- Joined
- Jul 12, 2010
- Messages
- 3,715
- Reaction score
- 751
- Location
- Northern Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Does anyone deny that Medicare WILL bankrupt this country if we do not make drastic cuts?
We will cut medicare probbably around 2016 when the healthcare costs just become overwhelming and they use that as a catalyst to kill off the medicare, medicade and private healthcare insurance and go straight universal healthcare.
I wonder if any left-leaning debaters will actually respond to this thread and actually deny that the current system will bankrupt the treasury if we do not make drastic cuts.
ok, tell us where those drastic cuts should be made
Why not today?
I think probably the only way we can really run medicare given the rising costs of health care is the allocate the money and do the best we can with it. It means some treatments will get cut, but unfortunately money is finite.
Does anyone deny that Medicare WILL bankrupt this country if we do not make drastic cuts?
The rising cost of healthcare is the symptom of the problem. The problem is a major disparity in generational ratio of workers to retirees. In the next couple of decades, there will be three retirees for every one working individual. And if the Social Security trust fund has been long since busted by LBJ and every succeeding administration, and TODAY the taxes generated by FICA deductions goes straight to retirees on SS, how do liberals think we can simply tax our way out of the problem?
The rising cost of healthcare is the symptom of the problem. The problem is a major disparity in generational ratio of workers to retirees. In the next couple of decades, there will be three retirees for every one working individual. And if the Social Security trust fund has been long since busted by LBJ and every succeeding administration, and TODAY the taxes generated by FICA deductions goes straight to retirees on SS, how do liberals think we can simply tax our way out of the problem?
not when
tell us what drastic cuts should be made. specifically, who is not going to receive the medical services/medical payments they are now receiving
but you failed to answer the question. whose ox gets gored under your plan. who will no longer be eligible to receive medical services or medical payment under your improvement
Oh I agree. However, whether we tax people and run out of money or let old people pay for it themselves, were still going to run into a huge number of situations where people will die from preventable things due to the cost. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
I certainly hope I don't live to see the day this country willingly lowers itself into the ****hole of universal healthcare and govt control of our health.
The rising cost of healthcare is the symptom of the problem. The problem is a major disparity in generational ratio of workers to retirees. In the next couple of decades, there will be three retirees for every one working individual. And if the Social Security trust fund has been long since busted by LBJ and every succeeding administration, and TODAY the taxes generated by FICA deductions goes straight to retirees on SS, how do liberals think we can simply tax our way out of the problem?
Why do conservatives think this is what liberals think?
I don't know. I'm not a conservative. But liberals created the mess, and they want to keep it as is. This is not true?
The simplest way to cut it would be to refuse claims for end-of-life care for terminal patients. Spending tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for a few more weeks of life is simply not an efficient use of taxpayer money. However, such a move is politically impossible. The public is addicted to medicare, and both parties wouldn't dare touch it for fear of political backlash. While you can stem the tide with small things, like reducing medicare fraud, I doubt the public has the will to actually make real reforms.
I don't believe anyone has a right to services that will ultimately be confiscated by a third party. These programs should not exist and people should not be dependent on the government for assistance. So, to satisfy your analogy, let's gore all the oxes and have a feast!
to:I realize we can't make drastic cuts on everyone overnight. It has to be gradual.
besides killing your credibility it now causes your thread title to be ripe for a change [replace "CUT" with "END"]These programs should not exist and people should not be dependent on the government for assistance.
That's a very pesstimistic viewpoint, IMHO. Since the program nearly wastes as much as it spends, and has to tax double in order to pay the costs, think of how much money is being taken versus how much is actually spent on healthcare services. Since we are a society largely dependent on government, we rely on it for charitable purposes.
And when we can no longer afford the system entirely because we waited too long to make any cuts, then how many people will die suddenly because there is no system left to depend upon? A bankrupted system is far worse than a privatized one, in terms of higher costs, damaged quality, reduced quantity, and human fatalities.