Have You Ever Wondered Why Conservatives Scream about Social Security but Ignore Medicare?

[jtown1123]

They can't make money off of it. If we get rid of Social Security, or cut it substantially for the middle class, that's a huge chunk of change that financial planners and Wall St. want to get their hands on. If we don't have Social Security,people will probably invest more in their 401(k), which means more fees for the person who manages your account.

Medicare is in much worse financial shape than Social Security. While this is a factor of rising health care costs across the board (meaning this is not strictly a Medicare issue), you barely hear a peep about it from Republicans. Let's be clear here: they can't make money off of giving health care to the elderly who use and need it much more than young folks, therefore, less hooting and hollering about its impending "crisis." Sure, there are a few people like Paul Ryan, but for the most part, it is always discussed as an afterthought, after Social Security.

This whole phony manufactured Social Security crisis is a direct attack to cut it then dismantle it.

Social Security is going to be held hostage during the debt ceiling limit debate coming up in March. Let's remind our leaders in the Senate and in Congress that Americans do not want Social Security cuts...especially after we just gave billions away in tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans.

Send this E-Card: http://www.ncpssm.org/sendcard/sendcard.php

You can check it to be sent to Reid, Pelosi, Boehner, and the Senate Minority Leader.

[somone]

1. Bush manufactured the crisis, and Obama is recycling it

for Wall Street

[jaxx]

2. If you can explain that comment, please do.

It doesn't make any sense.

[jtown1123]

3. True, but it's been in the works since the early 80s. CATO came up with a "Leninist" Strategy

against Social Security where they would slowly convince everyone it was in crisis so that people would be more willing to allow cuts. Because Social Security was and is so popular, their best bet was to undermine people's faith that "it would be there for them" when they retire. It's worked pretty brilliantly until this point: http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2010/01/washington_post_4.htm

[jtown1123]

4. Bush and Obama aren't conspiring to create a "crisis" I think they genuinely

believe Social Security is in trouble. Look at the people who are their economic advisors. They all come from this trickle down school of thought. This is extremely troubling that a Democratic President has been swindled into believing Social Security is a big problem, but so have other Dems like Steny Hoyer and Dick Durbin.

[Hawkeye-X]

6. Their economic advisors are giving them BAD advice.

What Obama should have done is fire them and get Krugman.

Hawkeye-X

[jtown1123]

7. Seriously. Krugman would be a fantastic economic advisor.

[rurallib]

17. I'd sure like to believe Obama is smarter than that.

[jtown1123]

36. It's not a question of smart so much as to who is talking in his ear.

The people who spread these lies about SS philosophically despise it because they think gov't can never do anything right or provide anything of substance. They refuse to admit that SS is a vital and necessary safety net.

[Hannah Bell]

34. lol. bush is on record in 1978 saying ss would be "bankrupt" in 10 years.

he's been making bad predictions for a good long time.

[jtown1123]

37. Actually, I believe that language has been around since the program's inception

I remember seeing quotes from conservatives in the 30s and 40s whining that it will bankrupt our children. I was talking to a senior the other day who said he was fed the same exact talking points 40 years ago.

[Hannah Bell]

41. it has. but we were talking about bush & cheney, & they've both been badmouthing

ss for a long time.

In 1978, a young Congressional candidate picked up the theme of crisis. Stumping at the Midland Texas Country Club, George W. Bush said:

" will be bust in 10 years unless there are some changes...The ideal solution would be… to invest the money the way they feel."(8)

Like the WMDs, the 1988 Social Security bust never manifested.


Here's Bush in 2005:

"Now, let me tell you something about the Social Security system. It's not a trust. A lot of people think, well, we're collecting your money and we're holding it for you, and then when you retire, we're going to give it back to you. That's not the way it works. We're collecting your money, and if we've got money left over - in other words, if the – if there's more money than the benefits promised to be paid in our hands, we're spending it and leaving behind an IOU. That's how it works. It's called a pay-as-you-go system. You pay, we go ahead and spend it. (Laughter.)" (2)

Isn't he cute? Here he is again, same year:

"We take your payroll taxes, we pay out the benefits to current retirees, and with the money left over, we pay...for other programs. And there's nothing left but file cabinets with IOUs. And that's how it works." (3)

Let's not ignore his second-in-command. Here's Cheney on the mission:

"Now, about 1.7 trillion of that is in the so-called Trust Fund: that is, money - that's money that's been collected that's not there as cash at this point."(4)

They don't sound very encouraging, do they?

[somone]

5. Bush was the first president to say it was facing bankruptcy

He used the bully pulpit and made it a big deal

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jtown1123]

9. That sounds right that he was the first president to say that but conservative think tanks

and other lower level people have been saying that even before Bush.

[somone]

12. Yes, think tanks crank out all kinds of crap every day

but it was Bush who pulled the alarm in his 2005 SOTU speech.

[jtown1123]

15. Unfortunately, the mainstream media has lapped up that language and reports it as fact

[CTyankee]

35. I've heard this as far back as I can remember...it didn't start with either Bush.

I don't remember the first time I heard it but it was a LOOONG time ago and I'm old...

[OHdem10]

10. May I suggest another thought. The Crisis is real and both

Parties saw this as way to bring Entitlements to the
fore for reform. Let us be perfectly honest--The
Elites have seen the handwriting on the wall for
years. They would be asked to make a larger contribution
from their higher incomes. They have balked all slong.
The crisis gave the perfect opportunity to "reform
entitlements" in such a way that the Rich get relieved
of any burden. Since the elites and Corporations have
all the power, the Government has yielded.

The Crisis is real. Otherwise, we would not have millions
unemployed.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OHdem10]

28. Medicare and SS are not being discussed. The Crisis caused

Loss of Jobs. They are real. The Crisis has been
caused by both the Banksters and Poorly managed Trade
Policy. No oversight of outsourcing among other things.

Tell all the Left Behind Workers with no job this is not
real.

When all else fail call people names.

[jtown1123]

31. I did not understand the connection to ss and medicare you made earlier. yes we have a jobs crisis.

[Horse with no Name]

11. Most hospitals DEPEND on Medicare for at least 50% of their profit

The majority of hospital corps are republicon owned.
I have sat and listened to the CEO of our hospital corp berate single-payer universal healthcare as an evil demon.
But in the next breath, said that we have to comply with regulations because we would lose over 50% of our revenue if we were disqualified for Medicare payments.

[jtown1123]

14. Excellent point. Is gettin the gov't to pay any easier than private insurance?

If the flawed SGR formula is ever fixed permanently instead of patchwork "doc fixes" I would think Medicare billing would be much easier to handle.

[Horse with no Name]

16. From what I understand from people that I know that do billing

they say Medicare reimbursement is just about guaranteed without having to jump through the hoops that have to be jumped through for private insurance. Just stay within the guidelines and do the paperwork--it's a gravy train.
Unless of course you get busted for fraud--then, depending on who you are--you either get elected to the Senate (Bill Frist's hospital corp defrauded the government of billions of dollars--biggest healthcare heist on record)...or, if you don't subscribe to the republicorp policy and simply make a mistake in your billing--you will prosecuted at the fullest extent of the law.

[jtown1123]

19. That's great that reimbursement is guaranteed. I would hope that would

make a case for a strong public option or single payer. If you know your services will be reimbursed without headaches, extra paperwork and fighting with private insurance, as a medical professional, you may be more willing to support government sponsored health care. Maybe I am being naive, but I would like to think it makes a strong case.

[patrice]

21. It also needs to be looked at for abuse: who is providing/not-providing actual care & for how much?

[patrice]

25. Which raises the definition of care. We have 3 nurses in our family & the stratification

of "care" is fucking up the works.

[patrice]

18. They have designs on Medicare nonetheless: as a guaranteed jobs program for their cronys & that's

extraneous jobs built on the backs of those providing direct care. Keep an eye on their ideas for "Medicare Reform" to see how true this is: HOW do Republicans intend to take fraud, waste, and abuse out of systems in which staffing ratios are already maxed out, WITHOUT affecting the quality of care? = a vital question.

[jtown1123]

20. Certainly. A big Republican proposal is giving seniors vouchers to purchase

private insurance. You can imagine how low those vouchers would be. Probably couldn't cover a quarter year's health care expenses.

[patrice]

23. I'd bet the whole frakking system is extremely top-heavy. Everything needs to be evaluated the

way that they plan to do (and are in some test states) to teachers.

[somone]

22. Leave Social Security alone, and expand Medicare for all

BTW, repeal that payroll tax cut Trojan horse.

[patrice]

24. That's why we have to protect the process for Medicare Reform. Republicans could destroy

all practical reasons for why we'd want to expand it into Medicare for all.

[jtown1123]

26. +1000

[notesdev]

27. They already got their hands on the money

It's the giving it back part which is coming to a head (this year is SS' inflection point). Bluntly stated, they don't want to give it back.

Medicare is not a problem for the corporate class for a very simple reason: where do you think those double-digit-per-year price hikes go? (Hint: they don't actually go towards making anybody healthier.)

[subterranean]

29. +1

[Recursion]

30. Er... some very rich people make a lot of money off of Medicare

Look at the McAllen, Texas comparative study of Medicare use and billing. What's hard to make money off of is Social Security (though both IBM and EDS managed), which probably does have something to do with its greater unpopularity among Republicans.

[jtown1123]

32. You correctly point out pple make money from Medicare fraud.

It's not that widespread of a problem, but it is definitely being cracked down on.

[Recursion]

33. Not even fraud

Medicare exists to transfer huge amounts of money to medical providers, many of which are owned by rich people.

[Kolesar]

38. IIRC the pension systems like SS were "privatized" in Britain and Argentina

And privatization in Argentina was a disaster.

[Recursion]

39. There have been good and bad stories; mostly bad

Bolivia seems to be going at a "third way" solution (in the less odious sense of third way; neither truly public nor private), and it hasn't hit any rocks as of yet.

Though in general I at least understand the impulse to hold something other than public debt in the pension funds, even if it's hard to find a workable alternative.

[Kolesar]

40. If the US was not maintaining a "SS Trust Fund" for baby-boomer retirees, ...

...the financial sector would still be trying to find a way to attach themselves to the routine receipts that are paid by wage earners and immediately disbursed to pensioners. They imagine a model where wealth can be passed to another generation. That means that the money will *never* be (fully) dispersed to pensioners.