Amazon Deepens Healthcare Push With $5 Monthly Subscription (reuters.com) 63
Amazon said on Tuesday it is offering a $5 monthly subscription plan for U.S. Prime members that will cover a range of generic drugs and their doorstep delivery, furthering the ecommerce giant's push into healthcare. From a report: The program, named RxPass, includes more than 50 medications addressing over 80 chronic conditions such as high blood pressure, anxiety, diabetes and male pattern baldness, Vin Gupta, Amazon Pharmacy's chief medical officer, told Reuters. However, customers enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid or any other government healthcare program will not be able to enroll in Amazon Pharmacy's RxPass service.
The average Prime member would save about $100 per year with RxPass, John Love, vice president of Amazon Pharmacy, said in an interview. Amazon Prime members in most U.S. states can sign up for the program from Tuesday. The flat $5 charge would be without insurance and on top of the Prime membership fee, which costs $139 per year in the United States.
The average Prime member would save about $100 per year with RxPass, John Love, vice president of Amazon Pharmacy, said in an interview. Amazon Prime members in most U.S. states can sign up for the program from Tuesday. The flat $5 charge would be without insurance and on top of the Prime membership fee, which costs $139 per year in the United States.
American healthcare is very expensive (Score:2)
But the cost of generic drugs isn't the cause.
It is already possible to get generic drugs relatively cheaply in many cases, this move will not make any difference to medical costs in the US.
Re: (Score:1)
This makes it even cheaper and more competition, plus you don't have to drive to the pharmacy drive through anymore.
American Healthcare is relatively cheap in comparison to the total cost (including the "insurance" you pay for through income taxes and opportunity costs of better cancer/stroke/heart survival rates) in other countries.
Re: (Score:2)
This makes it even cheaper and more competition, plus you don't have to drive to the pharmacy drive through anymore.
American Healthcare is relatively cheap in comparison to the total cost (including the "insurance" you pay for through income taxes and opportunity costs of better cancer/stroke/heart survival rates) in other countries.
Where are you getting anything to do with that last sentence? We don't get "insurance" through income taxes. We have to pay for our insurance. Though most that have it get it through an employer, who claims they cover some portion of it, yet out of pocket expenses are still through the roof. On top of the premium just for having you, you get dinged for copays, fees, and every other add-on they can think to hit you with so the financial burden for healthcare becomes nearly insurmountable for middle class fol
Re: (Score:1)
The cost of your insurance though is in untaxed income.
People look at the number and it looks big. It is big but at least half the country (probably more given if you have an employer health plan you probably are a net tax payer, and if you are buying on the exchanges its probably pushing you AGI down so you don't owe tax) had you spend that money any other way dear old uncle Sam would have laid hands on 25% of it first!
This is something the GOP needs to fix. Reduce tax rates, eliminate income tax shelters
Re: (Score:1)
You are advocating regressive taxes, which is dumb. Some things should be taxed more than others, and there is no need to tax the poor when the rich are getting most of the money.
Re: (Score:2)
Not at all - lowing the taxes rates does not eliminate progressive brackets.
Make the rate cuts deeper for the lower brackets if you like. Raise the minimum taxable income too while your at it to shift the costs of the change to higher earners. My point was to just make it revenue neutral.
However taxing health insurance the same as other comp is an important step to actually unlinking employment and health insurance.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't see how taxing employer-subsidized health insurance is going to make a beneficial difference for anyone.
As for shifting taxes to higher earners, that is something we will never see from the GOP. Their most recent plan is a national 30% sales tax on everything from groceries to gasoline.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to see regressive taxes, look at California. They tax the shit out of you just for being sick, worse than any other state at that, and it affects you the same regardless of how wealthy or poor you are, plus they don't allow you to deduct HSA contributions from your income.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/s... [forbes.com]
Re: (Score:1)
I live in Texas, the total tax rate is higher than California.
https://www.chron.com/news/hou... [chron.com]
Re: (Score:2)
While I've never been to Texas before, I'm living in California, and the page I linked is about just how horrid the health care situation is here, including the fact that California taxes health care services the worst of any state, and those taxes do not distinguish between rich and poor. A thing I just discovered yesterday, actually, after having quite a bad experience:
https://science.slashdot.org/c... [slashdot.org]
But actually Texas does look better in comparison even when you only look at general taxation. My income
Re: (Score:1)
Your article is mostly complaining about how "Medi-Cal", an expanded Medicaid program, doesn't pay enough. At least it is something, Texas has no equivalent program. And in fact Texas has the highest uninsured resident rate of any state at twice the national average. The right-wing nutjobs running the state also rejected the Medicaid benefits for the poor that were made available by the Affordable Care Act.
https://rollcall.com/2022/03/1... [rollcall.com]
As for the value of $100, that really has nothing to do with taxes. I
Re: (Score:2)
Your article is mostly complaining about how "Medi-Cal", an expanded Medicaid program, doesn't pay enough
You really ought to read it before commenting on it. You didn't even make it to the third paragraph, where it's blatantly obvious that there's much more than that wrong with it:
Healthcare accessibility is about more than just the uninsured rate. After all, insurance is useless if a patient can't find a hospital or doctor who will see him -- or if his coverage doesn't afford him access to the right medications and treatments.
And there's more:
The insurance plans available on the state's exchange, Covered California, are notorious for their narrow provider networks. One study found that 75% of Obamacare plans in the state strictly limit enrollees' choice of doctors -- one of the highest rates in the country. Another found that exchange customers have access to fewer hospitals than other privately insured patients.
Not medical there...
As a result, emergency room visits in California have increased about 10% since Obamacare went into effect -- the exact opposite of what was supposed to happen. Patients either can't find a doctor or can't afford to see one because of very high deductibles on exchange plans.
Not here either...
The Mercatus study evaluated each state's healthcare system on several measures of openness and accessibility beyond the uninsured rate. For instance, patients in different states have varying levels of access to telemedicine and drugs. Some states impose higher taxes on health care; that increases its cost and diminishes patient access to it. Providers face different levels of state regulation and legal liability that can hurt or help patient access to care.
California scored better than the national average on a few measures -- and is at or near the bottom on most of the rest.
And here, we're comparing to other states...You did look at the second link I posted right? It actually ranked Texas way higher than California. Come on dude, I didn't even make this hard for you, I gave you a nice infographic summary. So what happened?
On several other measures, California performs worse than the average state.
Take taxes, where California comes in dead last. The state has among the highest tax rates on providers and medical devices. And unlike most states, it taxes money put into Health Savings Accounts.
HSAs are among the most effective ways to lower health costs. Patients own the funds in their HSAs and can roll them over, tax free in most states, from year to year. So they have a financial incentive to spend their healthcare dollars wisely.
To encourage patients to fund HSAs, the federal government exempts money deposited into them, as well as earnings, from income tax. California doesn't follow suit. That makes accumulating assets in an HSA slightly more difficult for the state's residents.
Oh look at that...exactly a
Re: (Score:1)
Yawn. I did read all that, and I really don't care what you think about California's healthcare system. In Texas its worse as I clearly explained. Totally uninterested in the rest of your snark.
Re: American healthcare is very expensive (Score:2)
I honestly couldn't care less about Texas as I've never been there nor do I want to go there, but it's interesting that I showed how you're unambiguously and objectively wrong and you keep insisting that anyways. More to the point, why are you so hell bent on defending a state that is so obviously broken?
Re: (Score:2)
Think again, the GQP's latest con is a national sales tax of 22-23% and the elimination of income taxes and taxes on corporate America. This allows the little fellers to get on with their job of supporting the rich. Failing that, they want to whack the IRS to protect their fat-cat donors. The GQP is without honor.
Re: (Score:2)
and the elimination of income taxes and taxes on corporate America
Technically, under this "sales tax", corporate America "could" end up paying more than they currently pay in taxes (as in $0), as "sales tax" for anything they purchase (including services, I presume). This tax is a variation on the VAT tax.
Is it bullshit? Probably, but there's nothing fair or more equitable than our current forms of taxation. Frankly, I'm more in favor of simplification of the tax preparation process. If you're a salaried worker, you shouldn't need to fill out a 1040EZ, just have it sp
Re: (Score:2)
It's bullshit because businesses write off much of that, depreciate other things, and negotiate sweetheart tax deals that shift their promised tax revenue over to the people they employ.
Re: (Score:2)
My favorite tax scam is:
Business: we want to open an office in your city, we'll generate $$$ billions in taxes for y'all. Also, give us tax breaks.
State/city: Awesome, here is $$ billion tax breaks
Business: Perfect, thanks!! #richesbitches
Also business: employee drone #12345 here is your W2 explaining taxes YOU PAID to the state/city, meeting our claim of "generating taxes"
It's a huge circle-jerk to push the tax burden away from businesses and other wealthy people.
"But rich people spend money on things too
Re: (Score:3)
This is something the GOP needs to fix.
You used the words "GOP" and "fix" in the same sentence. +5 funny
Also, what you proposed is a regressive tax system that stomps on poorer people in favor of wealthier people. Though to be fair, you were putting this in the hands of the GOP ...
Re: (Score:2)
This is something the GOP needs to fix.
You used the words "GOP" and "fix" in the same sentence. +5 funny
Also, what you proposed is a regressive tax system that stomps on poorer people in favor of wealthier people. Though to be fair, you were putting this in the hands of the GOP ...
To be also "fair" (equitable is more appropriate?) - much of the left keeps creating "helpful programs" that largely enrich other wealthy people or donors. Different beneficiaries by different methods, but same game by any name.
For example, NYC has an incredibly broad and growing emergency housing program costing ~$138/day ($50k/yr) for a single adult. They've bought out thousands of hotel rooms (where the city pays in the range of $500/room/day) to use as shelters. Eric Adams is seeking something like $
Re: (Score:1)
This is based on averages based on individual people though... if you have a good income in NL, your share of the tax burden for health care is going to be a lot higher. However, having additional family members do not add to this b
Re: (Score:2)
Not even close. A good health care plan in the US for "family coverage" is closer to US$2000/month. That's the employee + spouse + children up to the age of 26 now. A lot of companies subsidize that cost as part of their benefits so you'd be paying $500 or $1000 a month instead of the entire amount. If you have a young/healthy family, I can see why people would blow it off.
However, if you DON'T have a health care plan and just pay cash for your health needs, you often pay MUCH higher rates. The insuran
Re: (Score:1)
This is not necessarily the case my friend.
I've been contracting for a good while....set up a HSA (Health Savings Acct.) that unlike a FSA is not use it or lose it...rolls over annually.
I load that up to the max annually, pre-tax....and pay for my ro
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, I also have maxed out HSA deductions for years so I've got a fat war chest. If only you could use those funds to pay for insurance itself. :)
I haven't tried negotiating cash prices with a doctor before. I'll have to give that a go.
Thanks!
Re: (Score:2)
In all cases I have run into....just asking for a self pay rate did the trick and they gave me a lower rate than insurance companies get.
Not necessarily. Insurance companies have contracted rates with each provider. Here's the gist of how it works: The provider bills the insurance say $5,000. Insurance says: "Ok, based on these ICD and CPT codes, we'll pay you $450, and the patient owes you $50".
Re: American healthcare is very expensive (Score:4, Informative)
However, if you DON'T have a health care plan and just pay cash for your health needs, you often pay MUCH higher rates.
That doesn't match my experience.
When I went to the doctor without insurance, I was offered a discount "cash rate" for office services (doctors like to get paid now, not in 6 months after insurance companies 'review' them).
When paying cash, doctors are less inclined to practice 'defensive' medicine to help support their insurance claims.
When paying cash, doctors used to give me lots of samples along with a prescription - if they had them.
When paying cash, doctors had complete freedom to refer me to any specialist, not just the insurance company list, which contributes to better, more effective care.
The high 'book rates' hospitals and others 'charge' are fantasy, no one willing to actually pay their bill has to pay those rates if they are willing to ask for a discount. The high rates are used to pad reimbursements for care provided to uninsured patients that don't pay their bill (charity care). By inflating the cost of services, hospitals get to write-off greater amounts, which helps them receive a better reimbursement from gov't charity funds.
Re: American healthcare is very expensive (Score:2)
You are looking at the subsidized insurance plan costs/premiums, before subsidy they approach $3k/month, and high-income earners do not qualify for the subsidies.
For mid-level earners, the subsidies are provided on a sliding scale that tracks income levels.
But what is left out, despite the high cost of these government plans, is the incredibly low reimbursement levels these plans pay the healthcare providers, so low many doctors, hospitals don't accept those plans.
It's understandable that someone outside th
Re: (Score:2)
I think this issue is a lot more complicated than people make it out to be, and I think it's more about what state you live in. For most of my life, I've had zero problems getting health care. Poor, wealthy, and everything in between, all the same. Actually getting care has been easy too; no long waits for anything. Even major surgeries were a month or two out at most. That is, until these past few months. Yesterday, I had yet more problems being able to see specialists I need for post-transplant (kidney) c
Re: (Score:2)
> But the cost of generic drugs isn't the cause.
If you're looking for *a* cause you won't find that generics are it.
But I'm on a $25/pill generic and I know organic chemistry and it's nonsense. It certainly drives up costs for everybody.
Many layers of fascist cartels are what maintains this atrocity.
Re: American healthcare is very expensive (Score:2)
The value-add for most customers is scheduled delivery and actually being aware of the program.
I suspect there are a number of Americans that are unaware of existing generic/discount Rx programs from smaller retailers that haven't been well publicized.
Re: (Score:2)
It is already possible to get generic drugs relatively cheaply in many cases
While that may be true, how many people know that and are willing to chase the cheapest prices around? Now ask that again, but for the elderly who are disproportionately affected by medical care and prescription costs.
Really, there's nothing specific to pharmaceuticals about any of this. People are busy and/or lazy so they go with the names they know; they can't or won't spare the time and energy needed to regularly price-check the things they're buying. It takes a price shock or other prompt before most pe
Formulary? (Score:2)
I've seen plenty of new articles on this, but nowhere do I see the formulary that would be supported. Looks like the marketing goons that are left are all over this one. The clinicians? Not so much.
Re: (Score:3)
The list of prescriptions is on https://pharmacy.amazon.com/rx... [amazon.com]. It seems fairly limited. I wonder how it compares to the Walmart $4 prescription drug list.
HSA funds (Score:2)
Can you use HSA funds for a subscription service like this? Since it is not a direct product purchase? Granted its $60 but any dollar the tax man can't put his hands on is a bigger dollar!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, you just have to prove any expense is for healthcare-related services, I would assume this falls under shipping fees.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The first one I looked up says HSA/FSA eligible.
https://pharmacy.amazon.com/Es... [amazon.com]
That said, it's basically the same discount I would get using GoodRX.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you use HSA funds for a subscription service like this?
Nope. From their RxPass FAQ [amazon.com]:
Does RxPass work with insurance or an HSA/FSA?
Unfortunately, you cannot use an HSA or FSA to pay your RxPass subscription fee. RxPass is not insurance and is not a substitute for insurance.
It's not entirely clear to me why that is. I had initially misunderstood RxPass to basically be a for-pay version of GoodRx (i.e. a discount service), but that isn't the case. You're receiving actual medication by paying a subscription fee, so I don't understand what the hold up is.
That said, you can use your HSA to directly pay for HSA-eligible items that are sold via Amazon Pharmacy [amazon.com], even without subscribing to RxPass. Likewise, there's nothing stopping you from using your HSA
Medicare (Score:2)
Maybe it's more about the data than the drugs (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No Insurance (Score:2)
If you don't have insurance for drugs, and you are taking generics, then this might save you money. You would need to check the price of the drugs you take and compare with what you pay now. It also might just be more convenient.
For me, I have one generic that I take, but it's free with my plan, so I would definitely be losing money if I used this service.
Re: (Score:2)
I've also found with some drugs that if the pharmacy runs them without insurance, they're cheaper than the copay, so always check on that if it's a cheap drug to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
The prices seemed on-par with GoodRX. The advantage here is the free shipping
Re: (Score:2)
Save up to $100 a year! (Score:3)
The average Prime member would save about $100 per year with RxPass
After paying $60 a year, plus the cost of membership in Prime. Such a deal!
Re: (Score:2)
Indian drugs (Score:2)
This is fueled by the fact that essentially all generic drugs now come from India and are dirt cheap, often less than 5c(US) per pill. The quality, however, is very suspect.
As another guy said, this will have negligible effect on US medical costs. Big players such as Walmart already offer generics at similar prices, and they don't exclude anyone or require membership.
Re: (Score:2)
News, but not a Deal (Score:2)
Against the reality of generic drugs already being available cheaply form a number of (no annual fee) sources.
With restrictions on "government medical insurance" and medicare: arguably the most needy potential clients.
Nope.
Re: (Score:2)
"Let food be thy medicine" (Score:2)
Free healthcare... (Score:2)
First hit is free! (Score:2)