Ontario plans to have free prescription drugs for anyone under 25

[photon]

Interesting, and it sounds like a great move.

Having a kid with expensive meds I can say I've been thankful that we've had good insurance most of the time, but being in a position where you have to decide between food and meds for your kid happens and shouldn't. Ever. A family going through a situation where a child needs expensive meds is dealing with enough without having to wonder how they'll get paid for.

All Ontario children and adults younger than 25 will have their full prescription drug costs covered by a new provincial pharmacare program, regardless of family income or whether they already have private insurance.

The province announced the expanded drug coverage in Thursday's annual budget, a move it projects will cost $465 million per year.

If approved, the new program would roll out Jan. 1, 2018 — and would cover 4,400 drugs for the province's four million children and young adults. The medications are the same already included in the ODP, which includes treatment for acute and chronic illness, as well certain pediatric cancers.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...ebar-1.4086229

[taco.vidal]

Originally Posted by photon

Interesting, and it sounds like a great move.

Having a kid with expensive meds I can say I've been thankful that we've had good insurance most of the time, but being in a position where you have to decide between food and meds for your kid happens and shouldn't. Ever. A family going through a situation where a child needs expensive meds is dealing with enough without having to wonder how they'll get paid for.

All Ontario children and adults younger than 25 will have their full prescription drug costs covered by a new provincial pharmacare program, regardless of family income or whether they already have private insurance.

The province announced the expanded drug coverage in Thursday's annual budget, a move it projects will cost $465 million per year.

If approved, the new program would roll out Jan. 1, 2018 — and would cover 4,400 drugs for the province's four million children and young adults. The medications are the same already included in the ODP, which includes treatment for acute and chronic illness, as well certain pediatric cancers.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...ebar-1.4086229

The current government is unpopular. Kathleen Wynne is fighting for her political life. She is desperate.

Ontario is in trouble. Its scary how bad things are in that province.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Those free prescriptions will be as free as their free university. Taxes have to come from somewhere.

[Northendzone]

So,what happens to little johnny who,is on an expensive med and he then turns 25 and the government turns off the tap....then what?

This change will shift some costs away from employers group benefit plans that is for sure.

Why not put a plan in with some thresholds and income tests and $465,000,000 - the real number is likely closer to a billion as government math is almost never correct.

[CaptainCrunch]

This is vote buying in its most pure form. Of course the people over the age of 25 are probably going to flip her the bird.

First they put out a budget that's based around fairy dust and unicorn farts in terms of revenue.

Then they start spreading the cash around, and when the budget crashes she'll still have a few more years to buy votes again. Or its up to the next government to play the bad guy.

[Northendzone]

I quickly reviewed the budget and it does not seem to,address the opioid crisis or the hydro rates.

Seems that doctors are pushing for free drugs for everyone.

The good news will be that the drugs are free, but the bad news will be that your basic income tax rate is about 67% of your earnings

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I quickly reviewed the budget and it does not seem to,address the opioid crisis or the hydro rates.

Seems that doctors are pushing for free drugs for everyone.

The good news will be that the drugs are free, but the bad news will be that your basic income tax rate is about 67% of your earnings

Yup they're basically going to drive people into the poor house to support their programs.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

This is vote buying in its most pure form. Of course the people over the age of 25 are probably going to flip her the bird.

Voter turnout numbers for people aged 25 and younger are typically very low, regardless of the platforms. I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that people over 25 will flip her the bird, a lot of people in that age group have children and no prescription drug coverage for them. Even the ones who do have coverage often don't have 100% reimbursement. This is a good program no matter how you slice it, as Canadians we brag about having free healthcare but frankly you need medication to treat most health issues and many people do not have coverage for medication or the

Try looking at it from the conservative bright side, it should be good for their economy since employers who currently pay premiums for this coverage will be able to save the difference between the extra tax it costs and what they are currently paying for their aged 25 and under employees and/or their dependants' coverage. Consider it like some form of corporate tax break, they can use those savings to invest in their business which will create jobs or lead to higher wages right? (Unless that makes as little sense in this context as it does when people use that arguement to justify giving the wealthy more breaks)

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

So,what happens to little johnny who,is on an expensive med and he then turns 25 and the government turns off the tap....then what?

They would be in the same boat as if the program hadn't been in place for them?

This change will shift some costs away from employers group benefit plans that is for sure.

Employers keep telling us these scenarios create growth

Why not put a plan in with some thresholds and income tests and $465,000,000 - the real number is likely closer to a billion as government math is almost never correct.

It's not as if tracking data on how much money is spent on prescription drugs by residents aged 25 and under would be overly difficult. The number will be disproven fairly easily if it's inaccurate, and if it is over 100% higher as you suggest, I'd say that makes a strong argument for why a program like this is necessary because it would mean people are currently only able to get less than half of the prescription drugs they need because they can't afford it.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

This is a good program no matter how you slice it, as Canadians we brag about having free healthcare but frankly you need medication to treat most health issues

And now you're just making stuff up again.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

And now you're just making stuff up again.

Hey any program that takes money from the earners and redistributes to the non earners has to be good!

And this one is twice as good! It takes money from earners (tax payers) and redistributes to not only the non earners and their children, but also gets the exclude the earners who don't have children! It's a win / win !

[Traditional_Ale]

Putting aside the political optics of this for the sake of this post, I'd hope I would be hard done by to find a reasonable human being who has an objection to this. Even the age of 25 seems appropriate. It would be cool, I think, that basic Canadian healthcare included mental health up to age 25 as a part of the basics.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

And now you're just making stuff up again.

I'm starting to question whether or not you actually know what making stuff up means.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Putting aside the political optics of this for the sake of this post, I'd hope I would be hard done by to find a reasonable human being who has an objection to this. Even the age of 25 seems appropriate. It would be cool, I think, that basic Canadian healthcare included mental health up to age 25 as a part of the basics.

As long as the regardless of income part remains. Essentially young people receive a benefit they will repay in taxes when working.

However, you can also bet doctors will now prescribe the most expensive drugs for people under 25 knowing full well the government is paying and drug companies will continue to pay doctors to have them recommend/prescribe their drugs

This program will balloon in cost and to get it under control they will stop issuing free meds to families over X income and it will just become another form of social assistance

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Hey any program that takes money from the earners and redistributes to the non earners has to be good!

And this one is twice as good! It takes money from earners (tax payers) and redistributes to not only the non earners and their children, but also gets the exclude the earners who don't have children! It's a win / win !

If you lost your job would you consider yourself to be less than human in the time between then and you finding another one? Earners and non earners? I honestly feel bad that this is how you view the world we live in. You realize a lot of these tax paying "earners" don't have prescription drug coverage right? And that "earners" under 25 who don't have children also occasionally need prescription drugs, but may not be eligible for benefits from their job(s) they're working at while putting themselves through school in hopes of becoming an even greater "earner"?

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

If you lost your job would you consider yourself to be less than human in the time between then and you finding another one? Earners and non earners? I honestly feel bad that this is how you view the world we live in. You realize a lot of these tax paying "earners" don't have prescription drug coverage right? And that "earners" under 25 who don't have children also occasionally need prescription drugs, but may not be eligible for benefits from their job(s) they're working at while putting themselves through school in hopes of becoming an even greater "earner"?

It was a jab at you, not the program. EVERY government run program that redistributes wealth you love, regardless of merit.

Read my post above for actual thoughts and concerns

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

It was a jab at you, not the program. EVERY government run program that redistributes wealth you love, regardless of merit.

Really? http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=161789

Feel free to take a jab back at yourself if you have the humility to admit when you are wrong.

Read my post above for actual thoughts and concerns

If you could stick to those types of posts it would make it a lot easier for me to do so. I don't even understand what you'd hope to gain from typing the other 2 out of 3 posts you've made in this thread.

[calgaryblood]

This is great news. Watching a friend struggle to put together money for medicine while his 3 year old son died of cancer was pretty heartbreaking. Thankfully they ended up getting approved for assistance but a lot of people who are barely over the income threshold don't get approved and while dealing with countless trips to the hospital, missing time off work, it can get really tight financially.

And cancer medicine is not cheap.

[Resolute 14]

As far as vote buying schemes go, I'm not sure if this one will work or backfire. On the one hand, you'll have parents who will be glad to enjoy some free money. On the other, you'll have everyone else who may not be so happy to pay for everyone else's kids.

[indes]

I've asked before but how long can we realistically just keep running deficits everywhere? Alberta, Ontario and the federal government are all way out of hand.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/site...anada-2016.pdf

When are we going to put our foot down on this stuff? Everyone just wants free ####. How anyone can justify just adding this program without removing other public service is beyond me.

Canada reminds me of a drunk 23 year old.