My personal solution to this is a "Medicare lien". It's not difficult to compute (A) how much a person has paid into Medicare and (B) how much Medicare has expended on that person's care.
No limits, no rationing, but if (B) exceeds (A) the government gets a claim on the estate for the overage.
My husband is a retired vet. He pays for additional health coverage. He had a stroke a few years ago. He requires ongoing medical care, and will for the rest of his life. Do you honestly think his coverage should be denied when (if) he turns 70? He should die because some bureaucrat evaluates the cost/benefit analysis does not generally indicate the continuation of life functions for a 70 year old unit?
IBTZ deathbot.
The health care law is designed to bankrupt private insurance companies and put them out of business by forcing them to insure ALL pre-existing conditions. That kills all options and forces everyone onto the government's bare-minimum for the masses plan... a plan that cuts the non-protected class off from live-saving treatment at the ripe old age of 70 (that number will most certainly go down in the near future when figures are revisited and budgets are cut).
You'll be a useless eater one day too. So will the people you care about. I hope you remember your callous words here when that day arrives.
The medical system needs to be fixed, but killing people is not the way to do it. Especially people who have served the country in the military.
>> Do old people have an unlimited right to as much younger peoples’ money as it takes in order to keep them alive?
Bogus premise. Such situations are not responsible for our Nation’s woes.
The correct answer is no, of course. However, until we get back to a reasonably private, competition-based health care system, what are we supposed to do? Do we let Mom die of a brain bleed because we are young or middle-aged and she is not?
It’s better to get the government out of medicine completely.