Do you support "means testing" for recipients of Social Security and Medicare?

[Dawson Leery]

[Brickbat]

1. No.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. No. Never.

[Ragnarok]

3. Nope.

[wtbymark]

4. Only if there's means testing to stay in congress!

[Jackpine Radical]

5. It would be the death knell to the programs.

[RC]

6. For those that voted 'Yes', why are you for it?

[librechik]

7. no, it's insurance, not welfare. Raise the cap!

that beats cutting benes or means testing

[StarsInHerHair]

8. HELL NO!

[bluestate10]

9. Yes. I certainly do. My take on the system is that if I can afford to

payout from the system, I should be free to make that choice. I would only want to have a fall-back medical coverage option in the event that I developed a treatable, serious illness.

[Cleita]

12. That's why it doesn't work. People won't pay into the

system when they are healthy and then will want to opt into it when it's their only recourse and no other insurance will have them. It would make the system entirely unworkable.

[bluestate10]

24. I don't agree. I plan to make a choice to fore-go payments if my

projected economic state at retirement is reached. I am far from retirement and have accomplished 80% of my goal. I fully plan to pay for my own medical needs in retirement, I am healthy now and plan to maintain my health. If I get a non-curable illness, I only hope by then that I can give permission to medical professionals to take my life without them going to jail.

You explain to me why a person with my objectives should NOT be allowed to fore-go SS and Medicare benefits if that is what I chose? I plan to make my choice fully understanding that I have paid more into the system, at this early time, than 95% of DU members will pay in during their working lives. The last statement illustrates EXACTLY why I should be allowed to opt out of getting SS and Medicare benefits when I retire, it is unlikely that I will need the benefits and payment to me would mean that a person that does need them gets less.

[Cleita]

29. If you don't want to pay into a social program that

benefits everyone regardless of their economic circumstances then you can choose to move somewhere else where it's not required. May I suggest Somalia or Bangladesh. We, who believe this is the way to have a functioning society that takes care of everyone by giving them access to health care, don't need selfish people like you undermining the system.

Otherwise, think about it. You may not have that money you count on when your time to retire comes. All kinds of stuff happens between twenty and sixty-five. It may not happen to you individually, but maybe you have a child with a chronic and expensive disease or other catastrophes you can't even fathom that will come your way. I feel sorry for you.

[bluestate10]

36. Read my post again. I said nothing about paying into the program.

I contentedly pay in and have no plans to stop or advocate that others stop paying in. My post was about receiving benefits. People that can afford to fore-go benefits in retirement should be allowed to make that choice.

[Cleita]

51. You have to apply for benefits, so if you don't

want them, you are free to not do so. Your post gave the impression that you didn't want to be part of the program and that would include not paying into it, which is where things fall apart if everyone doesn't pay into it.

[Philippine expat]

41. You have that right

you are not required to sign up for either SS or Medicare

[Cleita]

10. Never, never, ever....even after Hell freezes over!

It's the first step to turning government insurance programs for old age into welfare. Then it's not long before benefits start becoming diluted, disappearing and eliminated. It's another Republican Trojan Horse aimed at dismantling our social infrastructure created by the New Deal and the War On Poverty.

[BzaDem]

11. Both programs are already means-tested (though not in the way you think).

Higher income Social Security recipients get less relative to what they out in than lower income beneficiaries. Similarly, higher-income Medicare beneficiaries pay higher premiums. The means testing being talked about is along these lines. I have not seen any reports that they are planning to deny all Medicare and SS benefits to people based on income.

[LuvNewcastle]

18. That's the kind of means testing

that I understand is being discussed. I have no problem with it.

[IphengeniaBlumgarten]

13. Don't we already do this in Medicare?

I recall, a few years ago, when my income ticked up briefly, my monthly medicare payment also increased. Think it is back down now?

Although I think means testing for ELIGIBILIITY is a very bad idea, I see no problems with gearing premiums to income level.

[BzaDem]

15. Exactly. n/t

[JDPriestly]

14. No. I know several elderly people who would have been

means-tested out of Medicare prior to summer 2008, but would qualify now. One of them is somewhat confused and would not know how to apply for Medicare if she had to pass a means test and fill out financial forms.

[Avalux]

16. NO. It's OUR money. Why don't people understand that??

The GOP talks about both like they're some sort of handout, keeps telling us we all have to 'sacrifice' but can't raise taxes on the fat cats.

It makes my blood boil.

[FreeJoe]

17. Yes

To some extent, we already do. We tax the benefits of people with reasonable incomes but not those of people with lower incomes. We also provide substantially higher returns on contributions for people who made lower contributions. I think that we should take that even further by increasing the cap and decreasing the benefits for higher contributions. I wouldn't even mind making the payout a flat rate.

[bluestate10]

25. Flat rate with higher benefits for people that were less wealthy during

their working lives, lower benefits for people that were privileged earners. I am ok with that plan. I am also ok with wealthy earners not getting any benefits if their desire or means tests show they have no use for the extra money.

[Capitalocracy]

19. Here's my take on it

If you contributed to it, you're just as entitled as anyone to receive benefits. I might support something that gives more to those who need it more, but the concept of means testing in the past has always meant that we only offer benefits to the poorest of the poor, and that's not acceptable with SS or Medicare.

And considering the fact that it's completely solvent as long as we don't rob from it to pay for wars, I don't know why we even need to discuss the matter.

[bluestate10]

26. Would you be for people opting out of the benefits if they so chose?

It is about free choice. Isn't it? Or would you rather keep up the robbing arguments that are yelled infinitum by some on DU?

[TheKentuckian]

44. You can opt out by not using the benefits, your idea seems like a first step that transforms

to the better off opting out of contributing in short order.

Nobody is going to make you use your card or restrain you from reaching for your wallet so if you want to opt out then do it.

[Capitalocracy]

47. I wouldn't leave even someone who was so stupid as to opt out to die on the street

A lot of those people who opt out would come crawling back looking for help the moment their own savings run out, or their health care costs are too high, or whatever plan they had didn't work out. And since I'm not a monster, I would not deny them health care or SS payments. So to keep those people from getting a free ride later, which I'm sure you would be against, how about we just forget about that opting out idea and let's all pay our taxes like we're supposed to?

[Hamlette]

20. The followup question: Do you know that Medicare is CURRENTLY means tested?

just asking for all of those who voted "yes"

[Davis_X_Machina]

22. Don't drag facts into this....

[Hamlette]

38. my bad

[Fool Count]

21. Yes. Done properly, that is just another way to raise taxes on

the rich.

[bluestate10]

30. Exactly. Surprisingly, those that scream red-faced about taxing the top 1%

can't see the rationale. Looks like Hamsher and other miscreants have them fooled.

[Fool Count]

49. Curiously, it applies similarly to the other side.

The republicans, who would fight until the last man against the slightest tax increase
on the richest, would readily accept means testing, which is essentially the same thing
as a new progressive tax. They too see it as cutting the Social Security and Medicaid, which
is a good thing in their eyes. Ideological purity really does a number on one's critical
thinking.

[jwirr]

23. If we have to have means testing can it be limited to only those making more than $250,000 a year?

Edited to say No I am afraid of changing this program this way.

[bluestate10]

31. The concept of means testing MEANS wealthier seniors will get less benefits.

What is your point?

[jwirr]

39. Just that if we HAVE to have it that it be for the very rich only. Actually

I would put the figure higher than I did.

[fascisthunter]

27. doesn't means testing make SS into a form of Welfare???

[bluestate10]

35. Isn't highway, bridge construction a form of welfare for those that drive?

Isn't providing police for all a form of welfare for people that need police? Isn't public schools a form of welfare for parents, what about childless people? Societies are called fucking societies because some people get more benefits from one program than others do, with the shoe being on the other foot for a second, third, fourth... program.

[fascisthunter]

37. Have you considered the IMPLICATION of it being a form of welfare?

do you ever expect to depend on SS, because I probably will. This issue is a survival issue for me and millions of others.

[bluestate10]

46. All I wrote is that people that don't want SS and Medicare should not

take the benefits. But being part of a society, they should be required to pay into the system. Every benefit in society is welfare if one is stupid enough. I don't have children, so property taxes and taxes that go to schools come with no benefit to me other than not having angry, poorly educated children one day slit my throat. Chill-out with the SS as welfare talk if people pay in and are means tested, societies exists because people pay for stuff that they themselves may not need, but someone else does need.

[Philippine expat]

42. Yes it does

and then the Repukes just have more reason to try to kill it

[fascisthunter]

45. Another reason for me to distrust those dismissing our concerns

[Lil Missy]

28. Yes. And Social Security, Medicare Parts B and D ARE ALREADY MEANS TESTED!

[fascisthunter]

32. Do you disagree or agree with this cause and effect...

"It's the first step to turning government insurance programs for old age into welfare. Then it's not long before benefits start becoming diluted, disappearing and eliminated. It's another Republican Trojan Horse aimed at dismantling our social infrastructure created by the New Deal and the War On Poverty."

[Lil Missy]

48. I don't agree with the premise that means testing results in eventual elimination. HOWEVER,

I would agree that Republicans would eliminate all social programs if they could.

[OHdem10]

33. Up until now means testing was a way for the more affluent

to drop out of the program. If you have enough assets
that you can buy your own insurance and retirement you do
not have to pay into the program. This is the GOP answer
to their Rich constituents. If you cannot get rid of the
program, the rich do not have to participate.

Take the Rich out of the pool and there is not enough
to fund it.

It becomes a welfare program--not an insurance program.

[Bluenorthwest]

34. Hell no.

Only right wingers support that sort of crap. I'd not even consider voting for anyone who supported such utter bullshit.

[Raine]

40. NO absolutely NOT nt

[L0oniX]

43. The obvious thing is that those with millions are already socially secure and...

can afford their own health care.

[unkachuck]

50. no, it be the first wedge designed to shrink the programs....n/t