Manufactures and importers of durable medical devices will be paying the 2.3% tax. Why? Because the government found out what an outrageous markup they typically charge their customers. The Times Magazine article broke down the durable medical device manufacturer's profit margin and showed how they should not have to raise their prices at all. Those using the tax as an excuse to raise prices are taking advantage of the sick and elderly who are unwilling participants in the health care market -- meaning no one wakes up and decides to go out and buy a durable medical device. When consumers come into that market, they have little choice but to pay the outrageous markup or suffer. Keep in mind that a lot of these elderly specific products are paid by.... dum-dum-dum... Medicare!! And even at the medicare price, they're still making a profit!!
Before commenting further, I suggest reading the Times piece and get a better understanding of how durable medical device manufacture's and importers make billions and can easily afford a 2.3% tax that will go, in part, to the purchase of their products.
So, it seems like you wanted to seem like you were making a point/comment about my post, but actually said nothing at all specifically related to my post and the 2.3% tax.
I mean, anyone can google, and find a contrary opinion, but this Forbes article isn't even a debunking, just more context and background with some sources to POSSIBLE different numbers. The Forbe's piece was quite complimentary: Nevertheless, Mr. Brill has done a great public service in bringing this message to the attention of the general public with eye-opening concrete illustrations that left many readers shaking their heads in disbelief. The Forbe's piece serves to give additional perspective on the numbers in the Brill Piece. So, again, it seems like you only posted the links to seem smart, but didn't even bother to read them yourself. How embarrassing!!
And thank you for this: As I concluded in my first post, Mr. Brill has nicely codified much of what is wrong with American health care.
Yes, I agree.
"God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
-C G Jung
Part one was better then part 2, and at least for me it really tears his argument a part. It's hard to call 4000% markups greed when it only translates to a 2% profit margin on inpatient services. That obviously tells me that there is something else is the problem.
Most of the "facts" in the Forbe's piece were from the writer's own book. It was more a promotional piece than new information.
I did a little research on the author and found out at least one of his books was financed with grants from the Searle Freedom Trust.
I wouldn't call him a shill, but I would just allow the jury to hear about all his associations and incomes for writing article such as this.
a shell bill is a bill passed by the House initially, but then the provisions of that bill are stripped out by the Senate and replaced with..welll.... whatever they want.
Obamacare started in the House.... the House bill addressed tax break for military homeowners.
the military homeowners tax breaks were stripped out of the bill when it reached the Senate, and Obamacare was inserted.
and that,folks, is how you get around Constitutional provisions.... that's your federal government at work.
who here is surprised they can't follow the letter or the spirit of the Constitution?...certainly not me.
And give me a break. If you want to read up on the guy, here ya go. I think you are trying to attack the man because you honestly don't know how to attack the argument.