Seniors about to hosed by Obama

[OutHouse]

Seniors obviously didn't pay enough (or medical providers are greedy, or both) or we wouldn't be having this discussion. This train wreck has been decades in the making and throughout those decades politicians learned that to take on the problem was to become former politicians. All along the way, voters put the immediate gratification of lower taxes ahead of long term planning. The demographic writing has been on the wall since the birth of the baby boom. The relentless increase in per capita health care spending has been in place for decades. Ever more expensive end of life care and elder care has been the trend for decades. Seniors bear a of heavy share of responsibility for this mess and aught to be part of the solution.

if you get seriously ill and require a couple of weeks in ICU i bet you took more of your health insurance money than what you paid....

 

[pcgeek11]

Exactly. SS and Medicare would have been fine if the government had not used it for things it was not created for. The whole idea of lets take $1 billion from SS and we can pay it back next year because we should have a surplus somewhere else is what killed it.

AARP has also duped a lot of seniors. When they started they were decent, now though the only thing about senior that they care about is if the members can afford the membership dues. Both my parents dropped membership about 10 years ago when they saw where it was headed.

Exactly correct.

I also kicked AARP to the curb after being a member for years. They are just out for their own skin and the membership dues. Not even worth 3 cents.

 

[OutHouse]

Fair's fair. If the rest of us can't join a single payer system why should seniors? They have the highest health costs of any group. Let them rejoin the free market, pay for their own care, and see how fast we get real health care reform.

jesus you are ignorant.

 

[DaveSimmons]

. but what i dont see are the strong opinions of what you would do if your loved one is faced with medical problems and a system they were told all of their lives that they could depend on and which they took for truth is taken away? how would you deal with that? would you buy them their drugs? im guessing some of you would and some would not. the would nots would just say its their fault for not planning for the future.... but we all know everybody in here is filthy rich and will retire at 40.

before you people start blasting seniors saying they are moochers and freeloaders i suggest you step into their shoes and see things from their eyes. until then you need to shut your mouths until you know the impact of your heartless statements.

Except:
- Part D is a new welfare program enacted just a few years ago, not something they were told to expect as they paid in.
- Seniors vote against anyone else getting health care reform since they already have theirs and don't care about young people.

As long as seniors are voting Republican they should be denied universal health care just like young people are .

 

[IronWing]

Exactly. SS and Medicare would have been fine if the government had not used it for things it was not created for. The whole idea of lets take $1 billion from SS and we can pay it back next year because we should have a surplus somewhere else is what killed it.

What exactly is the government supposed to do with the trust fund? If the trust fund is kept in "a lock box", essentially stuffed under a mattress, there would be no reason to pay interest on it, with the assets losing value to inflation every year. If the money were to be invested in the markets, the government would own damn near business in America. Given folks attitude toward Government Motors I don't think that would fly. So Treasury bills are really the only place to stash the funds where it would earn interest.

 

[theeedude]

do any of you have relatives who are on Medicare and PartD? next week will be 1 year since my mom passed she was 81. If it wasnt for medicare and partD programs she would have been flat broke several years before she passed. what would have you guys suggested she do, what would you suggest YOUR mom do? cant get a doc because non will take medicare, cant buy drugs because the SS check is only 1100 a month...

some of you have strong opinions against SS/Medicare/planD. but what i dont see are the strong opinions of what you would do if your loved one is faced with medical problems and a system they were told all of their lives that they could depend on and which they took for truth is taken away? how would you deal with that? would you buy them their drugs? im guessing some of you would and some would not. the would nots would just say its their fault for not planning for the future.... but we all know everybody in here is filthy rich and will retire at 40.

before you people start blasting seniors saying they are moochers and freeloaders i suggest you step into their shoes and see things from their eyes. until then you need to shut your mouths until you know the impact of your heartless statements.

Same thing applies to people who are not seniors and are bankrupted by medical bills or unable to get treatment every day. Which is exactly why the system needs complete reform.

 

[IronWing]

Same thing applies to people who are not seniors and are bankrupted by medical bills or unable to get treatment every day. Which is exactly why the system needs complete reform.

That was the point of my postings. I want a single payer system. If seniors don't want to let anyone else in the boat with them then I see no reason why we should keep making payments on the boat.

 

[pcgeek11]

What exactly is the government supposed to do with the trust fund? If the trust fund is kept in "a lock box", essentially stuffed under a mattress, there would be no reason to pay interest on it, with the assets losing value to inflation every year. If the money were to be invested in the markets, the government would own damn near business in America. Given folks attitude toward Government Motors I don't think that would fly. So Treasury bills are really the only place to stash the funds where it would earn interest.

Fine except that isn't what they did. They dipped into the pot to pay for everything else under the sun except SS.

 

[Thump553]

An update-legislation to extend present Medicare benefits, extend unemployment and COBRA benefits have stalled out because of the objections of GOP Senator Bunning, a former baseball player.

So now we can see which party is responsible for hosing seniors, as well as the unemployed. It's ironic that the GOP hacks are now trying to blame Obama for the damage they themselves cause.

 

[IronWing]

Fine except that isn't what they did. They dipped into the pot to pay for everything else under the sun except SS.

The trust fund is invested in Treasuries. It earns interest on those investments. If the government did not spend the money on something (we can argue if the stuff they spent it on was worth it, but that is another debate entirely) then there would be no reason to issue the debt and pay interest. By the very nature of the fund and the desire to earn at least enough interest on the funds to keep up with inflation, the money is churned. A problem with the scheme is that medical inflation has outstripped the interest earned on the trust fund's investments.

If I deposit money at a bank with the stipulation that that the money has to sit in the vault I expect the bank would not only refuse to pay interest on the deposit but would also charge me a storage fee (safety deposit box fee).

 

[Anarchist420]

Medicare was the stupidest goddamn invention considering they could've taxed less and given tax breaks for having insurance. Then Medicare wouldn't be necessary. Obama could reduce the ridiculously high "defense" budget to $80B and then take some of that and give it to medicare. The amount of money we spend on military bases in Europe and Asia, as well as foreign aid is ridiculous.

 

[her209]

Noooooooooooo!!! Don't take away their "government run health care".

 

[First]

so that must be why not one of you was able to post a single piece of alternative evidence that was anywhere near capable of rendering what I said to be even remotely false.

Game set match fellas, this is classic denial of evidence, and subsequent re-assertion of the defendant's weak argument. Trick number 1 in the Liberal playbook. Keep an eye out for it, it's usually a little bit more....covert....than what we've got right here.
Keep it up guys, maybe if you just say the falsehood enough, people will believe it. Hm that sounds familiar....


We've got a shitstorm brewing between Social Security and Medicare and these Liberal zealots are telling you "nothing to see here, move along".

Good thing the truth doesn't depend on whether or not we can convince them-- the truth is perfectly happy to move along without their approval.

What's funny is that you still can't actually quote any relevant numbers in an actual post here where you've supposedly proven any of this. This "reality" would end the argument immediately, but apparently this tactic somehow slipped your mind eh? But I guess Deep down you know you're full of shit, and that's what really matters.

 

[Ozoned]

they never paid in enough for any of this, is the thing.

offtopic-
That $7000 SS thread I made, remember that-- told my Liberal friend about it gave him all the data all the numbers, he replies (over text) "I don't know enough about the program management to argue about it so I'm not going to".

I didn't say anything, but there really isn't anything to argue about...heh...numbers are numbers that's the great thing about them....

Your thread was flawed. The numbers were flawed. The math was flawed. The premise was flawed. The citations were flawed.

 

[Bitek]

do any of you have relatives who are on Medicare and PartD? next week will be 1 year since my mom passed she was 81. If it wasnt for medicare and partD programs she would have been flat broke several years before she passed. what would have you guys suggested she do, what would you suggest YOUR mom do? cant get a doc because non will take medicare, cant buy drugs because the SS check is only 1100 a month...

some of you have strong opinions against SS/Medicare/planD. but what i dont see are the strong opinions of what you would do if your loved one is faced with medical problems and a system they were told all of their lives that they could depend on and which they took for truth is taken away? how would you deal with that? would you buy them their drugs? im guessing some of you would and some would not. the would nots would just say its their fault for not planning for the future.... but we all know everybody in here is filthy rich and will retire at 40.

before you people start blasting seniors saying they are moochers and freeloaders i suggest you step into their shoes and see things from their eyes. until then you need to shut your mouths until you know the impact of your heartless statements.

I have an uncle on both and depends on it after he had a major heart attack @50 and spent the next decade taking money out of his small business (essentially ruining it and costing jobs) after no private insurer would go near him as he had many health probs. He spent 10K's of $ before he could get a Dr to get him into medicare early. He was very fortunate not just avoid being bankrupt by then, but his business was gone by then.

The irony is that he is a flaming republican and goes on and on about welfare and socialism and mexicans.
Of course, mexicans working their asses of for pennies helped build his biz (and his son's, who funneled him $ too) and social medicine saved his fucking ass. 100% true he would not be here w/o medicare w/ his health problems. He is also a giant asshole for wanting to deny that to others which saved him.

He tries to justify it saying how they paid into the system, they paid all these taxes so they deserve it back. Truth is the ins co's took his money all those years he was healthy, then took the money and ran as soon as he got sick. What he has cost medicare is far more than he ever put in.

The elderly are the biggest welfare queens in the country and they don't even realize it. I don't want to take that from them, but the way they tend to vote can be insanely selfish, hypocritical and determental to the country as a whole.

Instead of the dumbass HC opponents crying Congress should have the same HC as the people, how about the elderly be stuck w/ the same HC as the young and watch how fast shit would change.

 

[soccerballtux]

What's funny is that you still can't actually quote any relevant numbers in an actual post here where you've supposedly proven any of this. This "reality" would end the argument immediately, but apparently this tactic somehow slipped your mind eh? But I guess Deep down you know you're full of shit, and that's what really matters.

keep telling us the sky is orange.
You too Ozoned.

 

[daniel49]

I have an uncle on both and depends on it after he had a major heart attack @50 and spent the next decade taking money out of his small business (essentially ruining it and costing jobs) after no private insurer would go near him as he had many health probs. He spent 10K's of $ before he could get a Dr to get him into medicare early. He was very fortunate not just avoid being bankrupt by then, but his business was gone by then.

The irony is that he is a flaming republican and goes on and on about welfare and socialism and mexicans.
Of course, mexicans working their asses of for pennies helped build his biz (and his son's, who funneled him $ too) and social medicine saved his fucking ass. 100% true he would not be here w/o medicare w/ his health problems. He is also a giant asshole for wanting to deny that to others which saved him.

He tries to justify it saying how they paid into the system, they paid all these taxes so they deserve it back. Truth is the ins co's took his money all those years he was healthy, then took the money and ran as soon as he got sick. What he has cost medicare is far more than he ever put in.

The elderly are the biggest welfare queens in the country and they don't even realize it. I don't want to take that from them, but the way they tend to vote can be insanely selfish, hypocritical and determental to the country as a whole.

Instead of the dumbass HC opponents crying Congress should have the same HC as the people, how about the elderly be stuck w/ the same HC as the young and watch how fast shit would change.

what are you about 20?
The elderly obviously have more health problems and a diminished capacity to work, which is why SS came about in the first place. Most people who are young simply don't use doctors that much to begin with. I never did. nor do my kids seem to. I have another 10 plus years to work, Helping those older then me seems a reasonable thing to me. I have paid in for about 40 years already so quit whinning, get to work, and pay for mine

 

[Patranus]

Most people who are young simply don't use doctors that much to begin with.

Which is why many people do not have health insurance. They CHOOSE to live without it all the while bitching because they are not handed it by the government.

 

[First]

keep telling us the sky is orange.
You too Ozoned.

Each post you go without quoting your own numbers to solidify/end the argument is yet another way I've won it.

 

[Patranus]

Numbers are numbers and SS is perfectly sustainable. But that's obvious (and off topic).

I will source a "progressive" staple, factcheck.org to backup the claim that SS is not sustainable in its current form.

The projection comes from the 2004 Social Security Trustees report which estimates that the system’s unfunded obligations are $10.4 trillion over the course of what they call the "infinite horizon." Historically, the infinite-horizon projection has not been included in the annual report, and was only added in 2003.

Previously the Trustees had used only a 75-year projection to estimate the system’s long-term deficits, roughly the length of a human lifetime. (Average life expectancy at birth has now increased to just over 77 years, up from just under 75 years as recently as the 1980's, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.) The Social Security Trustees' 2004 projection shows a $3.7 trillion shortfall over this 75-year period.

http://www.factcheck.org/article302.html

 

[Zebo]

All of us have done the same thing. I've paid in for 30 years and have 20 more to go before I can get my "fair share". What a joke. There is no $$ left. That means reduced benefits and/or raised taxes for everyone else.

Money is there. Money doesnt disappear, in fact it grows each year. Some people have it all. And until we get back to 1963 tax stucture cuts like this are norm. It's really sad to see how both parties are utterly corrupt IMO and will hang hundreds of millions out to dry.

SS, don't count on it even you're receiving already. Medicare well that's disappearing right before your eyes.

 

[pcgeek11]

The trust fund is invested in Treasuries. It earns interest on those investments. If the government did not spend the money on something (we can argue if the stuff they spent it on was worth it, but that is another debate entirely) then there would be no reason to issue the debt and pay interest. By the very nature of the fund and the desire to earn at least enough interest on the funds to keep up with inflation, the money is churned. A problem with the scheme is that medical inflation has outstripped the interest earned on the trust fund's investments.

If I deposit money at a bank with the stipulation that that the money has to sit in the vault I expect the bank would not only refuse to pay interest on the deposit but would also charge me a storage fee (safety deposit box fee).

Yes but the bank puts the money back into your account. The Government has been spending it without replacing it.

 

[IronWing]

Yes but the bank puts the money back into your account. The Government has been spending it without replacing it.

100% incorrect. The Treasury re-pays the principal and interest on its bonds, so far. US Treasuries are still considered the safest investments going. The trust fund gets repaid just like everybody else who buys US debt.

 

[First]

I will source a "progressive" staple, factcheck.org to backup the claim that SS is not sustainable in its current form.



http://www.factcheck.org/article302.html

lol, stay out of debates you weren't apart of, because no one here is making that argument.

 

[Patranus]

lol, stay out of debates you weren't apart of, because no one here is making that argument.

You claimed that SS was sustainable - I provided numbers proving that it it not sustainable in its current form.