And all this, leads up to...
Posted on 07/26/2009 5:29:45 PM PDT by pharmamom
Ezekiel Emmanuel, Rahm’s health-wonk brother, wants the nation’s seniors to just get on with it. Death, that is. Believing that older Americans have already had their fair share of time, he suggests that they be denied health care resources—out of a concern for justice, apparently. This, from the Competitive Enterprise Institute, sums it up:
'In a January article published in the British medical journal Lancet, Emanuel and his co-authors advocate a health rationing policy that discriminates against older people. They wrote, “Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination … Treating 65-year-olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life years is not.” And, “although life-years are equally valuable to all, justice requires the fair distribution of them.”'
So, does that mean Obama is going to deny the mother-in-law medical care should she suffer illness or injury? What about his own mother? Maybe he could talk to some of those Canadian Muslims about swimming lessons for the elderly, get some tips about how to make it go smoothly.
Somehow, I don’t think this is going to go over very well with the AARP.
Let’s talk about people other than public safety officers. Let’s talk about your average government bureaucrat who gets to retire at 50.
No, pushing their retirement age to 53 is not the equivalent of pushing the age of retirement from 65 to 66 for someone who has worked for 45 years.
I think government workers should be able to retire after 30 years with a full pension—which they cannot begin to collect until they reach normal retirement age of 65.
Anyone that joins AARP is supporting communism!!!!
They haven’t got anything to offer in supplemental insurance that you can’t outside on your own.
They don’t even offer the best, SCAN!
Get the gov out of all of it. All gov programs are ripped off by the politicians, the lobbyists, the industry involved, and the consumers if they can figure it out.
Free up the insurance companies to make whatever kind of policies consumers want across state lines.
No free care to non-citizens.
(Tourists can take out short-time insurance policies when they come in (Mexico does that to Americans for driving cars)).
Let people & employers set their own priorities.
Let the free market set costs of hospitals, doctors, etc.
Get the gov out of healthcare altogether.
For the truly poor let there be charity.
TORT REFORM. Class action lawsuits against pharm companies is a major industry. Look at all the ads on TV for pharm products.
How is medicare/medicaid paying for all those powerchairs?
I’ll bet that’s interesting.
I second the last two words of your post and say them almost daily!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Look, you are illustrating my point by refusing to agree to raise the SS age no matter what scenario I propose about other people’s government benefits. No matter what I come up with, you’re going to say, “Let’s focus on XYZ” or “What about ABC?”
You are part of the problem!
I did not say I would not consider it.
But before we push out the date of retirement (social security benefits), fairness dictates that we push out the date of government bureaucrats’ retirement - bigtime.
Let’s do that - which you do not want to agree to - first.
Then we can talk about pushing back the SS date from 65.
Otherwise you will have people being forced - in the private sector - to work longer just so that government bureaucrats can retire at age 50.
THAT is not fair nor just.
I propose we raise the age at which one can receive any kind of federal government pension by three years and the age for SS benefit by one year. Is it a deal?
No. NO deal.
50 to 53 is not fair to the private sector person who is having to work til 66 or 67 or 70 (because the age will keep being raised) just to pay for a bureaucrat to have retirement freedom 15 years earlier.
No, No deal. Are you one? (government bureaucrat who got the retirement at age 50?)
And all this, leads up to...
Bravo Bravo! i knew some of these .....but not all Thanks!
So he got a 30 dollar raise for doing the procedure and told the patients he would take only what the government gave and no patient was forced to pay the 20% extra...Many doctors told their patients that they would accept the government payment and not bill them for the difference...
The cost of health care going up is strictly on the governments back..Then it was decided that insurance companies had to paid for birth control pills. (they didn't cover that when the pills first came out)
The congress decided insurance company's should pay for elective surgery like breast implants, recently for Viagra so someone guy could get an erection. Insurance companies had to pay for that. The list of what insurance company's had to cover grew and grew...
When I got married, insurance companies did not cover maternity benefits until you had been married for 9 months.. Hubbys insurance with Michigan Bell covered him and he paid extra for wife and family...It wasn't a large amount the companies didn't cover non-employees..Costs were low and everyone had hospitalization...Doctor visits were paid by the patient not insurance...But hospitalization was covered almost 100%.
We are from the government and are here to help you....Yea right, they always are out to screw you...now people expect and think they have a right to Cadillac coverage at used car prices...
I figured in one of my daydreams that all members of congress should line up on the capital steps and only shoot every other one...send the rest back to shape up and return this country to its rightful owners, the taxpayers...but Alas it was just a daydream...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.