jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (42 posts)

Hidden cost of Obamacare? This could cost taxpayers A LOT

  1. janesix profile image61
    janesixposted 3 years ago

    Due to Obamacare, I am now on Medicaid, along with thousands of other newly eligible adults in my state. For the last three or four years, the large pharmaceutical company that makes my medication had a program where they provide my meds for free (for people with very low income like I have). My meds cost $850 a month if I were to pay for them myself. This is ONE pill a day, just one med.

    Since January, when my Medicaid became active, the company sent a notice that they would no longer be providing free meds to Medicaid patients. Now, who foots the bill for my meds? You do. The taxpayers.

    How many millions is this going to cost the taxpayers?

    Call me paranoid, but this certainly looks like a lucky break for large pharmaceutical companies.

    I apologize for making you guys who work hard and pay taxes pay for my meds. I really am. It's not fair to you.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Not sure just how much has changed, at least at the bottom.

      Companies are now, as I understand it, being very limited in what they can charge for drugs, and that money WILL be made up elsewhere.  Part of it by charging medicaid for drugs that used to be free (actually I didn't know there were any free drugs to medicaid or medicare).

      So at the bottom, the public is paying perhaps a little more, but not a whole lot.  At least not for any specific patient.  I DO expect a lot more drugs to be dispensed, and the public will absolutely pay more for that, though.

      1. janesix profile image61
        janesixposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        For new drugs, like the one I take, the companies have a certain number of years where they can charge any amount (to recover R&D costs) but then have to make the drug available to be made generic. I think it's around 7 years, but I'm not sure. It has to do with patent laws. So in a few years, my drug will be greatly reduced in price (most likely, but it still depends on the actual manufacturing costs). These psychiatric drugs can be super expensive. More often than not, it's the lower income patients who take them, because we have trouble holding jobs for a good majority of us. My doctor just told me that there were a good number of patients on the program that the Abilify company isn't providing to for free anymore. It's all being forced on Medicaid program now.

        This is true as far as I know for psychiatric drugs. There may be different laws for drugs that are for actual medical conditions, as opposed to psychiatric ones.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I think it's true for all drugs, both in the patent thing (a reasonable way to do things, IMHO) and in patients on medicaid.  If someone needs the drug and cannot buy it, it was often available free.  Now that you CAN buy the drug (via medicaid) there will be a charge. 

          Fair enough - I understand that government is paying only a portion of what drugs on medicaid used to cost.  They are cutting what will be paid, in other words, and pharmaceutical companies will make up the lost income by charging medicaid (government) for drugs they used to supply for free to individuals that could not afford them.

          1. janesix profile image61
            janesixposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            It just worries me that it will end up costing the tax payers more than necessary.

            I only had to pay $4 for a month's supply of a drug that cost $856.

            It also worries me that if this obamacare thing doesn't work out,and psychiatric patients aren't able to afford the good, expensive meds, they will be reduced to taking the horrible, super cheap ones like Haldol. Most won't take drugs like that. I know I won't.

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Well, I think the key is in your own statement "I only had to pay $4..."  YOU may have paid only $4, but someone, somewhere, was making up the difference.  The public, in other words.

              Not to say Obamacare isn't going to bankrupt the country; it is.  As written, the US cannot afford to maintain it - either the benefits will be cut or the people using it or the entire nation will go down trying to turn the US into Utopia.  And all three options include the possibility that the drugs you want may not be available for you if you cannot buy them yourself.

              1. janesix profile image61
                janesixposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Yes.

                That's what I'm getting at.

                I worry for the taxpayers, and myself, and other people who won't be able to afford their meds, and will be on the streets, unmedicated.

                I am not suggesting socialism. I'm just saying it sucks. For me, and all around.

                1. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I agree.  I've been without insurance for years now, seeing a doctor only when absolutely necessary.  Now I have an insurance plan the public is paying for but that helps only the insurance company; by the time I've fulfilled the deductible my meager health care budget will be long used up and I'll be bankrupt.  So the $700 or so that Uncle Sam is paying the insurance company is good only for insurance company profits, not for actual health care.

                  Yeah, I wish it were different, but it isn't.  Come the day that I need more than a quick visit for an earache or something I'm in trouble.  And it WILL come - my age guarantees that.

                  You're not alone, Jane - there are millions of us that cannot afford adequate care and millions more, like me, that are just kind of hanging on and waiting for the shoe to fall.  And while Obamacare has apparently provided you with decent care, it hasn't even come close to millions of people.  I still can't afford a simple doctor's visit.

                  1. janesix profile image61
                    janesixposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    You have it worse than I do, and I feel bad for you (because I like you) because I'm not worried about actually getting physically ill. I'll have a hard time if I don't get my meds, but I won't be ill physically.

                    I guess we still have it better than the middle ages:) I should stop my little pity party.

                2. PrettyPanther profile image84
                  PrettyPantherposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I am quite content for my taxpayer dollars to help you and others obtain the medications they need.  It will not bankrupt our country, if we get our priorities straight and stop spending money on unnecessary wars and decrease defense spending to sane levels.

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I think you're wrong.  First, defense spending to "sane" levels means near zero to most people and that isn't going to happen.

                    But secondly, if we decrease defense spending, we'll just give it away in more luxuries for the poor.  Nothing will change, nothing will improve because our politicians (and the people that elect them) will continue to insist that someone else pay for their wants and desires, whether it be for free cell phones and health care or for a new museum or water treatment plant. 

                    Until we learn that we are responsible for ourselves, not someone else and not the endless pockets of Uncle Sam, we will not be able to care for everyone in the country, and certainly not provide health care at the level they expect for everyone.

                  2. janesix profile image61
                    janesixposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Thank you. You have a good heart.

                    I think Wilderness might be right on certain things, though. I don't think the way we are headed is sustainable(with obamacare etc.)

                    I think he might be wrong on the military spending though. I think we spend way too much on that.

    2. junko profile image73
      junkoposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      janesix, Medicaid cost has always been paid by tax payers. The very poor get medicare (hospital coverage) and medicaid paid for by the federal government's tax dollars.The state governments decide how to apply their federal medical funding of tax dollars.

      1. janesix profile image61
        janesixposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I know. I'm talking about the thousands of new people eligible for Medicaid starting in January this year. Just in my state. I'm sure there's the same numbers in other states as well.

        1. junko profile image73
          junkoposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Pretty Panther I believe wilderness was bewildered by your defense.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            If you will push the "reply" button under the post you are replying to it makes it much easier to follow what you are saying.

        2. junko profile image73
          junkoposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I know about the newly insured They were so far underclass they are not classified or accounted for in any statistics They are the poor they feel like they haven't been sick a day in their lives until they show up in the emergency room with No money and No insurance. They can't be turned away and the cost to save a life in one emergency can be more costly than providing medicaid and health maintence for life.

          1. janesix profile image61
            janesixposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            It's not that they(including me) haven't felt or been sick a day in their lives. What happens is they only go in and get treated when they have such a serious issue they don't have anywhere else to go and don't want to die.

            1. junko profile image73
              junkoposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              janesix, That's right, in other words. Well... thats how I see it.

              1. janesix profile image61
                janesixposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                But there are also plenty who abuse the system too. Going to the ER for minor things like a cold, addicts trying to get pain meds, etc. Lots of people on Medicaid abuse it too. I've seen it plenty of times.

                1. junko profile image73
                  junkoposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  In America we have a Constitutional Right to be wrong  Abuse can be found from the bottom to the top of society. Those on the bottom view abuse from the bottom and those on top has a view but see no evil.

                  1. janesix profile image61
                    janesixposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I really am having trouble following you. I don't know what you're getting at.

  2. WillStarr profile image89
    WillStarrposted 3 years ago

    "Companies are now, as I understand it, being very limited in what they can charge for drugs..."


    True, so they will no longer be able to recoup the money invested in research and development of new drugs, so America, long the leader in miracle drugs, will now be third rate at best, thanks to the Democrats and Obamacare.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Just the beginning of the damage Obamacare will do the country if not radically changed, I'm afraid. 

      But of course the liberals don't care - they have an inexhaustible source of funding in the rich.  Until it is all moved offshore, anyway, and they can no longer get their hands on it.

 
working