Raise the Medicare age

Raise the Medicare age

There are 45 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Feb 7, 2010, titled Raise the Medicare age. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

As a 62-year-old grandfather looking out for my progeny, I am appalled by the attitude of some seniors concerning Medicare.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Observer

Minneapolis, MN

#1 Feb 8, 2010

“ Impulsive, bone in her teeth”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#2 Feb 8, 2010
Interesting comment. Glad you're in a posotion to afford it. many are not. Just like that ass Reagan raised the retirement age, it only hurts when you think about it.
As to your prodigy, well perhaps they should get better paying work. Better still, maybe our gov should strive to keep jobs here, and not import everything.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#3 Feb 8, 2010
/wow, must be liberal day for the Press!
We don't have to be smarter than the rodents, we just need a bigger bat.
We spent a larger percentage of our GDP for defense under JFK than we do now! You have to remember we protect the entire free world not just us.

“REUNITE GONDWANALAND!”

Since: Jun 08

Woodbury

#4 Feb 8, 2010
Dave Racer suggests we "ask Congress to increase the Medicare eligibility age, perhaps to 68 or 70. Use your own resources to pay your health care bills, instead of robbing future generations."
I wonder how many people reach the age of 65 without any preexisting health conditions. For people with preexisting conditions - heart disease, asthma, any kind of cancer, even easily treated skin cancers, arthritis, back problems - purchasing health insurance can be virtually impossible, and paying for health care out of pocket is an option only for the very wealthy. Medicare is the only way many older people can get access to health care. Raising the Medicare eligibility age will give many older people a difficult choice - either delay retirement (if you have a job that provides health insurance) or go without needed health care.
Of course, comprehensive health care reform would make health care available to people with preexisting conditions - I wonder what Mr. Racer thinks of that.
Bob the Bilderberg

Saint Paul, MN

#5 Feb 8, 2010
If Dave Racer of St. Paul had ever noticed his pay stub he'd see that he pays over $100 a month for that Medicare, just like he would for any insurance premium. Only we are paying that insurance premium for over 45 years without ever benefitting from it.

Hey Dave: save your rightious indignation for a real cause, like benefits to people who didn't pay for them.
Gndydncr

Rochester, MN

#6 Feb 8, 2010
Darwinian wrote:
Dave Racer suggests we "ask Congress to increase the Medicare eligibility age, perhaps to 68 or 70. Use your own resources to pay your health care bills, instead of robbing future generations."
I wonder how many people reach the age of 65 without any preexisting health conditions. For people with preexisting conditions - heart disease, asthma, any kind of cancer, even easily treated skin cancers, arthritis, back problems - purchasing health insurance can be virtually impossible, and paying for health care out of pocket is an option only for the very wealthy. Medicare is the only way many older people can get access to health care. Raising the Medicare eligibility age will give many older people a difficult choice - either delay retirement (if you have a job that provides health insurance) or go without needed health care.
Of course, comprehensive health care reform would make health care available to people with preexisting conditions - I wonder what Mr. Racer thinks of that.
Heaven forbid we should ever ask anyone to make difficult choices.
Gndydncr

Rochester, MN

#7 Feb 8, 2010
Darwinian wrote:
Dave Racer suggests we "ask Congress to increase the Medicare eligibility age, perhaps to 68 or 70. Use your own resources to pay your health care bills, instead of robbing future generations."
I wonder how many people reach the age of 65 without any preexisting health conditions. For people with preexisting conditions - heart disease, asthma, any kind of cancer, even easily treated skin cancers, arthritis, back problems - purchasing health insurance can be virtually impossible, and paying for health care out of pocket is an option only for the very wealthy. Medicare is the only way many older people can get access to health care. Raising the Medicare eligibility age will give many older people a difficult choice - either delay retirement (if you have a job that provides health insurance) or go without needed health care.
Of course, comprehensive health care reform would make health care available to people with preexisting conditions - I wonder what Mr. Racer thinks of that.
Pre-existing conditions is obviously a concern for you. Then how about having a discussion and modification on that point alone rather than turning the entire health care industry on its head and putting into government hands. I note that you did not take the letter writer to task on Medicare going bankrupt and yet you seem okay to put everyone, not just seniors, into a system where those that are running it don't know what they're doing. Meanwhile, back to pre-existing conditions. There has to be some give and take between buyers and sellers. If a person has proof that they have been covered under a health plan, without interruption, since before the current condition existed, then they should not be denied coverage with a new carrier. There can be data bases and laws put into place that can assure that. Know this; if you require carriers to take on all comers not matter what, either you or your employer, either directly to the carriers or indirectly through taxes, will have to carry the load for everybody who doesn't. ALL health care costs have to be paid by people because neither corporations nor the government will - both of them pass it on to people in either higher prices at the check out or higher taxes from the paycheck.
Gndydncr

Rochester, MN

#8 Feb 8, 2010
Bob the Bilderberg wrote:
If Dave Racer of St. Paul had ever noticed his pay stub he'd see that he pays over $100 a month for that Medicare, just like he would for any insurance premium. Only we are paying that insurance premium for over 45 years without ever benefitting from it.
Hey Dave: save your rightious indignation for a real cause, like benefits to people who didn't pay for them.
At over $100 a month for medicare at 1.45%, Dave Racer would have to earn over $83,750 a year. Do you know Dave? Does he really make that much?
Marge Cullen

Minneapolis, MN

#9 Feb 8, 2010
There is always fat and waste that can be trimmed in any budget. Defense department budgets should receive the same scrutiny as any other department of our government and should not be immune from legitimate cuts in unnecessary, wasteful spending.

Paul G. Jaehnert, Vadnais Heights

I would love to see no war but I know that will never happen. But why are we paying contractors exorbant amounts of money while starving our soldiers and their families? I can guess why but we should be asking our government for an answer and change.

“REUNITE GONDWANALAND!”

Since: Jun 08

Woodbury

#10 Feb 8, 2010
Gndydncr wrote:
<quoted text>
Pre-existing conditions is obviously a concern for you. Then how about having a discussion and modification on that point alone rather than turning the entire health care industry on its head and putting into government hands. I note that you did not take the letter writer to task on Medicare going bankrupt and yet you seem okay to put everyone, not just seniors, into a system where those that are running it don't know what they're doing. Meanwhile, back to pre-existing conditions. There has to be some give and take between buyers and sellers. If a person has proof that they have been covered under a health plan, without interruption, since before the current condition existed, then they should not be denied coverage with a new carrier. There can be data bases and laws put into place that can assure that. Know this; if you require carriers to take on all comers not matter what, either you or your employer, either directly to the carriers or indirectly through taxes, will have to carry the load for everybody who doesn't. ALL health care costs have to be paid by people because neither corporations nor the government will - both of them pass it on to people in either higher prices at the check out or higher taxes from the paycheck.
Medicare is going bankrupt for two reasons: the skyrocketing cost of health care, and the fact that Medicare covers only the elderly, so it doesn't have a broad and varied risk pool. This is the risk pool that private insurers refuse to cover, unless subsidized by the government.
As for requiring insurers to cover preexisting conditions, you have to have a mechanism to prevent people from gaming the system, putting off buying insurance until they actually need it - that's why a mandate is necessary.

“Celebrate Liberty and Freedom”

Since: Sep 09

Mpls

#12 Feb 8, 2010
Thank God Obamacare failed and we did not let this admin do all this rationing
Gndydncr

Rochester, MN

#13 Feb 8, 2010
Darwinian wrote:
<quoted text>
Medicare is going bankrupt for two reasons: the skyrocketing cost of health care, and the fact that Medicare covers only the elderly, so it doesn't have a broad and varied risk pool. This is the risk pool that private insurers refuse to cover, unless subsidized by the government.
As for requiring insurers to cover preexisting conditions, you have to have a mechanism to prevent people from gaming the system, putting off buying insurance until they actually need it - that's why a mandate is necessary.
A mandate on who to do what?
wjh

Saint Paul, MN

#14 Feb 8, 2010
Gndydncr wrote:
<quoted text>A mandate on who to do what?
I guess to subsidize people with preexisting conditions.

Talk about gaming the system.

Using that logic, maybe auto insurance companies should stop discriminating against people with bad driving records so we all pay the same high premiums?
Gndydncr

Minneapolis, MN

#15 Feb 8, 2010
wjh wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess to subsidize people with preexisting conditions.
Talk about gaming the system.
Using that logic, maybe auto insurance companies should stop discriminating against people with bad driving records so we all pay the same high premiums?
Yup. And don't buy insurance until you have an accident.

“ Impulsive, bone in her teeth”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#16 Feb 9, 2010
Gndydncr wrote:
<quoted text>
Pre-existing conditions is obviously a concern for you. Then how about having a discussion and modification on that point alone rather than turning the entire health care industry on its head and putting into government hands. I note that you did not take the letter writer to task on Medicare going bankrupt and yet you seem okay to put everyone, not just seniors, into a system where those that are running it don't know what they're doing. Meanwhile, back to pre-existing conditions. There has to be some give and take between buyers and sellers. If a person has proof that they have been covered under a health plan, without interruption, since before the current condition existed, then they should not be denied coverage with a new carrier. There can be data bases and laws put into place that can assure that. Know this; if you require carriers to take on all comers not matter what, either you or your employer, either directly to the carriers or indirectly through taxes, will have to carry the load for everybody who doesn't. ALL health care costs have to be paid by people because neither corporations nor the government will - both of them pass it on to people in either higher prices at the check out or higher taxes from the paycheck.
You pretty much hit the nail on the head there,pal.
The only thing I see lowering costs would be to limit the amount healthcare providers charge.That goes against the very grain of the american system. But ... if the cost was lower,more could afford it. I'm thinking that selling more policies at reduced cost would off-set selling a few at a higher rate.
Peter

Houston, TX

#17 Feb 9, 2010
Darwinian wrote:
<quoted text>
Medicare is going bankrupt for two reasons: the skyrocketing cost of health care, and the fact that Medicare covers only the elderly, so it doesn't have a broad and varied risk pool. This is the risk pool that private insurers refuse to cover, unless subsidized by the government.
As for requiring insurers to cover preexisting conditions, you have to have a mechanism to prevent people from gaming the system, putting off buying insurance until they actually need it - that's why a mandate is necessary.
Add this to the stack of things you don't understand about healthcare. Millions and millions of people are on Medicare. That's broad enough. What the liberals mean when they say not "broad enough" is that it doesn't have "access enough" to the wallets of younger people. The liberal dream is to suck young people into the program and then to overcharge them for insurance thereby making it appear that they actually accomplished something. The failed healthcare bill capped differences in rates between the young and old for this very purpose. One can almost hear them giggling as they bury a huge tax into young peoples' premiums. Try again.

Medicare is a ponzi scheme draining young people for future benefits that won't materialize. Older people should give back benefits now turning the investment of their lives into merely a fantastic deal. That's the least the owe their grandchildren. Remember them?
What happiness

Sacramento, CA

#18 Feb 9, 2010
My money says Dave Racer is the first in line to complain about a too small increase in his other entitlement..... Social Security.
If Congress had any brass pendulous items, they would cap ALL benefits received to a fixed formula based on the amount the individual paid in, and end the ponzi scheme currently in place.
Gndydncr

Rochester, MN

#19 Feb 9, 2010
Ed Teach wrote:
<quoted text>
You pretty much hit the nail on the head there,pal.
The only thing I see lowering costs would be to limit the amount healthcare providers charge.That goes against the very grain of the american system. But ... if the cost was lower,more could afford it. I'm thinking that selling more policies at reduced cost would off-set selling a few at a higher rate.
As far as lowering the cost of healthcare is concerned, my point of attack would be tort reform. Whenever tort reform is mentioned, liberals will deny the affect it has claiming that the amount of money awarded in lawsuits doesn't really amount to that much -- and they may be right. However, what I believe may be overlooked is the whole battery of unnecessary (maybe even downright frivolous) tests that physicians prescribe in a CYA move -- health insurance has to pay for them too.

With that being said, and with congress and legislatures comprised mostly of lawyers, tort reform is highly unlikely because representatives and senators aren't going to endanger the potential revenue of their bretheran. That is why I would favor a law/amendment prohibiting lawyers from running for offices where laws are made and passed on the basis that in constitutes a conflict of interest -- but that's a whole other discussion.
Andy

San Francisco, CA

#20 Feb 9, 2010
Ed Teach wrote:
Interesting comment. Glad you're in a posotion to afford it. many are not. Just like that ass Reagan raised the retirement age, it only hurts when you think about it.
As to your prodigy, well perhaps they should get better paying work. Better still, maybe our gov should strive to keep jobs here, and not import everything.
Hard to believe a teacher thinks the government creates jobs. You should sit in on a civics class...you may learn something so you become capable of teaching instead of spewing.

“REUNITE GONDWANALAND!”

Since: Jun 08

Woodbury

#21 Feb 9, 2010
Peter wrote:
<quoted text>
Add this to the stack of things you don't understand about healthcare. Millions and millions of people are on Medicare. That's broad enough. What the liberals mean when they say not "broad enough" is that it doesn't have "access enough" to the wallets of younger people. The liberal dream is to suck young people into the program and then to overcharge them for insurance thereby making it appear that they actually accomplished something. The failed healthcare bill capped differences in rates between the young and old for this very purpose. One can almost hear them giggling as they bury a huge tax into young peoples' premiums. Try again.
Medicare is a ponzi scheme draining young people for future benefits that won't materialize. Older people should give back benefits now turning the investment of their lives into merely a fantastic deal. That's the least the owe their grandchildren. Remember them?
Peter writes: "Millions and millions of people are on Medicare. That's broad enough."
But, Peter, they are ALL HIGH RISK, so, that is absolutely not a large risk pool. By its nature, insurance is meant to spread the risk; no insurance provider can survive for long, without subsidies, if it covers only high risk clients.
Of course, none of that matters to you, since you, apparently, are all for eliminating Medicare, leaving older Americans (metaphorically, of course) out on the ice floes.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Law Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Clinton On Police Murders: 'Don't Let Hate Infe... 2 hr True Judgement 89
News In 10th convention speech, Bill Clinton faces t... 4 hr Years Of Viagra A... 1
News The Ted Suhl trial, day 4: A problem for the pr... 10 hr Guest 1
News Candidates in hot seat during community brainst... 14 hr Barrett 3
News Johnson: How did he do it? - 4:58 pm updated: 16 hr Nah nah goodbye 2
News Grand jury clears police in Wal-Mart shooting (Sep '14) 16 hr Gun Nut 8
News New Rochelle Middle School Found Dumping Raw Se... 18 hr 333stenbrian 1
More from around the web