MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
By David Leonhardt, New York Times/Business, April 5/6, 2011
The Republican budget released on Tuesday is a daring one in many ways....Yet there is at least one big way in which the plan isn’t daring at all. It asks for a whole lot of sacrifice from everyone under the age of 55 and little from everyone 55 and over....This decision doesn’t make him (Paul Ryan) unique in Washington. There is nearly a bipartisan consensus that any cuts to Medicare and Social Security should spare the baby boomers and the elderly.
The reason is partly political. Older people vote in larger numbers than younger adults. Children, of course, can’t vote at all. But beyond politics, Washington’s age bias depends on a basic misunderstanding of the budget — namely, that older people have already paid for their Medicare benefits.
They haven’t. For most Americans, Medicare resembles a giant welfare program. They receive far more in government benefits than they ever pay in taxes and premiums. The gap for a typical household runs to several hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The Ryan plan would let anyone who turns 65 before 2022 continue to be part of this hugely popular welfare program. In fact, Mr. Ryan would scrap the common-sense attempts to slow costs in last year’s health bill, like the baby steps to base Medicare coverage decisions more on medical evidence. If you’re 55 or older, you get the same old Medicare, with its same soaring budget.
If you’re under 55, you are excluded....
Comments
Graphic with above (link to full size):
Medicare: Reaping More in Benefits Than Paying in Taxes (unlike Social Security)
by artappraiser on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 5:23am
by artappraiser on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 5:46am
VA for everyone Or everyone who wants it, anyway. Let states contract their medicaid block grant to the va for coverage and Ryan can have his Medicaid dissolution and Medicare destruction act.
by jollyroger on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 6:32am
I liked your idea immediately the first time I saw you suggest it. It is a way out the money-driven medicine mess that really could work. Working like this--as more people signed up, they would hire more doctors and it would eventually get better and better, both drawing newly minted docs not in it for the money and more people signing up. Private insurance and practice continues to escalate in cost, more people opt for it. We end up most people in a National Health system with wealthier people opting out or people buying extra plans if they want fancier services , just like in the UK
Big glitch: the government has to have a desire to fund its growth. The GOP would be attacking it all the time, every day in every way. It would be a great help if it got into doctor/practitioner training, too, so all new docs are not money-driven maniacs because of their debts (and a pony.)
Still, it really is a good solution to the Medicare fee-for-service mess that drives money-driven medicine. It's going to be hell trying to get people to give an inch of that up. A VA competitor to it for the under 65 would acclimate those folks to a NHS type scenario before they retire, and also if successful, draw more and more practioners out of the open market, so that Medicare's "free choice" doesn't look so swell any more. Where people would start thinking what good is choice of things like brand name drugs and MRI's for every sprain if you can't get an appointment without waiting 6 months and the big name specialists won't accept your Medicare payment any longer? But it would have to be funded well as it grows, there's the problem.
P.S. I liked it especially as a counter-narrative to the cries of" Medicare for all." Without reforming Medicare first, I saw that as people knowing not of what they spoke. That would be a disaster in the making. Not the least of which a lot of people would have sticker shock at what the rates would be for non-retired unsubsidized.. As you can see from the Times' chart, fee-for-service is very very expensive. But it could also end up killing all government involvment in medicine as costs skyrocketed to crazy levels. That's because it's the main thing causing money-driven medicine. For profit insurance follows Medicare's lead, i.e., if Medicare refuses to cover Provenge, they can too, if Medicare covers Provenge, they get grief if they don't. A VA type system hopefully just says--we don't cover Provenge, it you want it, go pay for a private health plan.
by artappraiser on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 3:16pm