I'm a wife, mother, grandmother, sometimes-blogger, and because I intensely dislike some of the characteristics of a particular industry, this blogger "Doc" has called me anti-American, communist and socialist. They're terms I don't especially like, now that I've looked them up to clarify in my mind what they mean. I have written a blog entitled "Hostility, Truth in Labeling," simply to make sure everyone knew who it was that had been calling me these names. Toward the end of the blog I said that I wanted truth in labeling; then I proceeded to write out the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America. And I do pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And mean it.
This person has made many misstatements about me, implying that I want others to pay for my medications, among other things. I simply want to refute that one misstatement for now: I have paid for all the drugs I have taken all my adult life. Toward the end of the year I get a "break" in the cost of my meds because I am paying for one of those Medicare Prescription Drug Plans, against which I had fought fiercely. I had written approximately 25 letters to the editor (printed), and umpteen letters to my representatives in Congress, against the PDPs because they would be bad for the country, even if possibly good for me. When the PDPs were signed into law, I wrote to the paper one more time on the subject, thanking everybody and their children and grandchildren for their largesse. I am still against the PDPs, but I do take advantage of them, much as other self-sufficient adults take advantage of employer-sponsored health and prescription drug plans.
I had health insurance, employer-sponsored, most of my life. Many people do. Many people get a real break on prescription drugs, but they don't know it. They will know it when they do – if they do – begin to pay full price for them.
One of my reasons for being against the PDPs was that they super-inflated the cost of drugs in order to pay for the inordinate numbers of middlemen who would be involved: Social Security increased personnel and equipment and space, insurance companies' increased personnel and equipment and space, and drug company increased personnel, space and equipment. And drug companies are certainly not in the business of charity, any more than insurance companies or Microsoft. Nobody wants them to be in the business of charity. They all need to make a profit for their stockholders. My contention, however, is that many of these people are unnecessary middlemen; if we eliminated the need for them, it is possible the price of drugs could be lowered.
Also, just for the record, I am for making a profit. However, I am against profiteering.
Just a thought from a U.S. citizen who loves her country desperately and is not asking for a handout from anybody. For anything.
I have attempted to keep this nasty "difference of opinion" above the name-calling stage, but it is beginning to be increasingly difficult.