Medicare Reform Hocus Pocus (health care, premium, suspect, solutions)
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.
For those who applaud Rep. Ryan's Medicare fix-it, you might want to consider what your situation will be when you reach 65, and why the voucher program is a catastrophe waiting to happen.
FORTUNE -- Beware of magical solutions and one-size-fits-all ideological agendas -- like the idea that free markets can solve all our problems. When you think about it, it's just as silly as the idea that government can fix everything. Take the proposal by one of Washington's shining stars, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), to "reform" Medicare by having recipients pick among insurance company plans rather than having basic benefits and costs set by the government.
At 65 your "situation" should be to NOT depend on a govt program for your healthcare needs. How about buying an insurance policy. By the time you reach 65 you have had a lifetime to SAVE enough money to pay the premiums.
At 65 your "situation" should be to NOT depend on a govt program for your healthcare needs. How about buying an insurance policy. By the time you reach 65 you have had a lifetime to SAVE enough money to pay the premiums.
Bulls***. I hope you're putting around a grand a month away for your healthcare needs, because that's what the monthly premium is going to be. Then, while you're at it, put away another 10 grand a month just in case you get a catastrophic illness (cancer, heart disease, etc.)
At 65 your "situation" should be to NOT depend on a govt program for your healthcare needs. How about buying an insurance policy. By the time you reach 65 you have had a lifetime to SAVE enough money to pay the premiums.
Please educate yourself about health care before making any more statements about it. By 65, everyone, and I mean everyone, has some "pre-existing condition" which makes it harder to get insurance. In this country, almost everyone 65+ is on Medicare, and very few companies even carry such insurance.
That is about as succinct as one can get. First of all, absent the regulations of the Affordable Healthcare Act, I don't care how much money you save up for retirement, depending upon the slew of health problems that the elderly have you may not be able to purchase health insurance at any price.
While I as a rule shy away from anecdotal arguments, I think my mother-in-law serves as a really good example. Her husband left her with a sizable trust fund and I mean sizable, over the years, even with social security that trust fund has been severely depleted (she can no longer afford to even give a small amount of money as birthday gifts to her children or grandchildren), much less to afford health insurance with the large deductibles, co-pays, of a 74 year old woman who over the last ten year would have run up a bill for hip, and knee replacement as well as innumerable emergency room visits for a seemingly endless different heart conditions. There isn't a prudent insurance company on the planet that would not have required some yearly maximum, or life time cap on payments.
In this country, almost everyone 65+ is on Medicare, and very few companies even carry such insurance.
Yeah, and that is WHY very few companies cary insurance for people over 65. They can not compete with the governemnt and turn out even a 1% profit because the government can operate the programs at a huge loss and make it up by running a debt every year.
If companies can make even a 1% profit in an activity, they WILL find a way to do that activity. Right now government is in the way, both as an unfair compeditor and with all of the regulations they enforce on companies. Paul Ryan's plan may work or it may not. The logical solution would be to allow it to proceed is states that want to try it out and see what happens. If people really hate it they can throw out the people who voted for it or, if they can't get enough votes, they can move to another state. This one size fits all federal approach is a terrible idea, except for those that worship at the altar of big government. It is bankrupting our country and it also does not even provide the best care possible. Medicare is the largest denier of payments.
Yeah, and that is WHY very few companies cary insurance for people over 65. They can not compete with the governemnt and turn out even a 1% profit because the government can operate the programs at a huge loss and make it up by running a debt every year.
If companies can make even a 1% profit in an activity, they WILL find a way to do that activity. Right now government is in the way, both as an unfair compeditor and with all of the regulations they enforce on companies. Paul Ryan's plan may work or it may not. The logical solution would be to allow it to proceed is states that want to try it out and see what happens. If people really hate it they can throw out the people who voted for it or, if they can't get enough votes, they can move to another state. This one size fits all federal approach is a terrible idea, except for those that worship at the altar of big government. It is bankrupting our country and it also does not even provide the best care possible. Medicare is the largest denier of payments.
"If people really hate it they can throw out the people who voted for it or, if they can't get enough votes, they can move to another state."
When people get sick they think about a lot of other things than voting a guy out or moving to another state to get better health care! I SUSPECT YOU HAVE HAD A VERY HEALTHY LIFE. Sorry to say your time will come.
Yeah, and that is WHY very few companies cary insurance for people over 65. They can not compete with the governemnt and turn out even a 1% profit because the government can operate the programs at a huge loss and make it up by running a debt every year.
If companies can make even a 1% profit in an activity, they WILL find a way to do that activity. Right now government is in the way, both as an unfair compeditor and with all of the regulations they enforce on companies. Paul Ryan's plan may work or it may not. The logical solution would be to allow it to proceed is states that want to try it out and see what happens. If people really hate it they can throw out the people who voted for it or, if they can't get enough votes, they can move to another state. This one size fits all federal approach is a terrible idea, except for those that worship at the altar of big government. It is bankrupting our country and it also does not even provide the best care possible. Medicare is the largest denier of payments.
That is not the reason. There is no market. And before medicare, a lot of elderly had NO insurance b/c it was too expensive for them. That was in the mid-60s, too, before health care costs exploded, due to advances in treatments. Life expectancy was lower, too.
Move to another state? That's an excellent idea for the elderly. Just uproot yourselves from your life.
Medicare pays for too much. Medicare denies too much. Talk about talking out of both sides of one's mouth!
Ryan's plan defies basic common sense, notably that insurance companies will be willing to insure at an affordable cost the very people who are most likely to cost them the most money.
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.
