AARP position on Social Security and Medicare is not realistic

cbs ^ | 11/11/2011 | By Steve Vernon

[tobyhill]

AARP recently announced its staunch opposition to any reductions in benefits for seniors, saying, "Our message to the super committee today is clear: No cuts to Medicare or Social Security benefits."

Due to its mission as an advocate for seniors, AARP's position is understandable. But it's hard to imagine the deficit being tamed without some cuts in those programs, given that they account for more than a third of federal spending. Fiscal year 2012 spending on Medicare and Social Security totals $1.2 trillion -- a pretty tough nut to leave intact when you have a $3.7 trillion budget and a $1 trillion deficit.

It's also hard to imagine support among the younger generation for major reductions in entitlement spending on them while exempting seniors, considering the wide gap in wealth between older and younger Americans. According to a recent analysis by the Pew Research Center, the gap in wealth between Americans over age 65 and under age 35 has widened considerably since the 1980s; the median wealth of this older American age group is now 47 times the median household wealth of the younger group, up from a ratio of just 10 to 1 in 1984.

Younger workers might not appreciate cuts in unemployment benefits to preserve Social Security and Medicare benefits. The unemployment rate for Americans age 25 to 34 was 9.5 percent in August, compared to a rate of 6.6 percent for Americans age 55 and over.

[DuncanWaring]

I’m 59 years old.

AARP Delenda Est.

[SECURE AMERICA]

(Due to its mission as an advocate for seniors, AARP’s position is understandable.)

And here I thought their mission was to pimp for the Democrat Political Party!

[Old Retired Army Guy]

Nobody of either party that I know of has proposed cuts for existing Seniors/Recipients. The proposals kicked around would affect future benefits of people under 50 or earlier. The AARP ads are false and misleading as they attempt to scare existing beneficiary’s/seniors. They are nothing more than a blatant extension of the Mediscare tactics employed by Democrats over the last few decades.

[wita]

Due to its mission as an advocate for seniors,

I take serious issue with the statement above,
as well as every other stand this UNPRINCIPLED
agency might take. They are pro AARP, pro left,
pro progressive, pro everything that I am against.
They have never advocated for me.

[bert]

For the record.......

United Healthcare Secure Horizons has a Medicare Advantage plan that is so good and so popular that it was adopted by AARP. The first year is was makketed by both Secure horizons and AARP and generated tremandous confusion. Last year, the plans were marketed as AARP/Secure Horizons. I was going to look for another but was told that although AARP was in the title, it was the old plan and it had been accepted by AARP for marketing to members and was the same as before. AARP membership is not required forthe United Healthcare Mecicare Advantage Complete Plus plans

This year is the same. If looking at medicare plans, do not overlook the United Health care Medicare Advantage plans simply because the AARP name is attached. AARP is one of many sales agents (the largest) but does not administer the plans.

The medicare advantage plans so far have not been effected by Obamacare.

[oh8eleven]

This entire story is just so much BS:

Younger workers might not appreciate cuts in unemployment benefits to preserve Social Security and Medicare benefits.
Like getting back to reality and cutting back to 26 weeks from 99 weeks? More importantly, younger workers haven't
paid for their unemployment checks, while seniors have paid their entire working lives, and continue to pay monthly, for SS and Medicare.

It's also hard to imagine support among the younger generation for major reductions in entitlement spending on them
while exempting seniors, considering the wide gap in wealth between older and younger Americans.
Imagine that, a wide gap in "wealth" between a generation that's worked 50 years to accumulate it vs the newbies in the workforce.

... some may claim that it's not fair to cut Social Security or Medicare benefits, fairness might just have to get trumped by the necessity to reduce the federal deficit.
Sure, you taxed the crap out of us while we worked, spent it (and more), and now you want to take even more retroactively.

Dear Uncle Sam - F U, strong letter to follow.

[oh8eleven]

If looking at medicare plans, do not overlook the United Health care Medicare Advantage plans
Good advice but remember, not all Medicare advantage plans are available in all areas.
Also, many plans have $0 (zero) monthly premiums with great coverage including Part D. How do they do it?
IIRC, the 'gubmint pays then a flat fee for every person who signs up for their plan. Then the insurer tries to keep costs down to make a profit.
You can get more info here,

[Bookwoman]

AARP SUPPORTED Obamanationcare. That is all I have to know about them. I would never be a member and I would never purchase any product they recommended. They do not have my best interests at heart.

[DuncanWaring]

...while seniors have paid their entire working lives, and continue to pay monthly, for SS and Medicare.

Like Ida Mae Fuller, who paid $24 in FICA taxes and collected $22,000?

[ErnBatavia]

Since wifey and I both hit 65 this coming spring, we went to a "California Dept. of Aging" seminar about six weeks ago, and found it quite informative.

There are too many disadvantages to the Advantage Plans for our comfort zone, so we're personally gonna go the all-inclusive Plan F route - the monthly premium for the both of us will be just over $250 which beats the approximate $1000 we're currently paying for a high deductible crappy health plan.

As caregivers for my now late parents, who had Plan F, it became very obvious to us that this might be the way to go....during their many, many hospitalizations and constant medical appointments, I wrote NO medical checks for the approximate four years we were in charge.

[The SISU kid]

Bump for bookmark

[Jmouse007]

AARP the Socialists supporting Obamessiah and the Demicrats had ZERO problem with Obama's Obama DEATH care from robbing 500 BILLION DOLLARS from Social Securities Medicare and Medicade programs to the Eldely because of the BILLIONS of dollars AARP would make selling those very same people " insurance" to cover what Medicare and Medicade no longer covered as a direct result of Obama DEATH care which AARP TOTALLY supported and then AFTER it was signed into law they quickly petitioned Obamessiah for an EXEMPTION which they were granted, so that the wicked "law" they supported and pushed for against the welfare of those they lyingly claim to represent would not affect THEM!

AARP are nothing but Socialist, Democrat slugs and all of their members are as Lennin said: "useful idiots" and dupes! AARP doesn't give a darn about senior citizens. All they care about is USING them to make themselves rich and to further the Socialist, communist plans of the Democratic party. AA

[Condor51]

*** Nobody of either party that I know of has proposed cuts for existing Seniors/Recipients. The proposals kicked around would affect future benefits of people under 50 or earlier. ***

You're 100% right. The 'parties' aren't. But CMS has already decided on their own to cut payments to Doctors.

*** The AARP ads are false and misleading as they attempt to scare existing beneficiary’s/seniors. ***

Usually that's a big YES ( I loathe AARP too). But not in this case. Instead of Medicare, aka: CMS, paying 80%, they now only pay 50% for an Office Visit to my Primary Care Dr. But to Specialists they (CMS) still pays 80%. It is actually cheaper for me now to go see my Orthopedic Surgeon than my GP.

And this is all due to Obama's fricken 'Regulatory Czar', Cass Sunstein. Who Glenn Beck called 'The most dangerous man in America'. And Beck was right. With Sunstein in charge of all Regulations, Obama can bypass Congress.

[bert]

——many plans have $0 (zero) monthly premiums-——
both my wife and myself have plans that in our area have $0 premium and include part D

We are healthy and the out of pocket is less than one of the monthly pay plans of which there are many

I don’t understand why medicare advantage is so badly hated by the democrats

[businessprofessor]

Nobody of either party that I know of has proposed cuts for existing Seniors/Recipients. The proposals kicked around would affect future benefits of people under 50 or earlier. The AARP ads are false and misleading as they attempt to scare existing beneficiary’s/seniors. They are nothing more than a blatant extension of the Mediscare tactics employed by Democrats over the last few decades.

Reductions for anyone under 50 or 55 is political suicide but wide scale reductions are necessary to control federal spending. The idea that SS is sustainable without substantial reductions in boomer retirement benefits is laughable. The problem with SS is the coming wave of retirements with no savings to pay for their retirements.

The left continues to assert the SS is not part of the problem with government spending. They cling to phony government accounting (trust funds and intra government interest payments) to support their arguments. Delusion takes many forms. Reality will bite very hard however.

Likewise, there are lots of Freepers on federal retirement who insist that federal pensions are not part of the problem with excess government spending. Like SS, federal pensions are 100% unfunded. The unfunded liabilities in federal pensions are almost as large as SS. Many Freepers on the federal pension system also assert that federal retirement compensation is modest. This claim is also false, ignoring the full scope of federal retirement compensation.

Unfortunately, federal pensions and SS are just two parts of the crushing wave of government spending. Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, food stamps, student loans, housing assistance, extended unemployment benefits, and many other programs are also unsustainable train wrecks. External forces are going to eventually crush the dollar and the send borrowing costs sharply higher. A Greek style explosion is coming.

[101voodoo]

Correct, you win the Kewpie Doll.

There is one cure for the train wreck which is the SS and Medicare programs and that is privatization beginning with those new in the work force. It will be phased in and no one over a certain age (tbd) will be affected in any way.

It is not if but when it will happen.

[TheOldLady]

Click the Pic               Thank you, JoeProBono

Gary’s Chute Wasn’t Torn by the Shell Jacker! Great Luck!

Follow the Exciting Adventures of Gary the Snail!

Abolish FReepathons -- Go Monthly
If you sign up, a sponsor will donate $10

[oh8eleven]

we're personally gonna go the all-inclusive Plan F route
That's a supplemental plan, rather then an advantage plan.
Nevertheless, it's a good one, and one that I would have opted for if in the market.
Plan F also had a high deductible option IIRC.

[oh8eleven]

Like Ida Mae Fuller, who paid $24 in FICA taxes and collected $22,000?
First of all, you're talking about a sample of one. I don't know who she is, but there are minimum requirements for SS and Medicare.
Second, she probably gamed the system and qualified for SSI ... the new welfare.
Third, you didn't address the issue ... the "poor" young folk who don't feel they should have to give up anything, even if unearned ... i.e. the OWS scumbag mobs.