Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obamacare's Medicare Scam
Townhall.com ^ | May 13, 2012 | Susan Brown

Posted on 05/13/2012 8:26:49 AM PDT by Kaslin

America's senior citizens deserve to enjoy their golden years in security rather than be faced with the uncertainty of having their beloved Medicare benefits yanked away thanks to provisions within the Democratic Party's darling, Obamacare.

Mathematicians Congressional Democrats are not. Democrats failed to inform seniors nearly half of Obamacare's cost would be funded initially by taking more than $500 billion from Medicare. When this information was made public, Democrats promised the cost-shifting would not in any way lead to benefit cuts. In addition, they were told Obamacare would reduce the deficit and were told everyone could keep their doctors. If Democrats genuinely believed what they were saying, they obviously failed to factor into their quirky calculations that pesky little fact that Medicare reimbursement cuts to doctors would send them packing in droves, making it a bit tricky to use the same doctor if he or she no longer treats Medicare patients.

Moreover, another side effect from this pernicious legislation is what seems to be the ultimate destruction of the Medicare Advantage (MA) program as seniors know it today. It is to no surprise that this program elected by millions of seniors has been in Obama's crosshairs for quite some time. After all, MA allows beneficiaries the ability to receive Medicare benefits via private health insurance plans. In Obama's world, MA is a waste of money but spending countless tax dollars on green energy pipedreams is considered smart investing.

Obviously, Democrats failed to consider the timing of these cuts when Obamacare was enacted. Many seniors are in the process of losing their MA plans or will discover they are about to lose them - just before the 2012 election. Most sadly, according to the Heritage Foundation, low-income seniors and minorities will be the hardest hit by these cuts. Once again, Democrats claim to be the party for minorities and the poor, but contradict their claims with stunts like this.

More than 25 percent of Medicare recipients are MA participants. Of those, a large percentage lives in key swing states like Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio. The Obama administration knew they had to do something to protect the senior citizen vote so they pulled another trick out of their trusty Chicago politics top hat when they conjured up $8.3 billion taxpayer dollars to supplement MA benefits until after the 2012 elections. After the election, all bets are off and seniors will be left to figure it out.

The Weekly Standard suggests this ploy is illegal in that "a president isn't generally thought to possess the power to reallocate American's resources to shore up his political vulnerabilities." The Government Accountability Office (GAO) apparently concurred, recently telling the administration to stop this charade the administration fronts as a "demonstration project."

This Medicare funds siphoning will continue, according to a January 3, 2011 Wall Street Journal article, "Obamacare's Medicare Cuts in the New Year." The article discloses that Obamacare will extract from "Medicare and related federal programs," $638 billion over the next ten years, and an additional $1.6 trillion in the seven years thereafter, "for a total of $2.2 trillion" in cuts.

Democrats will use their best "Mediscare" tactics to deflect the blame to Republicans for the mess they've created. You can read an informative article about this "mess" at the Galen Institute online at: http://www.galen.org/topics/obamacare-a-dozen-more-damaging-disclosures/.

In stark contrast, Republicans have common sense solutions that will leave Medicare benefits intact for today's seniors and those nearing retirement. The plan also gives younger Americans the opportunity for a far superior program to work toward, while allowing today's seniors the ability to rest in the promises America made to them long ago.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: government; medicaid; medicare; ponzi; ponzischeme

1 posted on 05/13/2012 8:26:55 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
America's senior citizens deserve to enjoy their golden years in security rather than be faced with the uncertainty of having their beloved Medicare benefits yanked away

Why?

According to what theory of justice could this possibly be true?

2 posted on 05/13/2012 8:32:20 AM PDT by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Anyone that believes a word of anything the government says should be thought of as a complete fool and that goes double for anything spouted by the governments lapdog media! Just my O2 worth of course.


3 posted on 05/13/2012 8:38:17 AM PDT by mongo141 (Revolution ver 2.0, just a matter of when, not a matter of if!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

WHY? Because our seniors have paid into these programs all their adult lives and it’s your opinion that they should be robbed...just like it’s Obama’s opinion that they should be robbed? If we could apply criminal charges to our government officials they would all be in jail for bank robbery!


4 posted on 05/13/2012 8:53:41 AM PDT by RowdyFFC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RowdyFFC
Because our seniors have paid into these programs all their adult lives and it’s your opinion that they should be robbed...just like it’s Obama’s opinion that they should be robbed?

This graph below shows that the average man and woman (average defined in the study as average income over their working lives and living to the average life expectancy) who start receiving benefits in 2010 get over 3 times more in benefits than they pay in to the system! Of importance, the study accounts for inflation by calculating all past taxes and future payments in 2010 dollars to provide an accurate comparison.

Medicare is unsustainable. It will bankrupt the country unless it is reformed. No system can survive that pays out three times more than the person contributed. We have 10,000 baby boomers retiring every day and will continue to do so for the next 20 years. By 2030, one in five will be 65 or older, twice what it is now. And by 203 there will be just two workers for every retiree.

Medicare is a pay as you go system. Today's workers pay for the benefits of today's retirees.Medicare Part A has been running in the red since 2008. And 75% of the costs for Medicare Parts B and D come from the General Fund. By law, the premiums only pay for 25% of the costs.

5 posted on 05/13/2012 9:20:55 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RowdyFFC

And I favor paying back what’s been paid in, with interest.

Most seniors, however, are taking out large, even huge, multiples of what justice allows.

THAT is the problem.


6 posted on 05/13/2012 9:44:19 AM PDT by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“In stark contrast, Republicans have common sense solutions that will leave Medicare benefits intact for today’s seniors and those nearing retirement.”

And that is why this country is financially doomed. I am not specifically against Medicare, but how can we possibly afford it with $16 trillion of debt?


7 posted on 05/13/2012 9:54:13 AM PDT by suthener
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Socialism is about plunder and death. The socialist schemes, Social Security and Medicare, have been funded by dead Americans (assets...units of labor FORCED to “contribute” who did not live long enough to be a net liability...long-term drain). When there aren’t enough dead Americans to fund these schemes, the costs go up.

The answer: More dead Americans and more funds. Hence, Obamacare/Totalitariancare, IRS agents (plundering Americans) & death panels (terminating Americans).

US Unfunded Liabilities: Social Security 15+ trillion, Prescription Drugs 20+ trillion, Medicare 82+ trillion.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

R.I.P. Americans. “Free at last”


8 posted on 05/13/2012 11:04:22 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Click

9 posted on 05/13/2012 11:26:09 AM PDT by RedMDer (https://support.woundedwarriorproject.org/default.aspx?tsid=93)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kabar

Well, much to your chagrin, the baby boomers are not having the expected longevity that the liberal whacko’s screeched about. It’s funny that you are allowing their math to confuse you on this issue. Are you denying that they robbed the social security funds in which baby boomers created HUGE surpluses to cover their social security payments? Do you understand how much money in interests those dollars should’ve added to it over the years, but have now been robbed. And you’re willing to throw seniors to wolves? Do you even understand when a person dies off they don’t get one dime of return on their money? Do you have a chart showing how much ADDED money to social security is never recovered by people who die before they collect it?


10 posted on 05/13/2012 3:07:25 PM PDT by RowdyFFC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Seeing as how Republicans have been eviscerated for suggesting reductions in the rate of spending increases, the Democrats should suffer even more for actual, genuine cuts in Medicare.

But the GOP will have to make sure the voters know this, as they won’t have the media carrying their message for them as the Democrats do. This really could be an election-sealing issue.


11 posted on 05/13/2012 3:08:38 PM PDT by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

That is just not true. The pittance of the average $800 a month is not much money calculated over the few years one has left when they retire. Especially rated against inflation. AGAIN, the baby boomers created HUGE surpluses to cover their payments. AND the baby boomers are not having the great longevity that the democrats were screeching about. I know that SS and Medicare are not sustainable in the long term. But those who have contributed to it the many will not collect on it. In my own little high school class of 31 there are already 11 of dead that won’t collect a dime.


12 posted on 05/13/2012 3:14:49 PM PDT by RowdyFFC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RowdyFFC
It’s funny that you are allowing their math to confuse you on this issue.

It's not my math or liberals math. Why don't you read the SS/Medicare Trustee's Report for 2012 or The Heritage Foundation analysis of the 2011 Report, Social Security 2011 Trustees Report Shows Permanent Deficits

Are you denying that they robbed the social security funds in which baby boomers created HUGE surpluses to cover their social security payments? Do you understand how much money in interests those dollars should’ve added to it over the years, but have now been robbed. And you’re willing to throw seniors to wolves?

I don't think you understand how SS works. When SS contributions are collected thru the payroll tax, the benefits are paid out. Any "surplus" is deposited into the General Fund and Treasury issues interest bearing, non-market T-bills in the amount of the "surplus" and deposits it into the SS Trust Fund. The SSTF contains about $2.6 trillion in what amounts to IOUs, that is the full faith and credit of the USG to honor them. They are held as part of the $15.6 trillion national debt under "Intragovernmental Holdings." They represent an unfunded liability.

SS has been running in the red, spending more on benefits than it has been taking in revenue since 2010. The shortfall is being made up by cashing in the IOUs in the SSTF. The reason SS is going permanently in the red is due to an aging population and a system that does not link payouts to revenue collected.

Source: CBO "Combined OASDI Trust Funds; January 2011 Baseline" 26 Jan 2011. Note: See "Primary Surplus" line (which is negative, indicating a deficit)

Matters are even worse than this chart shows. In December, Congress passed a Social Security tax reduction. Workers are temporarily paying 2 percentage points less, from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent, in Social Security payroll taxes this calendar year. Since the government is making up the shortfall out of general revenues, CBO’s deficit projections for the trust funds do not include that. But CBO’s figures predict that the "payroll tax holiday" will cost the government’s general fund $85 billion in this fiscal year and $29 billion in fiscal year 2012 (which starts Oct.1, 2011.) Since every dollar of that will have to be borrowed, the combined effect of the " tax holiday" and the annual deficits will amount to a $130 billion addition to the federal deficit in the current fiscal year, and $59 billion in fiscal 2012.

Social Security has passed a tipping point. For years it generated more revenue than it consumed, holding down the overall federal deficit and allowing Congress to spend more freely for other things. But those days are gone. Rather than lessening the federal deficit, Social Security has at last — as long predicted — become a drag on the government’s overall finances.

Why Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme

Do you even understand when a person dies off they don’t get one dime of return on their money? Do you have a chart showing how much ADDED money to social security is never recovered by people who die before they collect it?

The money you contribute to SS doesn't belong to you. We have had a Supreme Court case, Flemming vs. Nestor that determined that. Congress can change the rules regarding eligibility--and it has done so many times over the years. The rules can be made more generous, or they can be made more restrictive. Benefits which are granted at one time can be withdrawn, as for example with student benefits, which were substantially scaled-back in the 1983 Amendments.

Yes. there are plenty of people who paid into the system and never got benefits, but there are others who get benefits without paying into the system like spouses, children, etc. And then there are those who collect disability benefits and have a shortened earning life.

SS is a Ponzi scheme.

13 posted on 05/13/2012 3:45:43 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Let me take a wild wack at that.

Because they and their employers paid for medicare coverage throughout their working lives. Maybe that is why the “deserve” to get the money back that was supposedly for health care in their old age.

If the government liberatarians want to say there is not money for the benefits people paid for, then give them back the money with interest so they can buy their own health care coverage. You bailed out the banksters, poured billions into failed alternative energy business and paid off GM’s unions. These fascists paid no insurance premiums at all.


14 posted on 05/13/2012 3:47:08 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson
Because they and their employers paid for medicare coverage throughout their working lives. Maybe that is why the “deserve” to get the money back that was supposedly for health care in their old age.

The truth is that people get three times more out of Medicare than they paid into the system. Medicare is a pay as you go system. The benefits for today's retirees are paid by today's workers thru the payroll tax. Medicare Part A has been running a deficit since 2008. And the premiums collected for Medicare Parts B and D cover only 25% of the costs. The rest must come from the General Fund.

Medicare is Bad Medicine for Young America

15 posted on 05/13/2012 4:47:17 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Thank you for posting that.

I’m a senior myself but realize this scheme IS totally unsustainable.

The only part that makes me sad is the fact that the b@stards who are responsible for the system will skate on the blame.


16 posted on 05/13/2012 4:51:57 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kabar

What do you mean, I don’t understand. I understand all that BS perfectly well. And I also know the republicans are trying to preserve it only for the ones that are collecting now. You didn’t even freaking read my post. So any answer you have is irrelevant now. I am in perfect agreement that those coming after need a better retirements system and said so.


17 posted on 05/13/2012 4:52:47 PM PDT by RowdyFFC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
And I favor paying back what’s been paid in, with interest.

Well there's nothing to pay it back with.

But sure, just print more Geithner/Bernanke minibucks and it will all be good.

18 posted on 05/13/2012 4:55:59 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kabar

My objection was to Jim Noble’s belief that our seniors programs can be just ‘yanked’ away. And it is my belief that such a step would not be ‘JUSTICE’ to do so. It needs to be phased out. I also don’t buy the ponzi scheme math. I am but one person, contributing. I have two children contributing who already have two children contributing and will eventually have six children contributing. The many many years before my children or their children are collecting a dime. Exponentially, the ponzi scheme thingie maybe needs to be re-calculated. I’m not even drawing social security yet, but I’m already responsible for four more that are paying in besides myself and another four soon to be contributing. lmao


19 posted on 05/13/2012 5:06:58 PM PDT by RowdyFFC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kabar; Jim Noble
kabar, Jim - looks like you guys have woken up the "It's only an 'entitlement' when someone -else- is getting it" crowd.

They can be vicious, hope you've got Kevlar handy.

If the thread goes long enough, you will be likened to a Nazi eugenicist for daring to run the numbers on the actuarial future of Medicare.

20 posted on 05/13/2012 5:24:39 PM PDT by Notary Sojac (Ut veniant omnes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RowdyFFC
I don't think you read or understood what I wrote and linked you to. The entitlement programs are unsustainable. They must be reformed. The Reps are trying to hold harmless those who are 55 or older. That may or may not work.

If the entitlement programs are not reformed, they will consume the entire federal budget, i.e., all tax revenue. Anyone who thinks we can get out of this mess without great pain doesn't understand the problem. In Greece, they cut their government pensions by 20% for existing retirees and reduced the minimum wage by half. You wouldn't believe what is in their austerity budget. We would be in the streets too with such cuts. The longer we wait, the more draconian the measures will be.


21 posted on 05/13/2012 6:10:15 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RowdyFFC
Sorry, but your anecdotal stories don't cut it. We have 10,000 baby boomers retiring every day for the next 20 years. By 2030 one in every five Americans will be 65 or older, twice what it is now.

In 1950 we had 16 workers for every retiree; today it is 3.3; and by 2030 it will 2. This is why the entitlement programs are considered to be Ponzi schemes. Most of us retired today have gotten back much more than we put into the system. I have a federal pension. I have received back more than 10 times what I contributed and I just turned 69. I also get SS with a similar payback. This can't continue.

Why don't you read the link I provided to you, "Why SS is a Ponzi scheme" from Forbe's magazine. We are headed down the same road as Europe. We are witnessing the collapse of the welfare state. The Left wants to keep it going a little longer by increasing taxes, but eventually they will run out of other people's money. We can't continue to borrow 42 cents out of every federal dollar spent. We are in deep trouble. The government can't deliver on its promises.

I’m not even drawing social security yet, but I’m already responsible for four more that are paying in besides myself and another four soon to be contributing. lmao

So why is SS paying out more than it is taking in?


22 posted on 05/13/2012 6:24:23 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Just give me the money back, plus interest, and we will call it even. Otherwise, forgitaboutit.


23 posted on 05/13/2012 7:36:35 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson
Sara:

The people who got in the system before you and me already spent our money.

All of it.

And the money that those a few years younger than us paid in, too.

We aren't getting our money back. Not unless the next President is a magic dwarf who can spin straw into gold.

Sooner that all Americans of all generations accept this fact, the easier the system will be to fix.

24 posted on 05/14/2012 4:18:53 AM PDT by Notary Sojac (Ut veniant omnes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: kabar

kabar, give it up. I AGREE the social security program has to be phased out!!!! I AGREE! Get it? And it ha to be phased out starting soon. But you just can’t yank it. You have to phase it out.


25 posted on 05/14/2012 1:03:33 PM PDT by RowdyFFC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: RowdyFFC
At a minimum SS and Medicare have to be reformed. I have not suggested they be "phased out." There is no political will to do so. We need to change the programs to make them sustainable. I would like them to be privatized to a greater degree.

SS is fairly easy to reform. We can make some slight changes to the computation and COLA formulae to make it sustainable. I favor personal accounts that will allow personal wealth accummulation and be less subject to government whim and blackmail. It would be supplemented by a small defined benefit program for survivors and the disabled. We should avoid the Faustian bargain, kick the can down the road solution that Reagan and Tip O'Neill reached in 1983 when SS went into the red.

Medicare is far more difficult to solve and will be more painful. It is also more lethal to the fiscal survival of this nation. There are a number of proposals to turn the cost arc downward. Without getting into the weeds, there is no doubt that medical care will have to be rationed in some way in the future. We have three entities that could act as the main instrument for rationing, i.e., the government, the insurance companies, or the individual. I favor the individual. Only when the customer is given the control over the resources and can link costs to the quality and need for services will the marketplace be allowed to work like it should. Right now, under Medicare, there is no incentive for someone to worry about costs. Someone else pays for most of the costs whether it is the USG or the insurance companies. 9 out of 10 people on Medicare have supplementary insurance.

The longer we wait to resolve these problems, the greater the likelihood that we will "yank" them away.

26 posted on 05/14/2012 2:49:44 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: kabar

SHUT UP!


27 posted on 05/14/2012 7:55:30 PM PDT by RowdyFFC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RowdyFFC

LOL. You are an idiot.


28 posted on 05/14/2012 9:19:50 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: kabar

NO, I’m not. you are. You don’t even understand when somebody the freak agrees with your sorry behind.


29 posted on 05/16/2012 9:42:50 PM PDT by RowdyFFC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson