TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Democrats vote 260 billion in Medicare Cuts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Democrats vote 260 billion in Medicare Cuts

post #1 of 100
12/4/09 at 12:07pm
Thread Starter 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091203/..._care_overhaul

Quote:
WASHINGTON – Unflinching on a critical first test, Senate Democrats closed ranks Thursday behind $460 billion in politically risky Medicare cuts at the heart of health care legislation, thwarting a Republican attempt to doom President Barack Obama's sweeping overhaul.

The bid by the bill's critics to reverse cuts to the popular Medicare program failed on a vote of 58-42, drawing the support of two Democratic defectors. Approval would have stripped out money needed to pay for expanding coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans.
Some people say our elderly are not being thrown under the bus. Yeah right.
Reply
post #2 of 100
12/4/09 at 1:23pm
If they're going to have insurance, why would they need medicare?
Reply
post #3 of 100
12/4/09 at 6:20pm
Thread Starter 
Gee and here I thought Obamacare wasn't going to take effect until 2014 and the cuts will take effect in January. Sounds like they are out of luck for FOUR years.

I don't think you get to be on Medicare AND Obamacare. Do you know something I don't?
Reply
post #4 of 100
12/4/09 at 7:28pm
That's what I was asking. If you have one, why would you need the other?
Reply
post #5 of 100
12/4/09 at 7:39pm
Thread Starter 
Medicare is still going to exist, they are just planning on deep cuts. I have said all along, the elderly will get rationed care. I honestly believe that.
Reply
post #6 of 100
12/4/09 at 8:12pm
What's the difference between "rationing" and the current medicare declining to pay for certain treatments and procedures?

Seems to me it's already being rationed.
Reply
post #7 of 100
12/4/09 at 8:33pm
Thread Starter 
It is going to be much, much worse.
Reply
post #8 of 100
12/4/09 at 8:45pm


exactly
Reply
post #9 of 100
12/4/09 at 9:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
It is going to be much, much worse.
That's one opinion from the article, which presents both sides. The other says it won't. Other than basing judgment on who made the statement, how does one determine which is correct?
Reply
post #10 of 100
12/5/09 at 8:31am
No one wants to see that Obama's plan IS to have everyone under the control of the goverment in health care - he's lying all the time and unfortunately too many don't even see this coming.

We will NOT have freedom of choice - you will be told by the government what health care you can have and what you can't!
Reply
post #11 of 100
12/5/09 at 8:22pm
Thread Starter 
260 Billion Dollars in Medicare Cuts starting in January, one short month away. The people receiving Medicare have PAID INTO IT ALL THEIR WORKING LIFE, this isn't just some freebie from the government.

So, now they cut their benefits, what are these people supposed to do? These are people living on fixed incomes, Social Security, there are millions of them and they actually paid into Medicare but they are thrown under the bus so that, in four years, another 46 million younger people that haven't paid squat can get free health care. Does that sound like a fair deal to you? Because it doesn't to me.

The Democrats aguments, I just, today, heard Swift Boat John Kerry say, "but Medicare is broken" Well Senator Kerry, if Medicare is so dang broken, who broke it? And if it is broken what makes you idiots think you can actually have a health care plan that will be a million times bigger and run that any better than you did Medicare?

They are going to bankrupt this nation, mark my words, it is going to happen.

Now Barack is going to run off to Copenhagen and God only knows what kind of thing he will do over there. If Cap and Trade goes through, this economy will not be able to take it.

I truly believe that Barack's ultimate goal is for everything to be under Government control, I really do.
Reply
post #12 of 100
12/5/09 at 9:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
260 Billion Dollars in Medicare Cuts starting in January, one short month away. The people receiving Medicare have PAID INTO IT ALL THEIR WORKING LIFE, this isn't just some freebie from the government..

So, once these people use up the money they've paid into it all their working life, we just cut them off? That would last them, what...2, maybe 3 years of advanced life medical care? Freebie isn't the word, because someone pays for it, but typically, they get far more back than they put in...is that fair? It isn't to someone.
Reply
post #13 of 100
12/6/09 at 8:19pm
Thread Starter 
And some people die and never use any of their benefits.
Also, people that have Medicare, usually, have supplemental insurance.

So, are you in favor of cutting people off because they "use up the money they have paid in" but are in favor of giving free health care to people that have never paid in at all?

It seems to me this is cutting off the seniors to give free health care to younger people.

They still have not addressed what they will do to combat fraud. The Medicare fraud problem is horrendous to the tune of tens of billions of dollars every year. How will it not be worse if this health care plan passes and the people insured will be about a million times more than are on Medicare.

Barack talked a good talk about tort reform but the House Bill makes tort reform illegal and will penalize any states that have it. Nice gift for the personal injury lawyers.

Barack also talked a good talk about make private health insurance more competitive by taking off the restrictions of insurers that keep them from crossing state lines. But nothing has come of it.
Reply
post #14 of 100
12/6/09 at 11:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
And some people die and never use any of their benefits.
Also, people that have Medicare, usually, have supplemental insurance.
Which means there is money available that doesn't belong to the survivors.

Quote:
So, are you in favor of cutting people off because they "use up the money they have paid in" but are in favor of giving free health care to people that have never paid in at all?
Actually, that seemed to be your stance. Are you saying that the US minimum wage work force isn't contributing to Medicare at all?

Quote:
It seems to me this is cutting off the seniors to give free health care to younger people.
Cut off how? The seniors will be covered too. It's quite funny how "passing debt to the younger generation" is such a horrible thing, but leaving that same generation hanging on health care is not an issue at all.

Quote:
They still have not addressed what they will do to combat fraud. The Medicare fraud problem is horrendous to the tune of tens of billions of dollars every year. How will it not be worse if this health care plan passes and the people insured will be about a million times more than are on Medicare.
Well then, it sounds as though there are a lot of seniors that deserve to be cut off. Kick the fraudsters off the program, and there will be plenty of money for everyone else.
Reply
post #15 of 100
12/7/09 at 3:28pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Which means there is money available that doesn't belong to the survivors.

What do you mean?



Actually, that seemed to be your stance. Are you saying that the US minimum wage work force isn't contributing to Medicare at all?

Did I say that? No, I didn't.



Cut off how? The seniors will be covered too. It's quite funny how "passing debt to the younger generation" is such a horrible thing, but leaving that same generation hanging on health care is not an issue at all.

I don't want to leave anyone "hanging on health care".
What I WANT is for the freaking government to ease restrictions and regulations so health care can be more affordable to all.
This isn't rocket science, it doesn't have to be a 2,000 page bill that will bankrupt this country.



Well then, it sounds as though there are a lot of seniors that deserve to be cut off. Kick the fraudsters off the program, and there will be plenty of money for everyone else.
I get it now, ha ha. You may think this is an amusing subject, I assure you it is not.
As you well know the fraud is not from the elderly receiving Medicare benefits, it is the health care professionals billing Medicare fraudulently.
Reply
post #16 of 100
12/7/09 at 11:37pm
Quote:
What do you mean?
You said some people die without using their benefits. It's just like unclaimed funds, after a while it goes back to the government, and they can use it for something else. So there actually is money there they can reclaim.

Quote:
Did I say that? No, I didn't.
Neither did I, yet you asked the same question.


Quote:
I don't want to leave anyone "hanging on health care".
What I WANT is for the freaking government to ease restrictions and regulations so health care can be more affordable to all.
This isn't rocket science, it doesn't have to be a 2,000 page bill that will bankrupt this country.
Affordability is one thing, but it seems that when it comes to benefits, it seems that there are some that feel some are more deserving than others.

By all means, let's decrease regulation. Let's let drug manufacturers use the homeless for test subjects. Let's let them cut that expensive testing in half and release new drugs as soon as they "appear" to be safe. How very Frankenstein'y sounding.


Quote:
I get it now, ha ha. You may think this is an amusing subject, I assure you it is not.
As you well know the fraud is not from the elderly receiving Medicare benefits, it is the health care professionals billing Medicare fraudulently.
As I well know? Oh please, saying the elderly have nothing to do with Medicare fraud is like saying the getaway driver has nothing to do with the bank robbery.

Do you know what you have when criminals become elderly? You have elderly criminals.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/6756271.html

Quote:
“You need a doctor on the payroll to write the scripts and generally get kickback; you need to get patients, who also usually get kickback and sometimes even get some service — like getting their house cleaned,” Morris said
Reply
post #17 of 100
12/8/09 at 5:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
That's what I was asking. If you have one, why would you need the other?
I'm surprised you'd ask that question.

The health insurance reform bill is not supposed to affect those on MediCare at all. That is a separate program. It will still take effect when you're 65. It will still cover everything it covered before. It will still be supported by taxes. MediCare taxes are not being raised. No one is going off MediCare. No one will be excluded from it who turns 65.

This is purely a funding issue. The bill takes almost 1/2 trillion dollars ($460,000,000,000) out of MediCare, supposedly saved by efficiency and fraud elimination, and transfers it to insurance for those who are too young for MediCare.

So, the question of why would someone need MediCare if they already have insurance makes no sense.

Now, you MAY have meant Medicaid, which is essentially government-paid medical insurance for those who can't afford insurance. In the current bill, Medicaid will be greatly expanded and will be available purely on a means-tested rather than a program-connected basis. Right now, Medicaid is available to those who are on AFDC, SSI, Social Security Disability, etc. If this bill passes, anyone making less than a given ratio (I think it's 200%) of the poverty level is automatically eligible for Medicaid, and much of the $460,000,000,000 will be used to supplement Medicaid payments to states.
Reply
post #18 of 100
12/8/09 at 6:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
This is purely a funding issue. The bill takes almost 1/2 trillion dollars ($460,000,000,000) out of MediCare, supposedly saved by efficiency and fraud elimination, and transfers it to insurance for those who are too young for MediCare.
Then what's the problem?
Reply
post #19 of 100
12/8/09 at 3:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Then what's the problem?
If there was really that much fraud and waste, it would make the program solvent if you could eliminate. There isn't, you can't, and the number itself is fraudulent.
Reply
post #20 of 100
12/8/09 at 3:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
If there was really that much fraud and waste, it would make the program solvent if you could eliminate. There isn't, you can't, and the number itself is fraudulent.
Then what is the real number?
Reply
post #21 of 100
12/9/09 at 12:49am
Nobody knows. But these "savings" from waste, fraud, and abuse are in the budget every year, while the costs go up every year. But since Medicare Part D only spends about $50 billion each year, it's going to be very tough to get $46 billion per year out of it in savings, right?
Reply
post #22 of 100
12/9/09 at 1:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
Nobody knows. But these "savings" from waste, fraud, and abuse are in the budget every year, while the costs go up every year. But since Medicare Part D only spends about $50 billion each year, it's going to be very tough to get $46 billion per year out of it in savings, right?
If "nobody knows" the "real" numbers, how is it even remotely possible to claim that the presented numbers are wrong? Or, to know how much money is actually needed for the program?

It seems to me that removing the incentives for fraud (loose money) would be a very logical first step. It would also give those that needed the program very real incentive to blow the whistle on the providers that are fraudsters. They know who they are!

Just because someone didn't plan maid services for cleaning their house and Direct TV into their retirement, doesn't mean that I should have to pay for it for them in the form of their getting kickbacks from crooked health care providers.
Reply
post #23 of 100
12/9/09 at 8:08am
OK, let me put this in small words, so it's easy to understand it.

There are not enough total dollars in Medicare to be able to get that much out of it without making Medicare worse by taking money away from doctors and services away from patients.

Even at the highest guesses, it is not possible for Medicare to have enough waste, fraud, and abuse to make up $460,000,000,000 in the next ten years. This figure is a trick to make it look like they're getting the money from somewhere to pay for what they want to pass. This would assume that over 10% of all Medicare dollars paid out now are waste, fraud, and abuse, and every bit of it could be eliminated. Both of those are ridiculous (and admittedly by the legistlators) and impossible numbers.

In addition, one of the new proposals to get around the "public option" is to lower the Medicare age to 55.
Reply
post #24 of 100
12/9/09 at 8:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
OK, let me put this in small words, so it's easy to understand it.

There are not enough total dollars in Medicare to be able to get that much out of it without making Medicare worse by taking money away from doctors and services away from patients.

Even at the highest guesses, it is not possible for Medicare to have enough waste, fraud, and abuse to make up $460,000,000,000 in the next ten years. This figure is a trick to make it look like they're getting the money from somewhere to pay for what they want to pass. This would assume that over 10% of all Medicare dollars paid out now are waste, fraud, and abuse, and every bit of it could be eliminated. Both of those are ridiculous (and admittedly by the legistlators) and impossible numbers.

In addition, one of the new proposals to get around the "public option" is to lower the Medicare age to 55.
Then the program SHOULD be shut down. It's not a broken system, it's a perfectly functioning mob bank. Why should I let them dump my tax dollars into a system that writes crime into the budget. Tax dollars they are giving <giving> to every provider/patient criminal syndicate that cares to submit a bill for it.
Reply
post #25 of 100
12/9/09 at 8:24am
Are you forgetting that the legislators point to two systems that prove that the government can run health care? They continually point out that Medicare and the VA sytems are the models they wish to emulate.
Reply
post #26 of 100
12/9/09 at 8:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
Are you forgetting that the legislators point to two systems that prove that the government can run health care? They continually point out that Medicare and the VA sytems are the models they wish to emulate.
Once the fraud is dealt with, they would probably be fairly decent systems.
Reply
post #27 of 100
12/9/09 at 8:43am
No expert believes that the fraud in those systems is particularly worse than any insurance system, except to the extent that Medicare largely depends on private insurance companies to detect and eliminate fraud through their own in-house investigations.

I did a quick search and found that virtually every budget for the last 20 years has had a line item of income from elimination of WFA, and the item has grown every year, as well as the line item expenditure for combatting WFA.

And, having a brother who depends on the VA system, I have to say, "Lord, save me from such a system."
Reply
post #28 of 100
12/9/09 at 8:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
No expert believes that the fraud in those systems is particularly worse than any insurance system, except to the extent that Medicare largely depends on private insurance companies to detect and eliminate fraud through their own in-house investigations.

I did a quick search and found that virtually every budget for the last 20 years has had a line item of income from elimination of WFA, and the item has grown every year, as well as the line item expenditure for combatting WFA.

And, having a brother who depends on the VA system, I have to say, "Lord, save me from such a system."
But you also said that "no one knows". So what makes their guesses any more notable than the ones being used here? And if no one knows how much fraud is taking place, then by default they also do not know how much treatment is actually needed. So, how do we know that taking money from the system will actually deprive anyone of anything, other than ill-gotten gains?
Reply
post #29 of 100
12/9/09 at 8:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
And, having a brother who depends on the VA system, I have to say, "Lord, save me from such a system."
My uncle was in the Army and doesn't have any insurance other than access to the VA. One of their adjustments a while back to cut costs or something was to tell him that he had to go up to Portland for everything. He lives in Salem, an hour away in good traffic, and has a heart condition, and he's supposed to drive straight past the perfectly good emergency room at Salem Hospital.

Yeah, applying that kind of "change" to everyone will save money. Toe tags are so much cheaper than treatment.
Reply
post #30 of 100
12/9/09 at 8:55am
I've never had any trouble with the VA myself. Louisville is 110 miles away, Nashville is 55. They let me switch to Nashville, all I had to do was ask.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Democrats vote 260 billion in Medicare Cuts