Posted on 06/17/2015 10:38:47 AM PDT by BradtotheBone
Republicans will risk political pushback to put entitlement programs on the agenda during the presidential election.
Some changes are in the wind for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid—entitlement programs that account for 45% of the federal government’s payouts.
Many of the changes are still years away. But some of them will start next year, smack in the middle of the presidential election campaign, forcing candidates to address issues that they and their advisers generally try to steer clear of when they’re running.
Kicking off the rare election-year debate: a move to rescue the Social Security disability fund image: http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png before 20% cuts in monthly payments need to be made (recipients are people unable to work because of illness or injury). Congress will find a solution before money runs short in fall 2016. Tighter eligibility standards are likely to be added as a condition of more money being pumped into the fund.
A less visible change with a broader effect will come with Medicare’s emphasis on value over volume. By the end of 2016, 30% of Medicare payments to providers will be value based. By 2019, that figure will jump to 50%.
Examples of value pricing: A single price for all care that is tied to one medical event, such as heart bypass surgery. And reduced payments to hospitals that have high rates.
The shift bears watching, since Medicare is the largest health insurance provider in the United States and other insurers are generally quick to follow its lead.
(Excerpt) Read more at kiplinger.com ...
Both of these steps will add a few months of solvency to social security, but they will "feel good."
Hope so. Gets real frustrating interviewing clients at a local food/clothing/etc bank when they're telling me they are on SSDI due to a "bad back" or "frequent headaches."
They are ripping us off to the tune of $750-850 every month. Plus they're on food stamps and the "lucky" ones are living in tax payer supplied government housing.
All of those "benefits" easily add to $2000/month or more.
Of course. Money we could have invested somewhere else.
But you would be surprised the the number of people who don’t know how all of this works and think they have “paid” into the system and it’s all waiting for them.
I think the Roth is the only variation that isn't supposed to be taxed upon withdraw.
Yup! I “gots” one of them living next door to me, too.
Receiving disability but can certainly put in a day long job with the yard, washing cars, etc, etc..!
>> they will “feel good.”
Unless you are one of the lucky ones that paid in your whole life and then get gypped out of your SS payments. That won’t feel so good.
Agree 100%. Medicaid is an entitlement. Medicare and Social Security were paid for as we were working. No way can they be considered an entitlement.
I don’t know about yours but MY SS is NOT entitlement, I worked hard to secure it. I resent those that call it that.
They don’t count. They are mostly white, rich and old and can easily be outvoted. Welcome to the Brave New World.
More likely we’ll see more discussion on that ...
Oh...what was it called where they take your 401K and roll it into some sort of government fund?
From 2008: Reports have surfaced in recent days over House Democrat attempts to make significant changes to 401(k) plans in our country. They first want to remove the tax break we currently receive by contributing funds to a 401(k) plan. Then, they wish to enroll everyone into a government run retirement plan where you would be required to put away 5% of your income to earn a 3% return. Let’s look at why this is likely to happen.
First, there are two reasons why I think that this is going to happen (assuming Obama is elected President).
http://20smoney.com/2008/10/28/should-government-take-over-your-401k/
The Democrats Want Your 401(k)
October 28, 2008
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: George Miller, who runs a congressional committee, Democrat in California, came out with the first notion of just getting rid of your being able to deduct for your income your contribution to your 401(k), that the government is “losing” $80 billion and we can’t afford lose that so they want to take that away. Then they had a hearing last week where a professor from the New School for Social Research, a professor of economics, Teresa Ghilarducci, she appeared and said: I’ve got a better plan. What we want to do, we want to take your 401(k) at its August level, before the crash. We’ll give you that equivalent and put it in your Social Security account, essentially, and we’re going to invest that money that we take from your retirement account, your 401(k), at its August level. We’re going to buy government bonds with it, which will guarantee you 3% — and then we will require that you put 5% of your pay into your 401(k) although it’s not yours anymore. The government owns it.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/10/28/the_democrats_want_your_401_k
Details: The Plan to Steal Your 401(k)
November 29, 2012
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/11/29/details_the_plan_to_steal_your_401_k
But they’re not the only one. From November 26th, a story from the Atlantic Monthly with the headline: “The 401(k) Is a $240 Billion Waste.” The Atlantic piece is about the same study, a Danish study, that TIME Magazine mentions. They think it’s a great idea to do away with the tax deduction because it’s basically only the rich. Anybody over $150 grand this matters. They’re rich. It’s not right, it’s not fair that those people should have a tax deduction, that the poor don’t. Everything’s been done on the backs of the poor since this country was founded. Do you realize the poor used to have homes on the beach and everything, but they got taken away from ‘em.
Basically, your problem is in thinking that the government “promised” you anything.
The minute you receive one dollar more, it starts becoming welfare.
Haha, no, and since I was born in the mid-1970’s it doesn’t matter too much. I think I regret getting a Social Security number for my son though. Could it be that SS# is the real mark of the beast? :)
Kiplinger hates Republicans. Really. Wouldn’t trust anything they say.
Nah, I don’t think SSN is the mark of the Beast. Remember, the Apocalypse is going to be world-wide, so something just issued to Americans doesn’t fit the bill.
Reward the caregivers for doing shoddy, cheap work? That'll save money.
Solution....don't get sick.
“Entitlement/entitled” has come to mean what the word doesn't mean. The real meaning of “entitlement/entitled” means you paid money in and are entitled to get it back - it's yours.
“Entitlement/entitled” meaning has been bastardized to now mean, “Free From The Government”. People on Social Security retirement benefits are now looked down upon as though they are bankrupting the government by taking "free" money.
I get my deceased husband's Social Security retirement amount that he paid for all his working life and he was with the same company for 35 years. The government gets to keep the money I paid into Social Security since his retirement amount was more than mine. I didn't get a note from the government thanking me for my amount they got to keep.
I am disgusted that some say I am receiving an “entitlement” of “free money” from the government.
I know a guy who did the lawn maintenance at a University here in NC. He got disability because of his allergies. After he applied and started receiving disability he opened up a drum roll......lawn care business.
It should be ‘waiting’ for them.
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.