Adapt Posted:

i don’t even get what you guys what. are you saying goverment healthcare is good or that you want something independent?

Any subsidized, centralized health-care entity is good. It could be a federal department, or a government sponsored monopoly like the Post Office, but so long as the profit motive is taken away people won’t get their coverage dropped.

This bill spends a lot more than it has to, and taxes the wrong people for the wrong reasons.

For example, ‘health care companies’ are one of the major sources of tax revenue for it. How much they pay for Obamacare is directly tied to their R&D expenditures, meaning the more corporations invest in future methods for improving quality of health care, the more they get taxed to pay for current health care. This is a huge disincentive to invest in R&D and stagnates the quality of HC in the long run.

Not just that, ‘health care companies’ is an all-inclusive term for any corporation that produces biomedical related technology – whether they produce reagents, instruments, or supplies (like test tubes). Meaning, more than just the evil pharmaceutical giants are going to get taxed, smaller niche but no less important companies are going to get taxed equal to their R&D expenditures.

Pfizer can afford this. It invests in like 100 different pharmaceuticals, of which like 6 make it past the FDA clearance every three-five years, releases the products for a short period of time until side effect lawsuits force them to recall it. During this time, Pfizer makes TONS of money, far more than it invested in R&D and less than it would lose in suits.

Other companies can’t do this and have more narrow profit margins. Taxing them based on R&D basically dooms them to bankruptcy because they can never improve their products. Either that, or they outsource overseas, which is going to impact middle clbum employment.