Dear Mitt

pineinthegrass wrote:

archer wrote: Fred, I have to live with the drug bill as does my mom. It is not nearly as good as what she had before the bill and at greater cost. We both ended up on the donut hole...for me not till October, my mom was there before summer. Why the bill didn't include the ability to bargain for lower prices like the VA I will never understand. It would still be cheaper for my mom to go to Canada for her meds. As for the stimulus, I wish it had included more money targeted at infrastructure....we HAVE to upgrade, the longer we hold off doing so the deeper the need. It's as much a debt as what we owe China. What I did not agree with is the money given to the banks and AIG..but I'll admit I don't understand it enough to articulate it. It just felt wrong. I relate more to the business world than I do to the financial world.

Hey, I'm not Fred. And it looks like you are answering from a cell phone, no prob there.

sorry about that, I can't see the author on the little screen. oops, my bad

But I see no way you or your mom could be spending more for drugs than before Bush's medicare drug act. Unless you are comparing apples to oranges where one or both of you had a private plan, work plan, or retirement plan and then later went to Medicare.
Before the drug plan, Medicare covered little if anything for drug costs. Now it does, regardless of the donut hole. Can you explain how it costs more for you, even with a donut hole, than before when there was no drug coverage (other than medical costs just going up as usual which doesn't have much to do with the question)?

My mom had a supplemental plan that covered her drugs much like an insurance plan does for everyone else, no donut hole and the premium for the drug portion was less than what she pays for less coverage with part D, that is partly because of the types of drugs she takes that the basic plans don't cover.. I had regular insurance before going on medicare with a drug plan, and still pay for a supplemental plan and part D.....and that part D is pretty pricey, same reason as my mom. Now that I am off the pricey drugs I plan to switch to a different plan next year...... My complaint about part D is not that they did it, but that it was a pretty nice gift to the insurance companies.....it isn't run by medicare and unlike the advantage plans that insurance companies run for medicare, medicare does not have much control over what they offer. The shopping for part D is a nightmare......one company will cover drug A pretty well, but if you take drug B, that isn't covered. If you go to a plan that covers drug B, then drug A may cost twice as much. The idea was right but the execution of it I think was wrong. You have seniors taking drugs until they hit the donut hole, then stopping till next year when they can afford them again.Rather than have a donut hole, negotiate lower prices for the drugs like Canada has. Yeah, I know, we are paying for research.....but that is not always true. I saw on the news yesterday that some drugs marketed here were actually developed by foreign companies, but the US companies still sell them for more here than the rest of the world.

And I don't see anything in your response endorsing Obama's $800 billion plus stimulus plan. And it did cover a lot of infrastructure. But it didn't come close to meeting its stated goals.

No it didn't, and I put part of the blame on his backing down and agreeing to less stimulus than what was needed instead of pushing for more. As fiscally conservative as I am in my household finances, I do understand that sometimes you have to spend money to make money......be it a business or a government. This economy will improve when people go back to work and spend more on the goods and services we make.....more workers, more taxes, more income, and so it goes. If you start a business you have your own stimulus going. If you don't invest enough capitol and manpower into it and get it off to a strong start it may well not flourish....many many successful businesses started with enormous debt with the goal of building the business into an income producing enterprise that makes enough to cover that debt. That's sort of how I see the stimulus package.....it was just too small to produce a thriving economy again, So we coast along getting a little better very slowly and not really flourishing because we didn't give it enough gas.

archer wrote: TLGOPT...Where has Obama ever said he loathes the 1%? Expecting them to pay a larger share is hardly loathing. Yeah I know, you made that up.

His outright support of the Occupy movement for a start.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:
His outright support of the Occupy movement for a start.

The truth will set us free. Thanks for reminding us. Obama is part of the 1% and his campaign and political thugs supported the Occupy Movement....