mfcorey1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:13 PM
Original message |
Ed Shultz is off base with his comments that the President has told the super committee to do deep |
|
cuts to medicare. Adjustments don't mean that you wipe out all that is good in the program. Clamp down on fraud and save millions every year. That is where the problem is in medicare.
|
valerief
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:14 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Or 'adjustments' is code for cuts. nt |
mfcorey1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. What cuts do you think he will suggest? Give me an example. |
patrice
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
7. They could look at the extent to which CMS reporting systems are being directed by Risk Managers rat |
|
her than by the authentic experiences & needs of patients.
|
Ruby the Liberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
14. Raising Medicare to 67 (or 70!) isn't only a cut to the program |
|
it is a defacto tax increase.
|
patrice
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
20. I missed that. Who is saying that's a possibility? nt |
Ruby the Liberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
21. Medicare to 67 was what Obama was offering during the debt debacle |
|
Thankfully, Boehner turned it down because he wouldn't accept the tax increases on the top 2%.
Feel free to bookmark this and we'll chat in 6 months.
|
patrice
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
26. Who knows how much of that was authentic and how much was theater. When you're talking |
|
to folks who would turn down $10. in cuts : $1 in tax increases, there's a lot of room to test any kind of responses you might be interested in.
|
polmaven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 07:44 PM by polmaven
:popcorn:
|
valerief
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
Whisp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
30. or code to reduce waste and overpricing. |
|
that is what Obama has been saying all along, if only some of you paid attention. There is a shitload of waste and double/triple dipping in the healthcare industry.
but to fill certain fantasies, he Must mean cut the livers out of old folks.
|
valerief
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
32. Yes, could be that, too. Or could be lots of other things. nt |
|
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 11:03 PM by valerief
|
TheWraith
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:15 PM
Response to Original message |
2. And "adjustments" can also be a euphemism for more revenue. |
|
A way to say it without causing the entire House to start shooting at him.
Also, means testing is a possibility. No reason to cover the well to do.
|
Bluenorthwest
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:15 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Prosecuting fraud is not an adjustment, it is simply the |
|
government doing it's job a bit, at last.
|
Raine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 08:12 PM by Raine
|
patrice
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
27. It doesn't have to be legal fraud, though I'm sure that's there. There are all kinds of variations |
|
in how Medicare funds are managed, most of which are legal, but less productive toward positive outcomes.
This could be a standards of care issue. My family has had some horrific experiences with our elderly mother before she passed on. Horrific! and all paid for by means of Medicare/Medicaid.
|
Bluebear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:16 PM
Response to Original message |
5. How do you know what he has told the super committee? |
ThomWV
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. Did you not listen to the speech? |
|
He said it in the speech.
|
Bluebear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
patrice
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
10. I rather imagine that it is not he, but Kathleen Sebelius who will make the recommendations based |
|
upon whatever data on quality measures that HEW has been collecting from CMS reporting systems plus whatever other legitimate research has been going on.
|
patrice
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
12. To some professional organizations, studying Medicare is not a matter of idle speculation like it is |
teddy51
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:16 PM
Response to Original message |
6. I wondered that as well, he seems almost giddy about medicare and medicaid |
|
being affected. Does he have something against medical coverage for the poorest among us?
|
FarLeftFist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:28 PM
Response to Original message |
9. I'm FOR tackling waste, fraud, and abuse. That covers a BIG chunk. |
B Calm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
23. Wow man, that would piss off Michele Bachmann's husband! |
abelenkpe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:32 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Cut waste OK but would you be ok with raising the eligibilty age? nt |
mfcorey1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
13. I am not for it but I know that is inevitable. |
abelenkpe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
24. Don't think we need to go there but do think it will be offered up. |
|
I have liberal relatives and co-workers that are OK with upping the age but they are already in their sixties.
|
tkmorris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
31. I see no reason whatsoever for it to be "inevitable" |
|
There are nations on this planet that provide similar, or better, medical care to every one of their citizens literally from cradle to grave. It is silly to suggest that we have no alternative but to DECREASE the number of citizens eligible here. We can choose to do so but it is by no means the only alternative. We have other options.
|
patrice
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
15. If they're actually allowed to go after the bullshit that goes on, there will be no need to raise |
|
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 07:40 PM by patrice
the eligibility age is my guess. Problem is that a significant amount of the bullshit is tied to the kinds of JOBS that make big campaign contributions and belong to all kinds of PACS and I don't mean rank-and-file staff here.
So, there's going to be a nasty fight about this.
|
lbrtbell
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:41 PM
Response to Original message |
16. "Adjustments" is code for "cuts" - n/t |
Marrah_G
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:42 PM
Response to Original message |
19. "adjustments" is just a weasel word |
|
It could mean anything.
Obama is very good at using words people can take to mean whatever they want.
|
mrmpa
(707 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 07:50 PM
Response to Original message |
22. Agree with you-Schultz is beginning to see things....... |
Whisp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 10:55 PM
Response to Original message |
29. the President did not say deep cuts. Ed is full of shit. Again. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 10th 2024, 05:09 AM
Response to Original message |