• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Paul Ryan wants to abolish Medicare and replace it with a voucher system, Obama may be just as bad

Vincent

Senior Member
Messages
126
Location
Baltimore, Maryland USA
I never knew about this but here is the gist of it:

If implemented, the government would no longer pay doctors to treat Medicare beneficiaries. Instead, beneficiaries would buy their own private insurance plans, and the government would give people money to pay to buy health plans from an approved list.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/paul-ryans-2011-medicare-plan-a-primer/

the so-called Ryan Plan for the federal budget, which would remove the federal guarantee (or entitlement) of medical care for senior citizens, and replace it with a voucher good for a sum of money which would usually not be enough to pay for the medical procedures older people require. They would have to pay the difference themselves, and many simply cannot.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/0...y-intends-to-betray-his-own-loyal-supporters/

The most recent indication that Obama intends to express his gratitude to his own followers by stabbing them in the back came in a September 24 Huffington Post article by Sam Stein entitled “Obama May Do Social Security Reform during the Lame-Duck Session, Senate Democrats Worry.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/obama-and-social-security_n_1910498.html

The republican solution sound more frightening, and is a direct assault on live-sustaining programs such as Medicare. Yes the system overall sucks but with no viable alternative, it should not be gutted. Who knows what Obama may or may not do if he is reelected. He went back on all of his big promises.
 

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
And how many doctors who take Medicare really know how to treat CFIDS?

GG

PS I know my Dr doesn't take it, he barely takes any insurance, and people have to pay out of pocket, like the good ole days.
 

Vincent

Senior Member
Messages
126
Location
Baltimore, Maryland USA
I don't know, probably most don't. I only posted it because the thought of getting rid of Medicare is going to cause severe financial hardship on those who rely on it. People could die without it.
 

jeffrez

Senior Member
Messages
1,112
Location
NY
My CFS docs take Medicare - thank god. And it's not like PWCs don't ever get other ailments requiring a mainstream doctor, just like "normal" people. So Medicare is a huge blessing to many in the US with CFS. And it's generally regarded as an excellent program.

I don't think Obama would be worse than R/R in that respect - quite the contrary, in fact. Not to reopen this whole can of worms from the other thread, but suffice to say that the savings Obama has made to Medicare will extend the life of the program by many years, whereas R/R want to cut benefits and replace Medicare with a bogus "voucher" system that will not cover all the costs that are being covered now for most people under Medicare. Obviously that's not a good thing for the vast majority of seniors and disabled who are on Medicare.

In other words, R/R want to rig the system so more of the healthcare money is being funneled to their buds in the private insurance biz so they can profit even more, while cutting benefits for sick/elderly people and causing them to pay thousands more every year for their health care and needed prescriptions - if they can afford it. And if they can't? Well, too bad, tends to be R/R's and the republicans' answer. It's kind of a "let's phase out the old/sick people b/c they're in the way and eating up our profits" sort of plan.
 

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
I don't know, probably most don't. I only posted it because the thought of getting rid of Medicare is going to cause severe financial hardship on those who rely on it. People could die without it.

Well, my understanding is the system keeps on taking more and more of our budget, it seems unsustainable, and we all want sustainability, correct? Our National debt is 16 Trillion, and yearly deficits are over a Trillion, the Bank of China is going to quit borrowing us money and/or (printing money can only be done so long, not sure why the US would be special in this regard?, so there could be an even bigger financial meltdown if the US does not get it's books in order) interest rates are going to go up/spike and these programs are going to be even more unaffordable, therefore I think they need to be changed, so the system can carry on in some form.

GG

PS We have a spending problem, if you took all the money from the rich and below, we still would not have enough money to sustain our spending! Who do you think is going to suffer the most when all this comes crashing down? The rich will still have resources and they are more mobile than everyone else, they can move etc..And they can afford to hire people to protect their money, therefore it will be the "middle class" paying for all this spending.
 

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
Yes, we do have a spending problem, but also a lack of revenue. Maybe if they'd stop spending so much on unnecessary military spending, there would be more for medicare. Clinton balanced the budget...it can be done.

My understanding is that when Clinton left office, our budget passed by Republican controlled Congress, was about 2 Trillion dollars. (Are we getting that much better services with a budget that has nearly doubled? Trillion is a huge number!) I am not a big fan of Repubs, just happen to think they are "the lesser of 2 evils" at this point and time. I don't have a problem with spending money on our military (Constitutional), although they have lots of waste, like every other dept in the US gov't, it's our meddling in countries where we have no business, and all the bases all around the globe.

I would imagine some are still necessary, but South Korea? they are rich now (Germany also), so should stand on their own more so, if they want us there, they should compensate us. I am sure there is lots of stratgery involved, so it's easy to say shut down all the bases overseas. But from what I heard recently, it was good to have some/a base in Europe so we could respond more quickly in Libya, although I'm not sure what that accomplished, saved lives?

GG

PS What is high enough tax rate? What is my incentive to keep working, if the gov't is just going to take more, working takes a lot out of me, but I would like to think I do a lot of good with my donations. If anyone has a good argument to the Laffer curve, I would like hear about, please keep it short and not a lot wonky talk. I can only read so much!
 

Dreambirdie

work in progress
Messages
5,569
Location
N. California
My understanding is that when Clinton left office, our budget passed by Republican controlled Congress, was about 2 Trillion dollars. (Are we getting that much better services with a budget that has nearly doubled? Trillion is a huge number!) I am not a big fan of Repubs, just happen to think they are "the lesser of 2 evils" at this point and time. I don't have a problem with spending money on our military (Constitutional), although they have lots of waste, like every other dept in the US gov't, it's our meddling in countries where we have no business, and all the bases all around the globe.

Aren't you forgetting someone. Who came after Clinton and before Obama....? :rolleyes:

Strange how republicans try so hard to forget and deny the existence of GW BUSH. He is the one who created the financial disaster and the huge uber-deficit.

I do agree with you that we need to stop meddling in countries where we have no business, but try convincing all the business interests and their multi-million dollar lobbyists that.
 

Ocean

Senior Member
Messages
1,178
Location
U.S.
And how many doctors who take Medicare really know how to treat CFIDS?

GG

PS I know my Dr doesn't take it, he barely takes any insurance, and people have to pay out of pocket, like the good ole days.
As far as giving things like antivirals, medicines for POTS, etc. there are mainstream doctors taking Medicare who give these treatments that are helpful for CFS and its related problems. And CFS is not the only disabling illness. Many who are disabled do get care from doctors who take Medicare.
 

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
As far as giving things like antivirals, medicines for POTS, etc. there are mainstream doctors taking Medicare who give these treatments that are helpful for CFS and its related problems. And CFS is not the only disabling illness. Many who are disabled do get care from doctors who take Medicare.

Good to hear! Don't doubt it, but until the Mainstream doctors learn about our illness, then they are not like to be of much use to CFIDS sufferers.

GG
 

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
Aren't you forgetting someone. Who came after Clinton and before Obama....? :rolleyes:

Strange how republicans try so hard to forget and deny the existence of GW BUSH. He is the one who created the financial disaster and the huge uber-deficit.

I do agree with you that we need to stop meddling in countries where we have no business, but try convincing all the business interests and their multi-million dollar lobbyists that.

I am not a Republican, I do not give my vote to either party, that's probably half the problem in the country, although it depends upon how difficult/parties make it claim you are an Independent. I think NH claims about 40% registered as Independents!

The Washington Post does not agree with you:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...6e8f578-0a6e-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html
 

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
I don't know, probably most don't. I only posted it because the thought of getting rid of Medicare is going to cause severe financial hardship on those who rely on it. People could die without it.

People die with it, I think if you look back, before gov't became so involved in Health Care, most people could afford to have a Dr come visit you when you are sick at home.

Here is a conservative point of view on the subject:

http://askheritage.org/how-are-libe...tm_content=2012-10-05&utm_campaign=2012_Brand

GG
 

beaker

ME/cfs 1986
Messages
773
Location
USA
So I guess Medicare was another government Ponsi scheme.

When Medicare was started, the technology and available treatments that we have today were not in existence. Not even imaginable ! And many illnesses not even well defined. Progress and the cost that comes with it, was unforeseen.
It was not set up as a Ponsi scheme at all.

That is the simple model.;)
of course you could add in the whole morph of medicine to a corporate model ( from research at institutions to caregivers to big pharma to insurance companies branching out into non traditional waters and the rock star CEO and the economy and deregulation on wallstreet and banking and overall corporate attitude changes...... and the baby boomers and on and on.........a dynamic world.

But they all add up to , imho, the fact that when medicare was designed and implemented, there was no crystal ball for how drastic the changes in health care would be.
 

Parismountain

Senior Member
Messages
181
Location
South Carolina
I don't think Obama would be worse than R/R in that respect - quite the contrary, in fact. Not to reopen this whole can of worms from the other thread, but suffice to say that the savings Obama has made to Medicare will extend the life of the program by many years.

We've been told that Obamacare will not affect those with insurance, or actually very few. I have Medicare Advantage. That program is going to go away under Obamacare (most of the 700 billion he robbed from Medicare to pay for expanding Medicaid to the poor. I will lose my lower co-pay, my vision care, my small dental benefit. Nice. Thanks a lot Obama.) Oh and my doc doesn't take Medicare, it's out of pocket each visit, about $600 twice a year. That's a huge percentage of my SSD.

And I will (off topic) state that managed care sucks. Three years ago I had a sleep study. I stopped breathing 12 times per hour. Doc wanted to try me on a Cpap machine but Medicare said you needed to stop breathing 15 times per hour. So Doc can't prescribe what he wants. He suggested my wife sew a tennis ball into the back of a pajama top, that would keep me off my back. Nice Medicare solution. Well last year took the test again and I had progressed to 20 stops per hour with a diagnosis of "severe" sleep apnea in REM stage, a very dangerous spot to be in . I was getting less than a minute of REM sleep a night. Gee, I could have told Medicare that the year before but ah doc doesn't know better than this managed Medicare guru guideline. No telling how many million brain cells I've lost while Medicare has the one size fits all model, doc can't treat since I'm an outlyer. So for all the talk of how conservatives want to kill sick people, which jeffrez has started again, I think managed care by staying completely within guidelines is what is going to kill people and I think I know which party has developed this system.

Yeah and no jokes about how apparent it is I've lost millions of brain cells by my point of view that dems are the problem in this country.
 
Messages
445
Location
Georgia
The poor folks are going to get treatment anyway. We are already paying for it. Nobody's robbing anybody. The insured people just get charged more to pay for it. There was a little Supreme Court decision about this. That's the whole basis of Obamacare. That's why he wanted a mandate.

I'm employed and I have a dental plan and a vision plan that cover practically nothing. So nothing different between you and me there.

And your drugs are more expensive because GWB let the drug companies charge whatever they wanted to under Medicare Part D. In Europe, the drug companies have to give bulk discounts to government health insurance programs. Not here.

BTW in GA, the first thing the receptionist asks is what your insurance is. Followed by "we don't accept Medicare patients." That's the market place at work in the medical field. Hope you like Ryancare.
 

Andrew

Senior Member
Messages
2,513
Location
Los Angeles, USA
When Medicare was started, the technology and available treatments that we have today were not in existence. Not even imaginable ! And many illnesses not even well defined. Progress and the cost that comes with it, was unforeseen.
It was not set up as a Ponsi scheme at all.

So are you saying that the government took the the Medicare deductions from my paycheck and invested them to make sure there was enough money in the pot to cover rising costs and the fact that baby boomers would be retirement age about now? That's what insurance companies do. If all they did is take my money and spend it on other things, then it's a Ponsi scheme.
 

Dreambirdie

work in progress
Messages
5,569
Location
N. California
Romney's EMERGENCY ROOM health care plan.

PART 1:
In a 2007 interview with Glenn Beck, Mitt Romney said: When they show up at the hospital, they get care. They get free care paid for by you and me. If that’s not a form of socialism, I don’t know what is. ”

PART 2:
In 2012 "Romney says that freeloading in the ER is now all good."

"Well, we do provide care for people who don't have insurance," he said in an interview with Scott Pelley of CBS's "60 Minutes" that aired Sunday night. "If someone has a heart attack, they don't sit in their apartment and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care. And different states have different ways of providing for that care."

Sounds pretty crazy and out of touch to me.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...that-freeloading-in-the-er-is-now-all-good/2/
 

caledonia

Senior Member
I don't have a problem with spending money on our military (Constitutional), although they have lots of waste, like every other dept in the US gov't, it's our meddling in countries where we have no business, and all the bases all around the globe.

I recently saw a documentary on Netflix (which, of course, I can't remember the name of) which explains why it is necessary for us to have the huge military. The gist is, if we were not the world's police man, then several areas of the world would destabilize into wars.

Other rich countries are happy that we're taking on this role because it saves them money on having to maintain a huge military.

I like the idea of having them compensate us for this service. I don't think this is happening now.
 

caledonia

Senior Member
One huge root to the economic problem is that Nixon took us off the gold standard in 1971, in order to pay for Vietnam and social programs started under Lyndon Johnson. That allowed us to start printing money out of thin air. At the end of WWII, the Bretton Woods agreement tied the world's currencies to the US dollar. So the world's currencies are tied to the US dollar which is tied to....nothing.

This is called fiat currency. This is supposed to be one giant Ponzi scheme which will eventually collapse. There are many people buying gold and silver in preparation for this event.