HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Fuck you to those who say...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:16 PM

Fuck you to those who say Medicare age eligibility needs to be changed upward.

No, that’s not an exaggeration, and the failure of certain wonks to take that into consideration speaks to their isolation from "Everyday people, even the everyday people who provide services to them, such as grocery-store clerks, waitresses, and construction workers in right-to-work states. These are people who cannot wait until they’re 67 for the full complement of Medicare benefits. Many of them are people who will wind up paying the individual mandate penalty in Obamacare, because even if purchased through an exchange, the monthly premium will be more than they can afford.

Not to mention the added health risks of doing physical labor into one’s golden years. Many of these people are lucky to make it to 65. As my AlterNet colleague Lynn Parramore notes, “longevity gains have gone mostly to high earners.” More from Parramore:

Life expectancy among the less educated and those with lower incomes has actually dropped. New research shows that between 1990 and 2008, white women lacking a high school diploma lost a shocking five years of life, while their male peers lost three years.

But if everyone in your family is college-educated and has a good job with adequate health insurance, why would it even cross your mind that not everybody does?

Here’s my hope: that this rumor is being floated in order to create enormous pushback from the left that would give Obama cover for rejecting it. Time to push".
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_12/medicare_eligibility_age_on_th041669.php

161 replies, 15452 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 161 replies Author Time Post
Reply Fuck you to those who say Medicare age eligibility needs to be changed upward. (Original post)
trumad Dec 2012 OP
Jackpine Radical Dec 2012 #1
trumad Dec 2012 #3
George II Dec 2012 #56
trumad Dec 2012 #57
SemperEadem Dec 2012 #71
patrice Dec 2012 #85
Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #121
George II Dec 2012 #122
Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #138
George II Dec 2012 #145
RegieRocker Dec 2012 #152
George II Dec 2012 #127
trumad Dec 2012 #128
DrDan Dec 2012 #134
trumad Dec 2012 #135
George II Dec 2012 #144
trumad Dec 2012 #146
sarcasmo Dec 2012 #149
sarcasmo Dec 2012 #148
iemitsu Dec 2012 #61
world wide wally Dec 2012 #64
markpkessinger Dec 2012 #73
RC Dec 2012 #76
George II Dec 2012 #123
sulphurdunn Dec 2012 #77
AAO Dec 2012 #83
DrDan Dec 2012 #79
patrice Dec 2012 #82
DrDan Dec 2012 #86
patrice Dec 2012 #87
DrDan Dec 2012 #88
patrice Dec 2012 #91
DrDan Dec 2012 #93
patrice Dec 2012 #96
DrDan Dec 2012 #97
patrice Dec 2012 #100
DrDan Dec 2012 #102
patrice Dec 2012 #105
George II Dec 2012 #124
Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #139
George II Dec 2012 #159
patrice Dec 2012 #89
DrDan Dec 2012 #90
patrice Dec 2012 #92
DrDan Dec 2012 #95
patrice Dec 2012 #98
DrDan Dec 2012 #99
patrice Dec 2012 #101
DrDan Dec 2012 #103
patrice Dec 2012 #107
DrDan Dec 2012 #108
patrice Dec 2012 #110
DrDan Dec 2012 #112
patrice Dec 2012 #115
DrDan Dec 2012 #116
patrice Dec 2012 #117
DrDan Dec 2012 #132
patrice Dec 2012 #150
DrDan Dec 2012 #157
patrice Dec 2012 #151
DrDan Dec 2012 #158
patrice Dec 2012 #118
DrDan Dec 2012 #106
patrice Dec 2012 #109
DrDan Dec 2012 #111
patrice Dec 2012 #113
DrDan Dec 2012 #114
trumad Dec 2012 #129
DrDan Dec 2012 #133
trumad Dec 2012 #136
DrDan Dec 2012 #140
trumad Dec 2012 #142
DrDan Dec 2012 #143
patrice Dec 2012 #104
DainBramaged Dec 2012 #120
DrDan Dec 2012 #131
DainBramaged Dec 2012 #160
DrDan Dec 2012 #161
hobbit709 Dec 2012 #137
DrDan Dec 2012 #141
patrice Dec 2012 #81
George II Dec 2012 #126
DainBramaged Dec 2012 #119
limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #5
aquart Dec 2012 #8
George II Dec 2012 #125
DeSwiss Dec 2012 #25
ReRe Dec 2012 #32
Auggie Dec 2012 #50
patrice Dec 2012 #78
retread Dec 2012 #2
Warpy Dec 2012 #4
CTyankee Dec 2012 #9
Warpy Dec 2012 #37
CTyankee Dec 2012 #45
AnneD Dec 2012 #48
heaven05 Dec 2012 #15
fasttense Dec 2012 #54
Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2012 #69
Bigmack Dec 2012 #6
limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #13
HockeyMom Dec 2012 #7
forestpath Dec 2012 #10
Samantha Dec 2012 #11
Aerows Dec 2012 #12
Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2012 #14
geckosfeet Dec 2012 #16
BlueJazz Dec 2012 #17
JEB Dec 2012 #18
Cleita Dec 2012 #19
burnsei sensei Dec 2012 #20
xxxsdesdexxx Dec 2012 #27
DirkGently Dec 2012 #94
rhett o rick Dec 2012 #21
madinmaryland Dec 2012 #22
eridani Dec 2012 #23
snappyturtle Dec 2012 #26
Zorra Dec 2012 #24
LittleGirl Dec 2012 #28
Madmiddle Dec 2012 #29
John2 Dec 2012 #74
RagAss Dec 2012 #30
louis c Dec 2012 #31
naturallyselected Dec 2012 #33
doc03 Dec 2012 #44
trumad Dec 2012 #47
doc03 Dec 2012 #52
SheilaT Dec 2012 #66
ReRe Dec 2012 #34
Generic Brad Dec 2012 #35
abelenkpe Dec 2012 #55
rickyhall Dec 2012 #36
shanti Dec 2012 #40
doc03 Dec 2012 #43
shanti Dec 2012 #62
doc03 Dec 2012 #72
doc03 Dec 2012 #42
Sunlei Dec 2012 #38
ancianita Dec 2012 #39
Oilwellian Dec 2012 #41
raccoon Dec 2012 #46
bread_and_roses Dec 2012 #49
tomp Dec 2012 #51
LibDemAlways Dec 2012 #53
KG Dec 2012 #58
midnight Dec 2012 #59
JackHughes Dec 2012 #60
hobbit709 Dec 2012 #63
trumad Dec 2012 #65
devilgrrl Dec 2012 #68
Union Scribe Dec 2012 #67
Still Blue in PDX Dec 2012 #70
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #75
AAO Dec 2012 #80
kenny blankenship Dec 2012 #84
Lithos Dec 2012 #130
Oilwellian Dec 2012 #147
RegieRocker Dec 2012 #153
stevenleser Dec 2012 #154
warrprayer Dec 2012 #155
Oilwellian Dec 2012 #156

Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:19 PM

1. OK, I'll take the hit. Medicare age eligibility needs to be changed.

The age of eligibility should be adjusted downward to sometime shortly after conception.

That would make it a universal single-payer plan. Just like Canada has.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:23 PM

3. Edited---thanks for the advice

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:42 AM

56. While youi were at it you could have edited out the obscenity in your subject line....

I didn't even bother reading the rest of your post, there might have been something good in it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:55 AM

57. Fuck that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:32 PM

71. right on

this isn't nursery school.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:06 PM

85. I'll second that motion. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:31 PM

121. Double fuck it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #121)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:06 PM

122. I thought there was a minimum age limit on this site?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #122)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:20 AM

138. We don't really enforce it, so you are safe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #138)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:40 AM

145. I rest my case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #145)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:14 PM

152. You have a case of something alright

 

but it's nothing you can rest on nor bank on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:17 PM

127. I have no objection to the use of that word, but the way it was used was offensive to me and....

...possibly others. Consider a first time reader of this site - seeing that on the home page? Some might never register or come back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #127)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:22 PM

128. No===as you can see by this thread...its just you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #128)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:07 AM

134. oh no it wasn't

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #134)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:09 AM

135. Oh---forgot about you Doc.

Fuck---thought I had it covered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #128)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:39 AM

144. It's just me who commented - how many just didn't bother at all? How many potential NEW members?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #144)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:59 AM

146. Give it up George.

Your concern is duly noted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #127)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:07 PM

149. Thanks for the laugh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #57)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:06 PM

148. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:08 PM

61. You miss good stuff when you allow words to offend you.

Trumad's subject line is perfectly appropriate for the topic.
In fact the sentiment is mild for the reality they propose.
If Obama presides over the dismantling of any aspect of the social safety net Democrats will find themselves cursed in the eyes of the public just as Republicans now find themselves.
It will demonstrate to all Americans that our government doesn't work and ought to be overthrown.
Our government exists for the benefit of the people not just the rich and if that is what elected officials think is appropriate then they all need to go. Congress and the President need to give up their sweet retirement and health care deals before they touch ours. We pay the bills and they work for us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:55 PM

64. You are probably missing some great books if you stop reading when naughty words are used

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:26 PM

73. I wasn't aware this was the Democratic Puritan Underground n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:37 PM

76. I bet George Carlin isn't one of your favorites either.

 

You must miss so much of life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #76)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:07 PM

123. As a matter of fact he WAS my favorite, but he was a comedian - there's a time and a place for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:39 PM

77. Words exist

to convey information, emotion and ideas. "Fuck" is one of if not the most versatile word in the English language. I'm an English teacher and I use it all the time, so does my friend the minister but less often and with less conviction of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #77)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:03 PM

83. Brings up a classic!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:49 PM

79. I am with you George - I very rarely read posts with frivolous profanity

I always picture some pre-adolescent attempting to appear worldly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #79)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:03 PM

82. You think OP is telling us that he/we should have sexual intercourse with everyone with whom

OP disagrees?

What's wrong with you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #82)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:06 PM

86. ridiculous . . . I just typically ignore posts with frivilous profanity . . .

as I said.

Does it bother you that I do that? Why would that be?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #86)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:11 PM

87. If you think it is profanity, that's YOU, and it's kind of ODD to say the least, so why should

the rest of us conform to your baseless idiosyncrasy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #87)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:12 PM

88. I didn't ask you to conform to anything, now did I?

I simply said I do not read posts with frivolous profanity.

Why does that bother you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #88)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:14 PM

91. Why do you NEED to display what you will or will not do? If what you don't do were

a justification to itself, without other agendas, you'd simply not do it and, therefore, not display your not-doing for whatever social effect you expect to acquire from it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #91)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:16 PM

93. and why do you feel the NEED to criticize my choice of posts to read?

you sure are offended by that. I wonder why . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #93)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:19 PM

96. Why didn't you just not read it? Why do you NEED to publicly judge others? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #96)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:20 PM

97. I simpy agreed with the post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #97)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:25 PM

100. Tell me why both of you didn't just choose to not read the dirty post. What's the purpose of your

posts? Why display false judgements about OP? Your offense at dirty words appears to be secondary to public display.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #100)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:27 PM

102. and your concern over this is quite a mystery. Why do you concern yourself with

what another DUer reads or choses to ignore?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #102)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:31 PM

105. As much a mystery as yours. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #100)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:10 PM

124. For me, I was hoping that it would bring some maturity to the site...that was wishful thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #124)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:26 AM

139. I'd stay very far away from reddit if I were you.

We are a huge fucking order magnitude more "mature" than they are. However there is some really good stuff posted there.

Have you considered using parental controls?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #100)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:47 PM

159. BECAUSE IT WAS PLASTERED ON THE DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND HOME PAGE!!!!!!

Hard to avoid reading it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #86)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:12 PM

89. Believe me, if any of us is actually proposing sex, you won't be as confused about it as

you appear to be about the word fuck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #89)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:13 PM

90. not worthy of a response

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #90)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:16 PM

92. Unlike your #56, I don't NEED one. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #92)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:17 PM

95. 56 was not mine - pay attention

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #95)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:21 PM

98. You're supporting it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #98)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:22 PM

99. so why does that bother you so much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #99)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:27 PM

101. It bothers me because you are not answering my questions about it. What purpose does it

serve to intentionally mistake OP's meaning?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #101)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:29 PM

103. why do you assume I made a mistake about the OP's meaning?

I just said i typically ignore posts with frivilous profanity.

Why does that bother you. Why are you ignoring that question?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #103)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:33 PM

107. You called it profanity. Doesn't that mean that you think OP refers to sexual activity or

some other taboo?

What precisely, pray tell, is your problem with OP?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #107)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:34 PM

108. don't know how to make it any clearer . . . I often ignore posts with frivilous profanity

which of those words has you confused.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #108)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:37 PM

110. So, how other people feel is "frivilous" (sic)? & You avoid telling me what is profane

about OP's use of the word "fuck".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #110)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:43 PM

112. why does this bother you so much . . .

you read what you want . . . and I will do the same

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #112)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:52 PM

115. Admit that your post wasn't just about reading what you want. It may be about someone else

reading what you want.

Otherwise, you would just simply have skipped the offensive post and gone on your way.

I stand by my original hypothesis; this has something to do with acquisition of power to make people do what you want and that's why you found it necessary to post your unfair unjustified judgement of OP's meaning and completely disregard and disrespect his/her feelings about this issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #115)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:54 PM

116. whatever . . . I will continue to ignore or read as I choose . . . and post accordingly

but feel free to offer your unsolicited analysis . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #116)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:16 PM

117. Wow. Hypocrite. Whose "unsolicited" and BASELESS analysis started this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #117)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:04 AM

132. I made no analysis - if you would have paid attention

just stated my reading preferences - and that sure does bother you . . . doesn't it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #132)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:37 PM

150. k, so you rejected something that you made no effort to understand in the first place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #150)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 02:10 PM

157. as I said - I rarely read posts with frivolous profanity

that is really not hard to understand.

Call it rejection . . . I don't care.

It is my choice what to read - and what not to read.

Get it?

Why does that bother you so much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #132)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:40 PM

151. Once again, tell us all & quit your diversions: You think OP is saying all of us should have sex

Last edited Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:26 PM - Edit history (1)

with anyone who disagrees with his perspective on this issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #151)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 02:11 PM

158. I guess you think this is clever . . . you have said it multiple times.

but, guess what . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #116)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:18 PM

118. It's been fun. I found out what I needed to know. Going to put some Deadmau5 on & get on

my mini-trampoline now.

Have a nice life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #101)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:33 PM

106. "intentionally mistake OP's meaning"

are you serious?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #106)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:35 PM

109. What exactly is your objection to the word "fuck"? Why is it a problem for you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #109)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:37 PM

111. what is your objection to someone ignoring certain posts? Why is that a problem for you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #111)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:44 PM

113. You could have done that without publicly judging OP, what was the motive for your display?

Do you somehow need public display to validate something about yourself or for someone else?

You have every right to your own choices. If you're trying to elicit de facto censorship of this board, I'm kind of interested in that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #113)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:46 PM

114. not at all . . . I just typically ignore them

if you read closely - I was just agreeing with a previous poster - one that was attacked because he/she feels similarly.

Why does that bother you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #114)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:28 PM

129. Poor George---poor Dan...

Living in their little curse free bubble.

You two are very strange dudes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #129)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:05 AM

133. never made any claims to living style - only reading preferences

sorry you feel your words are of such importance that they should not be skipped

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #133)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:12 AM

136. Seriously

You hijack a thread about Medicare because of the word fuck?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #136)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:26 AM

140. I made a comment to George - that's hijacking? seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #140)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:36 AM

142. You made close to 20 posts regarding the use of the stupid word.

Yeah---you hijacked my thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #142)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:39 AM

143. I believe it was Patrice that did the hijacking - if you read more carefully

I just made a comment to George

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #99)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:30 PM

104. It bothers me because I'm confused how someone could think OP is telling us all to have sex

with a bunch of strangers.

Do you think that is what OP means by the word "fuck"?

If you do, it would seem quite likely that you have some very definite difficulty functioning in our semantic universe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #79)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:23 PM

120. Frivolous my ass

every fucking word has a meaning, too bad you think you're better than the rest of us because your eyes don't pass over frivolity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #120)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:02 AM

131. never said I was better than anyone - please do not put words in my mouth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #131)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:41 PM

160. You already put your pompous foot in your mouth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #160)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:28 AM

161. because I am selective about what I read?

wow - this place is gettting weirder and weirder.

Why would that bother you so much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #79)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:19 AM

137. You must read them. Otherwise you wouldn't be throwing your 2 cents worth in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #137)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:27 AM

141. check out the definition of "rarely"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:00 PM

81. If I use the word "black" in a certain context do you always assume that I'm

referring to, say, a black man?

If I say "crap" do you always assume I am referring to excrement?

If I invite you to a baby shower, do you think we're going to shower a baby?

If I say a certain gift "Was not an America made item" do you think I'm talking about an American who cleans houses?

If you don't make those kinds of mistakes, why do you make the same rather selective kind of mistake about OP? Tell me that you think OP is actually proposing that all of us have sexual intercourse with all of those with whom OP disagrees. What's wrong with you?

Hypothetical Answer: You're more interested in the kinds of power acquired from coercing others to meet your demands than you are in what they are actually saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #81)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:15 PM

126. "Black" isn't considered profanity, and the word in question has little in common with "black"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:21 PM

119. Bullshit

look up pompous ass in the dictionary, maybe you'll get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:25 PM

5. +1

As a country we are really over-complicating the whole health insurance issue. It could be really simple. Other countries provide health care cheaper and get better results.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:33 PM

8. Oh, Canada.

I hate being embarrassed by their sanity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aquart (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:14 PM

125. I agree...and laugh at all the righties that want to move there as a result of Obama's re-election!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:12 PM

25. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:06 PM

32. Whew! I almost jumped all over your ass!

Then I read your reply. Damn right, the age needs to be adjusted downward, until we get universal health care for all, and then we won't have all this effing turmoil ever again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:45 AM

50. +1,000,000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:45 PM

78. All you Socialist-haters out there, please think how this would free up ENTREPRENEURSHIP!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:21 PM

2. It does need to be changed. It should cover from "cradle to grave"; however, I know that's not what

the assholes are talking when they talk change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:24 PM

4. I notice only highly paid men who sit at desks are supporting it

especially if they're old and in elective office and don't feel much like retiring, themselves.

I wish we could send all of them out to do about 6 months of hard physical labor and then see what they say about it.

People who do physical work largely can't do it any more after their mid to late 50s because their bodies can't stand it. This is what the "raise the age" doughboys don't understand.

What the really need to do in this period of high unemployment is lower it, not raise it. Lowering it to 55 with half benefits then would be great for a lot of people who have been thrown out of work by corporations or whose bodies can't handle full time physical labor. Such people would be able to eke out early retirement with part time work.

Benefits should rise to full at 65, the present system of keeping them at a lower point forever doesn't work, either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:34 PM

9. Oh, but now we are hearing about a "carve out" for people who have had hard physical work all

their lives. So don't count on anybody doing anything for us progressives...they'll always have an "out" for themselves...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #9)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:58 PM

37. No shit. People who do hard physical work now have to apply

for SSD, a process that takes three years minimum as automatic rejection goes up the food chain and only the persistent get accepted. The good news there is that it pays better than getting Social Security at 62.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #37)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:13 AM

45. a friend of ours, a plumber for 32 years, tried to get disability but has given up. He is 62 and has

retired. Luckily, he has a pension as a union member. But his knees and one shoulder are shot and he can't carry the heavy equipment, siinks, tubs and toilets any more...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #37)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:27 AM

48. Both my brothers have worked ...

Hard physical labor all their lives. I have worked as a Nurse. One brother has just enough strength left to do his self sufficient farm work, but he calls on friends for help with the heavy stuff. He has SSI and a ton of health problems from working with concrete. My other brother was a welder and horse trainer. I can't count his injuries.

I am in far better health than they are (and Nursing is probably one of the more physical womens jobs you can have). I will last longer than they can but even I feel it more these days than I use too, and I am the oldest.

Raising the age is just another way to gyp us out of our fair shair of the wealth we helped create. It is just like stealing our pensions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:55 PM

15. our

political parties are on the verge of losing touch with us. I think. One already has. The other is fighting for it's and our souls. I hope they and us win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:35 AM

54. Yeah, highly paid men behind desks will live longer if some infectious disease doesn't get them 1st

Do they ever stop and think what it will be like when everyone around them is sick?

Yeah, the less than minimum wage maid who cleans your bathroom and kitchen could be carrying an infectious disease and spreading it all over your house. But that's alright, you don't have to provide her with health care to take care of it.

Yeah you can afford 1st class on the plane but that air is constantly circulated around and around it goes. Into first class out to business class back to first class with all those people who can't get health care. I wonder what diseases they are carrying and spitting out into the air?

Yeah it's great to have those young kids working their way through college serving as your waiter or waitress for you. Maybe with raising the minimum age for government health care you will get some real old timers waiting on you. Handing you glasses of water, giving your kids glasses of milk. But you know a lot of them are part time and have no health care. I really wonder if they ever bother to get their vaccinations for very contagious diseases like meningitis or even if they get their flu shots. If they don't, you get to have all the illnesses they spread through out the restaurant. Enjoy.

How foolish the idle rich are, cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Or hording health care for themselves and allowing everyone else to spread their diseases all over. Do they really think one of those diseases wont get them or their family?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 03:45 PM

69. Yes, giving all those unemployed people over 50 SOME reliable income

would actually help the economy, since they would certainly spend what they received.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:33 PM

6. Raising the Medicare age will COST money...

Raising the medicare age would save us about $5.7 Billion. Problem is, it would cost us $11.4 Billion. Raising the eligibility age is like putting windshield wipers on a duck's ass... sounds like an interesting idea, but it just doesn't work.

http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-the-medicare-eligibility-age-be-raised/raising-medicare-age-will-increase-cost-for-people-of-all-ages

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bigmack (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:54 PM

13. windshield wipers on a ducks ass

Thanks for that imagery I'm starting to understand the medicare issues better now.

great article link BTW.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:33 PM

7. Paying the penalty for NO INSURANCE

would be cheaper than my husband covering me for $500/month with a $2,500 deductible under his employer insurance. Florida SUCKS when it comes to health insurance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:39 PM

10. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:42 PM

11. This leaked story is a trial balloon to gauge public reaction

You have hit exactly the right note.

The Congressional Caucus came out and said they have 43 votes and they will not support raising the eligibility rate for Medicare. They would consider means testing.

Whatever one's opinion is on the subject, he or she should be loudly screaming it. I personally like best the response from those that say they will leave the Democratic party if the Democratic politicians cave on this. I had seriously been thinking about this myself, remaining a progressive but calling myself an Independent. There is absolutely no reason for that eligibility age to be raised except to give the Republicans a "win." Protecting what the majority of citizens want protected is more important than giving the Republican politicians in the legislature a "win."

Sam

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:48 PM

12. If we had

actual regulations in place like other civilized countries that didn't allow pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies and hospitals to rip us off, we could lower the age. But we don't, and it doesn't appear that anyone in Congress wants to push for it.

The main problem is that the cost of health care in our country is outrageous and it is because no one is willing to go to the mat to fight for the people on this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:54 PM

14. Fucking A. Fuck 'em sideways.

The stupid Ratshit Fucks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:04 PM

16. It doesn't. Medicare should be available nationwide to anyone who needs it. Period.

Or more accurately, healthcare should be available nationwide to anyone who needs it.

Even toothless rednecks who voted for failin palin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:06 PM

17. This fucking backward-ass, unfair, disproportionate wage Country has plenty..

...of money for lying wars...low taxes of the filthy rich, tons of money for companies like McDonalds and WalFart plus..etc, etc, etc but Allofasudden ...oh my God..we have to do something about all the spending ??

Let the assholes get what they deserve..(which I can't say..cause I'm so pissed)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:09 PM

18. Fuck them

and the horse they road in on. Medicare for all would bring a lot of healthy people and their money into the system. Talk about your economic stimulus. Business would have a lighter burden and individuals would mostly spend the extra money they didn't have to pay the private blood sucking insurance companies. If they want to cut something, try the lard ass Defense Dept. with all their corrupt contractors (war profiteers). Anybody who votes to shortchange old and sick people can FOAD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:12 PM

19. Some jobs can't really be done by 55 year olds and yet they are expected to do it

until sixty-five and now later?

Do you really want grandma serving you coffee with her shaky seventy year old hands when you go to the diner? Do you really want that elderly man painting your house who barely can climb the ladder to do it? I mean if these people have no compassion, do they really have to be that stupid?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:24 PM

20. Ezra Klein did a great

analysis of raising the retirement age to 67 last night, and concluded that to do so would be more costly than doing nothing.
The case for not raising the retirement age is more valid.
The bad news is that people are not made of steel. Now, for some of us, that's a reality.
For others, too many others, it's a poorly-understood FACT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to burnsei sensei (Reply #20)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:25 PM

27. I contacted the president & my members of congress to let them know I'm against the age being raised

I cited the 5.7 billion in savings not being worth it. I told them that raising the age would negatively impact those at and near the retirement age. I did remind them that going single payer would be the best way to cut down on health care costs and reduce the deficit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to burnsei sensei (Reply #20)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:16 PM

94. $11b in economic costs for about $3b savings, wasn't it?


Medicare simply works better than private healthcare. We all pay for one or the other, one way or the other.

Where are all those supposed conservative rationalists on questions like these? The numbers don't work -- it's an emotional issue for those with a knee-jerk hatred of social program.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:34 PM

21. Well said. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:38 PM

22. I honestly don't believe there will be social security or medicare when I retire. I don't think I

will live much past 70 which for me is less than 20 years away. What money I have in a 401k will have been raped by wall street.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:42 PM

23. Raising Medicare eligibility age = mass murder n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eridani (Reply #23)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:20 PM

26. Yes...most definitely. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:45 PM

24. +1 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:37 PM

28. My friend's husband lost his job at 64

and he's now turned 65 so he's eligible for Medicare but his 53 yr old wife is now uninsured with pre-existing conditions and the kids in high school aren't covered either. We need Single Payer like other posters have mentioned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:43 PM

29. Entitlements

are what senators, congressman and presidents get, fucking shit is what the rest of us get. Leave the American workingclass so called entitlements alone. This is why we need a huge turn around in favor of the workingclass. Term limits as well as entitlement reform for our governing officials. They get way to much from taxpaayers and this needs to change drastically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Madmiddle (Reply #29)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:28 PM

74. Sure,

 

and most of them leave office as millionaires. President Obama was not a millionaire until he became President. He is set for life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:48 PM

30. I see your 'Fuck You' and raise you a 'Fuck You Scumbags !!!'

The fuckers want us piled up dead in the streets and our own party is going right along with it !!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:52 PM

31. I'm for lowering the age to birth minus 9 months

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:08 PM

33. The first step

The first step should be to lower the eligibility age to 62, the same as Social Security. This would allow people to retire early if they wanted, and supplement their SS benefits (and any employer-based retirement) with part time work or starting their own businesses. This would also help unemployment, and put a higher percentage of people on Medicare with somewhat lower medical costs.

I'm fortunate - I could retire today (at 58) and continue to receive health insurance from my employer until Medicare kicks in, but I know many others aren't so lucky. My wife and I run a reasonably thriving part-time business, and I'm counting the days until I'm 62 and I can retire and can collect SS and my employer account to supplement my business earnings.

Raising the age is crazy -

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to naturallyselected (Reply #33)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:30 PM

44. My employer told me I could retire at 62 with full employee heath insurance

the company liquidated and dropped our insurance September 1st. I have to pay $809 a month for insurance for the next 7 months until I turn 65. At the same time the bankruptcy judge permitted them to drop our insurance he OKed $20 million in bonuses to 18 management people. USA USA USA ain't it great!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #44)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:56 AM

47. WOW!

You say 809---wonder what your deductible is.

Its a scandal in mho.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #47)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:57 AM

52. It's not very good insurance compared to our employee insurance

$300 deductible, I pay 20% with a max yearly co-pay of $2000. That could be $12008 a year with premiums, deductibles and co-pays for a single. If you are married I believe the premiums are like $1400 and the deductibles and co-pays are doubled. Our emplyee insurance had no premium a $150 deductible and a max out of pocket of $1000. The 18 management people that bankrupted the company got $20 million to split up, some deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to naturallyselected (Reply #33)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:24 PM

66. My sister, now 65, was planning to

retire from her job at 60, because her company, an umbrella organization that administers union benefits, would provide her health care until Medicare kicked in. She would collect her pension at that point, knowing she could get a similar job so her total income would remain the same. Then, a few months before she would have put in for retirement, they eliminated the health care benefit to retirees. So she's going to work at least through her 66th birthday, possibly a little longer.

I do wonder why our older brother, 69, is still working. I do suspect it's financial, in that he of course is earning more than his SS would be. I have no idea what kind of pension or 401k he might have.

I'm 64. I currently work part time, so I guess I can say I'm semi-retired. I am employed by a hospital and the health care benefits are great, at least I think they are but I have barely used them because I'm so amazingly healthy. In my case, when Medicare kicks in next year, my current insurance will be the first payer, and Medicare the second. I plan to continue work for some indefinite, undefined period of time because I still need the money. I will put off collecting SS as long as possible, just to let the amount grow.

I'll probably live at least into my 80's, and very possibly into my 90's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:15 PM

34. Relax... it's a balloon.

They aren't going to do it. Remember, PO has to SIGN it, and he won't sign shit like that. OK?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:21 PM

35. Am I missing something?

There are people here endorsing this? It seems there are a lot of DU'ers upset recently and I am just not seeing the offending posts.

Are we talking one or two posters or an armada of DINO's?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Generic Brad (Reply #35)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:36 AM

55. O yes

Yesterday there were a few who were all for it explaining it is the fair and reasonable thing to do. We do have our share of third way well to do fossils here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:48 PM

36. What 62?

I'm 57 and SS tells me I can't get anything till I'm 66 and full payment at 70. 62 went away years ago. I've been slavin for these rich bastards since I was 17. I've been payin in for 40 years less those years I could only find a contract job that paid nothing in. Health insurance is nearly $200 a month while I'm currently workin 9 hours a week for burger king and collecting $149 unemployment for another 4 weeks. If it weren't for food stamps and housesitting I'd be starvin on the street in a month. This struggling week to week for 50 years could get real old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rickyhall (Reply #36)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:17 PM

40. i'm 57 too

and have been planning all along to take SS at 62. this is the first time i've ever seen anything about not being able to do so. from what i know, i can take a reduced amount at 62, with a full amount at 66+....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shanti (Reply #40)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:22 PM

43. You can still get SS at 62 I started in 2010 at 62.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #43)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:42 PM

62. thanks, i thought as much

luckily, i have medical coverage thru my PERS pension until medicare kicks in, so 62 is doable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shanti (Reply #62)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:58 PM

72. I was promised by my employer if I retired at 62 that I would have

full paid for health insurance until 65 so they liquidated in September now I have to pay the last 7 months until I turn 65 out of my pocket at $809 a month. I hope you have better luck with that than we did. While they cut the health insurance off for all active and retired employees the bankruptcy judge permitted the company to pay $20 million In bonuses to the top 18 management a--holes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rickyhall (Reply #36)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:21 PM

42. You can still retire at 62 if you can afford it, if you don't get

health insurance through your employer or maybe from you wife's employer it's pretty much impossible. Why would SS tell you you can't get (anything) until you are 66?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:07 PM

38. I join you with the FU. The age should be lowered to zero.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:14 PM

39. Serious or not, this chipping away at the social contract is what Republicans depend on.

People get exhausted paying this kind of bullshit any attention. I'll give Obama all the Fuck You Cover he needs, but this is still a bullshit tack.

Just stand your ground, Democrats! For fuck's sake! THAT alone would earn your inflated paychecks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:20 PM

41. Indeed

K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:15 AM

46. IMO, more and more college-educated people aren't able to find good jobs with benes.


Since more and more employers go to part-time, no benes workers. At my workplace, I think a little over 50% are part-time, no benes.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:33 AM

49. K&R - with !!!!!

It's encouraging to see so many have their heads on straight on this one. Very encouraging to see anyone taking those who do physical labor recognized. I would just add on that - for people who do heavy labor, making it into even their 50's is a stretch. Many are suffering physically in their 40's or even earlier. Backs and joints especially.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:45 AM

51. obama created a monster with the simpson-bowles commission.

he is being totally disingenuous. benefits will be cut. poor, working, and middle class people will suffer. the rich will still have plenty. that will be obama's enduring legacy because he allowed the discussion to take place on the wrong terms which allowed the media to spin it for the rich and give credibility to the defenders of the rich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:16 AM

53. Even college educated people with reasonably good jobs and adequate health insurance can

find themselves out of work with no insurance in their 50s and 60s. Not so easy finding another job when your hair is gray, no matter what your education and skill set. Happened to my husband when his division of a large corporation folded three years ago. Any talk of raising the Medicare age is cruel and irresponsible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:58 AM

58. i fully expect to work till i die.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:56 AM

59. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:08 PM

60. Tax cuts caused our national debt. Raising taxes is the only solution

Republicans have always opposed Social Security and Medicare and have sought ways to kill the programs. Not able to attack the popular entitlements directly, they have maneuvered to deprive them of funding. Cutting spending on Social Security and Medicare would reward the Republicans' long-term strategy of "starving the beast" with their tax cuts. It would deliver a victory to the Republicans' for their sleazy, dishonest tactics while hurting millions of the most vulnerable Americans..

Tax cuts caused our national debt. Raising taxes is the only solution -- first on the rich and in large measure, and later with modest incremental increases on the middle class once the economy has recovered. As Bill Clinton proved, it ain't rocket science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:49 PM

63. Looks like someone had a cow about your post but didn't get far

At Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:40 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Fuck you to those who say Medicare age eligibility needs to be changed upward.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021948550

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

No comments added by alerter

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:46 AM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Another case of overly sensitive alerter
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: cannot decide if alert is bogus, malicious, or simply accidental: post is fine, and I echo the sentiment
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Why the hell was this alerted... Looks like a stalking alert to me.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #63)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:52 PM

65. I think someone above objected to the word Fuck.

At least I hope that is what it was....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #65)


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:29 PM

67. Happy to rec this. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:18 PM

70. My mom was so looking forward to Medicare, but she died of cancer 15 days before turning 65.

Too many people don't make it.

Breaks my heart to think about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Still Blue in PDX (Reply #70)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:29 PM

75. I'm very sorry for your loss ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:59 PM

80. No, just remove the cap.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:06 PM

84. Certain ideas need to be dropped into a chipper shredder

along with the people who promote them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:39 PM

130. Yes it should

Only after we get a single payor system in place. Medicare should be an addition to single payor which adds benefits. Also, single payor should be better than what Medicare does today.

What I am thinking should be part of Medicare would include additional hospice and in-home care which are not provided today.

BTW, I am total agreement with you. Today's benefits should not be reduced by raising the limit, but rather expanded into a universal system with additional benefits being added that are more age appropriate

L-



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:06 PM

147. For those who think President Obama doesn't want these changes

I'm posting a portion of a speech President Obama gave to the Brookings Institute:

"As we've all known for some time, the rules of globalization have changed the game. How we work, how we prosper, how we compete with the rest of the world. And we all know how the coming baby boom retirement will add to the new challenges we face in this new era. Unfortunately, as the world has changed around us, Washington has been remarkably slow to adopt 21st century solutions in a 21st century economy. As so many of us have seen, both sides of the political spectrum have tended to cling to outdated policies, and tired ideologies, instead of coalescing around what actually works. For those on the left, and I include myself in that category, too many of us have been interested in defending programs that were written in 1938, admitting that we need to modernize these programs to fit changing times."


So you see, President Obama thinks the left is clinging to outdated policies and tired ideologies as well. It's not just the Republicans clinging to their guns, bibles, and tax cuts. Democrats are clinging to Social Security and Medicare and they're just tired, old ideologies as well! Don't you see? Raising the eligibility age for Medicare is a solution! Thousands and thousands will die because of this and problem solved! But not only that. Raising the Medicare eligibility age, automatically raises the retirement age for the majority of Americans, so that takes care of the little Social Security problem as well! I guess they think it's a slight of hand that most of us won't even notice! Get with the program Democrats! It's the 21st century for Pete's sake and globalization is the new game in town. It won't be "bloodless" as President Obama states toward the end of his speech. But at least now, they're REALLY serious this time about retraining us so we can work longer!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:17 PM

153. I must certainly

 

wholeheartedly agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:19 PM

154. I agree. But there is a person here who has been pushing that meme hard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:32 PM

155. It is coming

sure as the sunrise. Saw some DINO democratic senator on MSNBC the other day... don't know which one... get cornered into admitting medicare is "on the table". When pressed for specifics, he started waffling ansd weaseling around the question like a pro. They are going to raise the age on medicare and we will be lucky if that is alll they do. This is just my feeling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to warrprayer (Reply #155)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:55 PM

156. I'm making a video on that very subject

I think most Democrats will be shocked to see the number of Democratic representatives pushing for cuts in our safety net. I have video clips of Obama, Biden, Clinton, Pelosi, Hoyer, Clyburn, Reid, Durbin, Wasserman-Schultz, Schumer, Rendell, Booker, Ford, Geitner, Van Hollen, Udall, Conrad...on and on and on.

You're right. It's going to happen if we don't fight back hard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread