May 24 2011

Message of 2012: Let The “Under 55” Decide Medicare’s Future

Published by at 7:27 am under All General Discussions

NY-26 is having a special election today to fill a US House Seat. The race has been over examined to death, with the latest poll showing a measly +4% lead in a race which has to be a toss up at the moment. But it will also measure the temperature of the electorate for 2012. Bottom line: this is a R+6 district which probably should not be (and may not be) in play.

The race had one foul element, a democrat who portrayed himself as a Tea Party candidate. That is going to roil this race big time. He is not crashing in the polls after being exposed as a dirty-trick-charlatan. The question is will his lying pull enough votes from the GOP candidate to sneak the Democrat in, or will he taint the Democrat and ensure a GOP hold.

One thing is for sure, polling in this race is all guesstimating.

My take is this. The political tsunami of 2009 (VA and DE governorships) and 2010 (MA Senate and the enormous November drubbing) has not subsided yet. Obama is tacking still further left and his policies are losing more and more ground by the day. Support for Obamacare, his liberal spending spree and the resulting mountain of debt has tanked. He is around -20% in all of those areas.

Moreover, the news trust in the news media has gone down the tubes with their anointed candidate: Now all the left-wing news outlets are in the crapper when it comes to public confidence.

In a stunning rejection of network news and nightly news anchors, cable news, driven by the Fox News Channel and mouthy Bill O’Reilly, is now the top most trusted source—by a mile.

In a new poll from Boston’s Suffolk University, more than a quarter of the nation says Fox is tops when it comes to who they trust the most and O’Reilly is the most believable.

I ain’t buying the O’Reilly standard – all this means is we have a long way to go to educate the people on how DC malfunctions. But this rejection of main stream liberal media has to be bleeding out into a desire to be polled in my opinion. So I actually expect the GOP candidate to win.

But either way, the test seems to be Medicare changes to save the program. And if they GOP candidate does lose, and it is because the GOP had the spine to propose fixes, then the answer is obvious.

The GOP better not run from the Medicare issue. Fixing that with market based reforms and rejecting the disastrous path Obamacare is on for our seniors is a test of the Tea Party values. In my opinion, the message from here to 2012 is simple and blunt, since most of the resistance to Medicare changes are coming from those excluded from the changes – those over 55 years of age.

If the GOP is hurting due to the Medicare position, then it is time to remind those over 55 they are excluded, and to let those of us under 55 to decide Medicare’s Future without their intervention. And I am serious here. The Baby Boomers have left an gaping economic wound on this nation. They piled up mountains of debt and ridiculously hopeless promises. They gave our freedoms away to nameless and faceless bureaucrats, and now they have their snouts in the retirement troughs.

Well OK then – suckle away. But realize we later generations would prefer a different future. So please let us decide for ourselves.

21 responses so far

21 Responses to “Message of 2012: Let The “Under 55” Decide Medicare’s Future”

  1. MerlinOS2 says:

    I have to agree that medicare changes will require phasing in over the long term so those coming into the program can know what to expect.

    I actually read a well thought out article about a month ago suggesting a total phase out over about 50 years.

    If future medicare benefits are lowered as they need to be then contributions into the ponzi scheme can be adjusted to match that.

    That was the basic premise of the article I read and it proposed the long time frame to allow the boomer bubble to pass.

    All in all it made perfect sense.

  2. kathie says:

    A rant……

    Those retiring now and in the next few years, those born just after World War ll, are a generation of morally sanctimonious blow hards, who were handed the riches of generations of hard work and peace and took it all granted while trashing the hand that gave it to them. The kinder, gentler world they demand that others pay for, is a cover for their own profound selfishness and self-centeredness.

    Please stop “it isn’t who we are”. Someone doesn’t have a job, “it isn’t who we are”, someone doesn’t have medical insurance, “it isn’t who we are”, someone is fat, “it isn’t who we are”, the answer to every ill that befalls mankind, take from someone who works, plans, sacrifices, lives with in their means, and give to the guy who thought tomorrow would never come in a real way, to prove “this is who we are”. Please, I have had it, with the “do gooders” who always want someone else (the rich and powerful) to take care of the victims. Do they extend their own hand? NO! Why, because they see themselves as victims too.

  3. momdear1 says:

    One of the problems with Medicare (and Social Security) is that it has been extended to cover non elderly “disabled” people who were shifted off welfare rolls into Social Security back when SS was flush with funds. We have alcoholics, drug adicts, the retarded, those disabled by birth defects, the lazy and just about everyone else who can’t or won’t work, covered under this system. A recent Local newspaper article says it all. Parents of a 23 year old “handicapped” (from birth) man were complaining that the loss of Medicare/Medicaid coverage would deprive him of the necessities of life which included his motorized wheelchair, diapers, life support machines machines (which included a feeding tube) , physical therapy and other services which kept him alive. Why is our government spending millions of dollars on health and medical services to keep someone like this alive? Nature usually takes care of hopeless cases by aflicting them with problems that end their suffering while they are young.. This is just another example of our government thinking it is omnipotent and thinking if they just spend enough money they can overcome the laws of nature. Well, looks like the chickens are coming home to roost.

  4. crosspatch says:

    I believe Ryan’s notion if simply getting rid of the government insurance program and handing private operators a premium payment for seniors would work best. People would get the same care, they could choose their own provider, and a huge government bureaucracy could be eliminated. Just send a premium payment to the private insurance company of your choice and they are done.

    Sounds pretty simple to me.

  5. lurker9876 says:

    How much would a premium payment be per month?

  6. AJStrata says:

    Lurker,

    depends on the plan and the company offering. The way it works would be the government would subsidize the insurance company based on the number of ‘medicare’ members using their plan. That way the more people the entice the more subsidy they receive.

    We consumers simply pay the premium that is left over, based on our income (‘means’). Those who can afford pay full price, those who are poor pay nothing.

  7. WWS says:

    We have to consider the possibility that a majority of the voters are not willing to take the steps necessary to fix things, and thus are not willing to face the reality of the situation.

    This isn’t a very far-fetched idea; that is exactly what the voters of California and Illinois have already done. Add those two states together, and that’s about 50 million Americans who already live in systems that are past the point of no return. (everybody see that California is now going to have to start releasing felons early?)

    A recent poll showed that 53% of voters did not want to see any medicare cuts, and a similar margin felt that the budget could be balanced without changing medicare.

    Both of those outcomes are mathematically impossible, but that doesn’t mean that a voting majority doesn’t believe them.

    *Unless* people like us, who understand where we are headed, can successfully convince people that this is going to cause a disaster, then the *Only* choice any of us will have is to just sail along until the entire system collapses, and then hope we can pick up some of the pieces of the wreckage.

    It’s important to recognize this choice, since not *all* of the Democrat pols are idiots, and this is exactly what the more intelligent ones among them have decided.

    Let me repeat that, since I am very serious: a growing segment of the political leadership of this country now sees a personal and political advantage in policies that they *Know* will bring about the economic destruction and collapse of this country. They are counting on blaming others and being the “last men” standing.

    Better to rule in hell than serve in heaven, after all, or so they think. I don’t think it will work out well for them – look at what’s happening to the socialists in Greece and Spain. But it won’t be much consolation to know that they are going down into the pit with the rest of us when it happens – I’d rather defeat them now.

    These are the stakes – if we lose this battle, we lose the country. And that is a real possibility.

  8. dbostan says:

    Wo. getting into a debate over the Ryan plan (I am favourable of it), I am disappointed that the repubics are not able to play politics as well as the demsheviks.
    This plan, dealing with entitlements, was not exactly the mandate of the 2010 elections.
    The time for it would have been after the 2012 elections.
    Now, this plan on the table, it provides ammunition for the demsheviks to demagogue the issue.
    Again, I can only conclude the repubics are children when compared to the demsheviks, who play for keeps, to the detriment of our country and society.

  9. Mike M. says:

    I like the Ryan plan for one Great Big Reason…

    It leverages choice.

    Take a look at what the Federal Civil Service gets. They don’t get a single health care plan – they get a choice of plans. About 500 different providers (most regional HMOs), with about a dozen covering any one area. The employee pays a subsidized rate, which is high enough to make him a careful shopper. It works great.

    The Republicans need to push Ryan’s plan as a Plan With Choice. And to point out that the Democrats have a large political stake in NOT fixing Medicare. Fix Medicare, and the Dems lose Medi-Scare.

  10. crosspatch says:

    There is another important difference as well. If an insurance company does you wrong, you can flee to a different one. So if a provider doesn’t meet your needs or somehow provides substandard service, you can pick a new provider.

    When the government provides the insurance, there is no place to go. You can’t flee the government without fleeing the country. There is nowhere else to turn for an alternative. You are just flat stuck. The government has no incentive to provide good service, either, because it isn’t like they are going to lose any “customers” over it.

  11. crosspatch says:

    As for NY-26, it is going to be interesting to see the difference between the pre-election polling numbers and the actual results. A recent election in Canada saw the Conservative Party sweep to an outright majority government in the face of pre-election polling that showed a Labor Party win. Turns out Labor not only didn’t win, they came in third. The worst result for Labor in Canadian history.

    So … I really don’t believe the polls and there is really only one poll that matters; the one at the voting booth.

  12. WWS says:

    very hard to believe that the fake “tea party” candidate can pull 13% of the vote. Especially when voters in the district know who he is; he’s been on the ballot before.

  13. Wilbur Post says:

    I’m a Boomer and over 55 but I have long argued this same point. We can’t expect younger workers to pay thru the nose to keep these programs growing at the same rate. It ain’t fair and if the shoe were on the other foot, I would be revolting. Adjustments HAVE to be made and the longer they are delayed, the more disruptive they are going to be. The old adage says that what can’t go on, won’t. The current situation simply can’t go on.

  14. jan says:

    The debate over entitlements that are going bust, in relatively a short time, just demonstrates how difficult it is to evoke reality among folks who get used to government handouts. All the charts and math say that the trust funds are rapidly drying out for SS and medicare — the latter in 2024! It’s a death knell, though, that is not being heeded. Is it greed, ignorance, or simply a tin ear that people don’t see how an old program has run it’s course, and a new approach is now needed????

    However, I agree with Kathy, in her rant, how seniors have become sanctimonious in putting their age before basically wisdom. How can this older generation be so insensitive as to not want to leave a better legacy behind than, “I got mine. I don’t care whether you get yours or not.” Because that is the message they are sending out. Somehow their needs are so much greater, in life’s equation, than young struggling families. I don’t get it!

  15. ivehadit says:

    Yes, the hippies rebelled against the establishment in the ’60’s and now WE are rebelling against them!

    I will say this: the baby boomer generation has been paying for the seniors’ medicare and social security for 40 years.

    All I say to D.C. is, give me my money that you promised would be there at my retirement…forget the growth which is basically zero (this would be malpractice in any other investment business) just give me my principle back.

  16. Fai Mao says:

    AJ,
    Thank you for saying that the blame for this belongs on those born just after WW2. However, it extends to the previous generation as weel

    They have voted for FDR, HST, JFK, LBJ, WJC and anyother SOB that promisied them something for nothing

  17. kathie says:

    Jan, I was not referring to those who are collecting Medicare now. They have few choices as at 65 Insurance companies will no longer sell, those medicare eligible, insurance because the government is responsible by law.

    I was referring to those who were of the hippy generation either in age or thinking, sex, drugs and Viet Nam. They hated the bankers, their fathers and grandfathers who had made it because they did it on the backs of the less fortunate, but their hands were always out. They still are, can’t find enough money that belongs to others to spend on their super moral causes.

    Either people are going to choose insurance companies or the government death panels.

  18. WWS says:

    long post caught up in moderation.

    Well, Hochul has won, Corwin has lost. Going to be seen, rightly or wrongly, as a big defeat for Ryan’s plan.

    It may be that our only option is to allow the system to collapse and try to rebuild something from the ashes. The problem with that idea is that our democracy may not survive the process.

  19. crosspatch says:

    Defeated by the ghost of Ross Perot.

  20. lurker9876 says:

    wws, I’m afraid that failure leading to collapse is the only choice. I have a hard time envisioning the increase in monetizing of the debts (printing more money) to support us versys the value of the dollar AND why we have fiat money.

    As for the ghost of Ross Perot, the voters of NY-26 should have already known about how Bill Clinton won and cast their votes to Corwin. They didn’t learn from history. If they didn’t like what’s coming, I have no sympathy for them.