Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Given The Present HCR Law -The People I Feel For Are Those Aged 55 6o 65

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:52 AM
Original message
Given The Present HCR Law -The People I Feel For Are Those Aged 55 6o 65
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 11:28 AM by global1
particularly those in their early 60's. Their premiums will rise over the next 4 years until this law kicks in for them and they will still be subject to pre-existing conditions and would have a tough time switching to a less expensive package. If they remain relatively healthy - they will be paying rising premiums with no benefit to them. Then if they turn 65 by 2014 they fall into Medicare coverage. But in those 4 years - basically - the insurance companies have them by the balls. They need medical insurance. Will have a tough time switching plans because of pre-existing conditions and insurance companies looking for every excuse to deny them coverage. And any premium hike that the insurance companies give them they will have to bear.

This is why the effects of this law should have kicked in sooner or immediately and not put off in stages.

I was a big proponent of Medicare kicking in and starting at 55. That would have taken care of this group. This is the group that is most strained now. Saving for retirement - and then the economic downturn - where a lot of their IRA/retirement money went up in smoke. They should be taking a conservative approach now with their retirement monies - but with most of their money gone because of the bankers - they have to be more aggressive in order to just get back to square one. Yet they have lost all confidence in the financial community and perhaps feel more secure with putting any money they have left in their mattress versus listening to the banksters that have gone back to their pre-economic downturn practices.

Their houses that they own went down in value. Their jobs are precarious - if they even have jobs - and those that do are worried that if they make the slightest wrong move on the job that they can be fired. Getting fired or laid off now - means that being in the age bracket - they will have a devil of a time finding a new job - and probably just won't.

Prices on everything going up. Many still have their parents in their 80's whose welfare they have to worry about. Having to bear possible nursing home expenses for their parents that maybe didn't or couldn't prepare for this stage of their lives. Many have kids that are moving back in with them that they have to help.

This is the most put out group - and it doesn't seem like there will be any relief in sight for them over the next 4 years.

At least the elderly have Medicare and the young have their health and the promise of better medical care going forward as they age.

What could be done for us in the 55 to 65 age bracket that grew up with the promise that things would be even better for them then their parents because of IRA and such? Will this generation be the new walking poor?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. There's no reason to stop fighting for Medicare for everyone. We can get it
going incrementally, first for the over-60, then over-55, then over-50, whatever. We just have to keep demanding MEDICAL JUSTICE for everyonen regardless of age or income or medical circumstances.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
37. Oh please
This HCR will directly transfer billions of dollars to the same private insurance/pharma sector that lobbied for this crap to begin with. They've just been handed YEARS and YEARS worth of more lobbying money. And politicians have just handed themselves a guaranteed $ource of funding.

'We' can't fight that
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 02:34 AM
Response to Reply #37
45. I was just thinking today in a moment of purely
Dark cynical rage, that maybe we would all be better off if We The People just threw in the towel, and said, "Okay, let AIG run the Federal Reserve and Treasury, let United Health run health care, send home the President, Senators, and Congress people, and along with them, send home the lobbyists.

Then we would at least have the monetary savings gained by not having those lobbyists handing out that campaign monies. Maybe THAT would finally bring down the costs of health care in this country.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RKP5637 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. Same here! "I was a big proponent of Medicare kicking in and starting at 55."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
3. There will be a new, temporary insurance pool for those with pre-existing conditions
(and most of that age group has them) that will offer subsidized coverage until 2014.

So it isn't true that nothing in the bill will help them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. How much will those high risk pools cost?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. Doesn't matter. Its a Win!
New Dealalicious!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
55. :crickets:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dixiegrrrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #3
29. Subsidies are tax credits. Those who do not pay taxes are screwed.
Many people are on early Soc. Sec ( before age 65)
or on Soc. Sec. Dis., thus have low and un-taxable income.
But the subsidies are in the form of tax credits.

Medicare does not kick in until age 65 on Soc. Sec.
and not for 2 years on Disability.
And those incomes are very small, Medicare outpatient costs relative to income is high.
( Part A, hospital costs, have no premium, but pay only 80% of "approved" services.)

Fortunately the penalty does not kick in for 4 more years.
The chances are good that anyone on an average Soc. Sec. or Disability income would
be exempt from the penalty.
( but I do expect the penalty will be increased over time and the subsidy will be decreased).







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gaedel Donating Member (802 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. Tax Credits versus Tax Deductions
Tax Deduction have value only if you have enough income to take the deduction. Tax deduction are also more valuable the higher your tax bracket.


Tax Credits help everyone who can get them. Even if you owe zero income tax, a $500 Tax Credit means you will get a $500 tax refund.

An example of Tax Credits is the Earned Income Credit (EIC) which gives you money back even if your income is so low your tax bracket is o%.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dixiegrrrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. So, you are saying that if I have NO taxable income,
all I have to do file return, showing NO taxable income, and I will get a check for 500.00.?

uhhh...in 4 years, right?

So, for now............nothing.?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #32
54. No Silly,
You take the money that you don't have, and use it to buy private health insurance. Then when you file your tax return, you get it back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Digit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
4. All I can say is thank you
Someone out there gets it.

I am unemployed and know of several others out there just like me in the same boat.
Totally unable to find a job.
Talk about feeling discarded and kicked to the curb....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
90-percent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
5. Thank you
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 11:02 AM by 90-percent
thanks for thinking of us, speaking as a 55 year old male.

However, sometimes I think that my generation, who are all now in high levels of power and are running most of our institutions, deserve at least some retribution for all the damage wreaked upon the USA and the world in recent years.

All our current pain from our institutions being run largely by baby boom sociopaths have not made society better and more just. They have made a darwinian system that everybody in America suffers from.

Penance, in other words. People around my age are doing a downright crappy criminal job running things! When I engage in small talk with younger people at a store or supermarket I apologize for my generation wrecking the future of their generation.

-90% Jimmy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raccoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #5
52. Speak for yourself, Jack. Or Jimmy, if you prefer.

You can find sociopaths in any generation.

Most boomers aren't at high levels of power and are running most of our institutions.

Maybe you feel like doing penance. Then by all means, do so.

But don't presume that you speak for a whole generation.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
7. I totally agree with you. But it's not just people in that age bracket that will suffer
many younger americans perticularly in the 20-30 age bracket that are single and living on middle class wages will also be hurt when they have to buy something they will not be able to afford.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Up till the age of 26 they can remain on their parents' policies, if they have them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. and if they don't?
:crickets:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. How many times will this be repeated? Who cares?
Many people in that age group, including myself, aren't lucky enough to have parents that can afford or are willing to pay for our insurance.

So yes, this is a nice provision for those that can take advantage of it. But to pretend that everyone can take advantage of it is absolutely absurd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. The group policies that many older adults have would cover the young adult children
without increasing the cost to the parents, except for the deductible.

I wasn't pretending that everyone can take advantage of this, but millions will be able to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. My parents aren't on a group plan, they are on an individual plan
as is the case for millions of other families. So there will be cost in many cases and that cost won't be insignificant. So nobody is arguing that thisn't isn't a good provision but that's not the point. The point is many younger middle class americans that are single will be hurt by this bill, this provision doesn't change that fact even if it might minimize it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #16
22. No doubt there are younger people who will not be helped a lot
However, I highly doubt we will see any of them with premiums that are 25% or more of their income. Many of us over 50 do see premiums at that level. With the Senate bill passing with the multiplier of 3X allowed for age most will see those kinds of premiums in this group. And, after working for 30 years, a lot of us (not me currently) have made it to the point where our incomes knock us out of a subsidy. A couple who has worked all their lives to get to a combined income of $60,000 (subsidy for a couple ends at $58,280) will be taking a hit if they have to add a premium of $14,400 a year to their expenses. There are also not a lot of years left to try to scrape up money for retirement after many watched their savings wiped out in the crash and many lost their jobs as companies like to lay off their older workers whose salaries are a little higher due to having a lot of time with their companies. Not saying every age group doesn't have their issues but the problem here is people trying to figure out how to survive their later years without winding up eating cat food. One option is to keep working if we're able but then that keeps jobs tied up that younger workers need right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. I fully understand that and totally agree with you
I'm just trying to point out that this will hurt all kinds of age groups, although people over 50 in many cases will take the hardest blow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Thanks. There are people in all groups who will take a hit
I believed the Medicare expansion would have helped everyone. It would have helped a lot of us by being a lower premium in many cases than what we see with private insurance companies ($800 for a couple as opposed to $1200) and it would have allowed some to retire a little earlier (there are some in this age group who have some retirement funds left) who are continuing to work to keep their health insurance until they can get Medicare. Hell, even lowering the age to 62 might have opened some jobs. People can take a lower SS payment and retire at 62 but they still have 3 years to wait for Medicare.

Let's write to the President. We could do Medicare expansion as part of a jobs' bill. Lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #22
47. Sadly, I think the transfer of our "wealth" is the point. They want it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-27-10 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #47
59. it is *exactly* the point. as has been the point of most recent financial & political machinations
wealth is being concentrated/harvested.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #14
50. thanks for pointing all this out - lot of misconceptions out there


:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #8
48. Not if they have any open option to be insured on their own
So if that younger person, working full time, has expensive insurance available through employment, they can not simply remain on the parents. They can stay on the parents if the parents want them to and if they have no option of obtaining insurance on their own. They can not take the parent's plan over the employer's plan just because it is cheaper or better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
galileoreloaded Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
17. Buzz Buzz little worker bee!!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
9. Perhaps payback for the "excesses of the 60s and 70s" There is one thing we know about Conservatives
They hold grudges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #9
19. We should be a huge group of consumers of all sorts of products
If we have to pay rising insurance premiums along with higher deductibles and co-pays then we can't buy other goods. Small businesses get hurt by this in the long run.

So the next generations who are trying to start businesses or work in retail are taking it in the shorts, too. The domino effect isn't fair to them either as the economy becomes lopsided.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. Absolutely - and plenty of evidence single-payer would help businesses small-medium-even large
and most definitely help them HIRE people in their late-forties and up without the penalty of insuring them at higher premiums. Businesses, citizens, the economy and local/county/state governments would all benefit HOWEVER the corporate (in this case insurance) sector would not, so we aren't allowed to even consider it.

There is the added advantage of gutting the economy so that it can be remade "free" of government oversight and entitlements (other than taxpayer funded but privately run without oversight police and military of course) and you can't do that by actually aiding it.
See New Orleans, Haiti, Indonesia, Iraq, Afghanistan for real world in-progress examples.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. Agreed
Even Obama spoke of the Health Care issue in a holistic way when he said it was key to getting the economy back on a healthy track. So it's more than disappointing when in the face of having the votes in the Senate, he pivoted away from supporting some form of a public option, except for the subsidies of insurance premiums.

That's presuming that the Senators who supported the Bennet letter were honest. Time will tell if that was real or smoke and mirrors. Right now, as I type this, David Sirota is delivering a petition signed by over 30k people to Senator Michael Bennet's office in Denver demanding that he offer a Public Option amendment to the Reconciliation bill. Since the House already voted for such, there's no reason to refrain from an amendment.

On his radio show this morning, Sirota pointed out that this whole duck and sway by Congress over this issue is how Congress deceives the public. He said that he worked in the House for five years and has experience working in the Appropriations Committee. He's sure that this is what's going on right now and he aims to corner Bennet and force the truth. I hope they cover Sirota on the local news today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Sirota has a noble spirit, bless him.
Most of our side on the other hand aimed for mediocre and cheered themselves wildly when they achieved it. And when I say mediocre I am being very generous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
10. My parents...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joe black Donating Member (514 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
15. Thank you.
I'm in that boat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
18. Thank you.
I never thought it would be like this. Twenty years ago we thought we would be more comfortable at this age. But shit happens and it doesn't always work out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
20. I think you can extend sympathy for those in their late 40's into 50s
whose retirement accounts have been wiped out and who have little time to recoup. Ditto the young folks whose job opportunities have never been worst.

It sucks for all of us right now. Sacrifice is forced on ALL of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #20
36. Indeed. The age at which ageism kicks in seems to be dropping like a rock n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northernlights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
21. thank you for thinking of my group
I'm 56. My career was wiped out in the years following the high tech crash. Instead of being in my peak earning years, I was forced to live off my retirement funds. I now have no retirement funds, took on 20K in debt re-training for a new career, am "fortunate" to have found a crappy, low pay parttime job that works (for the moment) around my re-education.

I am, fortunately, healthy. I eat mostly healthy foods, get plenty of exercise, and have pretty good genes in the physical health arena.

But at this point, I see no retirement for me. My student loans were unexpectedly cut off halfway through the program, I have no idea how I'm going to finish it (especially the 5 months of clinical training, similar to a residency full time w/out pay) and can't afford to pay off the student loans unless I do finish it.

Fortunately I own my home outright, but am unable so far to sell it to "downsize" to a lower cost location and pay off the student debt.

No chance at this point of re-saving for retirement, and no trust that I won't be robbed of it all a 2nd time anyway. I expect to work at either a better or crappier job until I keel over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
23. Thank you for the support. A crash like this one 10 years before retirement
is not a good thing. Many of us who are able will now be working quite a few years beyond what we had planned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
27. Medicare should be immediately extended to this age group,
especially to the unemployed in this group, not as Health Care Reform but Emergency Aid.
The potential for "re-employment" in this age group is virtually ZERO.

This would also allow many in this group who might wish to retire early, but can't due to lack of affordable Health Insurance. Early retirement would open job opportunities for younger Americans.

I know many in this age group who would love to "retire" early and begin small businesses or small farms if they had access to Medicare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
33. Im 59 Ill dump my insurance if it goes up
and F this bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
34. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
35. Jeezus H Keeerist! Tell me about it!
I've been figuratively screaming about this for the last eight months on DU and elsewhere, and all I get is apologists for official support of age rating permanetly carved is stone. It has to be OK beacuse the insurance companies were already doing it, and we ought to be satisfied with them limited to doing a bit less of it. To all who support that viewpoint FUCK YOU STRAIGHT TO HELL!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unc70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #35
42. I and fellow Boomers get the blame and the short end, again
I have ranted too much already (see journal and archives), but it still sucks that Boomers are getting hit again while often being blamed for problems that are not theirs or of their making. (BTW our leadership is still older than Boomers (e.g. Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer -- all 70+) with a few exceptions too young to be Boomers (e.g. Obama).

I hope I can make it four years until Medicare; pre-existing condition (cancer), trying to get into state's high-risk pool.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 03:41 AM
Response to Reply #42
46. Obama's a "Boomer"
He was born in the 1946-64 "Boomer" era.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unc70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-27-10 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #46
56. Here is why Obama is not a Boomer
The Census Bureau definition (1946-1964) is not a cultural definition of the population group. More-realistic population cohort definitions based on cultural and shared events shift it a little earlier, typically something like 1943-1960. Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, was more a Boomer than is her son. She was born Nov 29, 1942. Almost no one whose mother was born during or after WWII should be thought of as a Boomer.

Early Boomers vividly remember the assassination of JFK, all remember MLK and RFK. Obama does not.

I have posted a little about all this before, have a longer unpublished article I will dig out and add to my journal.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-27-10 02:55 AM
Response to Reply #56
57. There is a big difference between what early Boomers and late Boomers
remember.

You wrote: "Early Boomers vividly remember the assassination of JFK, all remember MLK and RFK. Obama does not."

Of course they would vividly remember such things, since the early Boomers were all of school age by 1963. But that doesn't mean that Obama is not a "Boomer" because he doesn't remember those things. And Obama wasn't even living in the US at the time of the MLK and JFK assassinations, so it is not like he was exposed to media saturation about these events the way kids in the US were. I myself don't remember the MLK assassination-- I didn't find out about it until nearly a year later, when it was depicted in a set of US history books that I had received for Christmas 1968. But I remember the two Kennedy assassinations, including the TV commentators talking about the caisson carrying the body of the late President in 1963. And I remember parents and siblings of friends talking about Bobby Kennedy, and that fateful June morning when I went to a friend's house and everyone was in shock over Bobby's death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
secondwind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 06:52 AM
Response to Original message
38. 63 yrs old here. Defying the odds, by dropping my mandated health insurance in MA

this past autumn. If I get sick or need real help, then I'll just have to pay the back premiums that were not paid. Tired of paying 600/mo for nothing, I go to doctors in the Dominican Republic who are excellent.

I have 1-1/2 yrs to go! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 07:04 AM
Response to Original message
39. Don't act so burned up. We got the real McCoy in health care reform. Yes we did!
Go Team!!!


Yay!!!!!



:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 07:08 AM
Response to Original message
40. There's not much change for us.
It's not that I demand anything in a selfish manner. I have no problems with things that improve other people's lives. It's just consideration of our situation is not a priority with big insurance or the politicians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shimmergal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
41. Actually, I think if the govt.
has to subsidize insurance for millions of 50+ people at 3 x a halfway reasonable price, there'll be rebellion WITHIN CONGRESS because of the cost factor.

If we're lucky, it'll take the form of "Why not let them into Medicare?"

But there needs to be some public-interest lobbying group now to help them see this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. Isn't the amount of subsidy based on income and not premium?
That's my worry, being in that 300% age group. It seems the people who need medical care the most - older Americans and those with pre-existing conditions - are the ones being harmed by this bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
44. yup That would be my hubsand and I
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
49. "This is why the effects of this law should have kicked in sooner or immediately and not put off in
stages"

i concur
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
51. Not all younger people are necessarily healthy.
Edited on Fri Mar-26-10 10:15 AM by Jennicut
And not all older people are unhealthy. I am already on insulin for diabetes and take Lipitor at 34. I don't disagree with the entire OP, just wanted to point that out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-26-10 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
53. my hubby worked for one company for approx. thirty years
Many managers who were over fifty years old were laid off. For the past six years, we've watched our 401k diminish--he is one of the lucky ones who will still get a pension if he reaches 62 (they quit offering pensions for the younger employees). He finally has found a job that pays way less than what he once made (and I haven't been able to find a job). For the first time in my life, I'm insecure about getting a job, and I'm starting to think it's because of my age--I'm in my fifties. Anyway, if the bill allows the insurance industry to charge up to 300% for age, then we are basically screwed.

When congress even made the suggestion of offering medicare for those who were fifty-five and over, I was giddy. Now, I think it was a pipe dream-that dream lasted less than a week. For us, this bill may prove to be a nightmare-time will tell. But, I know this bill makes a corrupt industry even more powerful, and gives them even more influence with Washington-so, I don't see how it's a step closer to any form of public health care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-27-10 03:54 AM
Response to Original message
58. What boomers have had "stolen" from them will fall to their kids to help make up..
Parents of boomers (for the most part) were able to partake of the fullest of benefits, so many of us older boomers did not have to help all that much, unless our parents outlived the actuarial tables...but unless ill-health takes us, many boomers will be faced with having to ask for help from their kids...

the goal of every person should be to raise self sufficient children and to age with little assistance needed..if each generation can adequately fund their own needs, the whole society clips along nicely, but whenever one stumbles, it falls to family members to help out, and all the help given to elderly, is help that will not be there to launch the next generation.. It's almost impossible to "make up"..

If there are teens in the household, and Grandma & Grandpa need financial help, there will be less money for those kids when they need to think about schooling or even getting help to try and move out..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-27-10 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #58
60. A lot of those kids aren't going to have the means to help. And some aren't going to have the will.
It's a multigenerational clusterfuck.

The top 10% will generally do fine.

The rest -- good luck.

I'm glad I don't have kids.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Oct 23rd 2017, 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC