Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (529884)	11/17/2009 3:53:22 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1574848

>> Isn't that part D kicking in...? As I pointed out, Part D costs were 40% under budget for 2009. If those prices rise, it is possible the premiums will go up later. HOWEVER, it is important to realize that the reason Part D is so successful is that it is privately managed, and those private insurers have the ability to negotiate with drug manufacturers on bundles of prescriptions for particular drugs. And the donut hole, which Democrats want to close, is what makes the program fiscally feasible. Part D provides essential medications for almost everyone at a cost that doesn't break the bank; it also provides catastrophic coverage for those who, for example, need expensive chemo that isn't covered by Part B. It is an excellent program IMO and ought to be a model for how government health care is done. But the left is so adamant that health care be a GIFT from the taxpayers and that it cover everything and everyone equally, AND that it not be a Republican initiative, that they're unwilling to accept it and admit that it is successful. You and RW have bashed Part D numerous times, based on the liberal blogger complaints about it not allowing Medicare to negotiate for an overall price. Yet, Part D's cost effectiveness is unparalleled in the history of American government run health care. You guys just can't take Yes for an answer.