LAT: Medicare's Troubles May Be Sleeping Giant (worse than Soc. Sec.)

[DeepModem Mom]

Medicare's Troubles May Be Sleeping Giant
The program could run out of funds two decades before Social Security is forecast to, experts say.

By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Times Staff Writer


WASHINGTON — As restructuring Social Security moves to the top of his agenda, President Bush is sidestepping a troublesome problem: Medicare, which provides health insurance for 41 million elderly and disabled people, is fast going broke.

Medicare is projected to exhaust its hospital-care trust fund by 2019, more than 20 years before Social Security is forecast to slide into the red. The day of reckoning could come even sooner, because Medicare's condition has been going from bad to worse.

The government's unfunded promises to future retirees under Medicare amount to a staggering $27.7 trillion over the next 75 years, according to Congress' Government Accountability Office. That dwarfs the $3.7-trillion liability over the same period for Social Security....

***

The Bush administration holds out hope that new tax-free health savings accounts could someday be adapted to Medicare, allowing individuals to control their own costs. These accounts, created by the Medicare overhaul, allow individuals to set aside money tax-free for health expenses not covered by catastrophic-insurance policies. But it's not clear that such accounts would be attractive for heavy consumers of medical services living on fixed incomes....


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-medicare20dec20,0,2564229.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[koffison]

1. Paper did an interview with a SS idea founder, Something Bahl

The guy is about 90 years old now and is going to go to his grave never admitting there is anything wrong with the medicare or social security funding system. He was also the guy who fought for all the expansions in ss over the years since 1940 that has made it into the fiasco it is now versus what it was intended as.

[Bridget Burke]

10. So--do you agree with Bush that privatization is the answer?

Does his "ownership society" appeal to you?

[koffison]

11. oh of course

I have wanted partial privitization for 30 years. I am now 50 years old. Too old to take effective use of the offer. Now I am a supporter for our kids. There is no question the ss system is in big big trouble, not today, but starting in 15 years when they system spends more than it takes in without changes.

[pop goes the weasel]

16. Then you should have

gone to work for state government in Texas, because we don't get social security. And I can tell you, you wouldn't be happy with the hit in the stock market that the privatized plan has smacked public workers with.

Another thing--how do you think people on minimum wage are going to survive when they retire if social security is privatized?

[LynnTheDem]

19. Did you just decide FACTS were unimportant???

Just wondering, as you don't seem to be bothering with any.

[OneBlueSky]

21. the reason Social Security is in trouble (if it is) . . .

is that administration after administration has spent the trust fund rather than banking it as was intended . . . it's not that the system was badly designed . . . it's that it's been looted over the years until all that remains in the trust fund are IOUs . . .

[JackintheGreen]

2. The Stars, like dust...

I believe that this is the Asimov book in which citizens 'voluntarily' allow themselves to be executed at a certain age (maybe 60?) for the greater benefit of society.

Then there's the episode of Star Trek with the same idea.

Then there's our government, bankrupting the Great Society. Of course, I'm sure that the wealthy will be allowed to buy dispensation as "Valuable Contributors to Society."

On the bright side, I have 30 years yet before I might have to sacrifice myself for the communal 'health' of my daughter and her family-to-be.

Cheers!

[hadrons]

7. in Logan's Run, the age was drop to 30

[lumpy]

23. I can assure you that when

you hit 60 years you will not be wanting to be 'offed'. Life doesn't stop at 60 or 70 and for most, 80 years. You will have the same desires to enjoy life and the family and friends you accumulate. Age should be respected and acknowledged. There is a trend in this country to discount people of a certain age.

[da_chimperor]

3. 'heavy consumers of medical services'

So they mean sick people, right? I understand the terminology, but it's dehumanizing.

[ooglymoogly]

9. the real problem with medicare is that it

is a huge cash cow to drug co's, lobbying the government to make near useless and sometimes dangerous drugs to be paid for by medicare. most elderly and disabled are spending 500 to a thousand dollars on drugs like viox, that would cost 50 to 60% in canada and even that is a fabulous profit.
to fix medicare all we have to do is "fix" the drug co's....yuhhh just take a look on www.followyourmoney.com and see why this will never happen in this corrupt government.

[TX-RAT]

12. 2 local doctors on trial, 56 counts of Medicare fraud.

Another made his way to Pakistan before sentencing. Almost 4.5 million in charges to Medicare.

[CountAllVotes]

14. excuse me, Medicare does not pay for drugs

and if you have the two-bit drug card you save 10% or some B.S. like that. The cost of drugs is being paid for IN FULL by most persons that have Medicare only and do not qualify for Medicaid. Many persons are caught in this trap and must seek supplemental policies which cost roughly $3-$4,000 a year per person. Then you might have a prescription drug benefit.

However, drugs like Vioxx are not paid for by Medicare. No drugs are for the most part unless they have a special approval. Even if they do, they are still not free by a long shot.

[ooglymoogly]

18. i'm talking about the poor and handicapped...

in states like ma. they have medicare part a and b and wrap around medicaid or visa versa, that share the costs. prescriptions are either $1 or $2 at most on drugs that cost as much as $280 in the case of protinex, an acid reducer that might be more than cut in half in canada. renitadine also an acid reducer is sold over the counter for $12 and prilosec somewhat more. and yes viox used to be covered under the $2 prescription before the scandal. all i am saying is there is tremendous waste paying for inflated drug prices. and yes they do have to get an approval on some drugs. who pays what part of what i don't know. it is a complicated system.

[lumpy]

22. Medicare has not paid for prescription drugs

and still doesn't. Until Bush's flawed program for supplementary drug costs goes into effect it will remain the case. I personally know no elderly Medicare recipients who have signed up for the program, including myself. I have been on Medicare for several years and have paid for prescription drugs myself all along. The current cost of Medicare premiums is $78.20 per individual. Medicare doesn't pay for dental, eye exams and certain other routine medical needs. The information concerning Medicare entitlements is contained in a handbook issued every year for recipients.

[katmondoo]

4. Imade a copy of the article

and am sending it to my right wing senator Virginia Waite-Brown of Florida. She sent a flyer to all of her constituents touting the wonders of ****'s new Medicare program. I have been sending her everything I find on the subject. She is one Big A-hole. Using taxpayer money to push lies. Disgusting piece of S***

[shanti]

5. "fast going broke"....

interesting how all of the 'giveaway' programs for the financially less well off are doing so. so, all it takes is a little push?

[CountAllVotes]

8. Medicare is not a "give away" program

Medicare is paid for by those that qualify to receive it. Next year effective Jan. 1 it will cost over $75.00 a month per person. In a two person household that is over $150.00 a month and that is with NO prescription drug plan nor supplemental coverage.

Many are forced into Medicare. If you qualify to enroll you must enroll, otherwise lose your supplemental coverage if you happen to have any at all.

Give away program? Where does this line of thinking come from exactly?

[stray cat]

6. Finally someone is talking about Medicare

Medicare is the real concern and I would trust any solution of private accounts for this.

[Pegleg Thd]

13. There is a very easy way

to stabilize the system. Ban all those who voted for booshit from collecting from either s.s. or medicare. Save millions.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

15. The only threat there is to medicare are greedy doctors who....

robbed and raped the system since it's inception.

[w4rma]

20. The doctors? You blame the problems on doctors? You're clueless.

Totally clueless. Why you associate yourself with the word "progressive" is beyond me.

If anything, the doctors are UNDERPAID for the massive amount of work they do.

[zann725]

17. Elderly and Disabled WON'T be able to afford or get healthcare

with pre-existing conditions. Or certainly WON'T be able to afford the premiums. Trust accounts are NOT an option for either group... as they are no longer earning, and paying in. Though in BOTH cases, they HAVE paid into the System, and are therefore FULLY entitled to benefits.

This is absurd.

Plus for those 'supporters' of the new Trust Accounts, I read on another thread that Bushco is modeling the SS reform after Chile's program...in which the average person 'brings home' about $100/mo. in retirement benefits from their 'Trust' accounts. Get real people, do the math. Not only would your meager contributions to a private account NOT net you anything NEAR what you'd get on present SS (even with projected reduced benefits in 2042). Given the current devaluing of the dollar, AND the unstable stock market...with any luck, you'll end up with either NOTHING at retirement age (if the stock market tanks), or at best somewhere around $300/mo. in retirement income...even at the optimistic end of the spectrum. Oh, and if we get rid of Medicare... there's no way as a retiree on $300/mo. that you could afford ANY medical care at all, NOR any prescription drugs.

[Mountainman]

24. If we can spend billions in Iraq, why not spend billions on the people

here?

I feel this Social Security problem is a bogus issue. I think the problem is our country's priorities.

To the right, it is better to fight a war in the Middle East for whatever reason Bush can come up with today rather than take care of the people of this country.

When ever I here a Repub tell me what is wrong with Social Security, I think that his/her real motive is to not have their tax money helping anyone else yet the are quite willing to rebuild Iraq.