Posted on 10/03/2009 5:22:22 AM PDT by nc28205
On Sept. 23, Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., introduced H.R. 3631, which would freeze all Part B premiums for one year--including those for couples with incomes over $170,000. It would pay for the $2.8 billion cost by raiding the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund and the Medicare Improvement Fund. This legislation came up the following day and passed the House by a vote of 406 to 18.
Of course, nothing is really paid for here. Federal borrowing will be $2.8 billion higher than it would otherwise be--and all to primarily benefit 2.1 million seniors who could very easily afford to pay slightly higher premiums for their very heavily subsidized Medicare Part B benefits.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Elections matter. Be careful who you vote from now on.
Because seniors continue to demand more and more services that they never paid for. The average ammount of money each individual pays into the system doesn’t cover the tab. And if you read the article you will see that general tax revenues are supposed to make up shortfalls.
Imagine buying government bonds instead...I'd be in damn good shape right now....
No, the previous commentator is right. Benefits paid out to current recipients FAR AND AWAY exceed anyhting they ever paid in, even assuming a real rate of return equal to the market.
“”No, the previous commentator is right””
Get a clue! People pay a monthly premium for Part B Medicare (Original Medicare) and also pay a premium for a supplemental plan or a Medicare Advantage plan if they sign up for one. You have to have Part B and pay for it before you can have either of those alternatives. At this time Part B costs $96.40 per month and goes up each year in relation to the COLA given Social Security recipients. It will go up in 2010 WITHOUT a COLA because someone in DC has decided that the Cost of Living HASN’T GONE UP!
Medicare Advantage plans are on the chopping block to find the $$$ to pay for the proposed healthcare plans. This is supposedly because of the waste and fraud in the Medicare system. That waste and fraud has gone on for 40 years and they are going to tackle that problem NOW.
I worked for 54 years before retiring. How many years do you plan on working?
It will go up in 2010 WITHOUT a COLA because someone in DC has decided that the Cost of Living HASN’T GONE UP!
But, our politicans in D.C. are getting 4.17% increase this year! But, seniors don’t!
You are ignorant about entitlement spending. I suspect you are a senior demanding more government benefits. Social Security and Medicare are generational Ponzi schemes. Early retirees contributed relatively little but received increasing benefit levels. Congress has raised benefit levels many times to buy votes of seniors like yourself demanding higher benefit levels. Congress substantially raised payroll taxes starting in the mid 80s to pay for benefits so the situation will be reversed for most baby boom retirees. They have paid lots of payroll taxes, especially for Social Security. High end earners have paid very large amounts of Medicare taxes since the mid 90s because the earnings cap was lifted.
If you are a baby boom retiree, you have some reasonable justification for feeling ripped off. Otherwise, you are just demanding more welfare.
From a national economic perspective, your position as a baby boom or greatest generation does not matter. Congress has spent excess payroll that should have been saved to support retirees. The ship is sinking from the combined weight of excess government spending. Government spending will be drastically curtailed directly or indirectly. I prefer direct reductions with initiatives to produce such as elimination of Social Security benefits in exchange for opting out of payroll taxes. Indirect reductions are much more likely however. The Democrats will raise taxes (even on the elderly). The value of the dollar will fall leading to inflation and other woes.
A day of reckoning is coming. The combined weight of unfunded liabilities (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, federal pensions, state and local pensions) along with huge increases in other government spending will have a profound impact on the economy.
Dina Titus, D-Nev., introduced H.R. 3631, which would freeze all Part B premiums for one year--including those for couples with incomes over $170,000. It would pay for the $2.8 billion cost by raiding the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund and the Medicare Improvement Fund. This legislation came up the following day and passed the House by a vote of 406 to 18. Of course, nothing is really paid for here. Federal borrowing will be $2.8 billion higher than it would otherwise be--and all to primarily benefit 2.1 million seniors who could very easily afford to pay slightly higher premiums for their very heavily subsidized Medicare Part B benefits.
Unfortunately, most tea baggers are just average citizens and also work they aren’t professional politicians with with full war chests. You have done your part by making freepers aware of this bill and many will act on it.
I will draw you a nice analogy.
If you pay $1,500 a year over 40 years into a fund that is supposed to pay for all of your expenses then at best you would have saved about $180K using a 5% interest rate.
Most people have $1,500 a year deducted from their paychecks/employer match for Medicare savings.
Please tell me how that amount is anywhere close to covering the cost of someone for the last 12-15 years of their life? It isn’t and by law the general tax fund is subsidizing the cost. People who receive subsidies are freeloading off of someone else.
And, insurance is based on an expectations of potential accidents. It is not by its nature a service plan.
Ahhhh, so nice to hear an lightened soul chime in. It matters not what we want since in the end there is no such thing as a free lunch, a credit card with no limit or requirement to pay it back or a magic wand to create $$ out of thin air.
We have a clear case of what happens to all socialistic programs in the end and yet there are people who call themselves conservatives trying to fight for them to continue.
Your attitude is part of the reason we are heading for an economic meltdown. I do not doubt that you feel entitled to the benefits. If you are a recent retiree, you have reasonable justificatition for your feelings.
Your feelings will not change economic reality. The funds to support your retirement and my retirement (in 10 years or so) have already been spent. The ship will capsize from the weight of demands.
Our only hope is for individuals to willingly give up benefits in exchange for lower taxation. For seniors, it is a rotten deal but it is the only deal without sinking the ship.
Didn’t you see the white hair at the tea parties?
A young man sitting next to a senior citizen starts ridiculing the elderly ..."You old guys didn't have anything anything growing up...no TV, no computers, no VCR's, no cell phones..."
The old guy said, "You're right! That's why we invented them."
Your point? Are we supposed to stick trillions of dollars of debts on people that have not even been born yet? That’s rich. Just because our elected officials mismanaged the budget for decades does that justify us ripping off future generations under the arrogant guise that they owe us?
BS
We can print more money which will not only destroy our currency but hasten a broader collapse.
We can rip off another country’s assets but that only gets you so far
We can continue to debt and leave future generations with nothing but bills to pay off
or we can get real and understand that as a nation we haven’t the means to pay for what we promised.
And, anyone who has voted Democrat, supported Bush’s unfunded expansion of Medicare, thought we could have tax cuts while increasing social spending and fighting two wars or demanded more senior benefits without targeting the means to pay for it, STFU.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.