The real problem that no one is discussing

[Darwin333]

I have been harping on medicare a lot lately but this report puts it much better than I have so far. This is the real issue about our deficit and debt going forward and virtually no one, especially politicians, are seriously talking about it. My own opinion is that we, or more specifically our politicians, are not going to do a damn thing about it until we hit the wall bad. The political will simply isn't there and more importantly the will of the citizens is not there. Everyone wants to cut the budget, just not the stuff THEY like which is generally stuff like medicare. I don't see any possible way that this ends well for anyone in the US.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323353204578127374039087636.html?mod=hp_opinion

For the year ending Dec. 31, 2011, the annual accrued expense of Medicare and Social Security was $7 trillion. Nothing like that figure is used in calculating the deficit. In reality, the reported budget deficit is less than one-fifth of the more accurate figure.

$7 trillion in accrued "debt" from last year alone. Any private organization would be required by law to list these liabilities but its the .gov so...

And for the real bad news (yes, it gets worse)

For years, the government has gotten by without having to produce the kind of financial statements that are required of most significant for-profit and nonprofit enterprises. The U.S. Treasury "balance sheet" does list liabilities such as Treasury debt issued to the public, federal employee pensions, and post-retirement health benefits. But it does not include the unfunded liabilities of Medicare, Social Security and other outsized and very real obligations. As a result, fiscal policy discussions generally focus on current-year budget deficits, the accumulated national debt, and the relationships between these two items and gross domestic product. We most often hear about the alarming $15.96 trillion national debt (more than 100% of GDP), and the 2012 budget deficit of $1.1 trillion (6.97% of GDP). As dangerous as those numbers are, they do not begin to tell the story of the federal government's true liabilities.

The actual liabilities of the federal government—including Social Security, Medicare, and federal employees' future retirement benefits—already exceed $86.8 trillion, or 550% of GDP.

I am going to have to check the .govs numbers but I would bet a weeks pay they don't include the historical inflation rate of the .govs healthcare cost. See below:


Federal healthcare spending to date:

Federal healthcare spending going forward using only the historical rate of increase and NOT including the additional people, per-capita, that will be enrolled

Yes boys and girls, $2 trillion out of the Federal budget in 10 short years JUST for federal healthcare spending, $4 trillion in another 10 years and it just keeps getting more absurd from there. Anyone honestly think we afford that JUST for Federal healthcare spending to cover a relatively small portion of US citizens?

tl;dr: We be fucked.

 

[Matt1970]

So nearly 1/2 of our GDP is Medicare and Social Security? Something doesn't seem right there.

 

[Darwin333]

So nearly 1/2 of our GDP is Medicare and Social Security? Something doesn't seem right there.

No, its an accrued liability. Like if you promise to give me $20 in a week. You have not spent $20 yet, it is still in your bank account, and you can even spend it now if you want BUT on a balance sheet it is a liability (debt).

You are thinking spending, they are talking about liabilities (think debt which it really is).

 

[sm625]

Looks like something from tickerforum. I would challenge Karl's "Like Hell" assertion, but it would probably get me another strike lol. They will just continue to print and pump up GDP and spending on health care will hold steady at about 15% of GDP. I dont see why they would run the train into the ground when they (the banksters) have such a good racket going. This nation will slowly decay for many decades to come if they just keep the financial rape at about 15-20% per year, which is what its been the past decade or so. Anything more than that and it risks waking the sheeple.

But I do agree the real problem is what you bolded: will of the citizens is not there. There is no will of the citizenry except to consume more garbage, drink fluoridated water, stuff their faces with GMO foods, and stuff their brains with all sorts of propaganda mind control rubbish.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

With the private sector consistently "cutting costs" by lowering wages, cutting insurance, and pensions; the sad truth is that Medicare is an undeniable necessity for this country now. If you are so worried about it maybe you should write to people like Papa John and tell him to add 4 cents to his pizzas and shut the fuck up, instead of coming in here and lying to people about what the real problem in this country is.

The real problem is the people running this country, and most of the private sector, are clearly not patriotic Americans.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Clearly we're moving toward a single payer system. There's really no other way to dramatically bring costs down across the board.

The private sector cannot be relied upon here to adequately cover this country's healthcare needs. They've failed.

 

[sandorski]

Implementing Bulk Purchase Pricing would eliminate a good portion of that. 30-40% of that Cost could be eliminated with a European style Single Payer system as well.

 

[nehalem256]

Implementing Bulk Purchase Pricing would eliminate a good portion of that. 30-40% of that Cost could be eliminated with a European style Single Payer system as well.

The government already pays 50% of health costs. You are essentially arguing it can cover everyone with private insurance without spending any additional money...

 

[Darwin333]

With the private sector consistently "cutting costs" by lowering wages, cutting insurance, and pensions; the sad truth is that Medicare is an undeniable necessity for this country now. If you are so worried about it maybe you should write to people like Papa John and tell him to add 4 cents to his pizzas and shut the fuck up, instead of coming in here and lying to people about what the real problem in this country is.

The real problem is the people running this country, and most of the private sector, are clearly not patriotic Americans.

Ok..... so show me where we get the funding to cover just the .govs projected costs? You can argue all you want about the who and the why, I am talking about the math and the math says we be fucked.

 

[Darwin333]

Clearly we're moving toward a single payer system. There's really no other way to dramatically bring costs down across the board.

The private sector cannot be relied upon here to adequately cover this country's healthcare needs. They've failed.

So has the .gov. Look, I agree that when the train comes off the tracks we will get a single payer system. I just don't understand how the .gov is going to cover EVERYONE and have that medicare/medicaid spending that is charted reduce. How do you cover a fuckload more people but have the actual costs significantly reduced from where they are projected to be covering just a small portion.

Just doesn't add up to me. You can claim all the "bulk pricing" and whatnot but we can not afford what we currently have. How is it possible that we can afford it if we add everyone to the system even considering massive tax increases?

 

[Ausm]

Clearly we're moving toward a single payer system. There's really no other way to dramatically bring costs down across the board.

The private sector cannot be relied upon here to adequately cover this country's healthcare needs. They've failed.

That's why the public option people weren't invited to the initial meeting about the ACA.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Ok..... so show me where we get the funding to cover just the .govs projected costs? You can argue all you want about the who and the why, I am talking about the math and the math says we be fucked.

Yeah, by big businesses that pull in billions year after year. You conveniently left that part out.

 

[xj0hnx]

So has the .gov. Look, I agree that when the train comes off the tracks we will get a single payer system. I just don't understand how the .gov is going to cover EVERYONE and have that medicare/medicaid spending that is charted reduce. How do you cover a fuckload more people but have the actual costs significantly reduced from where they are projected to be covering just a small portion.

Just doesn't add up to me. You can claim all the "bulk pricing" and whatnot but we can not afford what we currently have. How is it possible that we can afford it if we add everyone to the system even considering massive tax increases?

It doesn't add up to you, because you are using real math, not progressive math. There is no way in this universe to cover more people for less money.

 

[nehalem256]

Yeah, by big businesses that pull in billions year after year. You conveniently left that part out.

Health insurance companies do not pull in 30-40% of health care spending as profit.

 

[mchammer187]

It doesn't add up to you, because you are using real math, not progressive math. There is no way in this universe to cover more people for less money.

How does pretty much every other western country with a single pay system do it?

 

[nehalem256]

How does pretty much every other western country with a single pay system do it?

Because the problem is not with Health Insurance companies

 

[xj0hnx]

How does pretty much every other western country with a single pay system do it?

You men the ones with much smaller, healthier, and responsible populations? And how do you know what they would be spending if they weren't single payer? You don't.

 

[mchammer187]

Because the problem is not with Health Insurance companies

They are PART of the problem.


Anyway his quote said how do we cover more people with less money. I answered it by saying pretty much every other country with socialized medicine has managed to do it so I don't see why the US can not as well.

 

[Screech]

They are PART of the problem.


Anyway his quote said how do we cover more people with less money. I answered it by saying pretty much every other country with socialized medicine has managed to do it so I don't see why the US can not as well.

The answer would be, of course, because we are a bunch of unhealthy lard-asses. I do think single payer was the right way to go, but I don't see anything changing the above unless people are actually punished monetarily for being fat or otherwise unhealthy but then you get into all sorts of discrimination etc etc etc.

 

[mchammer187]

You men the ones with much smaller, healthier, and responsible populations? And how do you know what they would be spending if they weren't single payer? You don't.

If anything any detriment to a large population would be offset by economies of scale.

Sure we are the fattest nation on earth but we arent twice as fat as say the UK.

I don't know what they would be spending if they weren't single payer but when the cost per procedure, per drug prescription, per hospital visit cost way higher here than anywhere else than I can make a good guess.

 

[nehalem256]

They are PART of the problem.


Anyway his quote said how do we cover more people with less money. I answered it by saying pretty much every other country with socialized medicine has managed to do it so I don't see why the US can not as well.

So why don't you explain why Obama didn't offer a system that would give everyone health insurance without raising taxes and allowing people to stop contributing to employer plans (increasing take home wages) and business to stop providing HI increases their profits?

 

[Athena]

Clearly we're moving toward a single payer system. There's really no other way to dramatically bring costs down across the board.

The private sector cannot be relied upon here to adequately cover this country's healthcare needs. They've failed.

Umm, not necessarily. We definitely need to move to an actual universal healthcare system but that's not the same as saying it has to be single-payer.

The left's knee-jerk call for single-payer is as problemmatic as the right's opposition to and all discussion about universal healthcare. Medicare is not a health system -- it is a payment system -- and if the only change were to put everyone into Medicare, we would still have an unsustainable situation.

There are many universal healthcare systems that are based on private payers that are as (or more) efficient and effective than Medicare. Medicare is in the fix it is because it was designed to pay provider whatever they asked for. When that became untenable, the non-solution was to peg payments based on the provider asking price, not on cost. We need to start talking about alternatives, not just parroting the "single-payer" line.

 

[mchammer187]

So why don't you explain why Obama didn't offer a system that would give everyone health insurance without raising taxes and allowing people to stop contributing to employer plans (increasing take home wages) and business to stop providing HI increases their profits?

Because it would never pass even in a majority D house and almost super majority Democratic senate.

 

[xj0hnx]

They are PART of the problem.


Anyway his quote said how do we cover more people with less money. I answered it by saying pretty much every other country with socialized medicine has managed to do it so I don't see why the US can not as well.

You didn't answer anything because you have no clue how much they would be paying if they are like our system.

 

[nehalem256]

Because it would never pass even in a majority D house and almost super majority Democratic senate.

Why wouldn't a plan that provides everyone with health insurance without raising taxes pass?

Especially if it at the same time increased corporate profits? Don't Republicans want to increase corporate profits?