 2017)

That is a surprise. I was expecting a cut in benefits, not premiums.
An admirable way to deal with a budget surplus IMO.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 14, 2017)

Warrigal said:


> That is a surprise. I was expecting a cut in benefits, not premiums.
> An admirable way to deal with a budget surplus IMO.


I agree.


----------



## Don M. (Sep 15, 2017)

A lowering of Medical costs/premiums would almost be Miraculous here, in the U.S.  Instead, starting next month, when the plans/premiums are announced for 2018, most people will be lucky to see a rise in premiums of less than 10%...with some locales seeing rises of perhaps as much as 35%.  I wonder how high our costs will rise before the majority of people wake up and look at the experiences in other nations who have a SP plan, and demand that our nation begins to follow suit.  These SP plans may not be perfect, but they sure make a lot more sense than this "runaway" bloated money hungry system we are saddled with.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 15, 2017)

Don M. said:


> A lowering of Medical costs/premiums would almost be Miraculous here, in the U.S.  Instead, starting next month, when the plans/premiums are announced for 2018, most people will be lucky to see a rise in premiums of less than 10%...with some locales seeing rises of perhaps as much as 35%.  I wonder how high our costs will rise before the majority of people wake up and look at the experiences in other nations who have a SP plan, and demand that our nation begins to follow suit.  These SP plans may not be perfect, but they sure make a lot more sense than this "runaway" bloated money hungry system we are saddled with.


I agree Don, and I am so sorry for the American people caught in this terrible bind.


----------



## Ruthanne (Sep 23, 2017)

This is great; I wish our country would learn from yours how to do healthcare.


----------



## Katybug (Sep 23, 2017)

Great news, Shalimar.  Wish we had some good news!


----------



## Don M. (Sep 23, 2017)

Humana just released the premiums on our Medicare Advantage plan for 2018,,,the price will be going up about 7%....which is about 5 times the 2017 rate of inflation...1.4%.  But then, compared to what some of the estimates are saying for next year, we may be lucky in getting just a 7% increase.  The good news is that the Social Security COLA for next year should cover that minor increase.  It would almost make sense for SS to just hand over the COLA to the insurance companies....might save them some administrative costs.  

Between Obamacare, and what the GOP is trying to push through, the future looks pretty bleak for anything resembling cost control.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 23, 2017)

Don M. said:


> Humana just released the premiums on our Medicare Advantage plan for 2018,,,the price will be going up about 7%....which is about 5 times the 2017 rate of inflation...1.4%.  But then, compared to what some of the estimates are saying for next year, we may be lucky in getting just a 7% increase.  The good news is that the Social Security COLA for next year should cover that minor increase.  It would almost make sense for SS to just hand over the COLA to the insurance companies....might save them some administrative costs.
> 
> Between Obamacare, and what the GOP is trying to push through, the future looks pretty bleak for anything resembling cost control.


Many people must hope they are never faced with a catastrophic illness.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 23, 2017)

Ruthanne said:


> This is great; I wish our country would learn from yours how to do healthcare.


Thanks Ruthanne.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 23, 2017)

Katybug said:


> Great news, Shalimar.  Wish we had some good news!


Thanks Katybug. Many older people are over the moon.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Sep 23, 2017)

Sounds wonderful Shalimar, way to go!


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 23, 2017)

SeaBreeze said:


> Sounds wonderful Shalimar, way to go!


Thanks! Now if our provincial govt will only do the same for dental!


----------



## BobF (Sep 24, 2017)

My feelings is that we are not getting a point for point comparison of what health care is provided by these other countries and their minimum cost.   Are these programs actually comparable to the US health care abilities at all?    On a line for line basis is the only way we can compare.   Cost of the health care to the user and cost of the health care to the state and federal government needs to be compared for all cases and types of health care.   Show the readiness and availability for service.   If hospitalized then compare the patients quarters and availability.    Specialist for certain medical needs need to be compared.

Many things can change the cost up or down.   Being the cheapest does not necessarily mean the best run at all.   For comparisons we should be given good comparative charts and costs so we can make some real and good decisions.   We are not seeing those charts at all.

How well do those other countries pay their medical folks?    Apparently not too well as many of our medical folks, doctors, come to the US from all over the world.   Is that what makes medical so low cost in other countries?   Or just one step of many that makes it so much less expensive elsewhere?    Plenty to think of before making changes to make our system as low cost as in other places.


----------



## AZ Jim (Sep 24, 2017)

Charts can say what the creator wants them to say.  What we need is government caps on medical costs and drugs then maybe some who are doing without could afford proper care.  If all physicians were faced with those caps they would get used to the new way of life.


----------



## Don M. (Sep 24, 2017)

AZ Jim said:


> Charts can say what the creator wants them to say.  What we need is government caps on medical costs and drugs then maybe some who are doing without could afford proper care.  If all physicians were faced with those caps they would get used to the new way of life.



If you look up the 10 highest paid careers in the U.S., 7 of them are in the Health Care arena......http://www.fincyte.com/best-highest-paying-jobs-in-america/

Prescription Drug prices are 2 or 3 times higher here than in most nations. 

If you look at where our politicians get their campaign money...at a site such as OpenSecrets.org...it quickly becomes apparent that our Health Care Industry is one of the highest contributors...to Both Parties.  Since MONEY is the only thing that drives progress in Washington, it will take a massive effort by the people to change our system....namely, voting most of these politicians out every 2 to 6 years until they start working for the people.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 24, 2017)

I was taken aback when I first learned of American posters who order their drugs from Canada because they are cheaper.


----------



## BobF (Sep 24, 2017)

Shalimar said:


> I was taken aback when I first learned of American posters who order their drugs from Canada because they are cheaper.



Within the US I beleive there are certain restrictions on how far down the prices might go.   Protections for the inventors and creators of these newer drugs.   A protection for their investments for a certain number of years.   Patent rights?    Anyway, if that is so then how can Canada get drugs cheaper than the US?   A question, not an argument.    Once the drugs are past the protection time it could be OK for the license to be sold to Canada where they might have lower cost manufacturing or pharmacy costs.


----------



## SifuPhil (Sep 24, 2017)

BobF said:


> Within the US I beleive there are certain restrictions on how far down the prices might go.   Protections for the inventors and creators of these newer drugs.   A protection for their investments for a certain number of years.   Patent rights?    Anyway, if that is so then how can Canada get drugs cheaper than the US?   A question, not an argument.    Once the drugs are past the protection time it could be OK for the license to be sold to Canada where they might have lower cost manufacturing or pharmacy costs.



U.S. drug prices are astronomical simply because Big Pharma is greedy. There is no correlation to patents or protections. That's why pharmaceutical manufacturers have been posting obscenely huge profits for so many years.

Why are they cheaper in Canada?



the cost of existing medications cannot rise higher than the rate of inflation 
new drugs cannot cost more than the median price in other countries 
new medications cannot cost more than similar medications for the same illness


----------



## BobF (Sep 25, 2017)

SifuPhil said:


> U.S. drug prices are astronomical simply because Big Pharma is greedy. There is no correlation to patents or protections. That's why pharmaceutical manufacturers have been posting obscenely huge profits for so many years.
> 
> Why are they cheaper in Canada?
> 
> ...



All of this speaks of price control and little else.

In the US there is patent control that protects the inventors from product theft and heavy taxes.   I lived near the site of a new factory that was built to develop and manufacture a specific drug.   It was a large factory that employed a large number of people.   After some years of developement and testing the new product was failed from becoming a available drug component in the pharmacies.   

The plant was shut down for that product but was converted to a place to build and market a different but approved drug.   All those years of development and employees wages needed protected from various ways of stealing designs and ideas.   These costs and money spent needed some sort of protection to ensure folks would consider trying to make newer drugs for personal use.   Tax protections for their learning years and special privacy were allowed.    Not many willing to just toss away their wealth on unprotected items.   

Big surprise if Canada does not also allow special treatment for design and patent protections.


----------



## BobF (Sep 25, 2017)

AZ Jim said:


> Charts can say what the creator wants them to say.  What we need is government caps on medical costs and drugs then maybe some who are doing without could afford proper care.  If all physicians were faced with those caps they would get used to the new way of life.



If you are talking of my expense and content compare to be nothing but charts, that is a mistake.   I am talking about folks actually talking and reviewing with other countries and comparing actual to actual.   Not some game with cute charts.   Delay in appointments, hospital needs and facilities, on and on, and then trying to make a comparison to the US ways from the smaller European style methods up to the massive US health system.   Is their too much wasted on federal controls that cost money and do not improve our health system?    Is our size a problem?    Should we actually allow the states to run their own systems to fit their needs?   Do we really need just one system for all to use?

We have many ways to handle the health system and so far I see mostly those looking for the cheapest way to do so.   We need to look for the best way to do so for the US.   *Cheap* may not work at all.


----------



## Trade (Sep 25, 2017)

BobF said:


> I am talking about folks actually talking and reviewing with other countries and comparing actual to actual.   Not some game with cute charts.



There are "folks" right here on this forum that live in those countries and actually are covered by those health care systems and not a single one of them agrees with you Bob. So what makes you think you know more about it than they do? Inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## SifuPhil (Sep 25, 2017)

BobF said:


> All of this speaks of price control and little else.
> 
> In the US there is patent control that protects the inventors from product theft and heavy taxes.   I lived near the site of a new factory that was built to develop and manufacture a specific drug.   It was a large factory that employed a large number of people.   After some years of developement and testing the new product was failed from becoming a available drug component in the pharmacies.
> 
> ...



The idea of patent protection in the pharmaceutical industry is a joke.

Increasingly, drug companies are not investing in R&D proportional  to the profits they earn from the drugs they bring to market, despite  their protests to the contrary. Instead, many have figured out that it’s  simpler and safer from a financial perspective to either buy the rights  to drugs developed by others and raise the prices many times over, as  with Sovaldi, or to obtain a medication already in existence and, using  monopolistic control, raise the price as much as 500% or more, as in the  case of the EpiPen. 

As a consequence, the patent protection process now  primarily serves the drug companies, most often not on behalf of the  American people, but, rather, at their expense.

Patent protection effectively grants the pharmaceutical industry a monopoly, regardless of the human consequences.


----------



## BobF (Sep 25, 2017)

Trade said:


> There are "folks" right here on this forum that live in those countries and actually are covered by those health care systems and not a single one of them agrees with you Bob. So what makes you think you know more about it than they do? Inquiring minds want to know.



How do you know so much anyway.   Likely a lot of BS to start with.   

I never said they should not be happy at all.    I am asking for a REAL comparison of the systems, costs, who pays, etc., and then a direct comparison to the proposed US system and the current US health system.    There definitely are differences but not one of us knows what they are and in a direct comparison.   Many of those other countries are not much bigger than some of our states.    Needs and abilities will be different from the entire US.

I think a direct comparison will tell us more than any of the political talk now going around.   Political talk is all about lying for a personal want.


----------



## BobF (Sep 25, 2017)

SifuPhil said:


> The idea of patent protection in the pharmaceutical industry is a joke.
> 
> Increasingly, drug companies are not investing in R&D proportional  to the profits they earn from the drugs they bring to market, despite  their protests to the contrary. Instead, many have figured out that it’s  simpler and safer from a financial perspective to either buy the rights  to drugs developed by others and raise the prices many times over, as  with Sovaldi, or to obtain a medication already in existence and, using  monopolistic control, raise the price as much as 500% or more, as in the  case of the EpiPen.
> 
> ...



A US patent is not a joke at all.    It is for the protection of the investors that are paying to design and test a new product.    The US and Canada are two different countries and the rules can be entirely different in both countries.   I have never yet seen prices as high as those in that chart you posted.   

https://www.news-medical.net/health/Drug-Patents-and-Generics.aspx


----------



## Trade (Sep 25, 2017)

BobF said:


> How do you know so much anyway.   Likely a lot of BS to start with.



Let me get this straight. You are saying that what people from the actual countries that have single payer say about their healthcare systems is BS, but what you, who lives in Ohio, USA say is correct? 



BobF said:


> I am asking for a REAL  comparison of the systems, costs, who pays, etc., and then a direct  comparison to the proposed US system and the current US health system.



What you want to do is obfuscate. 





BobF said:


> Political talk is all about lying for a  personal want.



You got that right Bob. That's all you do here. Spread lies and propaganda. Here you are posting in a thread about the Canadian Medicare system which you don't know jack shit about.


----------



## SifuPhil (Sep 25, 2017)

BobF said:


> A US patent is not a joke at all.    It is for the protection of the investors that are paying to design and test a new product.    The US and Canada are two different countries and the rules can be entirely different in both countries.   I have never yet seen prices as high as those in that chart you posted.
> 
> https://www.news-medical.net/health/Drug-Patents-and-Generics.aspx



The _theoretical_ model of a patent is not a joke, no.

The implementation and abuse by the pharmaceutical companies, however, IS. 

You mention differences of rules between Canada and the U.S. I believe the majority of drugs available by online/mail order in Canada were originally manufactured in the U.S. under U.S. patents. Therefore, I'm having trouble seeing how patent issues somehow don't seem to effect the Canadian drug prices.

I still think it's mark-up, plain and simple. Greed. Remember the brouhaha a while back about Daraprim? It went from $13.50 per tablet to $750 overnight, and the CEO (?) was in the media laughing about it. That had nothing to do with pharmaceutical property protection.

As for your link - thank you, but I'm already a bit knowledgeable about patents, being a holder of a few.


----------



## BobF (Sep 25, 2017)

SifuPhil said:


> The _theoretical_ model of a patent is not a joke, no.
> 
> The implementation and abuse by the pharmaceutical companies, however, IS.
> 
> ...



I hope you read the link about patents that I posted.   Only for a certain number of years will a patent work, after that, anyone can use those ingredients and create their own marketable pharmacy item.   It become public property but during the development and testing the patent does protect the investors.

Congratulations for having some patents.   I also have some myself from my working days.


----------



## BobF (Sep 25, 2017)

Originally Posted by *BobF* 


 
How do you know so much anyway.   Likely a lot of BS to start with.



Trade said:


> Let me get this straight. You are saying that what people from the actual countries that have single payer say about their healthcare systems is BS, but what you, who lives in Ohio, USA say is correct?
> 
> Not at all as I was referring to you and your twisted mind attitude about everything.
> 
> ...



Nothing new about that.   Not many in our US that know much about the Canadian Medicare system either.   Again that is why I think for the US to decide wisely which way to go we need a thorough study of all these 'better systems' you point to and any others also.   It should be a proper study and not just a jump into communism for no reason than Trade said so.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 25, 2017)

Excuse me Bob. I am a Canadian, and I live in a democratic country, not a communist one.


----------



## BobF (Sep 25, 2017)

I just went back to the beginning and re read the inputs.   Shalimar has posted a good topic.   The US is in need of doing something to be able to match what Canada has and be sure all the US folks end up getting all proper care at reasonable costs.

Not sure if Canada is truly a SP system as each Province appears to have their own health system and sets their own prices.    What ever it is it appears that BC is doing something right.

That does support my thinking that we should compare our system to theirs before making any leaps at all.


----------



## BobF (Sep 25, 2017)

Shalimar said:


> Excuse me Bob. I am a Canadian, and I live in a democratic country, not a communist one.



My comment was to Trade, who claims to be a communist but lives in the US.   It can happen you know.   Part of our Constitution allows that to be.

To me, if a person, our sport folks or people like Trade, refuse to honor our flag or national anthem, then they should be cut off from any and all welfare things.   Save those funds for the loyal and supportive ones.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 25, 2017)

Thank you for clarifying that Bob.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 25, 2017)

BobF said:


> I just went back to the beginning and re read the inputs.   Shalimar has posted a good topic.   The US is in need of doing something to be able to match what Canada has and be sure all the US folks end up getting all proper care at reasonable costs.
> 
> Not sure if Canada is truly a SP system as each Province appears to have their own health system and sets their own prices.    What ever it is it appears that BC is doing something right.
> 
> That does support my thinking that we should compare our system to theirs before making any leaps at all.


Thank you for your thoughtful post.


----------



## SifuPhil (Sep 25, 2017)

BobF said:


> I hope you read the link about patents that I posted.   Only for a certain number of years will a patent work, after that, anyone can use those ingredients and create their own marketable pharmacy item.   It become public property but during the development and testing the patent does protect the investors.



Yes, that's standard practice for patents. 

I notice you're emphasizing the protection of the investors. I'm not really very knowledgeable about investing in pharma companies: I'm sure it's done, but I'm not sure that the original intent of patents is to protect the _investors_. More like the _inventor_, no? Think Thomas Edison (who, BTW, stole ideas and prototypes, then patented them).

Again, what price human suffering? 



> Congratulations for having some patents.   I also have some myself from my working days.



Excellent. 

I think mine are expired by now, or at least they've been renewed by the companies I worked for. The ongoing technology, in any case, probably made them obsolete.


----------



## Don M. (Sep 25, 2017)

BobF said:


> That does support my thinking that we should compare our system to theirs before making any leaps at all.



In all this "Banter" over US Healthcare, I can't recall ANY of these politicians making the suggestion that we should look at what is working in other nations and perhaps begin to adopt similar policies here.  Instead, all we seem to be getting is a Childish battle between the two political parties, both of which seem to refuse to invite input from the other side.  The Republicans did it with Obama, and now the Democrats are united in their refusal to join in these latest proposals. 

IMO, most of the nation's more serious problems can be traced back to this Washington Partisanship.  There are good ideas that exist in dozens of other nations, and our people could reap some major long term benefits by looking at what the other nations are doing, and taking steps to begin adapting some of these ideas into our system...but, First, we need leaders who are willing to work for the people...instead of the drug companies, etc.


----------



## BobF (Sep 26, 2017)

SifuPhil said:


> Yes, that's standard practice for patents.
> 
> I notice you're emphasizing the protection of the investors. I'm not really very knowledgeable about investing in pharma companies: I'm sure it's done, but I'm not sure that the original intent of patents is to protect the _investors_. More like the _inventor_, no? Think Thomas Edison (who, BTW, stole ideas and prototypes, then patented them).
> 
> ...



I was thinking of the inventor to be the biggest investor.   Being the design, testing, approvals, etc., in order to get the product to the market.   Hopefully enough protection to get a financial return for the time and effort involved.   Something that might encourage others to attempt breakthroughs.

No rewards for special efforts might mean fewer efforts will be made.


----------

