Facing the music in Medicare
#1
David Brooks is a columnist for the NYT, author, and political pundit.

He is also a Republican.

I'm a card carrying Democrat, liberal by choice, progressive by nature.

In todays (8/21) column, Brooks makes a case for why the Romney/Ryan ticket will be most likely to solve the issue of reforming Medicare. He points out the the system is unsustainable in it's present form, and that the Democratic president in office is not providing the leadership to make the necessary changes to save it.

I don't agree with his entire summation, but see the hard truth of his critical look at this very important issue.

I include the link, below, if you are interested.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/opinio...lexed.html
Reply
#2
I'm not sure any of us younger than age 65 understand Medicare, I know I don't. I'm confused as to why we have a national health care plan coming up and we'll still need Medicare, too. I'm confused as to why military veterans have their own health care plan, and I'm confused as to why congress has their own plan going too.

It's my belief we should have a national plan where the government pays for it all, and the same thing should apply to all of us, without distinction. I certainly feel like I pay enough in taxes to support that, and it would probably be the main benefit I received from government, too. All the rest of this just seems like so much distraction and subterfuge, frankly.
Reply
#3
(08-21-2012, 08:29 AM)PonderThis Wrote: I'm not sure any of us younger than age 65 understand Medicare, I know I don't. I'm confused as to why we have a national health care plan coming up and we'll still need Medicare, too. I'm confused as to why military veterans have their own health care plan, and I'm confused as to why congress has their own plan going too.

It's my belief we should have a national plan where the government pays for it all, and the same thing should apply to all of us, without distinction. I certainly feel like I pay enough in taxes to support that, and it would probably be the main benefit I received from government, too. All the rest of this just seems like so much distraction and subterfuge, frankly.

Me too.

Now, how we gonna pay for it?
Reply
#4
Military spending seems like a no-brainer to me.
Reply
#5
I'm watching medicine appoint it's generals, in The Rogue Valley. I know some personally. They are inept, corrupt, and for sale. They are veted by thieves in the timber industry. Decent physicians will see their work hampered by "Coordinated Care". Patients will suffer. The landlords of our fancy new clinics will collect. Adminstrators will grow fat (Administrators have to be fat). And corporations will replace non-profits (In the interest of efficiency, and to end the charade). So far their only stance has been "Just Say No". And, that's just what we should do.
Reply
#6
I would suggest you read the comments. They ain't buyin.
Reply
#7
(08-21-2012, 01:11 PM)Willie Krash Wrote: I would suggest you read the comments. They ain't buyin.

They "ain't buying" because Brooks has played fast and loose with the facts. I like a lot of what Brooks writes, but not this particular piece; it is so full of untruths as to make the whole premise laughable. The Romney/Ryan proposal for Medicare cuts the same $700 billion as the Obama plan, but instead of going to reform the program and applying funds to preventative care, they offer nothing to control costs! They take away from Medicare without offering any of the reforms necessary.

3 Card Monte; the revolutionary Republican Plan for Medicare.
Reply
#8
They just busted a couple hundred of our medical community. For ripping off Medicare for millions. I'd suggest we shoot those, and see what effect that has on our medical expenses....
Reply
#9
(08-21-2012, 08:50 AM)Wonky Wrote:
(08-21-2012, 08:29 AM)PonderThis Wrote: I'm not sure any of us younger than age 65 understand Medicare, I know I don't. I'm confused as to why we have a national health care plan coming up and we'll still need Medicare, too. I'm confused as to why military veterans have their own health care plan, and I'm confused as to why congress has their own plan going too.

It's my belief we should have a national plan where the government pays for it all, and the same thing should apply to all of us, without distinction. I certainly feel like I pay enough in taxes to support that, and it would probably be the main benefit I received from government, too. All the rest of this just seems like so much distraction and subterfuge, frankly.

Me too.

Now, how we gonna pay for it?

What the august Mr. Brooks declined to address were the other ways in which we can leave this program, which is not free, alone. We can raise the ceiling on payroll deductions for Social Security. Right now it is at $110k, I believe. Raise it to $200k. We could also cut back on some of our military spending. Even Richard Nixon said we can't be the world's '911' call.
It was GWB who raised Medicare spending without a corresponding cut or tax increase. Paul Ryan voted for this too. Now he is saying it costs too much.
Mr. Brooks also wants to bring in private insurance companies. Huh?! Twitch They must love his new proposals. No doubt Big Insurance will contribute Big Bucks to the GOP campaign.
Reply
#10
Why cap SS at all?
Mr. Brooks has been moving more to the right as time goes by. He understands that there is only one position, far right. Otherwise he will be turned out into that neverland of moderates. The GOP machine is well oil, play by the party line or you will be gone. Poor Brooks he has watched the intellectuals go the wayside. He is stuck. Watch more talking points emerge.
Romney as a moderate learned he has to move extreme right or back to the beach house. He sold out quickly, Brooks is taking his time. He will learn you can't have it both ways. On the bus or off the bus buddy. It will be a lonely life to hold on to his values and lonely if he doesn't.
Reply
#11
[quote='Willie Krash' pid='225893' dateline='1345685960']
Why cap SS at all?
Mr. Brooks has been moving more to the right as time goes by. He understands that there is only one position, far right. Otherwise he will be turned out into that neverland of moderates. The GOP machine is well oil, play by the party line or you will be gone. Poor Brooks he has watched the intellectuals go the wayside. He is stuck. Watch more talking points emerge.
Romney as a moderate learned he has to move extreme right or back to the beach house. He sold out quickly, Brooks is taking his time. He will learn you can't have it both ways. On the bus or off the bus buddy. It will be a lonely life to hold on to his values and lonely if he doesn't./quote]

I hope your are wrong about David Brooks. I fear that you may be right (correct). I've admired Brooks for a long time, enjoyed his writings and especially enjoyed his most recent book (Social something). But it's the political season and the pressure mounts. I'm still confused about that 700 billion thing, but too lazy to dig into it. I'll wait 'till it's a done deal then bitch about it. Hey! I'm an American.
Reply
#12
Same boat Wonk.
Will this help?
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...cuts-says/
Says Paul Ryan's budget relies on the same $700 billion in savings from Medicare that Mitt Romney and other Republicans have been attacking Democrats about.
>>snip
Because we’re wonks ourselves at PolitiFact, our ears pricked up at the claim in recent days that Obama cut $700 billion out of Medicare. Just a few weeks ago, the oft-cited number was $500 billion. How did he manage to cut another $200 billion when no one was looking?

Well, there are cuts and then there are CUTS. Neither Obama nor his health care law literally "cut" a dollar from the Medicare program’s budget.


Here’s what Ryan said in an interview with George Stephanopolous of ABC News in June, before his selection as Romney’s running mate:

Stephanopoulos: "You know, several independent fact-checkers have taken a look at that claim, the $500 billion in Medicare cuts, and said that it's misleading. And in fact, by that accounting, your budget, your own budget, which Gov. Romney has endorsed, would also have $500 billion in Medicare cuts.

Interestingly Romney says he will repeal the ACA. (Obamacare)
I do not believe he can, he may need to do a little reading. Key word, he.
Reply
#13
A pack of cardiologists a ways south of us, started throwing in extras so unneeded, they weren't even extras. They were the operations they sold Medicare. Operations on the hearts of people who didn't need them. And, they got caught. So now, they don't do that any more. Even though we let them live, for some crazy reason. Now, they are caring physicians.
Reply
#14
(08-22-2012, 10:13 PM)Willie Krash Wrote: Interestingly Romney says he will repeal the ACA. (Obamacare)
I do not believe he can, he may need to do a little reading. Key word, he.

More reading, less lying. Dry
Reply
#15
(08-23-2012, 02:35 PM)TennisMom Wrote:
(08-22-2012, 10:13 PM)Willie Krash Wrote: Interestingly Romney says he will repeal the ACA. (Obamacare)
I do not believe he can, he may need to do a little reading. Key word, he.

More reading, less lying. Dry

It was my understanding that president Obama wants to move the 700 B (or 500, whatever) from Medicare to the ACA.
So, doesn't Romney have a point?
Reply
#16
From what I understand, that $716 billion will come from ambiguous sources while Romney/Ryan want to take it directly out of seniors' pockets. I'll have to read up on this but that was my impression.
Paul Ryan also wants to give seniors vouchers for insurance companies. If there is anything our medical system does NOT need, it is another for-profit middleman with his hand out.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)