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.
My sight is blurred right now but with correction in the good (only) eye, it's 20/50 or 20/60, maybe worse. I have an implant, actually.
I'll check into it; never knew about it at all.
I go to very specialized doctors who are usually not on the plans so I have a feeling Medicare wouldn't cover them either but you never know.
It good that you are going to check. Keep in mind that disability can be defined from multiple disabilities that together can meet the requirements. The effects of Prescriptions can also be determining factor for disability. Also, keep in mind that the issues of Statutory Blindness is complicated and you should not rely on just reading the rules.
Get as much info from many sources and it does not cost to apply. Social Security will, as a matter of procedure, in many cases, send you to their own doctors for evaluation; and at the same time look at your medical history.
You really need to understand that Medicare is not just one Medical Plan. Standard Original Medicare is the plan that has been around since inception. This plan is the one that you hear that Physicians sometimes may not accept patients. However there are many Medicare HMOs, PPOs Fee Based etc. that most Physicians accept because they are part of the network. I would be surprised if Eye Specialist did not belong to one of these Medicare Plans. There are many patients out there and it would hurt their referrals.
I never said that Medicare and Social Security enrollment is based on need. I said that you do not have a legal entitlement to these program. Everyone qualifies for Social Security and Medicare, if they meet the requirements of work and age. However, it has been ruled by the Supreme Court that your monies that have been given to the funds are not required to be returned, if you choose not; will not or cannot get benefits. Entitlement to Social Security is not a right. Fleming vs. Nestor, 1960.. That decision can be applied substantially to Medicare. I say that because you and others have constantly inferred that you should get your benefits because you paid your whole life--wrong--nothing contractual. Benefits can also be diminished or stopped.
What I said is that you get services and reimbursement based on your needs--not everyone gets the same. Social Security are needs based on issues if you have dependents; if you qualify for SSI and if you qualify for Disability etc.--not everyone gets the same or qualifies for all programs. Medicare is also needs based on the type of care you need--not everyone gets the same. And all these programs rates are based on availability of funds and can and do change.
We all the make the decisions in a participatory democracy--we do not leave it to others, as you say. There will be sacrifices; there has to be, to share the availability of funds and resources--that is what the Congress is doing now; making that decision of where to get the money and who will do without.
Everyone does not get Social Security Retirement at 65; for some it is 66 and some 67. Medicare does take effect when you are 65.
Also, The general ideas of Obama's plan is known because he has presented it to Congress, which is available for you to read. It does specifically say that some monies, for Universal Health Care, will come from reduction of Medicare Advantage Plans and overall Medicare.
As a note--you will be understood better, if you observe the spellcheck--it is very difficult to read. In addition, run on sentences, in one paragraph, are extremely hard to follow. Breaking down your good ideas into small paragraphs or even sentences with spacing, on a online thread, may not be stylistic correct; but it makes for easier reading.
Thanks for the vibrant discussion. It is good that you are concerned.
Livecontent
Congress actually is doing nothing on SS or medeicare. The last time they had a committee was a few years ago when Senator Breaux headed it. You can actually get SS at 62 not just at the full age. If you have points as required to qualify you get SS at 62 or 65/66. That is the rules that SS uses;reguardless of that court case like so many other legal matters. Same with medicare.It is illegal for them not to treat everyone equal as long as they meet the basis requirements as stated by SS.Basically Obama plans is not anyhting but basic statements and goals; which is why he proposed to congress in the form of a speech;not actaul legislation. In fact Clinton and he had much different plans and none apply to medicare and as he and others have stated again and again;it is not a UNIVERSAL HEATHCARE PLAN because it is not a one payer plan ; not mandatory and it will leave in place private insurance plans. That was the differnce in Clinton's and Obama's plans; that agian were just basic plans not actual legislation. Clinton's was mandatory. But again congress will actually write the fianl plan when and if it gets to a vote just like all legislation.Just as changes to SS takes a vote by both houses of congress and SS is probably the hardest to get thru congress;before it gets to the presidents desk.The only discussion was spurred by OMB that is required to notify the president when there is a pending shortfall in the future;the president is required to respond;which Bush did;congresss decided not to act on it. Basically the democratic leadership said nothig is needed at this time as there are surpluses out to 2040.
Personally, I think the handwriting is on the wall regarding company sponsored health care for employees. Private companies are moving away from providing their employees with health care. They just can't afford the spiraling costs. Same with defined pension plans. The people most affected by these changes will be younger employees over time. As they age, they will continue to be uninsured. The health care system in this country is broke and needs fixing. I have no idea what is best, but fighting for the present system just sets us up for more failures to come. Just MHO.
I'm completely in agreement with LiveContent. Fact: It is predicted that the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund (Medicare Part A) will be depleted by 2019. Fact: No one has an absolute right to Social Security Benefits, including Medicare. Thus, Congress giveth and Congress can take away. IMHO, Congress will make whatever changes are necessary to ensure continuation of Medicare beyond 2019 (even if it takes Congress until 2019 to do so.) Relating to the more specific issue of Medicare Advantage plans, it appears that President Obama's plan requires private insurers to bid on the government contract, rather than receive a flat 13% subsidy for providing the service directly to consumers. My understanding is that the average bid will be used for reimbursement. Of course, the current insurance providers are lobbying hard to prevent this, so who knows the outcome. Finally, I absolutely agree with LiveContent regarding the hard choices that will need to be made. There is a limited amount of resources and some folks are going to need to suck it up.
On a personal note- about 7 years ago my elderly mother was diagnosed with cancer. Based on her overall health and condition, her physician decided to schedule periodic visits rather than perform surgery. She was perfectly content with this decision. Five years later, she became symptomatic and subsequent testing showed the cancer had metastized. She died within three months of the testing. But NOT before she had undergone radiation and multiple hospitalizations. IMO, it was an absolutely ridiculous waste of health care funds. One of her physicians (the one she respected had since retired) should have informed both my mother and father that she was going to die regardless of any intervention. This kind of nonsense has to stop.
Sometimes hard decisions have to be made to ration the services. It makes no sense to give, for example, a knee replacement to an older person, in their nineties, and take away funds for the care of the young.
I suppose after baby killing is justified, coming for the elderly by rationing their healthcare is no stretch.
I suppose after baby killing is justified, coming for the elderly by rationing their healthcare is no stretch.
You really did not have to bring the abortion issue to this discussion. Abortion does not equate to the intelligent discussion of elderly health care. I am an atheist and I oppose abortion; I do not need to invent gods, to tell me abortion is wrong.
Lenora in her post brought up a more personal issue about her mother receiving health care when there really was not more hope of recovery.
You see that everyday where resources are wasted. Why??? maybe it is because the doctors, the hospitals and the insurance industry knows that they can get more money by playing on our emotions. This group knows that Medicare will pay for care in a hospital and that if they transferred the patient to a hospice than they would get less money.
In addition many patients in hospitals should be in nursing homes but again that would reduce compensation to all of them. These groups should support full nursing home care under medicare, which is restricted; but if they do, they know that families will be less willing to keep someone in a hospital and then they would lose revenue.
So, you are annoyed that end of life decisions should be on the table for discussion. Well, they are and it is national debate. It is not only a debate, these decisions are made everyday to make use of limited resources. It is necessary to ration services and care and not waste it on prolonged suffering of the elderly, which in many cases, that is what it does.
So you want to push abortion in front of every issue, well, let us look at the options: Perhaps we can use these funds more for the education of the youth, so they would avoid pregnancy. Maybe we can use these funds for pre-natal care. There are possibilities that we can use these funds to let young women know that they always will have help to care for their babies, instead of choosing abortions out of despair.
Yes, there are a few "perhapses", many "maybes", or some "possibilities" but there cannot be opportunities, unless we intelligently use our health care and discuss issues sensibly.
Can we please drop the abortion debate! HOW is that relevant to any retirement question? That ship done sailed a while ago. There are other forums for that debate.
I am not for rationing health care for the elderly but neither do I want crazy stuff that will accomplish nothing but draining my or medicare's pocketbook. If I'm 90 and fall and need medical care, I want to have it. What I don't want is to have some terminal disease and spend my remaining months in torture while they try everything to extend my meager life a few more months. I have never heard of anyone in the national health care systems being refused care just because they are old. The stories revolve around elective procedures - not emergency ones. Whereas here in the US, if you don't have insurance, you might not get necessary care.
On the other hand, I just spent money that I didn't need to. A regular doctor misdiagnosed a hematoma on my knee after 2 months. I went to see an orthopedist who just told me it is not an hematoma but rather a bursa and all I need to do is get back to regular exercise and wait it out. A long delay in seeing a specialist would have saved a few bucks. But I didn't know. Oh well.
My real objective is see doctors as little as I possibly can.
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.
