chairman bill wrote:Rick Santorum - surely the best argument for a socialised healthcare system.

Best argument for socialised abortion

It's my understanding that after serving a term in the Senate, they may participate in the FEHBP for life.

All government employees are insured through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). They are allowed to choose from around 250 insurance providers, and cannot be discriminated against for "pre-existing conditions," as many Americans are. Every year they are allowed to switch health insurance plans without penalty (again, American citizens cannot).

They only pay around 75% of their premium, and the rest is funded through taxes. Since this is a form of universal healthcare, it is ironic that many senators oppose universal healthcare. The United States remains, stupidly, one of the only industrialized countries without universal healthcare.

Federal employees include the military?

mrjonno wrote:Federal employees include the military?

No, there's a .Gov health plan called FEHBP and a .Mil health plan called Tricare. They're not the same, but .Gov employees can get care at a .Mil facility, but not vice versa.

Mazille wrote:Well, most of you people don't want to be European in the first place, so you silly islanders don't count anyway.

We like Europe

AlohaChris wrote:It's my understanding that after serving a term in the Senate, they may participate in the FEHBP for life.

All government employees are insured through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). They are allowed to choose from around 250 insurance providers, and cannot be discriminated against for "pre-existing conditions," as many Americans are. Every year they are allowed to switch health insurance plans without penalty (again, American citizens cannot).

They only pay around 75% of their premium, and the rest is funded through taxes. Since this is a form of universal healthcare, it is ironic that many senators oppose universal healthcare. The United States remains, stupidly, one of the only industrialized countries without universal healthcare.

Sounds just like "Obamacare", doesn't it?

.

Shrunk wrote:I mentioned on another thread I'm not sure where the $1 million a year figure comes from. Here in Canada a year's worth of Abilify will cost about $1500.

Was about to check on this, a million dollar a year drug when there are many considerably cheaper alternatives seemed a bit wierd, if it really did cost that much I would have thought the drug companies would have been giving it away to successful cases in the hope that insurances companies and governments might think it worth it. I doubt that even the most extreme blue ribbon gold and diamond encrusted insurance plan would authorize a million a year drug.

kiore wrote:

Shrunk wrote:I mentioned on another thread I'm not sure where the $1 million a year figure comes from. Here in Canada a year's worth of Abilify will cost about $1500.

Was about to check on this, a million dollar a year drug when there are many considerably cheaper alternatives seemed a bit wierd, if it really did cost that much I would have thought the drug companies would have been giving it away to successful cases in the hope that insurances companies and governments might think it worth it. I doubt that even the most extreme blue ribbon gold and diamond encrusted insurance plan would authorize a million a year drug.

Yeah, I wonder if something got lost in translation there. Like maybe the lifetime cost of leaving someone's schizophrenia untreated, in terms of lost earnings, hospital costs, etc. is $1 million.

Abilify's cost can range up to around 10-15k a year I believe. The lady does not seem much more accurate than Santorum. She, however, is not running for President....

And onto Santorum's market.... US taxpayers fund nearly 2/3s of the research that goes into this with drug companies joining in on latter stages. Also the 'market' price is one where the drug companies are given a monopoly to charge whatever they want for a given set of time.

This is a 'market' with two very large subsidies going to pharmaceuticals and yet Santorum is going to claim that the gov't cannot intervene on behalf of consumers as that would somehow ruin the sanctity of the market!