Skip to main content

View Diary: Tell Congress: No Benefit Cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid (121 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What about if I'm covered under the ACA? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior

    I'll be eligible for joining Medicaid thanks to my lack of income level. That eligibility doesn't end until I reach Medicare age. To me, being able to be on Medicaid, or receive subsidies under the ACA until Medicare kicks in doesn't bother me at all because I have coverage either way.

    I do not support raising the eligibility age. I believe in Medicare For All, or a robust Medicare Buy-In program at the very least.

    To me, the "benefit" here is the ability to see a doctor and afford prescription and other services. If you can get that through one avenue instead of the other, then there shouldn't be a problem.

    Understanding raising the age in this sense, this would be seen as a big deal and we might be able to get something we couldn't otherwise get by doing it.

    "There is nothing more dreadful than the habit of doubt. Doubt separates people. It is a poison that disintegrates friendships and breaks up pleasant relations. It is a thorn that irritates and hurts; it is a sword that kills.".. Buddha

    by sebastianguy99 on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 01:10:50 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The effect of raising the Medicare age and ACA (5+ / 0-)

      Bowles argued that 65-66 yr olds would be covered by ACA.

      Studies have shown that the actual effect of this saves the government basically nothing while shifting costs to 65-66 yr old beneficiaries.

      Out-of-pocket costs would increase, on average, by $1,200 for 240,000 people aged 65 and 66 who purchase coverage through a health insurance exchange and have incomes between 300 and 400 percent of the federal poverty level ($32,670-$43,560).

      Under current law, these 65- and 66-year-old retirees’ average out-of-pocket costs would be $4,800 in 2014, out of a total Social Security benefit of $18,464.

      If forced out of Medicare and onto the health insurance exchanges, their average out-of-pocket health care costs would grow to $6,000, out of a total Social Security benefit of $18,464.

      As a result, if the Medicare eligibility age is raised, out-of-pocket health care costs would go from consuming 26 percent to 32 percent of those 65- and 66-year-old retirees’ Social Security check.

      Out-of-pocket costs would increase, on average, by $2,200 for 1.1 million retirees with employer-sponsored retiree health plans – assuming that the increased cost to employers did not cause them to terminate these plans.

      Out-of-pocket costs would increase, on average, by $500 for 1 million retirees with employer-sponsored health plans – assuming that the increased cost to employers did not cause them to terminate these plans.

      Higher Health Costs Study Source: Social Security Works analysis of estimates from Social Security Trustees, 2011, and Kaiser Family Foundation, 2011.  
      •  Raising the age is just wrong headed (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        elwior, 4mygirls

        we should be lowering the age with a Medicare buy-in leading to Medicare for all.
        A likely scenario of raising the age is that millions of aged 65, 66 seniors would lean upon Medicaid for support, so instead of a monthly contribution to Medicare, the government would be picking up the entire bill.

        "Lets show the rascals what Citizens United really means."

        by smiley7 on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 03:13:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Nothing there about Medicaid (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        elwior

        If someone retires before eligibility, under ACA, they go on Medicaid unless they have income to pay for insurance within the exchange. If someone doesn't have the income and goes on Medicaid, their out-of-pocket expenses aren't likely to be as much.

        Also, your link speaks to only a certain 3.3 million people, what about everyone else? We also do not know what the exchanges will look like in the future (remember, only those of us under 55 are effected) so it is quite difficult to say what happens 20-30 years from now.

        Again, I do not favor raising the age, I want to lower it and invite more people in. Why we cannot play offense here is beyond me, but oh well, more defense it is.

        But I want a complete consideration of all the options. I do not want a repeat of Summer 11 when people here were convinced that Social Security and M/M benefits had been cut in the final agreement we now know as the "fiscal cliff".

        "There is nothing more dreadful than the habit of doubt. Doubt separates people. It is a poison that disintegrates friendships and breaks up pleasant relations. It is a thorn that irritates and hurts; it is a sword that kills.".. Buddha

        by sebastianguy99 on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 03:36:47 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Medicaid, when it works, is good. But what about (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      greenbell

      all those cases when it doesn't? What about the exodus of providers from Medicaid (because private insurers pay more and help them keep their prices inflated)?

      Having a benefit doesn't mean much if actually exercising that benefit is cumbersome or, in some cases, impossible. What you describe is a fig leaf: the people who get the leaf are happy (and good for them; they ought not to have to fight and scrabble for the basic care they get), but everybody else is still suffering. It is amusing how quickly some forget about everybody else once their own immediate needs are (perceived to be) taken care of.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site