Makes me both angry and sad.....

[graceanne]

Minimum wage in 1970 was $1.45. It's now $5.85. So you're right that minimum wage hasn't quite kept up with inflation (400% increase compared to 500%) but it is scheduled to go up again in each of the next two years.

In Oregon minimum wage is 7.50. The problem with that is that the beginning wages of several trained jobs (like CNA) is only 8 dollars. In other words, people working at McDonalds are making almost as much as people who've gone to college and learned a skill.

 

[Netzach]

Minimum wage in 1970 was $1.45. It's now $5.85. So you're right that minimum wage hasn't quite kept up with inflation (400% increase compared to 500%) but it is scheduled to go up again in each of the next two years.

Hasn't quite?

Can you live on 240 a week, after taxes, with rent on a studio apartment starting at 700? Let's make it 300 a week adjusting for urban environment and higher min. wage. But you have a kid.

No one works as hard for as little as poor people. If you track NYC rent on a studio apartment, I've seen it go from about maybe 450 a month to 2500 a month in the same time period. That's quite a bit more than 400 percent.

 

[Netzach]

Thank you. I may be 76% evil, but those motherfuckers scare even me.

The Underwriting offices are kept colder and at lower air pressure so their miasma won't escape...



I agree, and unfortunately there is no way to prevent the bullshit claims that are much a drain on resources as the legitimate ones. It still makes us, as a society, a distinct and heavy-handed part of the problem.



I buggered if I can see a way out, aside from the looming spectre of socialised medicine. And I have so many core political issues with that concept that it makes me twitch.

That said, wow, countries with socialised medicine (Canada and the UK being good examples of countries with similar enough cultures and tech to make comparison possible) spend WAY less of the GDP on healthcare, and still see equivalent or better performance from said healthcare. Infant mortality rates and other markers show favourably, and, holy crap, their percentage of GDP put into healthcare is significantly less. That's a strong enough argument on its' own for me to contemplate socialised medicine.

Why is everyone stuck in this rut of either or? Why not have the private option for those of us who are consumer choice fetishists and a functioning public health system? It seems to me like it would be considerably smaller than the systems of entire countries dependent on such, because not everyone will opt into it. And as for "I don't use it why should I pay" guess what, I don't use schools, I'm never going to argue that there should not be any.

 

[Homburg]

Why is everyone stuck in this rut of either or? Why not have the private option for those of us who are consumer choice fetishists and a functioning public health system? It seems to me like it would be considerably smaller than the systems of entire countries dependent on such, because not everyone will opt into it. And as for "I don't use it why should I pay" guess what, I don't use schools, I'm never going to argue that there should not be any.

Netzach, come now, don't talk crazy. American politics is always either-or. We don't get to hear about worthwhile compromises. It's either "FREE MARKET! FREE MARKET! FREE MARKET!" or "SOCIALISED MEDICINE!" etc.

There is some noise about a middle ground being talked about, but it isn't catching ground. It's just not as sexy as the edgy stuff. I really do think we're going to stupid ourselves into irrelevance.

 

[Jezebel77]

And that doesn't even get into the deep, hard fucking we get on a daily basis by Big Pharm. Oh, wow, they are cocksmen par extraordinaire.

It costs a lot of money for research and development of new drugs. They aren't completely evil, only 90%.

Sure they are bringing in a whole lot more than they are spending, but I personally would rather they keep looking for new treatments and cures. Plus, I want to have a job when I'm done with school, so they need to stay in business.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_development

 

[Homburg]

It costs a lot of money for research and development of new drugs. They aren't completely evil, only 90%.

Sure they are bringing in a whole lot more than they are spending, but I personally would rather they keep looking for new treatments and cures. Plus, I want to have a job when I'm done with school, so they need to stay in business.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_development

The money aspect isn't what I dislike. Making money is what business is supposed to do. It's the way they push their drugs on doctors who, in turn, push the drugs on us. Over-medication is evil.

It's the legal version of street-corner drug peddlers, with less guns, and prices that are FAR worse.

 

[Jezebel77]

The money aspect isn't what I dislike. Making money is what business is supposed to do. It's the way they push their drugs on doctors who, in turn, push the drugs on us. Over-medication is evil.

It's the legal version of street-corner drug peddlers, with less guns, and prices that are FAR worse.

There are so many different issues that this brings up.

First, how people need to take an active role in their healthcare. Just because you have a cough doesn't mean you need an antibiotic. People go to the doctors office expecting to walk out with a piece of paper in their hand thats gonna make them feel better. Hell, I know this and I still expect it. Just because you have a prescription doesn't mean its the right thing for you. Question everything. What's this for? What's it going to do for me? Why do I need it? What should I expect? How long am I going to take it?

I'm not sure what you mean by pushing their drugs...they do need to get the word out about new products (or why an older product is still the drug of choice when something new comes out). I'm a bit split on the drug ads on television. I think it can help initiate a conversation with your doctor but it can also lead to the patient expecting a prescription for something whether they need it or not. The key is the right doctor.

You need to find a doctor who is willing to answer all of your questions and explain their reasoning for doing things (or not doing things). I'm a doctor jumper. I want a doctor I'm comfortable with first of all, has values that I agree with and who knows their shit. I left one because she would ask me if I had insurance (I did) and would then give me the free samples....what's the point? why not save them for someone who doesn't have insurance? Then she would ask me if I could pass the word along to nurses at the hospital that they were looking for an office nurse...I think it was bribery. I left another doctor because she said she wouldn't prescribe me birth control, that I needed to talk to my husband about having children before I'm 30....I had major issues with that and with their office staff. I finally found one who impressed me. She took the time, answered my questions and actually used her mind ( I went specifically to get the varicella vaccine because a Dr had recommended it....I already had chicken pox as a kid and would have had a godawful time if they had given me the vaccine today). Anyways, the point is she took the time and instead of blindly following what another doctor recommended, did some research on her own (she was also a pharmacist before going to med school!)

As for the street-corner drug peddler....I've worked in them for 10 years and I'll be an official one in 2009...really not making all that much of a profit off of the prescriptions (most we were making a few dollars profit of each prescription....some only pennies).

 

[Homburg]

I'm not sure what you mean by pushing their drugs...

As for the street-corner drug peddler....I've worked in them for 10 years and I'll be an official one in 2009...really not making all that much of a profit off of the prescriptions (most we were making a few dollars profit of each prescription....some only pennies).

I'm not talking about the pharmacy (as I'm assuming this is what you are talking about). I'm talking about the manufacturers. They push the drugs towards doctors by free samples, incentives, etc. I'll try to find the article I read that talked about pharm sales tactics towards doctors. It's ugly stuff, and really makes me suspiscious as hell when my doc wants to medicate me with anything beyond short-term things like antibiotics and such.

 

[Jezebel77]

I was talking about both and I'd like to read the article.

 

[Homburg]

I was talking about both and I'd like to read the article.

The article I am thinking of was on Slate, and, well, doing a google search for slate and pharmaceutical company abuse etc produces a stupendous amount of hits. I may have to see if I can find where I saw the link.

Here is another one to read while I (probably fail to) find the article I'm referencing : Link to NYTimes


Some pertinent quotes:

Dr. Peter Leong recalls the day when he finally snapped at a drug company salesman pressing him to prescribe a powerful narcotic painkiller called OxyContin.

The drug's producer, Purdue Pharma, had already failed to persuade Dr. Leong with repeated offers of free weekend trips to Florida to discuss pain management. But when the salesman suggested that OxyContin -- which is as potent as morphine -- was safe enough to treat short-term pain, Dr. Leong exploded.

The company also used an often criticized but increasingly common marketing strategy: currying the favor of doctors in private practice with free trips and paid speaking engagements. Purdue Pharma, based in Norwalk, Conn., paid the transportation and hotel costs for hundreds of doctors to attend weekend meetings in spots like Florida to discuss pain management, a company consultant said. Doctors were then recruited and paid fees to speak to other doctors at some of the 7,000 ''pain management'' seminars that Purdue sponsored around the country. Those meetings stressed the importance of aggressively treating pain with potent, long-acting painkillers like OxyContin.

Purdue also contributed to foundations supporting research on pain, to pharmacy schools and to Internet sites aimed at educating consumers.

Another pharmacist, Samuel A. Okoronkwo, refused to fill an OxyContin prescription for someone he thought might be an abuser. He said a Purdue salesman suggested he could get into trouble for arbitrarily not filling prescriptions. ''I told him I didn't have to fill a prescription that I didn't feel was medically necessary,'' he said.

Frankly, it's easy to find articles like this. That's indicative, in my eyes.