Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[postman1782]

Gasoline prices are down 6% year over year.

Thanks, Biden.

"What did Biden do?"

He took all the blame from Republicans when prices were up. So, I'm giving him the credit when they drop. It's both or neither. Sorry. I don't make the rules.

Yep, I keep telling Republicans to thank Biden for the prices going down, and they say that he had nothing to do with it, but they spent most of the last 2 years blaming him for the prices going up, even though you tell them that Trump's OPEC deal had more effect than ANYTHING Biden did. And they say that wasn't Trump that did that.

[Kathandira]

Insulin capped at $35 now. Thanks Biden.

Is that for those who use it at home, or in hospitals, or anywhere it is being used?

[Edge-]

Is that for those who use it at home, or in hospitals, or anywhere it is being used?

Eli Lily is updating their pricing, so this is for consumers. It's not for every manufacturer, but now he's sorta pressuring them by talking up his expectations that others will follow: https://www.reuters.com/business/hea...ce-2023-03-01/

[Kathandira]

Eli Lily is updating their pricing, so this is for consumers. It's not for every manufacturer, but now he's sorta pressuring them by talking up his expectations that others will follow: https://www.reuters.com/business/hea...ce-2023-03-01/

Good step forward! Thanks for the added details.

[Edge-]

Good step forward! Thanks for the added details.

To give Democrats some credit here: They did move to cap it at $35/month for seniors on Medicare as par of the Inflation Reduction Act last year. Should have been overall, but hey, sometimes those smaller baby steps do result in more progress following.

[fwc577]

I will cut in here, as somewhat of a diabetic expert myself



The $35 price cut is simply for vials per the scant details in the press release. Vials suck. Yes, it's okay in a pinch but vials are a lot of fucking work as you need syringes and that can lead to inaccuracies and yeah, it's just not good.

They did also announce price cuts to kwikpens, however.

Part of the problem with some of these medications are the patents on the kwikpens themselves which allow prices to be kept higher.

So, here is the price for those:

The list price1 of a 5-pack of 3 mL Humalog U-100 KwikPens (15 mL or 1,500 units) is $530.40 and the list price of a Humalog U-100 10 mL (1,000 units) vial is $274.70, but the amount you pay will largely depend on your insurance plan.

Then you have their press release:

Cutting the list price of Humalog® (insulin lispro injection) 100 units/mL1, Lilly's most commonly prescribed insulin, and Humulin® (insulin human) injection 100 units/mL2 by 70%, effective in Q4 2023.

Their press release does not mention kwik pens for the better insulin types.

They did mention a newer basal (long acting) insulin kwik pen will be sold at a reduced price.

aunching RezvoglarTM (insulin glargine-aglr) injection, a basal insulin that is biosimilar to, and interchangeable with, Lantus® (insulin glargine) injection, for $92 per five pack of KwikPens®, a 78% discount to Lantus, effective April 1, 2023.

As a diabetic, my biggest fear here is that not only will others follow suit, but that we suddenly find insurers dropping coverage of kwik pens in favor of vials only, due to the large discount in prices.

I think until all the exact details and pricing and which products it applies to and doesn't apply to is made clear, we shouldn't be getting excited just yet because unlike Part D, this may not apply to injectables.

[Breccia]

As a diabetic, my biggest fear here is that not only will others follow suit, but that we suddenly find insurers dropping coverage of kwik pens in favor of vials only, due to the large discount in prices.

It's always good to get an informed perspective on these things.

[Polyxo]

Think we're starting to need that 2024 thread.



My only question is "lol why?"

I dunno, something to do with crystals or some shit I guess

[Endus]

Think we're starting to need that 2024 thread.



My only question is "lol why?"

If you're going after a largely supported (from his side of the aisle, at least) President to challenge them in the primary, you're probably gonna lose.

When my first reaction on hearing about it is "Who?", I'm comfortable saying you're definitely gonna lose.

[draynay]

Think we're starting to need that 2024 thread.



My only question is "lol why?"

Maybe it will help her market some wellness crystals or essential oils.

[postman1782]

If you're going after a largely supported (from his side of the aisle, at least) President to challenge them in the primary, you're probably gonna lose.

When my first reaction on hearing about it is "Who?", I'm comfortable saying you're definitely gonna lose.

She never met any of the debate requirements last time, she won't this time either.

[Gestopft]

If you're going after a largely supported (from his side of the aisle, at least) President to challenge them in the primary, you're probably gonna lose.

When my first reaction on hearing about it is "Who?", I'm comfortable saying you're definitely gonna lose.

I don't think she's under the assumption that she can win; I think it's more about trying to force a conversation about particular issues.

[TACOshake]

Think we're starting to need that 2024 thread.



My only question is "lol why?"

Why...
Some nitwits demanded seats on the DNC after the 2016 primaries. They pressured to have "online polls" and "online fundriaising" as criteria for debate attendance.
Supposedly an answer to some kind of Populism.
But it really opened the door for people that knew how to game Social Media.

[tehdang]

Think we're starting to need that 2024 thread.



My only question is "lol why?"

Please tell me there's going to be a debate before the Democratic primaries. I have to have some dark psychic force soundbites updated for 2024.

[Taifuu]

Please tell me there's going to be a debate before the Democratic primaries. I have to have some dark psychic force soundbites updated for 2024.

Why? What does it matter what the Democrats do? Regardless of what happens, you're just going to go wait for your talking points from Fox News, contribute nothing to the conversation, actively deny reality, and then finish it off with a round of "I'm the world's biggest victim" and "I'd totally for realz debate if everyone else wasn't a bunch of meanies!" type of posts.

[Breccia]

"I'm the world's biggest victim"

They have nothing left.

[D3thray]

I will cut in here, as somewhat of a diabetic expert myself



The $35 price cut is simply for vials per the scant details in the press release. Vials suck. Yes, it's okay in a pinch but vials are a lot of fucking work as you need syringes and that can lead to inaccuracies and yeah, it's just not good.

They did also announce price cuts to kwikpens, however.

Part of the problem with some of these medications are the patents on the kwikpens themselves which allow prices to be kept higher.

So, here is the price for those:



Then you have their press release:



Their press release does not mention kwik pens for the better insulin types.

They did mention a newer basal (long acting) insulin kwik pen will be sold at a reduced price.



As a diabetic, my biggest fear here is that not only will others follow suit, but that we suddenly find insurers dropping coverage of kwik pens in favor of vials only, due to the large discount in prices.

I think until all the exact details and pricing and which products it applies to and doesn't apply to is made clear, we shouldn't be getting excited just yet because unlike Part D, this may not apply to injectables.

Lilly, as well as Novo, Sanofi, and others already have a $99/mo cap on basal and quick acting insulins including the pens whether you have insurance or not. So this is in addition to those programs which is great to hear.

Source: I bill insurance for a living.

[Breccia]

Biden to announce budget including $200 billion in new taxes on the rich, and corporations, each year for ten years.

In other words, more or less reverse the tax cut for the rich's permanent benefits to the rich, while the effects on individuals are due to wear off anyhow.

"What are the specifics?"

Oh, who cares. Biden is just reminding everyone that he's a Democrat and that his values include people paying their fair share and balancing the budget. The President's budget is a glorified wish list, that hasn't changed.

Of course, Biden is in a position of strength. The GOP House has recently taken on the paradoxical stance of wanting to control debt spending (like that done under Trump's COVID pandemic), but also to not cut SS, not cut Medicare, not cut the military, etc. Shaving off a few jobs at the IRS won't make a dent in the federal budget. Biden basically said "my solution to the US not having money, is for the US to make more money, by taking it from people who are getting the benefits but not paying the costs". he then gets to sit back and smile while the House tries desperately to fulfill a Trump-like mess of promises to their own voters to reduce taxes without cutting spending but somehow not creating more debt.

Biden may be virtue-signalling, but at least it's an actual virtue. Meanwhile Schumer is waiting in the batter's box, taking a few practice swings.

[tehdang]

Why? What does it matter what the Democrats do? Regardless of what happens, you're just going to go wait for your talking points from Fox News, contribute nothing to the conversation, actively deny reality, and then finish it off with a round of "I'm the world's biggest victim" and "I'd totally for realz debate if everyone else wasn't a bunch of meanies!" type of posts.

I know that's what you're going to say no matter what I argue or present as evidence. But since you're wrong and find need to construct elaborate fictions for some reason, I'm going to persist in hoping for some fun debate back-and-forth and soundbites like in the 2020 primaries. You recall "dark psychic force," or do you believe that's something Fox News made up and fed to its many nefarious agents?

[Taifuu]

I know that's what you're going to say no matter what I argue or present as evidence. But since you're wrong and find need to construct elaborate fictions for some reason, I'm going to persist in hoping for some fun debate back-and-forth and soundbites like in the 2020 primaries. You recall "dark psychic force," or do you believe that's something Fox News made up and fed to its many nefarious agents?

Lol imagine making a post accusing others of accusing Fox News of making shit up after Murdoch already admitted that they lie on air for profits under oath. Ignoring all the shit posting you've done in the past, this comment alone is enough for everyone to know you've never been interested in having an actual debate. As if actually using the term soundbites wasn't enough of a clue.