A response to proposed Medicare cuts.

Post Reply New Topic

If you are old or in poor health, you aren't going to get affordable private insurance. Especially if the government "gets out of the way." Medicare got started in the first place because of a failure of the free market to take care of geezers.


So what is your plan? Spend your lifetime getting rich, so that when you are old, you will be able to afford medical care?


We all feel the pain of your loss of moral purity.

You should know that, when you eventually take up residence in a nursing home, then Medicare will only pay for one month. After that, you are on your own. You get to be "morally pure" again. But, only until all of your personal economic resources get depleted. Then, you'll become "morally impure" once again as Medicaid takes over the bill.

Thank you for saying it so plain.

Medicare and Social Security are HUGE programs that nobody really pays for (you get a lot more out than you likely ever put in). To some degree, they are both needed. Social Security, however, was NEVER designed to be a retirement plan for the masses. It was a welfare program for widows and orphans and a support structure for those truly unable to work. Medicare is a health care program for people too old to be insured by any private carrier (too high a risk of loss).

The way these programs have been run, they are bankrupting America in their own way. The OMB is bipartisan and has the data that proves these programs are UNSUSTAINABLE. Something needs to be done to give them a chance to be there for the current generation and future generations.

Proposed changes to Social Security and Medicare WOULD NOT harm those 55 and older (too old to do something to cope with changes to the plan). Only those under 55 would have to deal with incremental changes to the program designed to give them both a chance at survival.

I know of many advocates who say that people with money SHOULD NOT be getting Social Security so that the money is there to help those who really need it. They don't practice hypocrisy. They don't draw on their benefits. One guy did say he figured he should start drawing and give 100% of it to someone in need so that at least he knows his share is helping someone.

My parents are up in arms over this. Both are in their 60s. Both will not be affected by any reforms enacted, but you'd think they were going to the gas chambers the day any reform is passed based on how much they are overreacting to the proposals.

Medicare and Social Security are Ponzi schemes. Our great grandchildren will be paying for it.

ruveyn

ONLY IF they can find the good-paying jobs needed to keep the programs funded.

To hell with your grand children. If today's people don't survive, they won't be able to reproduce.

We are already inheriting them the reparation of the destruction of earth we are currently doing. We are already assuming that they will fix all the world's problems, they won't get hurt that much with another one.

At least they made it through the rapture.

They are paid for.


Only if you live long enough.


Yes it was.


Aw, boo-hoo.


As the current large voting block knows as "Baby Boomers" march toward retirement, even Republicans will be courting their votes. Libertarians won't, because they aren't really serious about getting elected.


Yep, they always target FUTURE retirees, and try not to harm people close to retirement, so as not to lose elections.


The "reform" isn't going to pass anyway, but wish them a pleasant execution on my behalf.

I'm guessing your parents are responding appropriately. Pretty much everything you said is wrong...

Do you fail to see the flaw in your plan?

The problem is really only temporary.

Now that the Baby Boomers are marching towards retirement, there will be a bit of a glut of retirees relative to workers.

After the Baby Boomers have died off, the country will be back to a more sustainable ratio of workers to retirees.

You're proposing not to harm people 55 and over--yet this is exactly where the problem lies. It makes little sense to harm future generations of elderly, when there won't be any problem supporting them. The problem is the huge number of baby boomers, whom even the Republicans dare not harm.

How many people do you know who have reproduced after they became eligible for medicare?

Sure, a few 70 year old men get 20 year old wives and have children, but I don't think it's a significant contributor to the population.

If one is eligible for Social Security Disability Income (SSDI), then one is eligible for Medicare.

I don't think that is what she meant. Reuvyn's reference was great grandchildren. I think she meant, if his grandchildren don't survive the other problems that the current generation is passing down for them to resolve, they might not survive and reproduce.

But, on your point, I wonder how much difference viagra is making?

I remember asking Reuvyn one time if he though social programs were important, in the case his grandchildren became disabled or needed help. His response was along the lines of "life is hard"; but I imagine they are pretty hardy folk.

One of the nice things about the Ryan plan is that it comes closer to doing what should be done. Yes, you still pay medicare taxes and get government paid benefits, but you get them by selecting from competing private insurers. That at least allows us to select the health care that is right for us, as would happen under a completely private system. It's way better than the present medicare system, where much of the money is spent on extraordinary interventions to add a few days at the very end of life for the few people who use them, while the vast majority of people do not.

Now, it's true that the Ryan plan doesn't eliminate the deficit right away, for example in this case by continuing to increase medicare spending at the rate of inflation. That's just realism. He's not trying to eliminate medicare; he's just trying to rein in the skyrocketing costs from which few people benefit.

I note that ruveyn's benefits wouldn't be affected by the Ryan plan, since he's over 55. At 51, I'm in one of the early years that would be affected, and I wholeheartedly support the plan. It would give me better health care at lower cost to the government and to the taxpayer.

Ah, so that's what this is about. Making money for private insurers, and from tax dollars no less. But Medicare recipients already have the option of signing up for benefits provided by private insurers. He simply wants to eliminate the government option?


Not necessarily. Medicare recipients already have the option of selecting private insurers within the Medicare system. Eliminating traditional Medicare will simply reduce the options.


So Mr. Ryan wants to bring in the "Death Panels" that Mrs. Paleface warned us about?


So, Death Panels it is, then.


You're so gullible.

Only for the poor. See, if you can afford to pay, you can afford not to care about anybody but yourself.