• Tue news: Where do Harris and Trump stand on health policy? Medtronic renal denervation coverage. Canada less likely to have drug shortages? Wall Street wants CVS execution plan. Nektar manufacturing facility sale. See more on our front page

Obama Targets Drug Companies for Cuts in US Debt

Anonymous

Guest
Obama Targets Drug Companies for Cuts in U.S. Debt Talks

Thursday, July 14, 2011

July 15 (Bloomberg) -- Drugmakers led by Pfizer Inc. and Merck & Co. were targeted for Medicare cuts by President Barack Obama as lawmakers push to agree on a deficit plan. The industry predicted "startling" job losses would result.

Pharmaceutical companies "are still doing very well through the Medicare program," Obama said today at a news conference. "Although we have made drugs more available at a cheaper price to seniors who are in Medicare through the Affordable Care Act, there's more work to potentially be done."

The drug industry contributed $80 billion toward the cost of last year's health-care law, helping Democrats make up for new spending in the bill. With cuts to Medicaid and Medicare on the table as part of deficit talks, the industry may have to give up more as an Aug. 2 deadline looms.

"It's extremely unfortunate that President Obama continues to push for a policy that could destabilize the successful Medicare Part D program and have a devastating effect on American jobs," said Karl Uhlendorf, vice president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the drug industry's Washington lobbying group. "Startling potential job losses could result from policy proposals that would undermine the business foundations of biopharmaceutical companies."

Companies Targeted

The drug sector has already fired 118,000 workers since 2009, the group said in the statement. Drugs such as New York- based Pfizer's top-selling cholesterol pill Lipitor are coming off patents amid industry consolidation.

Cuts to drugmakers weren't among as much as $353 billion in Medicare and Medicaid cuts on a list produced by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, a Virginia Republican. Medicare is the U.S. health insurance program for the elderly and disabled, and Medicaid is the federal-state health plan covering the poor.

Drugmakers including Whitehouse Station, New Jersey-based Merck were targeted in Obama's proposal this year that called for $200 billion in U.S. budget savings in a decade from the industry. Spending on drugs in Medicare totaled $55 billion in 2009, about 11 percent of the program's total spending that year, according to the U.S Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

The Standard & Poor's 500 Pharmaceuticals Index declined 1 percent to 323.33 at 2:28 p.m. New York time.

Premiums on Wealthy

Obama also suggested requiring high-income beneficiaries pay more for Medicare premiums, saving as much as $38 billion, according to Cantor's list.

"You can envision a situation where, for somebody in my position, me having to pay a little bit more on premiums or co- pays or things like that would be appropriate," Obama said.

Medicare already charges 40 percent more to people who make in excess of $85,000 to get physician coverage. Seniors buying drug coverage who make more than $85,000 pay more as well, according to Medicare.

Obama is leading negotiations between Democrats and Republicans to raise the country's legal borrowing limit before Aug. 2, when the administration says the government may no longer be able to pay its debts and would be in default. The parties haven't announced any agreement about the size or details of a deal, or whether it will include tax increases Republicans have opposed.

--Editors: Adriel Bettelheim, Steve Walsh

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic...LODT0X1A74E901-617UAPIQ1CVC6T47BD7RAC34PF.DTL
 














Ya can't pay a snake enough not to bite ya. Serves these dumb asses right. Obama is out to destroy private business and wants total control of health care. I'm sure our top execs have made out just fine, however. When the ship sinks, their lifeboat will keep them afloat quite well.
 




Ya can't pay a snake enough not to bite ya. Serves these dumb asses right. Obama is out to destroy private business and wants total control of health care. I'm sure our top execs have made out just fine, however. When the ship sinks, their lifeboat will keep them afloat quite well.

They might sink with all the gold in them.
 




Obama Targets Drug Companies for Cuts in U.S. Debt Talks

Thursday, July 14, 2011

July 15 (Bloomberg) -- Drugmakers led by Pfizer Inc. and Merck & Co. were targeted for Medicare cuts by President Barack Obama as lawmakers push to agree on a deficit plan. The industry predicted "startling" job losses would result.

Pharmaceutical companies "are still doing very well through the Medicare program," Obama said today at a news conference. "Although we have made drugs more available at a cheaper price to seniors who are in Medicare through the Affordable Care Act, there's more work to potentially be done."

The drug industry contributed $80 billion toward the cost of last year's health-care law, helping Democrats make up for new spending in the bill. With cuts to Medicaid and Medicare on the table as part of deficit talks, the industry may have to give up more as an Aug. 2 deadline looms.

"It's extremely unfortunate that President Obama continues to push for a policy that could destabilize the successful Medicare Part D program and have a devastating effect on American jobs," said Karl Uhlendorf, vice president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the drug industry's Washington lobbying group. "Startling potential job losses could result from policy proposals that would undermine the business foundations of biopharmaceutical companies."

Companies Targeted

The drug sector has already fired 118,000 workers since 2009, the group said in the statement. Drugs such as New York- based Pfizer's top-selling cholesterol pill Lipitor are coming off patents amid industry consolidation.

Cuts to drugmakers weren't among as much as $353 billion in Medicare and Medicaid cuts on a list produced by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, a Virginia Republican. Medicare is the U.S. health insurance program for the elderly and disabled, and Medicaid is the federal-state health plan covering the poor.

Drugmakers including Whitehouse Station, New Jersey-based Merck were targeted in Obama's proposal this year that called for $200 billion in U.S. budget savings in a decade from the industry. Spending on drugs in Medicare totaled $55 billion in 2009, about 11 percent of the program's total spending that year, according to the U.S Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

The Standard & Poor's 500 Pharmaceuticals Index declined 1 percent to 323.33 at 2:28 p.m. New York time.

Premiums on Wealthy

Obama also suggested requiring high-income beneficiaries pay more for Medicare premiums, saving as much as $38 billion, according to Cantor's list.

"You can envision a situation where, for somebody in my position, me having to pay a little bit more on premiums or co- pays or things like that would be appropriate," Obama said.

Medicare already charges 40 percent more to people who make in excess of $85,000 to get physician coverage. Seniors buying drug coverage who make more than $85,000 pay more as well, according to Medicare.

Obama is leading negotiations between Democrats and Republicans to raise the country's legal borrowing limit before Aug. 2, when the administration says the government may no longer be able to pay its debts and would be in default. The parties haven't announced any agreement about the size or details of a deal, or whether it will include tax increases Republicans have opposed.

--Editors: Adriel Bettelheim, Steve Walsh

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic...LODT0X1A74E901-617UAPIQ1CVC6T47BD7RAC34PF.DTL

This is good news, big pharma days of robbing the USA long enough.
 




It seems that there is a push in this nation to cut the federal budget by about 10-15%. The federal government is already spending far more than it brings in so it seems that only choice is to spend less. The biggest consumer of pharmaceuticals in the US is the dederal government and its demand is only going to get bigger in the next 10-20 years. The US government pays far more than any other government on pharmaceuticals. If the US was sitting on a hoard of cash relative to its spend (like the pharmaceutical industry does and its top management personally has) you might have a good case to complain. Like Willie Sutton, you go to where the money is. So would you suggest that a good place to look is in the pockets of the 10% unemployed or in the pockets of the wealthy corporations that seem to have stashed billions overseas purely on tax relief that the feds have given them in the last 15 years. If you are in the pharmaceutical industry or in the defense industry, or a federal worker, watch out because the cuts are going to hit you. That's life. Or is it just market forces that are the basis of capitalism? There's less money to spend. There are two choices, spend less per dose or buy fewer doses. Those of you that would complain about paying less per dose might also be the first to complain about health care rationing if the other choice were made.
 




Merck and all these other Pharmaceutical companies charge too much for these drugs. With millions of people out of work with no healthcare, who can afford it!!!! We need more generic drugs, or something to bring down the cost of these drugs. These phama companies are making record profits thru this recession and are sitting on boatloads of money, while still laying off at record levels. Their CEO's are not hurting either, their sitting fat and happy while the little guy is being escorted out the door after being axed. Its a shame, truly a shame.
 




Merck and all these other Pharmaceutical companies charge too much for these drugs. With millions of people out of work with no healthcare, who can afford it!!!! We need more generic drugs, or something to bring down the cost of these drugs. These phama companies are making record profits thru this recession and are sitting on boatloads of money, while still laying off at record levels. Their CEO's are not hurting either, their sitting fat and happy while the little guy is being escorted out the door after being axed. Its a shame, truly a shame.

You need to develop and market a succeful product befor it can become a generic you idiot. That takes huge amounts of cash which is recovered in the price of the product.
 








This is good news, big pharma days of robbing the USA long enough.

Dear Idiot,

Go and do some research on the cost of health care that is associated with medicines. It's about 10%. Even if you introduced wage and price controls or levied a 100% tariff on the industry, assuming a 17% (way higher than actual) top line gross margin, you would only affect the net cost of health care by about 1.7%, a rounding error on the total cost of health care.

Venezuela, Cuba, or China would welcome you. Why don't you go?
 




Dear Idiot,

Go and do some research on the cost of health care that is associated with medicines. It's about 10%. Even if you introduced wage and price controls or levied a 100% tariff on the industry, assuming a 17% (way higher than actual) top line gross margin, you would only affect the net cost of health care by about 1.7%, a rounding error on the total cost of health care.

Venezuela, Cuba, or China would welcome you. Why don't you go?

And you're probably one of those demanding cuts to teacher's salaries, cut union wages and gov't employees.

We're all in this together. If we demand cuts from others-you should be prepared for a cut too.
 








And you're probably one of those demanding cuts to teacher's salaries, cut union wages and gov't employees.

We're all in this together. If we demand cuts from others-you should be prepared for a cut too.

Big difference between average American worker getting $400-600 per month pension after 30 years of work.....and teacher, union worker or civil servant literally getting thousands each month, free medical and the life of Riley...all from ma and pa taxpayer on the brink of losing their home and living on social secuity and tiny pension!!!! Tax 'em (those that worked that is) and let 'em weep, the Democratic motto. Can't wait for 2012 elections and new wave a fiscal responsibility.
 




This country is headed for the shitter simply because there are self-centered extremists on both sides, the country is run for the benefit of only those that can pay the entry fee on Capital Hill, suffers from a clear majority who cannot grasp any complications at all, are regressing in their view of the world and science, and seems to have lost anyone that is willing to address any challenge head-on. Wake up America and see what your competition is doing in the rest of the world. I am the product of generations of those that worked their ass off, and (mostly) gave more than they took. I am grateful for their sacrifices and the fact that fair opportunities were readily available to me and anyone like me. Wake up during the next 5 years or America will very likely never accomplish anything significant ever again. And by the way, shooting tribal people all over the world is not accomplishing anything great. Interest rates will rise simply because investors will not be able to see how the wealth of the US will contiue to grow during the country's decline.
 




And you're probably one of those demanding cuts to teacher's salaries, cut union wages and gov't employees.

We're all in this together. If we demand cuts from others-you should be prepared for a cut too.

Yes to cutting union wages and government employees. Yes to getting the NEA out of the schools. Yes to holding school systems accountable for teaching the 3 "Rs" instead of global warming, groupthink, racial and cultural gerrymandering, and other rigamarole.

Why should I be prepared for a cut too? Where is the evidence that medicines are disproportionately expensive relative to the total cost of health care? I work in the PRIVATE SECTOR! Union dues are money laundered into Democratic coffers, and are supported by arcane, archaic, and irrelevant laws.

Take your neobolshevik cultural bias and move to a country that agrees with you.
 




This is good news, big pharma days of robbing the USA long enough.

So we lose out because....we will be denied a life saving medication if we're over a certain youthful age......or your insurance carrier thinks its too high priced.....or just maybe it won't be created because its too expensive.....or FDA says no to approval in the first place....Se la vie. Sad.
 




Yes to cutting union wages and government employees. Yes to getting the NEA out of the schools. Yes to holding school systems accountable for teaching the 3 "Rs" instead of global warming, groupthink, racial and cultural gerrymandering, and other rigamarole.

Why should I be prepared for a cut too? Where is the evidence that medicines are disproportionately expensive relative to the total cost of health care? I work in the PRIVATE SECTOR! Union dues are money laundered into Democratic coffers, and are supported by arcane, archaic, and irrelevant laws.

Take your neobolshevik cultural bias and move to a country that agrees with you.

You need to run for public office!
 




Yes to cutting union wages and government employees. Yes to getting the NEA out of the schools. Yes to holding school systems accountable for teaching the 3 "Rs" instead of global warming, groupthink, racial and cultural gerrymandering, and other rigamarole.

Why should I be prepared for a cut too? Where is the evidence that medicines are disproportionately expensive relative to the total cost of health care? I work in the PRIVATE SECTOR! Union dues are money laundered into Democratic coffers, and are supported by arcane, archaic, and irrelevant laws.

Take your neobolshevik cultural bias and move to a country that agrees with you.

Unions were created in the late 19th ccentury as a reaction to the excessive abuse of labor by unfettered capitalists starting during the Long Depression (1870's). And then they were opposed by capitalists and government alike. Capitalists have long considered that 100% of productive utilization of their capital assets is their goal while simultaneously hoping that their labor pool would be freely available but only when it is needed. Highly trained workers doing jobs a monkey could do better, part time jobs, bizarre work hours, constant threat of termination, jobs moving offshore, reduction in quality of life, outrageous accumulation of wealth by a select few. Same shit in the 19th century and it will result in the same unionization desire in the 21st century. But only in America is there such confusion over the proper role for labor. In Europe, labor, and particularly so skilled labor, are considered by individuals, government, and employers alike as an essential element of productivity and society. And labor is regarded as an essential element that must be properly maintained and sustained within a productive equilibrium of cost and value. Ignorant Americans such as yourself love to refer to those foolish Europeans as Marxists and Bolsheviks. But with the exception of those basically corrupt regimes (Greece and Italy) or countries where the hoi polloi foolishly thought they were budding capitalists (Ireland) generally, Europeans are happier, more full of hope, and exhibit more social cohesion and political awareness than their counterparts in the US. And these are attributes that the US is showing less and less of each and every year. Spend some time in Norway, Sweden, Finland, or Denmark for starters. Then compare that experience with hanging with some toothless, clueless Tea Party mothas in your dream world for America. Most of the US are laborers - not capitalists - but you couldn't guess that by the way that the government treats them. Just keep some of them dumb enough with fundamentalism and entertainment and you can keep running the show for benefit of the lucky few chosen ones. I have had the best university education this country can provide, while my grandfather was a union bricklayer. We both worked hard but the difference was that the field of opportunities had grown when it was my turn for a future. We both made something of ourselves (with a lot of help from society). And we were both valuable, needed, and we expected that our government would represent us as the heart and soul of this country. We both expect that government would provide certain services to the benefit of society at large. Services like high-quality public education, support of those that cannot manage on their own like the elderly and infirm, like a military capable of defending American territory. And we were both upset when taxes were wasted on poor quality services and have demanded improvement - not elimination - of those services. Union or not. Based on my experience with Merck, I cannot say that, in general, labor is in any way over-represented in this country. And Merck's negligence in maintaining the well-being and productivity of its formerly high-quality workforce has not made it a stronger company or its host country a stronger country.
 




Unions were created in the late 19th ccentury as a reaction to the excessive abuse of labor by unfettered capitalists starting during the Long Depression (1870's). And then they were opposed by capitalists and government alike. Capitalists have long considered that 100% of productive utilization of their capital assets is their goal while simultaneously hoping that their labor pool would be freely available but only when it is needed. Highly trained workers doing jobs a monkey could do better, part time jobs, bizarre work hours, constant threat of termination, jobs moving offshore, reduction in quality of life, outrageous accumulation of wealth by a select few. Same shit in the 19th century and it will result in the same unionization desire in the 21st century. But only in America is there such confusion over the proper role for labor. In Europe, labor, and particularly so skilled labor, are considered by individuals, government, and employers alike as an essential element of productivity and society. And labor is regarded as an essential element that must be properly maintained and sustained within a productive equilibrium of cost and value. Ignorant Americans such as yourself love to refer to those foolish Europeans as Marxists and Bolsheviks. But with the exception of those basically corrupt regimes (Greece and Italy) or countries where the hoi polloi foolishly thought they were budding capitalists (Ireland) generally, Europeans are happier, more full of hope, and exhibit more social cohesion and political awareness than their counterparts in the US. And these are attributes that the US is showing less and less of each and every year. Spend some time in Norway, Sweden, Finland, or Denmark for starters. Then compare that experience with hanging with some toothless, clueless Tea Party mothas in your dream world for America. Most of the US are laborers - not capitalists - but you couldn't guess that by the way that the government treats them. Just keep some of them dumb enough with fundamentalism and entertainment and you can keep running the show for benefit of the lucky few chosen ones. I have had the best university education this country can provide, while my grandfather was a union bricklayer. We both worked hard but the difference was that the field of opportunities had grown when it was my turn for a future. We both made something of ourselves (with a lot of help from society). And we were both valuable, needed, and we expected that our government would represent us as the heart and soul of this country. We both expect that government would provide certain services to the benefit of society at large. Services like high-quality public education, support of those that cannot manage on their own like the elderly and infirm, like a military capable of defending American territory. And we were both upset when taxes were wasted on poor quality services and have demanded improvement - not elimination - of those services. Union or not. Based on my experience with Merck, I cannot say that, in general, labor is in any way over-represented in this country. And Merck's negligence in maintaining the well-being and productivity of its formerly high-quality workforce has not made it a stronger company or its host country a stronger country.
The following message was a paid political announcement sponsored by the AFL-CIO and the public relations firm of Engels, Marx & Lenin LLP!