Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not accurate, the plan is closer to 15K, with more for those whoa re elderly or more sick. Premiums would be higher for the wealthy. Why should the Govt continue to apy the full ride, are you telling me people actually pay equally into Medicare to what they spend?
Ah no insurance plan private or government has people pay equally into it as to what they spend. Private insurance works because on average people pay more into it than what is paid out of it. Government insurance like medicare/medicaid don't need to worry about turning a profit or much advertising and are actually more effcient at spending the money on healthcare. In addition everyone pays into medicare even people who are currently not covered by it(everyone under 65). What insurance company has people paying into it that they don't have to worry about paying out for?
What do you think the majority of the population is doing to earn a living? Sitting at a desk and going out for three-martini lunches all week long?
The majority of Americans don't have this luxury but they are the people who really don't count in the big scheme of things . The people who do make the policy or call the shots or make the decisions do live this way and lunch is either done at one of the better eating establishments in your burgh or if they are really important it is catered. Also how many senior VPs or COOs or CFOs or CEOs do you know who can use a machine tool in the engineering shop or handle a fork lift in shipping and recieving. We are not talking small businesses here but those who have grown or evolved enough to have professional management and the inventor or company founder is a picture on the wall or a ad blurb on a Annual Report. This is what is wrong with American Democracy and explains why a Mitt Romney is such a doofus and along with all the other double chined accolites in the GOP.
Not sure if this has been mentioned about SS...how about getting rid of the cap? It's mid August and after this paycheck, I no longer pay into SS again until January since I hit the limit. Why not take the 4.2% out of my entire salary? If they did that to everyone, it would put a lot more in the SS pot every year.
I read $6K when Ryan first introduced this plan. He doesn't know himself how much insurance costs, since he has spent most of his working life as a congressman, and gets most of his HI paid for by his employer, the federal govt! I never heard about this "more to the elderly or those with prior health conditions". Medicare IS health insurance for the elderly, with a VERY few exceptions. And virtually EVERYONE over 65 has some prior health condition, even seemingly healthy people.
The problem is your statement that Medicare is health insurance for the elderly is wrong because a large and growiing fraction of Medicare spending is on the disabled. At the present time about 45 million senior citizens are in the program but 16 million disabled Americans are in the program too and about 300 billion dollars of Medicare spending out of a total of over 800 billion this year is accounted for by spending on the disabled for everything from medical transport to home care to in somecases organ transplants and like in my case dialysis. Its very lucrative for disability lawyers to get a client on Medicare for disability as well as something called SSDI (You may have seen those anoying Binder & Binder adverts). So you don't need an obvious disability like paralysis, blindness or organ failure like kidney or heart failure. Who do you think pays for all those power chairs etc. How much do you think this all costs ? I am or I should say my Providers are billing Medicare for over $ 100,000 each and every year.But the only option I have is to die which in my case would likely occur 4-6 weeks after treatment is stoped. So I thank God and Richard Nixon for having the humanity to put patients with Kidney failure on Medicare with no waiting period once the Nepherologist says you need dialysis which I started 4 years ago . The bad news is dialysis isn't a cure and I will need it for the rest of my life. Finally, a disability is the mother of all pre-existing conditions and I don't think any private insurer is stupid enough to want a client like me!
You have a good point and I repped you for it. But, there is another side to this as well. Older people often have no choice about working longer. The get laid off in downturns or because they cost more than younger employees or their skills become dated and they have a very difficult time getting back into the workforce due to age discrimination. How many companies do you see with 70 yo sales people. The older ones end up taking menial jobs bagging groceries or stocking shelves - jobs needed by younger Americans who lack the skills and education to hold more demanding positions. So while it is great for some to call for working longer, the reality is that is not really an attractive option for the reasons you mention as well as the fact that it is darn near impossible to remain employed in a good paying job until age 70 in our society. Maybe we need to come to grips with the idea that we need to help older Americans after the inevitable squeeze out of the workforce to have some financial stability instead of squandering our treasure on wars and tax cuts for billionaires.
I agree and remember being told by a former co-worker after I left the life of an academic scientist for the life of a senior technologist in a medium sized tech company that I shouldn't get too comfortable becasue there were really few if any 50 somethings in our engineering department. I was 47 at the time. I lasted 7 years but my waterloo was failing health and when my time came they were really nice about it, Good severence package, short term and long term disability insurace enough to retire at 54 and still live in one of the most affluent counties in the USA. This all in return for the signature on a voluntary termination agreement, and signing non-compete, non-disclusure, non-dispargement and non-interfernece agreements. Because my health problem was kidney failure I got both SSDI payments and Medicare which replaced the COBRA health insurance I had from the company. I consider myself very fortunate and thank the Lord I had enough status to get such benefits and that deal. However, I know very few other Americans have the same opportunity and like you feel we as a so called Christian nation need to care for our young, weak, sick and elderly.
It seems to me (I'm 31) and a lot of people I know, that people under about 35 have no expectation of social security and Medicare being around when they reach retirement age.
FYI this is the result of a concerted propaganda campaign over years to make it "common knowledge" that people under 40 or so shouldn't expect to have Medicare or SS or to retire before 70. Any lie becomes the truth when it's repeated often enough.
FYI this is the result of a concerted propaganda campaign over years to make it "common knowledge" that people under 40 or so shouldn't expect to have Medicare or SS or to retire before 70. Any lie becomes the truth when it's repeated often enough.
and why do you say it is a lie? yes, I am sure there will be a way to save the two progarms, but at what cost and what age for collecting? If the programs are not changed there will be no money to continue them as they are now, why do you say it is a lie? As it is the cost has gone up, the age limit has been changed and the amount before the max is reached has been changed over the years...
FYI this is the result of a concerted propaganda campaign over years to make it "common knowledge" that people under 40 or so shouldn't expect to have Medicare or SS or to retire before 70. Any lie becomes the truth when it's repeated often enough.
Yes. It's worth repeating at this point, this was being said 30 years ago when I was in my early 30s.
Yes. It's worth repeating at this point, this was being said 30 years ago when I was in my early 30s.
They were saying the same thing in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s... too, and yet, my parents, who recently passed away, somehow were able to retire getting their SSA benefits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita
and why do you say it is a lie? yes, I am sure there will be a way to save the two progarms, but at what cost and what age for collecting? If the programs are not changed there will be no money to continue them as they are now, why do you say it is a lie? As it is the cost has gone up, the age limit has been changed and the amount before the max is reached has been changed over the years...
The fact is, the programs can be tweaked to add many more years without eliminating SSA nor privatizing it.
Here are the relevant facts about Social Security’s future (as CBPP sees them):
–The trustees estimate that the combined Social Security trust funds will be exhausted in 2036 -- a year earlier than they forecast in last year’s report.
–After 2036, Social Security could pay three-fourths of scheduled benefits using its annual tax income. Those who fear that Social Security won’t be around when today’s young workers retire misunderstand the trustees’ projections.
–The program’s shortfall is relatively modest, amounting to 0.8 percent of GDP over the next 75 years (and 1.45 percent of GDP in 2085). A mix of tax increases and benefit modifications --mcarefully crafted to shield recipients of limited means and to give ample notice to all participants -- could put the program on a sound footing indefinitely.
–The 75-year Social Security shortfall is only slightly larger than the cost, over that period, of extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the richest 2 percent of Americans (those with incomes above $250,000 a year). Members of Congress cannot simultaneously claim that the tax cuts for people at the top are affordable [or like the Ryan budget, add trillions more in tax cuts] while the Social Security shortfall constitutes a dire fiscal threat. And the shortfall is well under half the cost over 75 years of making all of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent.
This is the CBO:
Quote:
CBO | Social Security Policy Options
Long-run sustainability for the program could be attained through various combinations of raising taxes and cutting benefits; such changes would also affect the Social Security taxes paid and the benefits received by various groups of people. This CBO study examines a variety of approaches to changing Social Security, updating an earlier work, Menu of Social Security Options, which CBO published in May 2005. In keeping with CBO's mandate to provide objective, impartial analysis, the current study makes no recommendations.
...
The options fall into five categories:
Increases in the Social Security payroll tax,
Reductions in people's initial benefits,
Increases in benefits for low earners,
Increases in the full retirement age, and
Reductions in the cost-of-living adjustments that are applied to continuing benefits.
It is too far away. But consider that your parents who are in their 50s are the ones who are really going to be screwed over by Ryan. They paid for a benefit they won't receive. They will get only about 1/3 of what it will cost to buy insurance from private sources. No prescription cover at all. It's going to be tough on them. If they need nursing home care, the cuts to Medicaid will put that out of reach for most of them. They may end up living with you to cut costs to pay for their medical care. None of us want to be a burden to our kids and that is why we have voted for and paid for Medicare and Medicaid over the years. Ryan is ripping that away to fund tax cuts to the very wealthy. That is wrong and it should bother you.
And eventually, you will start to worry about your own golden years. The comforts of having predictable medical expenses that people have enjoyed since the 60s will be gone for you.
Excellent post that really grasps the reality for younger voters. Before there was Medicare and Social Security, many seniors were living well below the poverty level and had no health insurance because no insurer would cover them at rates they could afford. The lucky ones lived with their children, who helped to bear a lot of the burden for their care and medical expenses. That will be you, all of you under 35 year-olds, whose parents are now in their 50s and in danger of being cut off from Medicare as we know it. You will either have to step up and contribute to the care of your parents, or see them go without.
Please don't think that because you are years away from retirement, this has no bearing on your long term financial health. It absolutely does.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
