HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why is it that so many pe...

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 04:59 PM

Why is it that so many people who are ON Medicare, and by-and-large love it.......

...are against having Medicare-for-all?


The GOP's biggest supporters are those over 65 years old, in every poll. Almost all of these people are on Medicare. In poll after poll, they love Medicare.


Why do they think it is a bad idea for everyone else to be on it?


And forget the "it will cost 30 trillion dollars!" bullshit. All of us under 65 who are paying for our private insurance are paying WAY MORE than 30 trillion over 10 years into the medical system.

All that Medicare-for-all would do would be to shift that money THAT WE ARE ALREADY PAYING from going to private insurance to going into Medicare.



ps. Here's a fun fact. If we get a Dem President and Senate in 2020.... we can lower the Medicare age to 0 with simple budget reconciliation. Don't even need to be filibuster proof!

90 replies, 3601 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 90 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why is it that so many people who are ON Medicare, and by-and-large love it....... (Original post)
scheming daemons Feb 5 OP
elleng Feb 5 #1
guillaumeb Feb 5 #19
elleng Feb 5 #21
fleur-de-lisa Feb 5 #2
Strelnikov_ Feb 5 #5
R B Garr Feb 5 #31
yardwork Feb 5 #60
R B Garr Feb 5 #63
FakeNoose Feb 5 #70
R B Garr Feb 5 #72
shanti Feb 5 #75
MarcA Feb 5 #80
Texin Feb 5 #38
Haggis for Breakfast Feb 5 #82
erronis Feb 5 #39
NRaleighLiberal Feb 5 #49
Cheviteau Feb 5 #55
fleur-de-lisa Feb 5 #61
demigoddess Feb 5 #66
charliea Feb 5 #67
ooky Feb 5 #69
rpannier Feb 5 #62
ooky Feb 5 #71
onecaliberal Feb 5 #81
dsc Feb 5 #3
wasupaloopa Feb 5 #11
dsc Feb 5 #16
wasupaloopa Feb 5 #41
WillowTree Feb 5 #77
Mr.Bill Feb 5 #58
pnwmom Feb 5 #17
doc03 Feb 5 #4
Ohiogal Feb 5 #6
scheming daemons Feb 5 #13
MichMan Feb 5 #36
PoindexterOglethorpe Feb 5 #7
Mariana Feb 5 #24
PoindexterOglethorpe Feb 5 #34
Mariana Feb 5 #40
onethatcares Feb 5 #42
procon Feb 5 #8
world wide wally Feb 5 #64
wasupaloopa Feb 5 #9
luvtheGWN Feb 5 #68
wasupaloopa Feb 7 #90
riverwalker Feb 5 #10
Hoyt Feb 5 #12
Raven Feb 5 #14
Mariana Feb 5 #27
Hoyt Feb 5 #35
Mariana Feb 5 #37
Hoyt Feb 5 #45
ismnotwasm Feb 5 #15
guillaumeb Feb 5 #22
CurtEastPoint Feb 5 #18
DURHAM D Feb 5 #20
scheming daemons Feb 5 #26
DURHAM D Feb 5 #30
Basic LA Feb 5 #23
scheming daemons Feb 5 #25
Kajun Gal Feb 5 #78
DURHAM D Feb 5 #29
Vinca Feb 5 #28
Dem2theMax Feb 5 #59
Vinca Feb 5 #76
Dem2theMax Feb 5 #79
Mariana Feb 5 #32
dawg day Feb 5 #33
George II Feb 5 #43
progressoid Feb 5 #65
charliea Feb 5 #73
PeeJ52 Feb 5 #44
Honeycombe8 Feb 5 #46
dansolo Feb 5 #47
pamdb Feb 5 #48
Hamlette Feb 5 #50
HockeyMom Feb 5 #51
c-rational Feb 5 #52
relayerbob Feb 5 #53
Hoyt Feb 5 #56
relayerbob Feb 5 #83
Hoyt Feb 5 #84
relayerbob Feb 5 #85
Hoyt Feb 5 #87
CharleyDog Feb 5 #54
pamdb Feb 5 #57
brooklynite Feb 5 #74
Ron Green Feb 5 #86
ck4829 Feb 7 #88
KWR65 Feb 7 #89

Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:03 PM

1. BECAUSE of the "it will cost 30 trillion dollars!" bullshit.

DIVIDE and CONQUER!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:34 PM

19. The GOP knows that lies work.

And fear of the unknown also works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #19)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:41 PM

21. Yes, and they play on them constantly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:03 PM

2. "I got mine. F*ck everyone else!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:04 PM

5. Yep n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:05 PM

31. When half the people have insurance through work and are

happy with it, this comment can work both ways. Why should people be bankrupted by a 20% co-pay when they donít have that now. Medicare pays 80%, then you have to buy a supplemental anyway. Promising Medicare will really pay 100% will require more than casual campaign lines.

edit: meant co-pay, not deductible

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R B Garr (Reply #31)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:29 PM

60. I have a 20% co-pay on my insurance.

I would have a 30% co-pay but I'm healthy and pay more for the 80-20 plan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #60)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:34 PM

63. I just had an operation and paid zero.

I know employer-provided plans are different. The stats are that half the people have employer-provided insurance and are happy with it. Public option seems to be the best way to get people in the system and then expand on that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R B Garr (Reply #31)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:55 PM

70. If Medicare For All becomes reality, then companies will no longer give health care benefits

It's a simple reality, healthcare insurance in the workplace gets re-negotiated every year. Maybe some companies do it every other year, but the point is that underwriting benefits can change quickly. If and when the government gives Medicare For All, companies will jump at the chance to stop covering employees' health insurance. Anybody who has company-provided insurance now will see it disappear in a heartbeat.

So we need to take a quick reality-check on this. I believe it's going to happen with the next Democratic president, whoever he or she may be. Of course it would help to have Dem majority in both houses too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FakeNoose (Reply #70)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:03 PM

72. That's why I said the plan needs more concrete talk

than superficial campaign slogans. Medicare now has a 20% co-pay and that is more than perception, itís just an undeniable fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FakeNoose (Reply #70)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:15 PM

75. Good

Health insurance should never be attached to one's employment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shanti (Reply #75)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:35 PM

80. Agreed

Some people like their job and insurance benefits. Some like their job
but don't have the benefits. Others have to keep a job they don't like
for benefits. And when people lose their jobs, another whole matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:23 PM

38. More like "I got mine and I'll be even happier if I take your's too."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Texin (Reply #38)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:47 PM

82. You just described my father-in-law to a "T"

He's a die-hard Goldwater repub (We are not on speaking terms.), and he screams about subsidies, Affirmative Action, the various welfare programs (even those for infants, the elderly and the disabled), and just about anyone who gets help from the government. ANYONE.

Anyone, but him, that is. When he developed an illness that forced him out of the work force, he went immediately to a lawyer to help him get all of the governmental benefits for which he was eligible.

Yet, he still screams from his government-padded perch about government "freeloaders," looking for a handout.

It's the classic, "I got mine and FU."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:24 PM

39. And that's not just Medicare. It's "I'm white and european, and I got mine." Get out of my country.

Of course most of those white/european immigrants were either kicked out of their homeland or couldn't make a decent living. Just look at the trumpf history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:55 PM

49. This. Sad

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:12 PM

55. I'm Eighty Years Old

And I'm on Medicare and I've advocated for years for a single payer insurance program; which is Medicare as far as I'm concerned. The original poster offers no links to the polls he says that are there. Most, if not all my friends are on Medicare and every one of them are in favor of Medicare for all. Since you say that we old folks think, "fuck you, I've got mine". I say you're full of shit. You paint with a broad brush, kid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheviteau (Reply #55)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:31 PM

61. Was the post directed at you?

You seem kinda cranky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheviteau (Reply #55)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:39 PM

66. agree with you. We are over 65 and use Medicare.I am all for Medicare for all.

But we really should have universal health care. 1. health insurance raises prices so much to make profits. 2. once I heard a doctor on radio said he was injured and went to scanning place and said how about an appointment and I'll pay cash. He got right in for 1500. When he asked why it cost so much to go through insurance company, they said it is because they have to hire people to ask, ask, ask, from insurance companies because they always refuse over and over the first times. If we transfer that same idea to Medicare for All, we are going to shoot ourselves in the foot. and we need to control drug companies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheviteau (Reply #55)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:42 PM

67. I concur

As a recently enrolled Medicare recipient I'm still working although I signed up as required when I hit 65 late last year. While I'm still using my employer provided insurance, I've been advocating to my representative and Senators for the last 10 years that we need the simplification of single-payer, and unlike Medicare I'd include dental care too. Why not just sign everyone up at birth? They get an SSN at birth now, why not a Medicare one?

Shouldn't everyone in the US have access to healthcare? Not health insurance, care...

I think so anyway...



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheviteau (Reply #55)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:53 PM

69. The OP specifically referred to GOP voters, which in that case I think the OP is correct,

just based on the majority of GOP voters I have heard or read voice their opinions of universal health care of any kind, regardless of what we call it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:33 PM

62. Yep x 100000000000000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:58 PM

71. In the case of right wing voters, I think you are right.

I have also observed the same attitude from right wing voters who have great health care plans through their employer. They take it for granted that they will always have it, so they show an insensitivity to the plight of those who don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:38 PM

81. That's exactly it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:04 PM

3. because they are afraid that by adding in people who haven't been paying in for years

their benefits will become diluted. People who are 65 now have been paying a certain percentage of their wages for decades into the system. Someone who is 20 now hasn't been. For them both to get the same benefits could dilute all the benefits if the taxes aren't raised to the correct rate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:21 PM

11. You are only paying for part A hospital beds.

This is an argument weíre everyone defines for themselves what they think Medicare for all is.

No two people have the same idea what it looks like,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wasupaloopa (Reply #11)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:27 PM

16. I am 51

so I am not on Medicare yet. But I will say the people I know who are do have a fear of it becoming like Medicaid if it is expanded. I highly doubt the premium paid for part B covers anything like its entire cost. It comes out to be less than 3000 a year and I think less than 2000 a year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #16)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:27 PM

41. Like I said nobody knows what Medicare for all means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #16)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:24 PM

77. The part B premium for 2019 is $135.50/month or $1626 for the year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wasupaloopa (Reply #11)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:20 PM

58. You are correct.

First misconception that many people have is that it is free. My wife and I combined pay over $500 a month for our Medicare and supplemental policies. And that does not cover dental or optical. That's cheap, but it's far from free. It's more than the rent in our mobile home park. It's more than our car payment. It's more than our utilities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:29 PM

17. Yes, they are afraid they will be short-changed. What they don't understand is that everybody else

who has insurance has already been spending money for it -- or their employer has -- and that money can be spent more effectively in the Medicare system instead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:04 PM

4. Those are the same people on Medicare that hated Obamacare and said

keep your government hands off my healthcare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:05 PM

6. Most of these older right wingers

say ďI paid into it all my lifeĒ.

They donít want others receiving medical care that ďthey didnít pay for.Ē

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohiogal (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:22 PM

13. But any medicare-for-all plan would have those under 65 paying into the plan

...instead of into their private insurance premiums.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohiogal (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:18 PM

36. I think this is correct

People have been pre paying into Medicare for over 40 years before they are ever eligible for benefits. They don't understand why someone else would become eligible after only paying into it a short amount of time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:09 PM

7. Most people I know who are on Medicare want everyone else to have it

if they don't already have better coverage.

Too many seniors watch Fox News, unfortunately. But not this senior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PoindexterOglethorpe (Reply #7)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:47 PM

24. Most people you know who are on Medicare aren't the majority.

The majority of people on Medicare enthusiastically vote Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:13 PM

34. I tend not to associate with such people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PoindexterOglethorpe (Reply #34)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:25 PM

40. I don't blame you a bit. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:32 PM

42. not this guy

that would be saying "there are more repukes than Democratic people"

what we got, is a few members of congress that are bought and paid for by the insurance bemoth. They're not about to twist the teat that really feeds them.

I am an old guy that is using his Medicare, so is my SO.

I LIKE IT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:10 PM

8. Maybe they think everyone else is unworthy

of healthcare. It's a priveldge, you know ,that they paid into so why should some brownskinned folks and kids get the same deal as the white people?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to procon (Reply #8)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:35 PM

64. I like to point out John McCain as an example of this.

He was covered under government paid health care every day of his life from beginning to end. Yet, he opposed any government forms of help with health care to average citizens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:18 PM

9. At this point nobody knows what Medicare for all is.

We are arguing about words with no substance.

We are not going to get tax funded universal health care provided by the fed government.

If that is what you want give it a name. Socialized Medicine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wasupaloopa (Reply #9)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:48 PM

68. "Socialized medicine"

Yeah, just like socialized interstates, and socialized public schools, and socialized fire and police departments.

Oooh, that word "socialized" is so old school -- lingering on in the minds of too damn many.

Funny, that word is a derivative of the word "society" which is something we all live in.

My late husband's cousin lived and worked (public school principal) in Indiana. She moved to Florida several years ago to enjoy her retirement in the warmth. Even though she earned her income via the taxpayers of her city and state, her answer to medicare for all is "I worked hard for my medicare. Why should I pay for someone else's healthcare?

I fear there are FAR TOO MANY just like her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to luvtheGWN (Reply #68)

Thu Feb 7, 2019, 04:27 PM

90. I have nothing against socialized anything. I just want

us to use words that we know the meaning.

Medicare for all has not been defined. Socialized medicine has been defined.

It makes no sense to say old folks are against Medicare for all. It is a meaningless statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:21 PM

10. I'm on Medicare and I support M4All

It would only strengthen an already great program. IMHO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:21 PM

12. I want people to have it, but a lot of folks aren't going to be happy

with it because their private insurance is better.

But people who go without coverage now, will definitely be better off. The 20% coinsurance and higher premiums than people think will be tough for many without subsidies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #12)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:24 PM

14. I had private insurance and then got Medicare. I see no difference at all, in fact, Medicare

is less bureaucratic, if you can believe that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #12)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:55 PM

27. If that were true, we'd be hearing lots of stories

about people who aren't happy when turn 65 and go on Medicare. We'd have large numbers of them complaining about how much Medicare sucks, compared to their old insurance. We aren't hearing a lot of those stories. Why is that, I wonder?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #27)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:15 PM

35. Medicare-for-All means no more employer paid insurance. Now if you are talking Public Option, that's

different.

So you go from having you employer pay for a good portion of your health insurance to having to pay it yourself. Hopefully, your employer passes savings on to you. But if they donít, youíll be paying a chunk for Medicare premiums, 20% copay, uncovered services, etc. Still better if you donít have coverage, but it wonít be cheap.

Medicare coverage is still expensive. You pay each month as well as what you paid while working 40+ years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #35)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:23 PM

37. People who retire at 65 and go on Medicare

don't get employer paid insurance anymore, either. They're in a position to compare one with the other. Why aren't they griping about how bad Medicare is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #37)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:42 PM

45. If they still work, in most cases the employer plan is still primary. You are missing the point,

Medicare doesn't cover everything and will cost you directly either in premiums or taxes, unless you are very poor. It will be a good thing because everyone deserves coverage, but people are still going to gripe under M4A -- whether they are 20, 40, 64 -- because it is not free or much cheaper than what they have now, if any cheaper.

I'm on Medicare, and glad to have it, but it cost me a good chunk every month and I paid in for 50+ years, in fact still paying Medicare tax when I work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:24 PM

15. Paying for it is the least of my concerns

ĎCostí is almost a red herring argument (not quite though). The exact mechanics of how it will be administered is of more concern to me, whatís included, what wonít be, having a strong preventative medicine policy, how the reimbursement for Providers and hospitals will work out, how we are going to work dental in there, right now M4A little more than a slogan.

I donít actually care what we call universal healthcare care. I can put up with calling it M4A as long as itís a workable plan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #15)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:43 PM

22. "M4A" will never work.

I am in favor of "A4M".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:33 PM

18. I saw a 'why are drugs so $$$' today and a Dumper said, 'Because we have to pay for the ones who get

it for free.

IOW... just as a commenter above said:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:41 PM

20. Do you have any polling of people currently on Medicare

and their support of/or opposition to Medicare For All.

Doubt it.

You just made an assumption and started at OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DURHAM D (Reply #20)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:52 PM

26. See below response.


Trump's highest approval numbers are among those over 65.

Those over 65 are on Medicare.

Those who support Trump are against Medicare-for-all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #26)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:04 PM

30. your conclusion is drivel nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:44 PM

23. Where was this reported?

I've only heard the opposite from my fellow Medicare recipients. Sounds like a straw-man argument to bash Boomers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Basic LA (Reply #23)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:51 PM

25. Trump approval rating by age

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2596

18-34: 26%
35-49: 34%
50-64: 41%
65+: 47%


Trump's biggest support is among seniors. Among those that are on Medicare.


Support for Trump tracks almost directly with LACK of support for M4A.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #25)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:24 PM

78. Many dems are on medicare. There ARE dems over age 65...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Basic LA (Reply #23)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:04 PM

29. Exactly.

He just made it up to try and start a generational fight.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 05:58 PM

28. Today is my 70th birthday and I've always been for a Medicare-for-all system.

Republicans seem to have a selfish gene no matter their age. As long as they've got theirs . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #28)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:20 PM

59. Happy Birthday!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dem2theMax (Reply #59)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:24 PM

76. Thanks. 70 is the new 50 (I'm telling myself).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #76)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:27 PM

79. You are very welcome!

I'm seven years away from that number myself. And it sure does feel like it's coming fast. Of course 70 is the new 50. It has to be!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:05 PM

32. A lot of them really don't understand how dysfunctional our system is

especially if they went from a position with nice healthcare benefits directly to Medicare & Supplement. They've never been uninsured or underinsured in their adult lives. They've never faced the prospect of bankruptcy over medical bills. They truly believe that everyone who has a job has the same access to healthcare that they did and still do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:36 PM

43. Part of it is because we've been paying into it for 50 years and it works. Perhaps....

.... we're "against" it (not really) because an immediate expansion to everyone would screw up a good, efficient system. Build on Medicare over time, don't try to do it overnight.

It's not simply shifting what Americans are paying from private insurance to Medicare. It's a lot more complicated than that, plus the government has contracted the private insurance companies to administer a big % of Medicare right now.

There's a lot more to Medicare than many of the Medicare for All fans realize.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #43)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:36 PM

65. "good, efficient system"

Whaaaa?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #65)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:06 PM

73. It's an extremely efficient system...

If your measure of efficiency is the ratio of administrative costs to total outlay, or the overhead. Here's a Politifact (yes I know they're suspect) comparison of Medicare administrative costs to private healthcare. Medicare currently has a 1.4% overhead. Politifact looked at multiple categories of health insurance carriers and they have administrative costs 8-15 time higher.

They advance an argument that expanding to the entire population could not be done with the same efficiency, but I found their arguments thin...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:37 PM

44. I'm not against it. I think it's great. It's the way it's supposed to work.

UHC through AARP is so competitive within the market for my supplemental. Almost all my drugs are at zero cost when I go through their mail order supplier. My doctors and hospitals are in their HMO. Life couldn't be better. Everyone should have it. Of course they aren't going to be able to pay the $183 a month that I pay now, because I've been paying my entire life. People working will have to put in their employer's contribution plus their contribution either as a payroll tax or a combination payroll/business tax. It's just people won't be paying through work, they'll be paying through government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:50 PM

46. Cost.

People get Medicare after paying Medicare taxes for decades. So it's complicated and more expensive (up front), when you talk about extending it to everyone, most of whom will not have been paying the taxes for decades, and many who have not paid Medicare taxes at all.

When people say Medicare for all, what I think that means is the loose format of it, so people have an idea what the program would sort of be like (public Medicare + private insurance together). But it wouldn't really be Medicare as we know it. It would be a single payer program, not Medicare.

But the cost up front seems to be astronomical. I've seen explanations that in the long run it costs less and such. I don't know. I'm not an economist or accountant, and really, if there is no real program, I don't see how the actual cost can be determined. Things always cost more than projected, in my experience.

I don't know where you saw that people on Medicare don't want Medicare fr all. Do you have a link? Or is that Republicans don't want Medicare for all, and most 65+ people are conservative?

I think the argument for being in favor of Medicare for seniors, but not a single payer country-wide might be: The seniors worked for it and paid for it for decades, while the single payer concept pays for health care for people who haven't worked for it, paid into it, sacrificed for it, and perhaps even get other benefits. I think that is probably the main objection, after the cost.

BTW...Medicare for all provides not that much health care from the taxes paid. The main benefit from Medicare is ability to buy private insurance to supplement it, so the cost for the supplement is much reduced. Both the govt benefit and the private ins. cost.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:52 PM

47. Because "Medicare for all" is not Medicare for all

Bernie's proposed legislation has absolutely nothing in common with Medicare as it exists today. It is a completely unrealistic proposal that has zero chance of ever becoming law. I am completely in favor of expanding current Medicare to cover more people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:54 PM

48. medicare for all

I am 67 and my husband is 66. Even though I had what it referred as a
"Cadillac Health care plan" when I was working, and my husband rode on my plan until I hit 65 and he had to use Obamacare fora year until he hit 65, we
both advocate Medicare for all. I even have a bumper sticker that says that.

You can thank Joe Lieberman's wife, a shill for the Insurance lobby, for squashing single payer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:58 PM

50. you know it's not free, right?

my husband and I pay over $1,000 per month for Medicare and a supplement. The supplement is about $150 per month.

Do NOT take this as a complaint. We can afford it as my husband still works at age 70. And it is the best insurance I have ever had. I had a knee replacement last year and my husband had a heart attack. We have billed less than $80 for it all.

On the other hand, my grandson cut his head pretty badly. I bet their portion of the bill will be $1500. We can help but their best friends just moved to Canada in large part because of medical bills. They have a 4 year old child and haven't paid off all the bills from her birth (wasn't complicated but compounded but a few hospital trips since) and they want to have another child but can't afford it here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:59 PM

51. I love Medicare because they leave me alone

unlike my former employer's Wellness Program. Self insured with nasty emails constantly telling me I was in non-compliance for not declaring a PCP, yearly physicals, mammograms, colonoscropies, etc. Got so bad that I quit, and went without insurance for 5 years until I aged into Medicare.

Yeah, I would be happy with Medicare for all. They don't increase your premiums for non-compliance which my former insurance did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:59 PM

52. Brainwashing and incessant false arguments. I agree with the underlying premise, we are

paying more into the medical system now, just in different forms. Also, I think the reThuglicans really want to dismantle the Great Society and to do so have starved the government and paint false and alarmist economic arguments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:00 PM

53. Side comment

I'm on Medicare, I'm for medicare for all, but it has some serious issues that need to be fixed also, both in terms of what is covered and how much, and in terms of who takes it. And also who has political control over who gets what. Presumably the part about who takes it, would not be an issue if that's the only way Dr's get paid, unless the Dr is completely private, which a lot of good ones may do. (Think private school vs public school). One of those, be careful what you wish for issues, there is a LOT of work to be done.

Note, however, that the real root of the problem, created under Reagan, is this corporate/GOP concept of "managed care", where bureaucrat X, where-ever they are located, private or public, has the right to define who gets what procedures and where you can buy prescriptions and for how much, etc. This intervention in medical treatment should be considered malpractice, IMO, since the people making these decisions are not your doctor and have, for the most part, never seen you, nor know anyone's specific needs.

This is to say nothing of the enormous extra costs involved in denying something, then having it appealed, blah, blah. Millions are thrown away due to this, presumably in the hopes enough people will give up or die that the net savings are OK. Plus, as an example, the insurance company tried to convince me to get a particular procedure, and it was unclear as to whether it was necessary. The procedure cost $50k+. A test to verify whether the procedure was even helpful or even called for was denied. The test cost $450. I paid the $450 in cash and the tests were administered by a very nice and funny woman who muttered "bastards" every single time the word "insurance" or any insurance company name was spoken. As it turned out, no need for the procedure at all, in fact, it would have increased my risks with my heart problems significantly. Bear in mind that GOP created managed care will likely result in no funding for birth control, abortions, or other sorts of things they deem politically intolerable, as long as they have the power to do so. Medicare needs to be kept somehow independent of the political process, and good luck with that.

The real solution to these last problems is that this "managed" part needs to go, and whoever is handling the funding needs to do ONLY that. FUND. I get there are cheats. If someone has evidence of fraud that can stand up in court, then intervene, b all means. Otherwise ... stay the hell out of our healthcare issues, whether government or private.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to relayerbob (Reply #53)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:13 PM

56. I hear/read you. But managed care greatly reduced the rate paid to providers, stopped them from

ordering total hips for someone with terminal cancer, put a halt to docs sending you to facilities in which they have an investment interest, etc. Heck, we'd all be getting Botox facial injections -- billed as being for headaches -- were it not for managed care. And anyone that thinks doctors should not be held to best practices and practice guidelines, has no idea how many clueless docs there are out there.

Back in the 70s and 80s, docs and hospitals pretty much got paid what they charged -- so you can imagine how much charges increased every year (actually more often than that).

I'd be willing to bet your health insurance premiums would be triple or more without managed care, and it's still not enough. Yeah, docs don't like it and gripe, because they no longer get $5,000 for a hernia operation and someone tells them "No" when they try to perform a joint replacement on someone with 2 months to live.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #56)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 09:01 PM

83. Nice try

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to relayerbob (Reply #83)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 09:07 PM

84. That's all you have?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #84)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 09:11 PM

85. What more do I need?

You've spouted off Reagan as if you memorized the crap, threw up straw dog arguments about the evil doctors (sorta reminds me of evil-race-du-jour from the WH) and completely ignored my point about if they have evidence of abuse, then act on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to relayerbob (Reply #85)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 09:26 PM

87. Truthfully, I think you have term "managed competition" -- which was Reagan and GOPers' BS answer to

our healthcare issues -- ]- and "managed care" mixed up.

California, New York, states that expanded Medicaid, etc., adopted "managed care" long ago to help control healthcare utilization over unbridled physicians, hospitals, etc., like we had before.

I do have evidence, provider rates today are much lower than they were prior to managed care (without even adjusting for inflation). Providers can no longer scam people by sending them to labs they own without being totally transparent about it, etc.

Those against "managed care" are more likely Reaganites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:01 PM

54. We're on Medicare and appreciate the health insurance. We pay about $120 each for Medicare. Yet,

Medicare only covers 80% of accepted fees. So, we each pay another $500 EACH for supplemental insurance. My husband has never seen a doctor in 10 years and I go for the annual health check, healthy. (and it must be noted, this plan includes dental care which is very limited of 2 cleanings, and all else is only slightly discounted. Our biggest expense in healthcare has been dental, which is barely covered, and we pay out of pocket for fillings, lab tests, x-rays, crowns, etc.) So, the many thousands we have paid in the last 10 years for health insurance was never used. That's INSURANCE. We have it in case. In case of emergency.

$1000 month for 10 years = $120,000 down the drain for this family of two seniors on limited income. (ps the roof leaks and there's no money for that. Which is the more urgent problem. We live where it rains 7 months a year. But going without the supplemental plan is like asking for a calamity, right?)

Medicare is not free. It's not really that cheap. In my view, EVERY person deserves/needs healthcare. If they cannot pay 500 a month for supplements, they will get huge bills or care/cure will still be out of reach.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 07:15 PM

57. medicare for all


I'm 67 and my husband is 66 and we are both on medicare and support medicare for everyone. Not just when you turn 55 or something, but everyone. Frankly, I think children, maybe up to 16 or 18, should have free health care.
We are supposedly the richest nation, if we wanted to, if we cared about the citizens of this country, we would do something. But the republicans don't give a flying fuck about anyone and, up until now. have controlled both House and Senate. An you can thank Joe Lieberman's wife who is a shill for the Insurance Lobby, for squelching single payer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 08:13 PM

74. Here's another fun fact: no you can't just "lower the medicare age to 0"

You could do it, but the funding for Medicare is built on a "pay in" young, "pay out" old model. If "pay out" now applies to everyone, there's no existing model to fund the program.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 09:19 PM

86. A Single Risk Pool Equals a Health Care System.

Multiple risk pools equal an investment scheme. We have enough investment schemes in this country; we need a health care system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2019, 06:34 AM

88. Good question

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2019, 06:45 AM

89. They falsely think other people having it will mean they will get less care

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread