General Discussion

mainer

(12,018 posts)

108. You seem to lack an understanding of what "universal access" is all about.

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:57 PM

Dec 2012

Rich people DO contribute a larger portion of money to Medicare. 3.8 percent of a million is a lot more than 3.8 percent of $50,000. Yet you want them to receive NO SERVICES at age 65. That's after giving a lifetime of far more money. Yes, it may be the same 3.8 percent of their income, but it is a lot more money than others give.

And you think ALL rich people are pushing for cutting Medicare. You know what? I'M A DEMOCRAT. So is Warren Buffett. So are most people who earn a lot of money in entertainment. You want to put them in your "evil 1-percenter" category? I'm in the entertainment industry, so I know these one-percenters. And they all voted for Obama. And they all were pushing to have their taxes raised. The very people who helped elect Obama. So I resent you casting us as the people who would take away YOUR Medicare.

This is the part of DU that drives me crazy. The folks who can only see in black and white and think that the world is all "us against them."

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

132 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How about raising the Medicare age on the top one percent? [View all] ProSense Dec 2012 OP

Kick for ProSense Dec 2012 #1

My proposal is to tax the piggies until they squeal. freshwest Dec 2012 #132

I say Aerows Dec 2012 #2

No. Keep it universal, or they'll just chip away at it... JHB Dec 2012 #3

This does not ProSense Dec 2012 #4

Let them pay for their own medical. demosincebirth Dec 2012 #5

"People" are not living longer. Affluent people are living longer eridani Dec 2012 #6

As if the 1%... 99Forever Dec 2012 #7

That's the point. ProSense Dec 2012 #8

You really don't get it, do you? 99Forever Dec 2012 #9

What the fuck are you talking about? ProSense Dec 2012 #10

Me? 99Forever Dec 2012 #12

Yes. n/t ProSense Dec 2012 #15

If you say so. 99Forever Dec 2012 #17

Another thing: ProSense Dec 2012 #11

+1. nt Romulox Dec 2012 #13

LOL! You oppose cutting Medicare for the top one percent, ProSense Dec 2012 #14

They wouldn't "taste" anything jberryhill Dec 2012 #27

"You think that Dick Cheney's replacement heart was paid by Medicare" ProSense Dec 2012 #30

I don't know of any Sgent Dec 2012 #130

What ? rickford66 Dec 2012 #51

Oops, no I meant benefits. n/t ProSense Dec 2012 #56

even being a well-off Republican, brokechris Dec 2012 #58

I favor a higher retirement age for people like me that have jobs that don't require constant bluestate10 Dec 2012 #16

You have got to be joking? ProSense Dec 2012 #18

Means testing is more expensive than offering Medicare/SS to the 1 % mainer Dec 2012 #19

This doesn't ProSense Dec 2012 #20

I thought you were advocating means testing for Medicare mainer Dec 2012 #41

Means testing is a slippery slope. We need to lower the Medicare age to zero, like so many other Overseas Dec 2012 #21

Medicare is already means tested. ProSense Dec 2012 #22

The Top One Percent are already retired. Free from worry. Overseas Dec 2012 #29

How many ProSense Dec 2012 #32

Their retirement income is subject to Medicare tax mainer Dec 2012 #46

If all income will be subject to a Medicare tax then we do not need to raise the eligibility age. Overseas Dec 2012 #73

Pure greed may caused them to object, but it won't devastate them to raise the age, whereas Overseas Dec 2012 #64

Means-testing of Social Security or Medicare is the sneakiest way to kill off either program. Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #23

The program is already means tested. n/t ProSense Dec 2012 #25

No, it isn't. duffyduff Dec 2012 #33

Depends on your definition Sgent Dec 2012 #131

This would not have an appreciable effect on Medicare spending muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #24

No, ProSense Dec 2012 #26

So your proposal in the OP is purely satirical? muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #28

I was making a point ProSense Dec 2012 #34

Yes but it would open the door to lowering the bar further down the food chain Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #52

It could be tiered Rosa Luxemburg Dec 2012 #31

anybody who pays into the system should be eligble. Mel Content Dec 2012 #36

why not just apply medicare/fica taxes to ALL income and capital gains, with no monetary cap...? Mel Content Dec 2012 #35

There is no cap on Medicare. n/t ProSense Dec 2012 #37

but it's not taken from all income, either. Mel Content Dec 2012 #42

Starting in 2013, investment income also subject to Medicare tax mainer Dec 2012 #44

well that was quick- glad to see that they're taking my advice. Mel Content Dec 2012 #47

The top 1% do not use Medicare. former9thward Dec 2012 #38

Where exactly ProSense Dec 2012 #39

Where did your false claim come from is the question. former9thward Dec 2012 #40

Luckily ProSense Dec 2012 #45

Are you kidding me? Many 1 percenters use Medicare! mainer Dec 2012 #49

No, because I didn't make the claim. LOL! n/t ProSense Dec 2012 #53

You are wrong on both your stats. former9thward Dec 2012 #63

Um, my husband is a doctor. Many of our friends are doctors. mainer Dec 2012 #65

Yeah I bet Steve Jobs was one of them. former9thward Dec 2012 #93

Why would Steve Jobs be a Medicare recipient? ProSense Dec 2012 #97

Correct you are. former9thward Dec 2012 #112

And all 1 percenters are as rich as Steve Jobs? mainer Dec 2012 #99

From my other posts former9thward Dec 2012 #114

You have no idea about the medical profession, do you? mainer Dec 2012 #117

A one-percenter only has to make $340,000 a year mainer Dec 2012 #100

Well that certainly settles it. former9thward Dec 2012 #115

No, ProSense Dec 2012 #67

The link is fixed. former9thward Dec 2012 #91

Inividual income, but ProSense Dec 2012 #95

I am opposed to increasing the Medicare age on ANYONE mainer Dec 2012 #43

It will still ProSense Dec 2012 #48

Medicare is NOT means tested! Where are you getting this from? mainer Dec 2012 #70

I think this is a terrible idea that would end up backfiring big time. forestpath Dec 2012 #50

The only problem when you do something like this, and I'm not opposed to using sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #54

I like it! n/t ProSense Dec 2012 #55

No. People's circumstances in life brokechris Dec 2012 #57

Doesn't that ProSense Dec 2012 #59

I am saying that NO ONE brokechris Dec 2012 #61

Even millions disappear pretty fast when you're suddenly quadriplegic mainer Dec 2012 #66

I have no stats to prove it but I suspect those 1% people dballance Dec 2012 #60

How can they be for raising the age if we don't have universal healthcare? ecstatic Dec 2012 #62

Medicare is for everybody. It is not welfare for the poor. You are calling for privatization. limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #68

Wait, ProSense Dec 2012 #71

And you are saying that ALL rich people are advocating for this policy, so let's screw 'em all. mainer Dec 2012 #75

No, that's not what I'm saying, but ProSense Dec 2012 #82

What's next, deny social security to the top 1%? Probably. limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #69

And then deny it to the top 5% because, well, they're pretty well-off too. mainer Dec 2012 #72

Social Security ProSense Dec 2012 #74

NO! That's a slippery slope. NO raising of the eligibility age. nt Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #76

Raise the Medicare age on people who don't use Medicare in the first place? Spider Jerusalem Dec 2012 #77

So then ProSense Dec 2012 #80

I think that's a great idea! NashvilleLefty Dec 2012 #78

the top 1% changes annually DrDan Dec 2012 #79

Why do the top 1% draw Medicare? liberal N proud Dec 2012 #81

Bad idea. truebluegreen Dec 2012 #83

Note: Medicare IS means tested... when it comes to contributions mainer Dec 2012 #84

Is that ProSense Dec 2012 #85

Thank you. limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #86

"The wealthy pay more in premiums and use less benefits." ProSense Dec 2012 #87

Do very wealthy Medicare beneficiaries pay higher monthly premiums? limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #88

Just wait until ProSense Dec 2012 #89

No. I'm against incrementally privatizing Medicare, losing premiums, and shrinking the risk pool. limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #94

Doesn't this ProSense Dec 2012 #96

That's why we should not raise the eligibility age for anybody. limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #101

Ditto mainer Dec 2012 #102

The point is, kicking rich 65 year olds off Medicare makes them oppose Medicare mainer Dec 2012 #90

Does kicking not rich people off Medicare make them oppose it? ProSense Dec 2012 #92

I'm not distorting the point. You are. mainer Dec 2012 #98

No, I don't ProSense Dec 2012 #103

You seem to lack an understanding of what "universal access" is all about. mainer Dec 2012 #108

You lack an understanding ProSense Dec 2012 #111

The PORTION of their contributions to total contributions is larger. mainer Dec 2012 #119

It's still ProSense Dec 2012 #120

It will be 3.8 percent of income, come 2013. mainer Dec 2012 #121

Cool. n/t ProSense Dec 2012 #122

This OP obviously didn't go over like you thought it would... cherokeeprogressive Dec 2012 #104

It when over just like I thought it would: ProSense Dec 2012 #106

Oh, so do you typically get on a thread and personally Cha Dec 2012 #128

I oppose means testing Warpy Dec 2012 #105

"As someone above pointed out, the rich will destroy anything they don't get." ProSense Dec 2012 #109

Yeah, right. ALL THE RICH want to destroy Medicare. mainer Dec 2012 #110

Stop putting words in my mouth, and ProSense Dec 2012 #113

No, the OP was directed at all one percenters. mainer Dec 2012 #116

OK, have it your way. ProSense Dec 2012 #118

You say "fear." I say "firm knowledge based on past behavior." Warpy Dec 2012 #123

Every ProSense Dec 2012 #124

There are MANY ways to solvency, if they really want it to be solvent SoCalDem Dec 2012 #107

Once we do that customerserviceguy Dec 2012 #125

The f---g one percent never retire anyway as long as doc03 Dec 2012 #126

And eliminate health care for elected officials lbrtbell Dec 2012 #127

No. Keep SS & MC universal. Anything less contributes to the destruction of the formula that's HiPointDem Dec 2012 #129