[Dems_R_Losers]

We have to start means testing. My parents are 85 and 87, have more money in the bank than any of their children and a house that is paid for, and yet they are getting Medicare and Social Security. They have received far more in benefits than what my dad paid in before he retired. Medicare should be abolished and only Medicaid available to seniors who cannot afford private health insurance.

[From many - one.]

One solution I rarely see mentioned is encouraging seniors to work. I’m approaching 70 and you couldn’t pay me to give up my work, I like it too much.

Able-bodied people should not spend from 65-85 sitting alone at home getting depressed.

Since it’s mostly women, maybe they can do childcare for their own grandkids, get paid and be part of the contributing economy.

Another is to encourage in-home care for granny by family members. Some type of compensation for the family caretaker would be needed, but less than for nursing homes or hired help.

[Alberta's Child]

The U.S. has already put in place two key measures that will ultimately play a very large role in "entitlement reform." The interesting angle to the story is that most people don't recognize them -- and that's the way it's supposed to be (since we're dealing with a populace whose delusional expectations are the heart of the problem here). These two items are as follows:

1. Engage in an orchestrated long-term strategy to under-report currency inflation in the U.S., thereby reducing the "real" growth of entitlement spending even as people are provided cost-of-living increases that supposedly protect them from inflation.

2. Tie the U.S. currency to that of a large foreign country where workers are paid near-slave wages (by U.S. standards) and where Third World environmental/legal standards prevail. This enables U.S. consumers to effectively prop up their standard of living even as the U.S. dollar declines against other world currencies and U.S. workers pay an ever-increasing tax burden to support these massive entitlement programs.

[steel_resolve]

Looking on the (sort of) bright side, entitlement can’t continue forever. The end game is an empty treasury. At some point, benefits will be reduced. They might not get reduced as much as we might like, but reduced they will be.

[qam1]

Xer Ping

Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.

Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.

[redpoll]

>>>Senior care should not be Job 1 of the federal government. We need to rethink the entire models of entitlements, and we need to start that process now.<<<

Let me be the snotty parent here and point out the Constitution LIMITS government, and this is just one of dozens of consequences which are taking place after allowing the government to exceed its authority.

I’m going to be a senior myself in a few years, but I can’t find anything in the Constitution addressing seniors, building Little League fields, medical care, helping teenage girls cross their legs on a date, giving me a check to help my mortgage crisis, telling me what to teach high school students, or any of the other thousands of little things that the government does which are not specifically enumerated powers.

It makes sense that the system will eventually break. If it breaks when I’m in my 70s and 80s, I’ll be pissed, but I’ll also tell anyone who listens that it was inevitable.

[VOA]

bump