no disrespect intended ti just strikes me that this is one of those arguments that no one ever changes their opinion on. Right up there with gun control, abortion and capital punishment. I just wanted to add a moment of humour to your debate.
It will be interesting to see whether our posters are actually willing to consider cutting government expenditures- rather than just paying lip service to the idea- when it comes to a program they, or their family members stand to benefit from, now or in the future. This has been the chief stumbling block, in my opinion, in dealing with these issues: few are prepared to give up anything, even hypothetically. The changes I suggested to Medicare coverage- limited coverage for patent medicines, and exclusions for services relating to transplants- are two that I'd be willing to accept, but they are probably not enough to put the program on track, and further limitations of coverage may be necessary. But let's see what the reaction is to these two suggestions, and what other services posters may feel could be cut with significant benefit to the bottom line, while leaving the program as comprehensive as it can be, given the budgetary constraints.
I'm not ignoring you, I have to complete some more tax returns before tomorrow. If I get a chance later today or tomorrow I'll share my ideas.
Wow, man, I totally forgot about that! April 15. No wonder people have got taxes on their minds. Fortunately, for those living abroad, no return is due until June 15. Good luck with all that, it's a busy time, for accountants, and lots of others.
Cost of organ failure There are probably research papers written on the services that could be limited to have the greatest cost saving impact on Medicare, but transplants may, as it turns out, be one of them. I read an article that said $71,000 per year is spent on dialysis of those with bilateral kidney failure before transplantation, $100,000 on transplantation, then $17,000 year after wards on rejection suppression drugs. Kidneys may be among the cheaper transplants. The typical heart transplant appears to cost in the neighborhood of $650,000. __________________ Zackman, I noticed that none of the things you put forward, as recommended, contained any mention of cuts to Medicare expenditures; but, are you, or anybody else out there who considers themselves "fiscally responsible people", willing to consider reducing, where necessary, the coverage provided by Medicare, so as to bring its expenditures down, and put its operations on a solid financial footing, without further raising taxes, which almost everybody agrees are already too high? I've suggested two, so far, limited coverage for patent medicines, and exclusions for services relating to transplants.
Please tell me how a Government Run - Nationalized Healthcare System can be paid for by the entire country when 47% of wage earners DON'T PAY TAXES? Even without Obamacare, the Federal Budget already spends 52% ($1.529 TRILLION) of the federal budget on Social Welfare & Healthcare programs. In other words… Only 154 Million people will pay for all 309 Million US Citizens? Really? For the 154 Million tax payers, do the math and tell me what the tax rate is under the current progressive tax system to support $1.529 TRILLION in expenses plus Obamacare. What do you suppose the tax rate would be on those that DO pay taxes? 40%? 50% 60% 70% Or... Perhaps you might advocate a national sales tax (VAT) like they have in Europe? Please tell me how you propose to pay for "free" healthcare without an excessive and damaging financial burden on half the US population? This is why I believe free market reforms, not Nationalized Healthcare, will bring down Healthcare costs and limit the tax burden on the 53% of tax paying Americans.
I'd certainly advocate and agree with cuts & reforms to Medicare expenditures; in fact, I never said I was against them. Furthermore, go back and read my thread on how $60 billion is stolen from tax payers through Medicare scams every year: http://www.cancuncare.com/forum/free-all/15515-please-dont-read-watch-video-if.html However, you do realize that any politician that does advocate cuts to Medicare/Medicaid won't be a politician for long... Don't you? In reality, once the public gets these types of entitlements it is almost impossible to take them away. No political party, not the Democrats, not the Republicans, have the guts or will to go against the Lobbyists & Special interest groups of the elderly, poor, and big Labor Unions. That is also a great argument oppose increased entitlements before they become law and are put into place! So, yes I'd support cuts & reforms to Medicare/Medicaid. Now please explain why free market reforms vs. a Government takeover won't work to bring down healthcare costs & limit the tax burden on those who actually pay taxes???
That's true, Zackman, and we have to start with ourselves. Can you agree to the two I suggested, on behalf of yourself and your family, for starters? For the moment this is irrelevant because politicians won't be able to cut Medicare expenditures without the support of the American people, starting with us. So far on this forum, no one has stepped forward with support for specific cuts they'd be willing to accept on behalf of themselves and their families. As to your last comment, which is lacking in specificity, I'll supply some of my own: I think that if Medicare were to limit coverage for patent drugs, and exclude coverage for transplants, private insurance companies would see that as an opportunity to offer some kind of Medicare supplemental policies to replace the dropped coverage for those who wished to consider it, could afford it, and were not otherwise ineligible for it. If we accept the limits to coverage I proposed, we will do so knowing some will not be able to get the insurance I'm speaking of. Speaking of those who do, at some point, suffer organ failure, we understand they will die without care, but what we're talking about here is a government program, and reasonable limits of coverage can be set so as to keep its costs within limits Americans generally are willing to pay through their taxes.
Just think of all the money we would save if there was a forced euthanasia program for people over 65 (50 for politicians) Really though, if we would get the heck out of the middle east that is money that could be spent at home... or better yet not spent at all... sure the world will hate us for leaving, but they hate us anyway for staying.... so long as there are extremists and unfriendly governments blowing up markets, things will never get better there. Drug screenings should be mandatory for anyone claiming public assistance... I'm sorry but you shouldn't be able to afford drugs if you are collecting assistance. (this includes alcohol) Public schools should be shielded from civil lawsuits so they can stop spending education money on lawyers and payouts. If there is a serious problem it can be handled in criminal courts. Mandatory minimums should be abolished so that judges can "judge" (imagine that) how much punishment to give out so there are less people in prison and more people working. There should be a freeze on any new government financed construction not deemed absolutely necessary until the deficit is eliminated. Oil and gas exploration should be opened completely so that the US can be a major exporter instead of importer... done in a way to balance environmental impact with practicality. Declaring VAST areas off limits is silly. The US should start wholesaling all of its antiquated military assets to allies rather than maintaining them in reserve for a massive war that will never come. (the real WWIII will be nuclear so all those old fighter jets wont do much good) Do away with foodstamps and direct cash payments for living necessities and operate distribution centers instead. Employ government auditors whose only job is to find fraud. (just a few finds a year per official would likely cover the entire operating costs) Consolidate government offices/agencies that share similar missions. (ie: the 3-letter agencies. ) National sales tax of a few cents on the dollar. (small enough amount that most people wouldn't get too pissy about it...) Restrict foreign aid except in cases of disaster situations. I'm sure there's more I just cant concentrate with the rain pounding outside...
Time indoors Hi, Life, yes the rain is a big distraction, and totally shut down my work, yesterday, but being stuck indoors does give one time to post! I'm getting ready to make another attempt to get to work, now, but I'll enjoy looking over your list when I have time to do it justice. I'm sure it contains some excellent food for thought, although I saw at a glance that you did not cast your vote for the cut in Medicare coverage I proposed, and I think I caught the drift that there may be other areas we could cut, first. While I agree it's possible to cut elsewhere, I think we have to look at the really big, costly programs, and see whether any of their particular features may simply be too costly to include in a publicly financed program. Get back to you on the rest!
