Jump to content


Photo

Paul Ryan’s Extremist Medicare Plan-Dangerous Or A Political Lie Manufactured by Democrats?


  • Please log in to reply
148 replies to this topic

#1 LTnewsDawg

LTnewsDawg

    Just Ones and Zeros

  • RSS Bot
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 71786 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 04:53 PM

<div class="zemanta-img">
<div class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 217px"><a href="http://www.daylife.c...mpaign=z1"><img class="zemanta-img-configured" src="http://blogs-images....8/207x3002.jpg" alt="WASHINGTON - JANUARY 26: Committee Chairman P..." width="207" height="300" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)</p></div>
</div>
<p>Ready or not, a television commercial depicting Granny being pushed out of her wheelchair and over a cliff by someone resembling the newly minted GOP Vice-Presidential candidate, Congressman Paul Ryan, will soon be coming to a TV near you.</p>
<p>While Nana and Gramps are likely in no immediate danger of meeting their end at the hands of the Republican plan to modify Medicare, Congressman Ryan —as the architect-in-chief of the GOP’s controversial approach to the utilization of “premium supports” as a replacement for Medicare—is about to encounter a buzz saw of criticism over his controversial proposals.</p>
<p>The question is, will the criticism be justified or just one more attempt to paint a candidate with a highly partisan brush?</p>
<p>Let’s see if we can figure it out by first understanding the concept that sits at the center of the Ryan plan &#8211; premium supports.</p>
<p>Premium supports replace the current system of having government pay health care providers for the services, procedures, hospitalizations, etc. administered to Medicare beneficiaries with direct, cash payments to those same seniors (and other Medicare beneficiaries) who would then use the money to buy their coverage from private health insurance companies. If properly utilized, the premium support payments should provide the identical quality of care as is available through the Medicare program.</p>
<p>The theory supporting the use of premium supports suggests that, by moving coverage for the 65+ crowd to the private markets, the competition that would result would not only result in substantially lower costs to government— as there would be established “caps” on what seniors would be given to spend versus the current system where healthcare costs are largely determined by the providers and Medicare is left to pay the constantly rising bills—but would also provide better coverage for our seniors who would benefit from insurance companies creating better products in the effort to acquire the elderly’s business.</p>
<p>Additionally, with there being a more finite amount of money available to seniors to pay for their care, the trajectory of medical costs could be held down as the elderly wouldn’t have much extra money to pay for more than what they can purchase with their subsidies.</p>
<p>Sounds like a typical, GOP created plan, yes?</p>
<p>You might be surprised.</p>
<p>Just as the idea of an insurance mandate was, ironically, originated at the conservative Heritage Foundation—only to see the concept’s creators turn against the idea along with Republicans en masse once President Obama agreed to include mandated coverage in the Affordable Care Act—the notion of utilizing premium supports was the brainchild of a couple of Democrats based at Brookings and the Urban Institute.</p>
<p>Predictably, these originators, along with their fellow Democrats, have now turned sharply against the concept <em>as Congressman Ryan has proposed it</em>.</p>


View the full article

#2 Goldi

Goldi

    Cha-Ching!!!

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6235 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 09:27 PM

Obamacare will cut 700 billion from Medicare over the next ten years. Why aren't the Dems talking about that ?

Edited by Goldi, 13 August 2012 - 09:27 PM.


#3 skeptic2

skeptic2

    Ask not what your country can do for you..

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23064 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 09:52 PM

The Medicare cuts, passed in the Affordable Care Act, come in the form of reimbursement reductions to hospitals, Medicaid prescription drugs and private insurance plans under Medicare Advantage. The Congressional Budget Office projects that they’ll extend the solvency of Medicare by eight years.

AARP, the seniors’ lobby and chief gatekeeper of Medicare benefits, endorsed the Affordable Care Act despite its cuts, arguing that they wouldn’t affect seniors’ access to care. The law expanded benefits by closing the prescription drug coverage gap known as the “doughnut hole.” The hospital and drug industries also endorsed the legislation, believing that the additional customers via the coverage expansion would more than make up for the cuts.

Obama and Ryan agree that Medicare per-beneficiary cost growth needs to be capped at per-capita GDP plus 0.5 percent. But they disagree on what to cut in order to get there.

Ryan’s plan under the Path To Prosperity would end Medicare as an insurance program that directly pays medical bills for the elderly. It would be replaced with a fixed subsidy which seniors may use to buy competing private and public insurance policies on an exchange. If the value of the subsidy does not keep up with the growth of health care costs, seniors would make up the cost and pay higher medical bills.
The Congressional Budget Office projects that Ryan’s plan would raise seniors’ out-of-pocket expenses by $6,500 per year.


http://tpmdc.talking...ma-medicare.php

Edited by skeptic2, 13 August 2012 - 09:54 PM.

A bad beginning makes a bad ending. Euripides, Aegeus. Greek tragic dramatist (484 BC - 406 BC)

#4 ralph jesus

ralph jesus

    Really Senior Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2091 posts
  • Locationlancaster

Posted 14 August 2012 - 05:22 AM

poor mitt. he was for the ryan plan before he was against it. repubs just cannot take responsibility for their actions so it will be funsville watching ryan trying to explain away his plans to gut medicare so the rich can have a big fat tax cut they don't need.
sorry ryan thinks americans are so shallow and judas like that those over 55 will sell out the rest of the country as long as they get theirs.
i say americans are not that selfish.
imagine hitler telling the older jews that they are just going on a train ride and then have a nice warm shower so no need to worry...it's those under 55 he will murder en masse.

#5 toobad

toobad

    Really Senior Member

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2001 posts
  • Locationhere

Posted 14 August 2012 - 05:35 AM

poor mitt. he was for the ryan plan before he was against it. repubs just cannot take responsibility for their actions so it will be funsville watching ryan trying to explain away his plans to gut medicare so the rich can have a big fat tax cut they don't need.
sorry ryan thinks americans are so shallow and judas like that those over 55 will sell out the rest of the country as long as they get theirs.
i say americans are not that selfish.
imagine hitler telling the older jews that they are just going on a train ride and then have a nice warm shower so no need to worry...it's those under 55 he will murder en masse.


Funny you should mention it Ralph...imagine hitler telling the older jews that they are just going on a train ride and then have a nice warm shower so no need to worry...it's those under 55 he will murder en masse.
Seems to me just like Obama explaining his new healthcare plan...Dont worry people ...the showers will do ya good....

#6 Goldi

Goldi

    Cha-Ching!!!

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6235 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 05:54 AM

The Medicare cuts, passed in the Affordable Care Act, come in the form of reimbursement reductions to hospitals, Medicaid prescription drugs and private insurance plans under Medicare Advantage.


What do you think the results of that will be? Less doctors treating Medicare patients, which means less access to care for the elderly. Medicare doctors are already receiving lower rates than average and Obamacare will lower them even more. Under Obamacare doctors will be gauged against their peers based on how many procedures were done for the elderly and how much it costs the Medicare program. All payments will be automatically cut by 5% to anyone who falls into the 90th percentile or above. Common sense would dictate that this rule would probably affect specialists such as oncologists, Cardiologists, etc.

This would mean that every year 10% of Medicare physicians will be punished if they perform too many procedures, order too many tests, or prescribe too many drugs, for those on Medicare, with no thought about whether the treatments result in better patient outcomes. In other words, don’t spend too much money on those over age 65, if you do, pay the penalty.

Edited by Goldi, 14 August 2012 - 05:55 AM.


#7 Goldi

Goldi

    Cha-Ching!!!

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6235 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 06:04 AM

Ryan’s plan under the Path To Prosperity would end Medicare as an insurance program that directly pays medical bills for the elderly. It would be replaced with a fixed subsidy which seniors may use to buy competing private and public insurance policies on an exchange. If the value of the subsidy does not keep up with the growth of health care costs, seniors would make up the cost and pay higher medical bills.
The Congressional Budget Office projects that Ryan’s plan would raise seniors’ out-of-pocket expenses by $6,500 per year.



Obamacare isn't keeping up keeping up with the growth of healthcare cost either, beings it is reducing the reimbursements to the doctors and hospitals. So what is the difference? Talk to anyone on Medicare and it is almost a necessity to have supplemental health insurance to cover what Medicare doesn't cover. Seniors must make up the cost and under Obamcare it will be worse.

Edited by Goldi, 14 August 2012 - 06:04 AM.


#8 ralph jesus

ralph jesus

    Really Senior Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2091 posts
  • Locationlancaster

Posted 14 August 2012 - 06:05 AM

ryan will have to be held accountable for his plan which will be very difficult to explain away with smoke and mirrors. the bottom line is that he wants to cut programs for those who need them to stay alive while giving tax cuts to the super wealthy. how the hell he sells that as christian is beyond me.

Edited by ralph jesus, 14 August 2012 - 06:11 AM.


#9 toobad

toobad

    Really Senior Member

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2001 posts
  • Locationhere

Posted 14 August 2012 - 06:48 AM

ryan will have to be held accountable for his plan which will be very difficult to explain away with smoke and mirrors. the bottom line is that he wants to cut programs for those who need them to stay alive while giving tax cuts to the super wealthy. how the hell he sells that as christian is beyond me.


Ralph medicare is a mess...and his plan is just another way of fixing it...he said he would be looking for bipartisan ideas to the plan...you can raise taxes on the wealthy and it wont fix the mess...we need a new plan for future generations...Obamas plan is just more of the same..."smoke and mirrors..with unproven projections and magic math...Obamas plan is to push it out of the way until he is done with another four...

#10 toobad

toobad

    Really Senior Member

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2001 posts
  • Locationhere

Posted 14 August 2012 - 06:50 AM

Ryan added, “My mom is a Medicare senior in Florida. Our point is we need to preserve their benefits, because government made promises to them that they’ve organized their retirements around. In order to make sure we can do that, you must reform it for those of us who are younger. And we think these reforms are good reforms. That have bipartisan origins. They started from the Clinton commission in the late ’90s

#11 skeptic2

skeptic2

    Ask not what your country can do for you..

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23064 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 06:58 AM

At a minimum, insurance for a 65 year old will cost twice what it costs to insure a 50 year old. This is based on the cost of Medicare HMO's.
A bad beginning makes a bad ending. Euripides, Aegeus. Greek tragic dramatist (484 BC - 406 BC)

#12 toobad

toobad

    Really Senior Member

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2001 posts
  • Locationhere

Posted 14 August 2012 - 07:03 AM

The best thing about the long-term budget proposal from Paul Ryan, the Republican chairman of the House Budget Committee, is that it forces Americans to confront the implications of their choices. If voters want taxes that amount to roughly 18 percent of gross domestic product, then they are going to have to accept a government that looks roughly like what Ryan is describing.

The Democrats are on defense because they are unwilling to ask voters to confront the implications of their choices. Democrats seem to believe that most Americans want to preserve the 20th-century welfare-state programs. But they are unwilling to ask voters to pay for them, and they are unwilling to describe the tax increases that would be required to cover their costs.

Raising taxes on the rich will not do it. There aren’t enough rich people to generate the tens of trillions of dollars required to pay for Medicare, let alone all the other programs. Democrats, thus, face a fundamental choice. They can either reverse President Barack Obama’s no-new-middle-class-taxes pledge or they can learn to live with Paul Ryan’s version of government.

Until they find a way to pay for the programs they support, they will not be serious players in this game.

Because he had the courage to take the initiative, Ryan’s budget plan will be the starting point for future discussions, at least as long as Republicans control at least one house of Congress. But it should be acknowledged that the Ryan plan has several grave weaknesses.

As configured, it is unacceptable to moderate voters and stands no chance of passage. Substantively, it does not address the structural problems plaguing the American economy: wage stagnation, inequality, declining growth rates. It doesn’t have an answer to rising health-care costs. Nor does it leave room for policy creativity; there’s no money to allow future generations to rise to unforeseen challenges. So, while acknowledging that Ryan has done the nation a great service by providing a starting point, we should expect his budget to evolve as the debate goes forward.

First, though Ryan is absolutely right to call for a fundamental reform of the tax code, we should probably aim to generate tax revenues equal to 20 percent of GDP, not the 18 percent he proposes. This would allow us to preserve some of the discretionary spending programs that Ryan cuts.

For example, Ryan would cut Pell grants to their 2008 levels. This is not the horrendous monstrosity some liberals are screaming about. But the economic challenge from China and India demands that we spend more on Pell grants, scientific research, early childhood education and other investments in human capital than Ryan proposes.

Second, we can’t let the oldsters get off scot-free. As my colleague David Leonhardt reported in The New York Times, two 56-years-olds with average earnings will pay about $140,000 in dedicated Medicare taxes over their lifetimes. They will receive about $430,000 in benefits. This is an immoral imposition on future generations. The Ryan budget wouldn’t touch this generation, but a bipartisan budget deal should ask middle-class and affluent boomers to make a sacrifice for their country. Slow the growth in health-care benefits now and dedicate that money to paying down the debt and investing in the young.

Third, we still need a calm discussion about controlling health-care costs. Just about every expert agrees that we can’t afford to have Medicare pay for every new procedure that medical technologists devise. The president’s health-reform plan relies on a centralized board of technocrats to restrict choices. The Ryan plan relies on a premium support model that would allow individuals to exercise greater control over what sorts of procedures they would not be covered for. We probably need a system that takes advantage of both models.

Ryan is forcing Americans to confront the implications of their choices. With a few straightforward changes, his budget could be transformed into a politically plausible center-right package that would produce a fiscally sustainable welfare state while addressing the country’s structural economic problems. I suspect the process Ryan has started will take us back toward the moderate framework the Simpson-Bowles deficit commission proposed a year ago.

Great journeys begin with one bold step.



#13 skeptic2

skeptic2

    Ask not what your country can do for you..

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23064 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 07:11 AM

You pasted David Brooks from April 2011.

The cost of living increases have been changed since then, and that is probably the single biggest problem with Ryan's plan.
A bad beginning makes a bad ending. Euripides, Aegeus. Greek tragic dramatist (484 BC - 406 BC)

#14 toobad

toobad

    Really Senior Member

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2001 posts
  • Locationhere

Posted 14 August 2012 - 07:25 AM

My point is the Ryan plan does get the discussion started...it may not be the perfect plan..and as anyone knows would not pass in its present form..but it does offer an alternative to just going on as it is...and as the writer points out...raising taxes on the wealthy is not the answer..I believe if Ryan and Mitt win this election or not...some form of the Ryan plan will be considered in the future...

#15 52skidoo

52skidoo

    Cha-Ching!!!

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14005 posts
  • LocationLancaster County

Posted 14 August 2012 - 07:59 AM

ryan will have to be held accountable for his plan which will be very difficult to explain away with smoke and mirrors. the bottom line is that he wants to cut programs for those who need them to stay alive while giving tax cuts to the super wealthy.



how about these descriptions...


"Right-wing social engineering." - Newt Gingrich May 2011


Donald Trump: Paul Ryan Budget Is 'Catastrophic' - 4/10/12

raising taxes on the wealthy is not the answer.



Romney - Ryan 2012: Sacrifice For The 1% !


there's a winner....

Edited by 52skidoo, 14 August 2012 - 07:59 AM.


#16 ralph jesus

ralph jesus

    Really Senior Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2091 posts
  • Locationlancaster

Posted 14 August 2012 - 08:05 AM

The choice is to rule and police the world or take care of our own
Let Poland buy their own star wars

#17 Mark Glaeser

Mark Glaeser

    Language Bastardizer

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9083 posts
  • LocationBerks County

Posted 14 August 2012 - 11:04 AM

The choice is to design a government according to our Constitution,
or just spend money on whatever we feel like.....
Live. And let live. Joe Jacobs

#18 toobad

toobad

    Really Senior Member

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2001 posts
  • Locationhere

Posted 14 August 2012 - 11:21 AM

The choice is to rule and police the world or take care of our own
Let Poland buy their own star wars


Just in case you haven't noticed ...we have been policing the world the past 4 years at least as much as we ever had...And our own have been left far behind...the poor and the middle class have lost ground in the past 4 years...

#19 Citydweller

Citydweller

    Head Inmate

  • Administrators
  • 8667 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 11:32 AM

Obamas plan is just more of the same..."smoke and mirrors..with unproven projections and magic math...


Hmmm.... magic math vs. magic underwear.... what a choice!


"P.S. If you do not receive this, of course it must have been miscarried; therefore I beg you to write and let me know."
- Sir Boyle Roche, M.P.


#20 toobad

toobad

    Really Senior Member

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2001 posts
  • Locationhere

Posted 14 August 2012 - 11:39 AM

Hmmm.... magic math vs. magic underwear.... what a choice!




this guy dont seem to think so...

Edited by toobad, 14 August 2012 - 11:40 AM.


#21 52skidoo

52skidoo

    Cha-Ching!!!

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14005 posts
  • LocationLancaster County

Posted 15 August 2012 - 07:10 AM

ryan voted against erskine bowles...

what a coincidence...

#22 toobad

toobad

    Really Senior Member

  • LancTalkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2001 posts
  • Locationhere

Posted 15 August 2012 - 07:21 AM

erskine loves Ryan...so he's got to be good...after all he's from the great Clinton years....he knows a good plan when he see's one...

#23 52skidoo

52skidoo

    Cha-Ching!!!

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14005 posts
  • LocationLancaster County

Posted 15 August 2012 - 07:38 AM

not according to reagan's budget director...


Paul Ryan’s Fairy-Tale Budget Plan - NYT 8/13/12


http://www.nytimes.c...-plan.html?_r=2

#24 skeptic2

skeptic2

    Ask not what your country can do for you..

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23064 posts

Posted 15 August 2012 - 09:03 AM

Ryan voted for the Iraq War, the bank bailout, the unfunded Medicare prescription drug plan and the Bush tax cuts

But he voted against Simpson-Bowles

fiscal conservative..
A bad beginning makes a bad ending. Euripides, Aegeus. Greek tragic dramatist (484 BC - 406 BC)

#25 nvh

nvh

    Jerk Whisperer

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14882 posts
  • LocationConestoga

Posted 15 August 2012 - 09:21 PM

Ryan voted for the Iraq War, the bank bailout, the unfunded Medicare prescription drug plan and the Bush tax cuts

But he voted against Simpson-Bowles

fiscal conservative..


He must have had one of those conversions I hear bandied about.

Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;   Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere   The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst    Are full of passionate intensity.

W B Yeats


#26 Guest_daddyG_*

Guest_daddyG_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 August 2012 - 04:48 AM

Priceless, liberals using Simpson-Bowles!

A trio of House Democrats is urging moderators at this fall’s presidential debates to look beyond the Bowles-Simpson deficit plan when they ask domestic policy questions.

Reps. Mike Honda (Calif.), Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.) and Jan Schakowsky (Ill.) say the plan from the president’s fiscal commission is just one path for reining in deficits and aiding the economic recovery – and is deeply flawed, to boot.



But while the reasons for the Republican opposition to Bowles-Simpson may be better known, a majority of the Democrats on the commission – including Schakowsky – also voted against it.


http://thehill.com/b...-bowles-simpson

Edited by daddyG, 16 August 2012 - 04:48 AM.


#27 nvh

nvh

    Jerk Whisperer

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14882 posts
  • LocationConestoga

Posted 16 August 2012 - 05:29 AM

Priceless, liberals using Simpson-Bowles!

[/font][/color]



http://thehill.com/b...-bowles-simpson


Nuance is not your friend.

Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;   Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere   The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst    Are full of passionate intensity.

W B Yeats


#28 52skidoo

52skidoo

    Cha-Ching!!!

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14005 posts
  • LocationLancaster County

Posted 16 August 2012 - 07:50 AM

Nuance is not your friend.



that's what makes them so darned funny...


gop = out of touch

#29 Guest_daddyG_*

Guest_daddyG_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 August 2012 - 08:33 AM

No shortage of laughs from liberals on this message board.

Why do you think I come here?

#30 52skidoo

52skidoo

    Cha-Ching!!!

  • LT Founder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14005 posts
  • LocationLancaster County

Posted 16 August 2012 - 08:48 AM

No shortage of laughs from liberals on this message board.


BUBBLE LOGIC:

i know you are...but what am i




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users