After 72 years, I can no longer afford to love my country.
10
I bet the federal groverment raises there salary we need to get these people out of our government they get all there insurance free they need to be on the dank insurance plans we are gas may be lower but the price of food didn't and the doctors have raised there prices s office call had went up to 150.00 dollars this is un real what in the hell are you all thinking you are giving illegals free insurance and our social security when these people never paid in any this is unseen so give give us our raise and leave Medicare alone
4
Many commenters are trashing the White House and Democrats saying they are anti- elderly disabled, but if memory serves me correctly, wasn't it Bush and the Conservatives who still want to turn Social Security over for private enterprises to run. Even Medicare, which most conservatives want to abolish. Being old is that great if it means losing your memory.
6
If there is no COLA for Medicare or SSI, then there must be no COLA (or any raise) for federal employees.
Do people here realize that the government has multiple ways to calculate inflation? Let's take the Medical Device tax. Inflationary increases are calculated NOT on the Federally published inflation rate, but on a separate rate based on the increase in salaries for those working at the FDA as well as for those cost of living (including housing) increases for the states were those people live (Maryland, DC, Virginia). It cannot go down, only up (i.e. deflation and recession ignored). That is only one out of hundreds of agencies that cook the books on inflation.
All brought to you by politicians, and those weren't the Reps this time.
Do people here realize that the government has multiple ways to calculate inflation? Let's take the Medical Device tax. Inflationary increases are calculated NOT on the Federally published inflation rate, but on a separate rate based on the increase in salaries for those working at the FDA as well as for those cost of living (including housing) increases for the states were those people live (Maryland, DC, Virginia). It cannot go down, only up (i.e. deflation and recession ignored). That is only one out of hundreds of agencies that cook the books on inflation.
All brought to you by politicians, and those weren't the Reps this time.
1
Before you go trying to take this out on federal employees, go back and check the raises they've had in the last ten years. They've had little or no increase in years when Soc. Sec. went up significantly. Fair payment for those currently employed has nothing to do with Soc. Sec. - you just want to punish others because you think you're not being treated fairly. Do your research and see how fairly you think Fed. Employees have been treated since the beginning of the Obama Administration.
2
All I can say about our political leaders ... on BOTH .. sides of the aisles .. they stink .. they are KILLING the middle class, lower class and retirees ... then the new bunch's 1st. order of business... pass a law limiting the number of terms they can serve and eliminate all their male children from office to ensure they do not hand their office to their progeny... and o by the way ... eliminate all consultants and brown money bag totters and corporate bag stuffers (ceo, cfo, c any thing..)
6
they killed the middle class when Bill Clinton and his Republican colleagues okay'd the shipping of our jobs over to China, maybe even further back when Reagan busted the Air Traffic controllers union.. Good old American Capitalism, a Ponzi scheme for sure.
8
Congressional pay should remain stagnant if social security doesn't increase.
15
Not only inadequate reporting, but also an inadequate system. I was penalized for NOT taking Medicare when I turned 65 (I had coverage from my employer) until I received "the letter" telling me i was required to sign up for Medicare. Recently I received a letter telling me I had to contact SS as I had turned 70 1/2. When I FINALLY reached a representative by phone, I was told I was REQUIRED to take monthly SS even though I was still working. I was not in need so presumed I didn't need to collect until I was fully retired - NO - I MUST collect! DUH! an inadequate system!
For so many of the comments, I hear "sour grapes" because the more wealthy earn more money - I don' have much money saved and my parents were always struggling to make ends meet, but I don't feel as if those who have parlayed their money into more than I have should be left with the burden for the rest of us.
Let's make this a "FAIR" cost - let's all accept an equal percentage amount of increase/decrease/cost/contribution and we will all be paying a fair share - the wealthy will pay more, the poor less and the - well - middle class will pay the middle - but it will be fair!
To those of you who would disagree - I feel the same way about taxes: take away the loop holes for the wealthy, the exceptions for the poor - everyone pay a percentage of his/her income no matter what the amount may be; we'd all be payiing something.
For so many of the comments, I hear "sour grapes" because the more wealthy earn more money - I don' have much money saved and my parents were always struggling to make ends meet, but I don't feel as if those who have parlayed their money into more than I have should be left with the burden for the rest of us.
Let's make this a "FAIR" cost - let's all accept an equal percentage amount of increase/decrease/cost/contribution and we will all be paying a fair share - the wealthy will pay more, the poor less and the - well - middle class will pay the middle - but it will be fair!
To those of you who would disagree - I feel the same way about taxes: take away the loop holes for the wealthy, the exceptions for the poor - everyone pay a percentage of his/her income no matter what the amount may be; we'd all be payiing something.
3
Now there is a definition of "fair".
The problem is there are a lot of people out there who define "fair" as "you make so much more than me, you should pay for everything". :-(
The problem is there are a lot of people out there who define "fair" as "you make so much more than me, you should pay for everything". :-(
2
Safe to say that while the Affordable Care Act has helped some, it is far from a success. Medical cost are a reality that won't be easy to fund for all. I believe that politicians and policy wonks really don't want to tell the public the truth. The truth is we spend too much and need to rethink how we deliver medical care and advice. Rationing is in the cards - just need to find a better term.
"Last year, Medicare paid $50 billion just for doctor and hospital bills during the last two months of patients' lives - that's more than the budget of the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Education."
See: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-cost-of-dying/
"Last year, Medicare paid $50 billion just for doctor and hospital bills during the last two months of patients' lives - that's more than the budget of the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Education."
See: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-cost-of-dying/
1
$800 Billion taken from Medicare to help pay for Obamacare as part of the Affordable Care Act.
Now, instead of the President and the Democrats standing up and taking responsibility for hurting seniors the blame is laid on others.
Wait until the Obamacare 40% "Cadillac Tax" kicks in. Instead of blaming a severely flawed law and those who wrote and passed it the fingers will be pointed at the companies who provide benefits to their employees and at the insurance companies.
Now, instead of the President and the Democrats standing up and taking responsibility for hurting seniors the blame is laid on others.
Wait until the Obamacare 40% "Cadillac Tax" kicks in. Instead of blaming a severely flawed law and those who wrote and passed it the fingers will be pointed at the companies who provide benefits to their employees and at the insurance companies.
2
that money came from Medicare Advantage programs which are offered by private insurance companies that are of poor quality. Nothing lost there, Medicare at its roots is a good program.
5
`The only reduction in funding for Medicare was to reduce the federal subsidy for Medicare Advantage insurance sold by private companies to the same as the subsidy for regular Medicare. Medicare Advantage policies are sold by private companies in lieu of Medicare Part A, Medicare Part B, and Medicare Supplement policies. Those of us on regular Medicare A and B have to pay for a supplemental policy if we don't have one from a former employer. Medicare Advantage was created by the second Bush administration to prove that private insurance would be cheaper and better than Medicare. It costs more, but the feds were paying the difference to try to gull people into switching to it. Now they don't pay the difference, that is the only reduction in Medicare funding.
That the ACA reduced funding for Medicare is a lie promoted by its opponents. Medicare itself is still fully funded. Medicare Advantage, that is policies sold by private companies, are still funded, just at the same rate as regular Medicare rather than at the inflated rate that the private companies charge.
That the ACA reduced funding for Medicare is a lie promoted by its opponents. Medicare itself is still fully funded. Medicare Advantage, that is policies sold by private companies, are still funded, just at the same rate as regular Medicare rather than at the inflated rate that the private companies charge.
7
It should be made clear that the main reason Medicare costs are soaring for the elderly is because of how much more Obamacare is costing than anyone would acknowledge earlier. About $700 million was re-directed from Medicare to give out subsidies for Obamacare recipients.
5
When my Obamacare cost went higher than what I'd been paying prior to its inception, I half-jokingly noted I was actually looking forward to turning 65 and being eligible for Medicare. Well,looks like the joke's on me....now that I am going to get Medicare, it's going up too! If the increase is implemented, I will be paying more for medical care than ever. And, here's another thing about being 65: life insurance and car insurance premiums also go up as well! So, seniors on Social Security will have even less disposable income with or without a cost of living increase.
4
This great Ponzi scheme is finally starting to be exposed. 70% are exempt from any increase, despite the costs skyrocketing. Hey, that sounds like our tax code! I feel for the seniors who were lied to when Medicare was created, but either the costs need to be paid for or perhaps the government could do its job and start doing obvious things to mitigate increases, such as negotiating drug pricing like every other country on Earth and/or making wealthy seniors pay more or opt out.
2
The costs for retirees with incomes of $214,000 a year or more will go up by $600 a year. To be not working and make $214,000, a retiree must have savings of several million dollars. And perhaps Social Security benefits of $30,000 a year. And getting excellent health care. Are we seriously worrying about $600 a year, or $1,200 a year or even $1,800 a year for those Americans? In a country where 12% of the population has 80% of the wealth?
8
If the accountants would take their noses out of their data bases for a moment, they may see the reality of life as a senior. Yes, we're delighted fuel prices have dropped ... but prescription prices have tripled ... even for generics, making the drive to the pharmacy that much more expensive. The accountants have conveniently dropped fuel and food costs "because they are so volatile" from figuring out the gross product. But food and fuel for our homes is what we seniors spend money on! It may look good on paper to hold social security at last years rate, but it's more than painful to those of us that live on it. You have created a catastrophe.
9
The harsh reality of older Americans are paying the bill of the Republican populism errors it´s not just the austerity measures humiliation rights rights and save Social Security
1
I've been shopping for at least 50 years. I got my experience as the oldest of 8 kids.
I still do the shopping as my wife doesn't like to so I am up on prices. The increases of the last four years have been tremendous. In the past transportation costs were blamed but with fuel costs so low for the first time in years I can't buy that one any more. Something is causing these increases and I believe a lot of it is government regulations and some is a profit motive gone awry.
I manage to provide healthy meals by watching for sales on items we use and combining them with coupons. I stock up on sales items like coffee and cereal. I buy meats at COSTCO and break the packages down into meals and freeze them. Bread can be frozen too and a few slices removed and put into a plastic zip bag for use. A whole box of pancakes can be made up and the pancakes frozen into meal size.
Food shopping has always been something that must be well planned but I think it's more important when you have a set income with no ability to earn more like senior citizens.
If there's a home economics class at the senior citizen's center attend it. You may not be as sharp as you think you are or may learn something new.
I still do the shopping as my wife doesn't like to so I am up on prices. The increases of the last four years have been tremendous. In the past transportation costs were blamed but with fuel costs so low for the first time in years I can't buy that one any more. Something is causing these increases and I believe a lot of it is government regulations and some is a profit motive gone awry.
I manage to provide healthy meals by watching for sales on items we use and combining them with coupons. I stock up on sales items like coffee and cereal. I buy meats at COSTCO and break the packages down into meals and freeze them. Bread can be frozen too and a few slices removed and put into a plastic zip bag for use. A whole box of pancakes can be made up and the pancakes frozen into meal size.
Food shopping has always been something that must be well planned but I think it's more important when you have a set income with no ability to earn more like senior citizens.
If there's a home economics class at the senior citizen's center attend it. You may not be as sharp as you think you are or may learn something new.
4
10 billion? Take it directly out of the military. Drop that several billion dollar jet, the F35
8
AARP going to aid seniors. ..the way they did, capitulating on med D plan in 2003? That's a laugh. Dues aren't paying for that building they have in DC.
Think about it!
Think about it!
3
"...positive spin on the absence of a cost-of-living adjustment...from a “sharp decline in energy prices that is putting more money in families’ pockets” and is contributing to the economic recovery."
'Spin' is a synonym for 'prevarication' nowadays?
I'm a "fixed income" retiree living in 'small-town America' who goes through one tank (about 11.5 gallons) of gasoline per month...boy-oh-boy, all that money I'm saving on Furman's "decline in energy prices" is going to get me to Hawaii for the months of December and January...
SS is a contractual agreement between us working-stiffs and the government, they take "contributions" while we work and "pay benefits, annually adjusted for inflation" after we retire. Here we are, and true to form, the government is reneging on their deal. Take your 'positive spin' and shove it.
'Spin' is a synonym for 'prevarication' nowadays?
I'm a "fixed income" retiree living in 'small-town America' who goes through one tank (about 11.5 gallons) of gasoline per month...boy-oh-boy, all that money I'm saving on Furman's "decline in energy prices" is going to get me to Hawaii for the months of December and January...
SS is a contractual agreement between us working-stiffs and the government, they take "contributions" while we work and "pay benefits, annually adjusted for inflation" after we retire. Here we are, and true to form, the government is reneging on their deal. Take your 'positive spin' and shove it.
5
One problem is how the cost of living is figured. Cheaper gas prices don't necessarily make a lot of difference to senior citizens, but housing, food and medicine/health care have a tremendous impact and those prices have all been going steadily upwards.
6
A quirk in the law. The quirks in the House should get of their qurikie backsides and do the jobs they are being paid for. Quirk, indeed.
Kerry Olson
Kerry Olson
3
Denmark, anyone?
3
"Even some affluent beneficiaries could struggle with the higher costs. For those with incomes of more than $214,000 a year, Medicare actuaries say, premiums next year could exceed $500 a month"
If I was making $214,000 per month I would not struggle with a $500 a month premium. A large portion of affluent beneficiaries probably spend more a month for their cars.
If I was making $214,000 per month I would not struggle with a $500 a month premium. A large portion of affluent beneficiaries probably spend more a month for their cars.
Drive around this country anywhere in the last 10 years and everywhere you look - Hospitals / Medical Centers /Etc are being built or greatly expanded. Where exactly do they think People who can afford any of this will come from?
Maybe from the new Flood of Flat Broke Immigrants poised to Flood in ? Oh wait - that's right - they will be getting all the Free, Government subsidized Services aging Americans won't be able to afford. That's right, forgot about that.
Maybe from the new Flood of Flat Broke Immigrants poised to Flood in ? Oh wait - that's right - they will be getting all the Free, Government subsidized Services aging Americans won't be able to afford. That's right, forgot about that.
1
Poor and the seniors are to blame for the economic mess the Republican Party has made.
6
This 'economic mess' was not driven by seniors or Republicans. It was driven by Clinton when he claimed everyone had a 'right' to own a house and mandated that Fanny and Freddie lead the pack on mortgages to people that couldn't afford the. Then, before leaving office, he and Congress deregulated banking. The Republican party are not a bunch of 'good guys' but then neither is the Democratic party. The latter has caused more problems over time in their zeal to redistribute. Doesn't work.
Out here in reality land, I laugh when straight faced reporters and pundits claim that there is no inflation.
If the average person took a grocery bill from 4 years ago and tried to buy the same items at the same store today the price would easily be double- very easily. Most of us eat.
Go out to a fast food place and buy a meal. The price has easily doubled.
Get your car fixed, buy a set of name brand tires, etc.
Go to the doctor, the dentist, etc.
Check your car insurance rates- they are higher too.
About the only thing cheaper is gasoline and humans cannot eat it.
We need a new formula for our citizens on Social Security.
If the average person took a grocery bill from 4 years ago and tried to buy the same items at the same store today the price would easily be double- very easily. Most of us eat.
Go out to a fast food place and buy a meal. The price has easily doubled.
Get your car fixed, buy a set of name brand tires, etc.
Go to the doctor, the dentist, etc.
Check your car insurance rates- they are higher too.
About the only thing cheaper is gasoline and humans cannot eat it.
We need a new formula for our citizens on Social Security.
35
Also, consumer electronics show some deflation.Overall,I would estimate inflation around 5-6%,about what FedEx and UPS raise their rates every year.If govt used honest inflation numbers,it would give negative growth and show the U.S. in recession.I don't think politicians want to do that.
2
And the politicians what to increase the taxes on gas because they think we won't notice. Unfortunately, gas prices at the pump do NOT reflect the price of a barrel of oil, and the states are already taking more and more out of what we pay for gas. God help us when gas increases; it will.
Do you think the politicians will cut the taxes on gas when that happens?
Do you think the politicians will cut the taxes on gas when that happens?
Curiously, the Fed wants to see more inflation and is trying to make that happen. Somebody is playing games.
6
The whole idea is to kill off the elderly, because those who live too long and are not wealthy are inconvenient. Much could be fixed by raising the cap on earnings of workers currently paying into social security, but Congress's masters in the mega corporate world would not approve as it would inconvenience them. Better to let old people die earlier than necessary for want of high priced medicines that used to be commonly available while the important elite line their pockets with more wealth.
16
More redistribution of wealth.
3
What inadequate reporting! Who makes up the 7% and 30% groups? What's the profile of those scheduled to pay more?
10
Redistribution - Obama's singular achievement. Easy targets always include seniors - who obviously have more than their fair share.
5
The price of gas is lower therefore the federal government receives lower tax money, therefore let's raise the Medicare premiums?
What American politicians have failed to reform is the BLOATED military spending of the failed invasion policies in the Middle East. The 3trillion spent on our wars in the past 10 years would more than have balanced funds needed to sustain Medicare without premium increases. Time to realize we are now being required to pay the bills for our tragic military history. Think different, VOTE DIFFERENT!
What American politicians have failed to reform is the BLOATED military spending of the failed invasion policies in the Middle East. The 3trillion spent on our wars in the past 10 years would more than have balanced funds needed to sustain Medicare without premium increases. Time to realize we are now being required to pay the bills for our tragic military history. Think different, VOTE DIFFERENT!
20
The falling gas prices are interesting as: increased food costs haven't come down, drug prices increased greatly, airlines made more, and have you ever considered how much he government saved as you watch all the cars with government license plates drive by. And gas producers want to make more and be allowed to export most of it but our government doesn't want the prices to go lower, perhaps having a "deal" with OPEC [remember them back in 1972?] But do the vast number of government employees get COLA's? You betcha!
1
If Social Security increases were tied to increases in income for the top 1%, our checks would have increased by 18% over the past decade. According to EPI.org average income for the top 1% in my state, Connecticut, is over $2,000,000 a year. I live on $1100 Social Security a month. Many of us are tired of being told to eat cake. How can our government and the top 1% look at themselves in their mirrors? No one should question why Bernie Sanders is the candidate of choice for many Americans (especially seniors.)
17
While CMS knows waste, fraud and abuse consume $1 out of every $3 spent on healthcare, the cost of which is now $3 trillion and 20% of GDP, they settle for ads showing how seniors should report fraud which if one does gets a call back saying their "looking into it". Meanwhile millions are added to Medicaid roles and subsidized exchanges and Medicaid picks up the increased costs of QMB's [the poor over 65, blind or disabled] and pays more for all their drugs at higher prices than Medicaid pays, which comes out of state Medicaid funds which along with education is over half all the states budgets which must be balanced. This as government treaties increase the costs of all the drugs no longer made in the USA!
And then there are those of us, police, firefighters, teachers, who have had their Social Security checks reduced by 60-80% because we became teachers, &ct., in our later years, even after paying into Social Security for 20 or 30 years.
1
Maybe someone should have told you a long time ago that SS is not a sufficient retirement plan. So you didn't plan and you me to pay for that inability. Not likely.
This is MRS. If I remember correctly, the prices of food and fuel were not factored into inflationary calculations, therefore, there was little to no inflation. Liars can figure, but figures don't lie. I look at my household budget and see that there in an inflation out there that is eating away at my income, but the government does not acknowledge any real inflation. I would just love to sit down with the cretins who came up with this method of calculation. I'll be that they don't worry about their next meal or how to pay for their next trip to the doctor with prescription in hand. Oh, the cost of peanut butter and rice cakes has risen to the point that they have now become a delicacy.
16
Govt has admitted they changed the way they calculate inflation,at least 2 times,since the Jimmy Carter days of 14% reported inflation.Using methods used then,would show much higher inflation.
5
Increasing Medicare premiums on higher income retirees sounds like something out of the Bernie Sanders playbook. It would merely be making the tax code more progressive. Isn't it amazing how such left-wing ideas sound better in theory than in practice?
4
Too bad we aren't seeing any mass protests regarding this and the dire state of Social Security, like the protests that happened down in Roseburg Oregon last week regarding the gun nuts wanting unfettered access to guns.. Funny, Congress will do anything to guarantee the crazies access to guns but won't lift a finger for unfettered access to health care, and shoring up Social Security.. Inanimate objects get special protections while seniors, and disabled HUMANS get the shaft.
11
Do not forget that $715 Billion was taken from Medicare to fund Obamacare. To then tell us the fund is in trouble is chicanery on the government's part.
that $715 Billion came from the wasteful "Medicare Advantage" program where insurance companies offer poor quality insurance packages. So, no love lost there. You sir, are obviously anti Medicare and Social Security, maybe even a Fox news junkie, which speaks for itself.
1
They endlessly advise everyone to be smarter; not to take Social Security payments early or even on time; to wait and instead get more because you waited...
but now if you DON'T yet collect Social Security, your Medicare bill is set to soar, SUCKER!
but now if you DON'T yet collect Social Security, your Medicare bill is set to soar, SUCKER!
8
I'll believe that when I see it.
This is part of the WH's war on the elderly, pure and simple? And why is the WH at war with the elderly? Because the elderly vote in higher proportion to the rest of the population and tend to vote conservatively.
4
So then maybe they should stop voting conservative. Death panels anyone?
2
WH war? No, the Tea Party conservatives' in Congress War on the Elderly.
1
"Gasoline prices, in particular, have declined sharply, holding down overall prices in the economy."
Yes, but eggs are up 50%, Power&Light, GasEnergy, Water, Meat is over the moon, the scrawniest head o' lettuce is two dollars. Thank goodness for pork and chicken, and onions and baked-in-store bread! It's quite humiliating and kind of horrible to have to worry about such things...
Yes, but eggs are up 50%, Power&Light, GasEnergy, Water, Meat is over the moon, the scrawniest head o' lettuce is two dollars. Thank goodness for pork and chicken, and onions and baked-in-store bread! It's quite humiliating and kind of horrible to have to worry about such things...
16
Since Congress is doing such a half-hearted and mediocre job, they should take a suspension without pay which would reflect on the quality (and quantity) of their work. That's what would happen to nearly every other sort of American worker, if not worse. Even sports heroes take pay cuts when their work and/or comportment is inferior.
8
The idiocy of tying SSI increases to gas prices! A large proportion of those receiving SSI don't drive, but they certainly can't avoid eating, and food prices are up 10 - 25% this year, depending on the item. Not to mention everything else a person needs to live, from toothpaste to toilet paper.
18
I hope these and other recipients of Congress's contempt will remember their elected elephants on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2016.
9
I thought sequestration of the military and domestic programs, including Medicare but not Medicaid, occurred when the Democrats controlled Congress and held the Presidency, no?
I turned 65 earlier this year and went on Medicare. I will not go on Social Security until 2016 when I reach full retirement age, 66. Why should I get screwed with a 70% increase in Medicare premiums just because I am waiting one year to reach full retirement age to go on Social Security? Makes no sense.
15
Lets see. Price of eggs up. Price of fruit up. Price of meat up. Everything I purchase is up, except for gas. And I do not drive anywhere, and now healthcare climbs to. Not to mention insurance. We need to use a different market basket of goods, forget services, for those who live on social security.
34
@ Deeply Imbedded
Those on social security don't use healthcare, public transport or watch TV then which are all services? This is a problem for a particular group of Medicare beneficiaries (paradoxically those at either end of the income scale) not really an inflation issue.
Those on social security don't use healthcare, public transport or watch TV then which are all services? This is a problem for a particular group of Medicare beneficiaries (paradoxically those at either end of the income scale) not really an inflation issue.
1
AARP needs a stronger lobby in Congress.
2
What do you thick AARP is?
The original American Association of Retired People sold out to the current organization which is a for profit insurance company, and only uses the initials to gain membership and profits, just like all the other insurers.
The original American Association of Retired People sold out to the current organization which is a for profit insurance company, and only uses the initials to gain membership and profits, just like all the other insurers.
Is America incapable of creating any new product/service that does not involve siphoning money from some other part of the economy?
Just look at the "new industries" that have been created in the past decade: offshoring, payday lenders, subprime car loan industry, the private college industry, the sharing economy, the re-assembling of all of the duopolies and cartels (through mergers) that once dominated the U.S. economy (except they are now almost completely unregulated), ZIRP used to fund the TBTF banks and hedge funds.
None of these industries created anything new. They just moved money from the people who have no political power to the ones that do. Despite what the paid-for think tanks say, it is QUITE CLEAR that our economy has become a zero sum game.
As long as this nonsense continues the economic base on which these social safety net rests will shrink relative to population.
Unlike some of the dim-wits running for President, I don't think cutting these programs are the solution. The answer is to stop supporting the leeches in these "new industries" that do nothing but move paper and money around and pretend they are creating something of value.
Just look at the "new industries" that have been created in the past decade: offshoring, payday lenders, subprime car loan industry, the private college industry, the sharing economy, the re-assembling of all of the duopolies and cartels (through mergers) that once dominated the U.S. economy (except they are now almost completely unregulated), ZIRP used to fund the TBTF banks and hedge funds.
None of these industries created anything new. They just moved money from the people who have no political power to the ones that do. Despite what the paid-for think tanks say, it is QUITE CLEAR that our economy has become a zero sum game.
As long as this nonsense continues the economic base on which these social safety net rests will shrink relative to population.
Unlike some of the dim-wits running for President, I don't think cutting these programs are the solution. The answer is to stop supporting the leeches in these "new industries" that do nothing but move paper and money around and pretend they are creating something of value.
29
Well said sir. Well said. Every one of the Republicans running for president right now refuse to address the issue you point out. Well, except for Trump. The lineup fears backlash from the early evangelical Southern Baptists.
The great Ronald Reagan would have stood up against the current situation. But then, none of the current Republican candidates would not have attacked him for being a RINO. (with the exception of Fiornia, Kasich, Graham and Trump)
The great Ronald Reagan would have stood up against the current situation. But then, none of the current Republican candidates would not have attacked him for being a RINO. (with the exception of Fiornia, Kasich, Graham and Trump)
1
Or perhaps they could prosecute the corporations that stole billions and healthcare ones who steal $1 out of every $3 we spend on healthcare, 140 million of our 320 million population which are paid by rapidly growing entitlement programs [70 million Medicare and 70 Medicaid and tax payer subsidized exchanges].
Like the "lock box" [remember that back in 2000] which the government emptied before we had the ability to watch, now they must "rob Peter to pay Paul", until we all "Peter out" A-Pauling, isn't it?
Like the "lock box" [remember that back in 2000] which the government emptied before we had the ability to watch, now they must "rob Peter to pay Paul", until we all "Peter out" A-Pauling, isn't it?
Solar companies that go bankrupt is a good one!
Why does this article not reference the bill that was introduced by Engel from NY about changing which CPI to use? The way it is calculated now is based on a law passed by Congress in the 1970's. Why are we using an outdated model and why are we determining an increase by looking at Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers? How the elderly spend their money is completely different and we need a different approach.
29
read my comments below. I'm 100% in agreement with you. Though Obama and others in Congress want to change it so that the gov't doesn't have to pay as much in COLA as the formula has it now. They want to go the other way, in order to save money, because they can't get into agreement on how to shore up Social Security and Medicare. Next year the Disability program under SS will be bankrupt and will result in an across the board reduction of 20% for payees. The Conservative are blocking any meaning resolution. They are all in this together, both parties.
1
This is MRS. Agreed, but we all need that different approach to the CPI calculation.
1
The Disability program is in danger because of massive fraud. Two years ago The Wall Street Journal reported that a judge in West Virginia was approval all appeals when people were turned down for disability.
His reasoning was that it was the only way for people who had no skills except for coal mining which has been decimated would be able to live when they ran out of unemployment eligibility. The judge was forced to retire after a federal investigation was initiated. West Virginia has the highest number of people on Disability of all states.
Another area of fraud has been civil service employees, railroad employees, police and firemen. Even clerical employees were retiring and collecting disability. An investigation revealed that 95% of New York's MTA employees were retiring on disability. There is now an active claw back effort being made after too many with bad backs that they said prevented them from walking are running in marathons and golfing were caught in their fraud.
His reasoning was that it was the only way for people who had no skills except for coal mining which has been decimated would be able to live when they ran out of unemployment eligibility. The judge was forced to retire after a federal investigation was initiated. West Virginia has the highest number of people on Disability of all states.
Another area of fraud has been civil service employees, railroad employees, police and firemen. Even clerical employees were retiring and collecting disability. An investigation revealed that 95% of New York's MTA employees were retiring on disability. There is now an active claw back effort being made after too many with bad backs that they said prevented them from walking are running in marathons and golfing were caught in their fraud.
Make our Pharmaceutical companies compete in the global market, after all car manufacturers, machine good manufactures and even food product suppliers have to compete in the global market. Why should Pharmaceutical companies have a free ride when it comes to global competition. For many older drugs, Canada is a lot better deal and the quality is just as good. The point is something has to give. Finally people need to take care of their health. Run and ride a bicycle when you are young and walk a treadmill when you get older. The best way to cut drug cost is to not need to take them.
10
The President as a candidate promised to do this, and then cut a deal with PhRMA, which after Senator Baucus and WH staff cut a deal. Then Axelrod said he was still going to do this, just not in ACA health reform. Now he's increasing the very expensive biologic drugs to extend patients so "generic" biosimilars can in effect have patent protection of 12 years here, while Canada, Mexico and other "competing nations" have 5 to zero years of patent protection. The main customers for these are Medicare and Medicaid recipients paid for by taxpayers,
On the bright side, at least seniors are still getting their Social Security checks. As a young adult, I'm paying into a system that is projected to go bankrupt long before anyone in my generation reaches retirement age. I don't expect to see the money I pay into Social Security ever again.
5
My contemporaries, now collecting SS, said the same thing.
19
It is not projected to be bankrupt. It is projected to be able to pay only 78 percent of promised benefit levels if the trust fund, as predicted, is exhausted in 15-20 years. Payroll taxes will cover benefits in perpetuity, just not at the level where they sit currently. And that gap can be eliminated by dumping the ridiculous spousal benefits, which are pure handouts with no requirement to prove need, and by assessing the FICA tax on billions of dollars that are sheltered -- while the first dime of any wage is assessed for these programs.
Please get your facts straight.
Please get your facts straight.
21
The projections I have seen do not include Congress paying back into the Social Security fund what was taken out of it over the past couple decades. I would like to see the numbers that would include that.
And you are, of course, right about more money going out from the fund than what was paid into it. Personally, I think we need to keep a system in place that prevents 80 year old people from living on the streets. Regardless of the monetary issue of returns on an investment.
And you are, of course, right about more money going out from the fund than what was paid into it. Personally, I think we need to keep a system in place that prevents 80 year old people from living on the streets. Regardless of the monetary issue of returns on an investment.
3
None of this matters, unless we can seriously limit the cost of healthcare in the US. From 1960 to 2015 the total spending, as a percent of GDP, has increased linearly, from 5% to 18%. If this trend continues, we will soon be directing 25% of the total productivity of this country to healthcare.
You can take out "profit", and trim a couple of percent.
You could magically predict the entire GDP to grow faster than healthcare cost, but that would be voodoo economics.
You could cut out other components to make room for healthcare, but be realistic. For example, all defense spending is now about 4% of GDP. The big money is other federal and state government spending, and private purchases of goods and services.
We can only figure out how to spend less.
You can take out "profit", and trim a couple of percent.
You could magically predict the entire GDP to grow faster than healthcare cost, but that would be voodoo economics.
You could cut out other components to make room for healthcare, but be realistic. For example, all defense spending is now about 4% of GDP. The big money is other federal and state government spending, and private purchases of goods and services.
We can only figure out how to spend less.
7
Cut the cost of health care by forcing the docs to work for free.
1
Perhaps the answer you're looking for is the $1 trillion a year in waste, fraud and abuse, mostly enriching large corporations which are all very profitable, and increase proportionally at 15% annually.
the best thing to do is to contact your representatives in Congress especially the "Conservative" ones. Then let Obama know to reformulate the current COLA and NOT to the gov't's benefit either like he wants. Millions of phone calls, and letters to them will awaken them from their daydream fantasy land.
6
Actually a democrat from NY already introduced a bill to use CPI-E because how it is calculated now is outdated and hurts our older population.
12
Michelle- i doubt the Congress will go along with it. I know Obama wants to use a stricter formula which would reduce any future COLA increases, so i doubt he would sign the bill if it passed, unless of course millions of people get together and hold their feet to the fire.
1
Limiting the increase based on whether or not someone has started drawing social security results is unfair. People with the same incomes should be paying the same rates whether or not they are receiving social security. Raiding the contingency fund just kicks the can down the road.
I don't mind having to pay more based on having a high income although that's not to say the brackets for step increases are perfect.
Obviously there is also inequity between those at the tops and bottoms of each rate bracket and there may be arguments for altering the bracket step points or how costs are distributed among bracket categories.
One irony for those who aren't yet drawing social security is medicare cost reduces the value of waiting to draw benefits. On the one hand you'll get a higher social security benefit by waiting, but on the other hand you'll be paying more for medicare and not gaining as much as you'd expected.
Those converting from ordinary to Roth IRAs need to be wary of the medicare income brackets which don't coincide with tax rate income brackets. Thus someone who is careful to stay in the same tax bracket might wind up crossing into a higher medicare rate bracket.
For those
Although it costs me a bit more I don't mind that high income retirees pay more than others.
If this would result in a high income retiree who is drawing social security paying lower benefits than another with equal income who isn't yet drawing social security it s wrong.
I don't mind having to pay more based on having a high income although that's not to say the brackets for step increases are perfect.
Obviously there is also inequity between those at the tops and bottoms of each rate bracket and there may be arguments for altering the bracket step points or how costs are distributed among bracket categories.
One irony for those who aren't yet drawing social security is medicare cost reduces the value of waiting to draw benefits. On the one hand you'll get a higher social security benefit by waiting, but on the other hand you'll be paying more for medicare and not gaining as much as you'd expected.
Those converting from ordinary to Roth IRAs need to be wary of the medicare income brackets which don't coincide with tax rate income brackets. Thus someone who is careful to stay in the same tax bracket might wind up crossing into a higher medicare rate bracket.
For those
Although it costs me a bit more I don't mind that high income retirees pay more than others.
If this would result in a high income retiree who is drawing social security paying lower benefits than another with equal income who isn't yet drawing social security it s wrong.
1
Your comment on brackets is spot on. If only the congresscritters had a clue about simple mathematics, they could derive smooth functions to derive tax rates, medicare income rates, etc., which would be easier to compute, much fairer, and which would eliminate the "bracket edge" problems.
1
Wow. Just wow. I could only dream of having healthcare premiums and deductibles as low as they seem to be with Medicare. Medicare for all!
5
Your dream would be a nightmare if that S.S. check is all you have to live on for a month.
14
I certainly understand that many people are in that predicament. I hope that I will be able to live partially off retirement savings in addition to a SS check, but that isn't a certainty even for people who responsibly saved for decades, thanks to the skyrocketing cost of health treatments/prescriptions combined with ever-growing health premiums and deductibles (really? what other country requires a deductible, that discourages early care?)
The Part B premiums discussed in this article are only part of the cost of Medicare. You need to include Medigap insurance which covers costs not covered by the government in Medicare Part B plus the cost of Medicare Part D for drugs. My medical insurance bill for Medicare in 2016 will be $10,750 based on the info in this article and rates for Medigap and Part D. Closer to what you are paying for 1 person?
6
Hey, wait a minute! We want a raise even if COLA didn't change! Gee, doctors want a raise, the insurance companies want more, pharmaceuticals of course, hospitals, shoot, everyone wants more! That'll put an end to no change in the cost of living index!
1
A 50% increase in premiums for many on medicare? Annual social security cost of living adjustments since 1975 except for 2010 & 2011, under Obama.
And STILL people here want the Fed Govt running their healthcare?
Fine with me if you want this...but leave me out.
And STILL people here want the Fed Govt running their healthcare?
Fine with me if you want this...but leave me out.
4
The raise-in-premium has been long predicted. Somebody HAS to pay for all the FREEBIES America gives itself repeatedly.............
3
I'd suggest that Medicare could be adequately funded with NO increase in premiums if the U. S. would simply stop all its foreign military adventures and use the money instead for citizen's health costs. Never happen, of course, because the health of the military-industrial-banking consortium comes first.
2
"Senior services - it's a death that's worse than fate." (Elvis Costello)
4
Who is surprised by this? It was clear from the beginning that the number didn't add up and that the Democratic politicians were selling snake oil.
4
The numbers don't add up? Since when do the numbers add up for any federal programs? Congressional salaries, for example, aren't "balanced" by some separate tax. The Defense Department doesn't bring in penny. The federal courts are also a "losing" proposition. And so on and so forth... In fact, the only federal programs (other than the IRS) that have any significant income side are Medicare and Social Security.
7
The vast majority of people choose to live their life without considering saving. They buy houses, cars, TVs, go on vacation, eat out at nice restaurants, etc. When retirement comes, all I am hearing is we want someone to take care of us. Life is full of choices and consequences.
6
Do you have the same problem with people who never even try to get a job or do anything productive and still get welfare, food stamps, housing subsidies, and medicaid?
At least most retirees have worked all their lives and paid into Social Security and medicare.
At least most retirees have worked all their lives and paid into Social Security and medicare.
5
I wish I lived in the world you describe. I haven't had a vacation in twenty years. I live in a slum apartment and drive a sixteen year old car. I haven't had a W2 paying job since 2005. I live on scraps of contract work, 1099, with no Social Security. I did everything society said I should do to be successful, served in the military, I have three degrees including a master's, and yet, here I am. Don't talk to me about choices.
2
Funny way to describe women in their 70s and older who got married and stayed home because it was really considered odd for a married woman to work, especially if she had children, unless there was something wrong with her husband. Very interesting and narrow perspective you have there about previous generations who for much of their abbreviated time in the "help wanted, female" workforce did not earn what their male counterparts did, even for the same work.
3
It's time to control provider and medication reimbursement. If affordable access to health care is something we feel should be available to all Americans, then let's do something about it. Reduce what providers and big pharma can charge consumers and insurance companies. It'll upset a few (i.e. medical establishment and big pharma) for the benefit of the many (i.e. the rest of us).
5
Cost of gas my butt. Any of these economist been to grocery stores lately? Yeah, my MD says "eat healthy" and then slaps a $150 bill on me while we creep toward deductibles. I wave at the healthy food as I drive by our local "saving" markets. Pride my butt, where do we sign up for food stamps?
19
My 2 cents here is that pharmaceutical drug costs need to be reined in, in the US that is. Reading that a retired man who sold his house to care for his wife who suffers from Parkinson's disease and has to pay $600.00 a month for her medications to stablize the disease's severe symptoms, is heart wrenching.
Imagine you live in a County in California where you can obtain medical care for nearly everything that ails you but you are homeless because of the exhorbitant costs and lack of housing.
The whole system medical and labor in the US is going to collapse. Doctors in increasing numbers will not accept Medicaid or Medical, leaving hospitals to do it all. Employers keep dicing and slicing labor compensation into bits of small insignificant wages and the medical costs that are deducted from regular paychecks deminish.
Imagine you live in a County in California where you can obtain medical care for nearly everything that ails you but you are homeless because of the exhorbitant costs and lack of housing.
The whole system medical and labor in the US is going to collapse. Doctors in increasing numbers will not accept Medicaid or Medical, leaving hospitals to do it all. Employers keep dicing and slicing labor compensation into bits of small insignificant wages and the medical costs that are deducted from regular paychecks deminish.
12
W started a socialist, unfunded giveaway to seniors with Medicare part D. Drug costs are going through the roof because of greed and zero government regulations. We can't afford this unsustainable calamity. Medicare will pay for a penile implant but we don't get dental care. We truly are a dysfunctional society.
15
It was hardly socialism; it was welfare for Big Pharma, who dictated the prices.
15
My heart bleeds for those at the 200,000 dollar level. I am at a 50,000 dollar level and already pay over $500 a month for supplemental. Don't come crying to me about increases. With the cost living increasing I am struggling as I have never done before. Insurance premiums go up on houses, cars, utilities increase, etc. I am told that inflation is nonexistent. Ha.
13
"$500 a month for supplemental"
You are being robbed, David! Switch to a better supplemental plan. At $144, mine is a fraction of that, and I'm 100% fully covered for all deductibles and co-pays and out-of state specialists, etc.
You are being robbed, David! Switch to a better supplemental plan. At $144, mine is a fraction of that, and I'm 100% fully covered for all deductibles and co-pays and out-of state specialists, etc.
Very low-income beneficiaries can easily apply for, and receive, extra help paying for Medicare Part D (medications) through another Social Security program. This will help mitigate the pain.
Many also are eligible for state subsidies. Some also are "dual eligibles," receiving both Medicare and Medicaid benefits.
Anyone who relies solely on SS can get many other benefits, as above. Depending on the state, Medicaid can cover dental and vision needs, as well as transportation to medical office visits.
Meals on Wheels and similar programs offer both congregate meal sites at "senior centers," take-home meals for weekends and meal deliveries for (where I live) nothing to a $3/meal donation.
No one wants a handout. The pain is real -- I am on Medicare myself and will see the hit as my husband & I elected to postpone our SS benefits. At the same time, I know exactly how much I and my employers contributed to SS and Medicare over my working life, and believe me, it's a pittance compared to what I'll take out.
My eyes roll when the "senior lobby" complains, as it's resisted any changes in the inflation measure that determines the COLA.
Many also are eligible for state subsidies. Some also are "dual eligibles," receiving both Medicare and Medicaid benefits.
Anyone who relies solely on SS can get many other benefits, as above. Depending on the state, Medicaid can cover dental and vision needs, as well as transportation to medical office visits.
Meals on Wheels and similar programs offer both congregate meal sites at "senior centers," take-home meals for weekends and meal deliveries for (where I live) nothing to a $3/meal donation.
No one wants a handout. The pain is real -- I am on Medicare myself and will see the hit as my husband & I elected to postpone our SS benefits. At the same time, I know exactly how much I and my employers contributed to SS and Medicare over my working life, and believe me, it's a pittance compared to what I'll take out.
My eyes roll when the "senior lobby" complains, as it's resisted any changes in the inflation measure that determines the COLA.
3
"I know exactly how much I and my employers contributed to SS and Medicare over my working life, and believe me, it's a pittance compared to what I'll take out." Have you considered how much you could have made if you had invested that money over 40+years instead of letting the government take it?
It could be as much as more than the overage you think you are getting.
It could be as much as more than the overage you think you are getting.
I realize that the younger people don't fully grasp Social Security and Medicare and won't till they get here, but we paid in all our lives, separately from income tax, for each of these, and that was money we could have used for our savings, but, let's face it, people of all ages except the very rich, are not always good at saving as much as they need to because things happen, and some would make bad investments. So this was our base. It was what we paid for, what we were promised, and what the previous generations received. It is not an entitlement. It's been robbed by Congress, and beneficiaries have been added to it so that we encompass not only the elderly and spouses, but the disabled, the former spouses, and the survivors of deceased workers. These are the mainstays of what little safety nets the middle class and the working poor have and while many of us can put money aside for emergencies or have small pensions, this is what we live on. This is ours. Some day it will be yours and you will understand how important it is because from the day you started working, you contributed.
16
Although he will probably allow the GOP Congress to fiddle and twist in the wind, Czar Obama could settle this like everything else he's done with the stroke of a pen!
1
Shouldn't Mr. Obama be reaching out to Congress to put together a deal, he gives up some (say, on Obamacare and Planned Parenthood) and Republicans lower appropriations for the White House, which they will control in 2017?
The earth will fall in if gop gets hands on economy again.
3
People with incomes as high as those you cite should not be eligible for social security. And the rest of us should get at least enough to pay the rent in big cities. Who has enough money to buy gas?
6
Social Security is a mandatory pension system into which everyone must pay. We have no choice, and we all pay in. That is why SS payments are called "contributions" - not unlike the contributions you would otherwise make to a 401K.
After a lifetime of paying in, when you retire you are entitled to your SS benefit like any other pension plan into which you paid, whatever other income one may have.
It is not and never has been a needs based program.
Benefit levels are determined by contribution levels - the more you have paid in, the higher your benefit, though by a formula that is highly progressive and rightly favors those who had lower incomes.
After a lifetime of paying in, when you retire you are entitled to your SS benefit like any other pension plan into which you paid, whatever other income one may have.
It is not and never has been a needs based program.
Benefit levels are determined by contribution levels - the more you have paid in, the higher your benefit, though by a formula that is highly progressive and rightly favors those who had lower incomes.
4
Sorry, anyone who's paid in to Social Security over the course of their working life is entitled to collect. That's how the system is supposed to work.
8
If your income remains high when you collect Social Security, what you collect is heavily taxed. And, if your income is high while on Medicare, you may pay two or three times what others pay for Medicare, even while you continue to pay 3 percent of your high income in Medicare taxes.
Sure republicans will pass a bill to cover the costs of medicare rises by cutting Social Security, but only for those paying for it but not of age to receive it yet. Republicans LOVE to pass costs on the 55 and under generation.
3
It was Barack Obama who called to raise the Medicare age to 70, along with SS.
3
Do we need to remind the people in the House that people over 65 vote? Elections are coming up next year.
13
Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress care only about eliminating a woman's right to a legal abortion, "investigating" Hillary Clinton and casting symbolic votes against the ACA. Some leaders, some problem-solvers!
19
Ladies and gentlemen get your head on straight! Whatever party or president in office controls what his department heads decide. Weird how Obama took money from Medicare to pay for Obamacare? Since he has been in office the cola has been withheld in 2010& 2011 and now in 2015! Does any one see a political pattern? Seniors wake up and put the blame where it belongs! Get your heads out of the sand and stop the amnesia! We seniors have been targeted by this administration since 2009! Wake up, smell the roses and be honest with yourselves!!!
4
Go ahead then and vote for Republicans like Mitt Romney. His running mate Paul Ryan is supposed to be the GOP's fiscal policy guru. Maybe you weren't paying attention when he announced his plan in 2012 to reduce the deficit by turning over Medicare to the states as a block grant program with no cost of living allowances whatsoever.
Medicare was passed in 1965 despite strong opposition from Republicans, like Reagan. Were you that senior in 2009 that held a sign saying, "Government get your hands off my Medicare!"?
Medicare was passed in 1965 despite strong opposition from Republicans, like Reagan. Were you that senior in 2009 that held a sign saying, "Government get your hands off my Medicare!"?
2
Am always suspicious when gas prices suddenly fall. This latest price fall was a puzzler especially since it's not even close to any election...hmmm. North Dakota? Home grown fuel? Oh, now I get it the needed excuse to lower the economy to withhold SS colas without any entity left to blame. Nice !
6
While I agree that this price jump and then fall was a manipulation I do question that multiple oil companies were in cahoots with the Government to stall SS colas. More likely it was a big player say a hedge fund pulling shenanigans to rob you some more. And of course our government officials looked the other way.
Wait, I thought the government fixed healthcare inflation?
5
We are on Social Security after 50 years of non-stop working full time jobs and having consistently paid into it. We never used drugs nor committed crimes; we have followed the rules and been good citizens.
2008/2009 blew away investments due to criminal bankers, wall street, and scuzzy politicians. My husband works at Walmart to help buy food because we go one week per month barely able to eat and too proud to use food banks. We pride ourselves in being self-reliant. We buy all the supplements for our MEDICARE.
Food pricing is through the roof and we just can not afford it. Gas prices going down? So what good is that to us for our one vehicle when we can't afford to take a trip or even go to a movie. The car takes us to work or to buy food.
What is wrong with this picture? Congress increased their salaries, and they vote in their cost of living increases. Truth is, the "American Dream" is a misnomer and Congress needs to be fired... a total house cleaning.
2008/2009 blew away investments due to criminal bankers, wall street, and scuzzy politicians. My husband works at Walmart to help buy food because we go one week per month barely able to eat and too proud to use food banks. We pride ourselves in being self-reliant. We buy all the supplements for our MEDICARE.
Food pricing is through the roof and we just can not afford it. Gas prices going down? So what good is that to us for our one vehicle when we can't afford to take a trip or even go to a movie. The car takes us to work or to buy food.
What is wrong with this picture? Congress increased their salaries, and they vote in their cost of living increases. Truth is, the "American Dream" is a misnomer and Congress needs to be fired... a total house cleaning.
27
Sooner the better!!!!!
2
The end of this story has already been written and most intelligent people won't need to see the script to know what happens before the credits roll.
This is a problem that only the Congress can fix and they won't because they can't. In fact, a good number in the House will attempt to use this problem as a means to bring the whole program crashing down.
This is a problem that only the Congress can fix and they won't because they can't. In fact, a good number in the House will attempt to use this problem as a means to bring the whole program crashing down.
6
If we aren't going to pass the increase in costs on to the recipients as the law requires then it is time to means test the program. Since it is absurd to be subsidizing healthcare for rich seniors. Of course that changes the politics and might reduce support for Medicare.
It is means-tested.
1
Real patriots say that we are a "Can do!" country. Bull. We are actually a "Can't do" country. We can't do what other countries have done so well, establish an efficient National Health Care system. Republicans scream "Socialized medicine" to insure the delivery of cash rather than care. Stories of delays in care or deficiencies in care in the "Socialized" medicine countries is pure fiction conjured up to put the screws to you.
13
"Stories of delays in care or deficiencies in care in the "Socialized" medicine countries is pure fiction conjured up to put the screws to you."
Having family in both Canada and England I can assure you that rationing of health care is a reality in both countries. England has the highest rate of births to single women in Europe. People are going on TV shows like "Embarrassing Bodies" to get medical care for ailments suffered for years. How long do you think a women should wait for surgery to removes 34 lbs of breast tissue? These two women were not obese but an anomaly) Is six years long enough to suffer with an oozing hole in your back with fistulas? Should a man have to grow shoulder length hair to cover the tumors and infected sebaceous that no one will authorize his needed care?
The unemployment rate is 20% for people 18-30. They are not paying taxes into the National health services but get care anyway.
You've no idea how bad the system has become.
Having family in both Canada and England I can assure you that rationing of health care is a reality in both countries. England has the highest rate of births to single women in Europe. People are going on TV shows like "Embarrassing Bodies" to get medical care for ailments suffered for years. How long do you think a women should wait for surgery to removes 34 lbs of breast tissue? These two women were not obese but an anomaly) Is six years long enough to suffer with an oozing hole in your back with fistulas? Should a man have to grow shoulder length hair to cover the tumors and infected sebaceous that no one will authorize his needed care?
The unemployment rate is 20% for people 18-30. They are not paying taxes into the National health services but get care anyway.
You've no idea how bad the system has become.
A sudden 50% increase in Medicare premiums for those already in Medicare is an outrage, whether it results in making retired folks pay $50 or $100 more a month. The dollar amount may seem trivial to some, but to many of us that adds up to a lot of money over the year. Who else could get away with suddenly raising prices 50% Maybe the CEO of a Pharmaceutical Hedge Fund could raise drug prices that suddenly, but surely not the US government.
10
I want to make sure I get this straight... Medicare premiums are set to double, but there will be no increase at all (not even a measly percent or two) in Social Security benefits because inflation is zero???
Our government is run by hateful, selfish, cruel oligarchs currying favor with the one percent. Shameful.
Our government is run by hateful, selfish, cruel oligarchs currying favor with the one percent. Shameful.
11
The primary reason social security recepients are not getting the inflation adjusted increase warranted under the levels of inflation their primarily fixed incomes shoukd recieve is Congress is using the incorrect measure for inflation.
There are several benchmarks generated by the Federal government to measure the rate of change in prices of goods and services in the U.S. Each different inflation measure is arbitrarily constructed to capture different perspectives on the overall price levels. Social Security inflation measure is called CPI-W which dropped 0.4% from 3rd quater 2014 to same period this year. Congress used CPI-W benchmark to erroneously conclude Social Security beneficiaries didn't need an increase.
But many Social Security recepients know the prices they are paying for food, medicine, utilities and especially rent have increased significantly in the past year. The Labor Dept uses another inflation benchmark which tracks the prices of goods and services senior citizens typically purchase more closely; the CPI-E. The CPI-E index reflects an inflation increase of 0.6%. If Congress had used the inflation benchmark which more closely tracks the inflation seniors experience instead of no increasev this year they would have recieve an average costbof living increase of $44- $62 per month.
Seniors are some of the most consistent voters in America and the Republiucans in Congress should bev keeping that fact in mind, especially since 2016 is an election year.
There are several benchmarks generated by the Federal government to measure the rate of change in prices of goods and services in the U.S. Each different inflation measure is arbitrarily constructed to capture different perspectives on the overall price levels. Social Security inflation measure is called CPI-W which dropped 0.4% from 3rd quater 2014 to same period this year. Congress used CPI-W benchmark to erroneously conclude Social Security beneficiaries didn't need an increase.
But many Social Security recepients know the prices they are paying for food, medicine, utilities and especially rent have increased significantly in the past year. The Labor Dept uses another inflation benchmark which tracks the prices of goods and services senior citizens typically purchase more closely; the CPI-E. The CPI-E index reflects an inflation increase of 0.6%. If Congress had used the inflation benchmark which more closely tracks the inflation seniors experience instead of no increasev this year they would have recieve an average costbof living increase of $44- $62 per month.
Seniors are some of the most consistent voters in America and the Republiucans in Congress should bev keeping that fact in mind, especially since 2016 is an election year.
11
Food prices have been skyrocketing for the past 6-7 years under Obama, after at least 15 years of extreme stability....yes, even under Bush. They hardly changed at all, but started going up sharply.
Milk: up from $1.79 a gallon to over $4 a gallon
Hamburger: up from $2.29 a pound to now $6 a pound (!!!!)
Fruits & vegetables: about 50-70% increase
Cereal: up from $2.79 a box to over $5 a box (!!!!)
Orange Juice: $2 a half gallon, now $3.79 for 59 ounces (they raised the price AND cut out 5 ounces of product!)
Ice Cream: $3.59 for 1.75 quarts, now $5.59 for 1.5 quarts
I could go on all night. My grocery bills are almost double. We are not elderly or on SS, but we have had to cut back. Thank god my kids are grown and out of the home -- I can't imagine feeding teenagers today!
Nobody wants to talk about this! Do they not even look at the receipts or prices when they shop? Dr. Krugman says we HAVE NO INFLATION -- that proves to me he does not do the family shopping!
Milk: up from $1.79 a gallon to over $4 a gallon
Hamburger: up from $2.29 a pound to now $6 a pound (!!!!)
Fruits & vegetables: about 50-70% increase
Cereal: up from $2.79 a box to over $5 a box (!!!!)
Orange Juice: $2 a half gallon, now $3.79 for 59 ounces (they raised the price AND cut out 5 ounces of product!)
Ice Cream: $3.59 for 1.75 quarts, now $5.59 for 1.5 quarts
I could go on all night. My grocery bills are almost double. We are not elderly or on SS, but we have had to cut back. Thank god my kids are grown and out of the home -- I can't imagine feeding teenagers today!
Nobody wants to talk about this! Do they not even look at the receipts or prices when they shop? Dr. Krugman says we HAVE NO INFLATION -- that proves to me he does not do the family shopping!
2
first of all restore the 900 billion dollars taken out of the medicare fund to help fund obamacare. secondly, for those talking about pharmaceutical costs, medicare part b covers dr charges and out patient costs, precriptions are covered under part d
7
Who pays Medicare taxes? Are people working now and paying Medicare taxes guaranteed Medicare coverage after 65 years of age? Why do people who make more money and pay more in Medicare taxes have to pay even more in Medicare premiums once they retire? Haven't they paid enough? Why is their responsibility to continue to pay more and more? Shouldn't everyone contribute? Are we promising more than we can afford?
6
Stop the whining. My wife and I paid $800 per month EACH for health insurance before we went on Medicare. Now, we still pay over $300 monthly each. A retiree couple would have to be pulling in $428K to have to pay a combined premium of $880 per month. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to cry for someone pulling in that much money.
As long as "we", that is all of us, through our federal government, intend to provide for our elderly population's healthcare, and as long as we have the human and physical resources to do that, we CAN afford it.
This is a crock, gasoline is not edible, and very little gas is purchased by Seniors. So the young folks are getting that freebie. Medicare, drugs, food and rent, all will be more expensive for Seniors. Obama has misplaced his head.
10
It's not Obama, it's Congress.
3
The President has zip to do with COLA. Wake up or stop telling stories...
1
Republicans call themselves the party of family values. I guess grandma and grandpa don't count as family among Republicans. Besides, look what bad choices us old folks made in getting old. More and more it seems that the party of family values only values fetuses that have yet to join any family. Clearly women of child bearing age don't count given their assault on Planned Parenthood.
I loathe John Boehner, and he is my Rep. I'm now thinking, much to my horror, that he's the best we can expect from Republicans. It's clear that the crowd on the campaign bus as a group has concluded that SS and Medicare are going away. As my governor Kasich told a group in NH last week, "you'll get used to it." I guess the old saying "better the devil you know than the devil you don't know" is some fundamental truth. It seems the devil in all his many manifestations is quite welcome in the party of family values. I hereby state that I'm begging Boehner to remain Speaker in spite of the bad taste those words leave in my mouth.
I want the Republican Party to define exactly what they mean by "family" when they tout their "family" values in their 2016 platform. Sane people can vote responsibly by a truthful answer to that question alone. I think we all know the answer.
I loathe John Boehner, and he is my Rep. I'm now thinking, much to my horror, that he's the best we can expect from Republicans. It's clear that the crowd on the campaign bus as a group has concluded that SS and Medicare are going away. As my governor Kasich told a group in NH last week, "you'll get used to it." I guess the old saying "better the devil you know than the devil you don't know" is some fundamental truth. It seems the devil in all his many manifestations is quite welcome in the party of family values. I hereby state that I'm begging Boehner to remain Speaker in spite of the bad taste those words leave in my mouth.
I want the Republican Party to define exactly what they mean by "family" when they tout their "family" values in their 2016 platform. Sane people can vote responsibly by a truthful answer to that question alone. I think we all know the answer.
17
All lobbyists who professionally seek to influence policy in government for whomever or whatever entity employs them, be that for profit, nonprofit, foreign, or domestic should be publicly registered. All their expenses, gifts, donations, or advertising should be made a matter of public record. Those monies and expenditures should then be subject to a reasonable excise tax, say 25%, or the average of what most citizens pay in total federal and state tax overburden. Call it a cost of doing business. This money, like an environmental clean up fund, would be used to identify and close outmoded subsidies, loopholes, and special interest whining clauses.
In what moral universe are fees raised on the fixed income elderly when patently exorbitant if not extraneous federal expenditures could be identified in virtually every district in the country, let alone overseas.
In what moral universe are fees raised on the fixed income elderly when patently exorbitant if not extraneous federal expenditures could be identified in virtually every district in the country, let alone overseas.
8
Since I thought fuel costs were not included in most measures of inflation (because they are so volatile), I thought the issue of a decrease in gas prices was being seen as a harbinger of lower prices due to lower costs of goods and services due to, in turn, savings in transportation expenses. But if we don't see those lower prices, then the gasoline argument makes even less sense. As others have already pointed out, driving for many people on Social Security is not the huge part of their life and budget that it may be for working people.
16
I'm in total agreement. In Chicago the gas is now @3.25 to 4.00 a gallon. The rent prices all over the city went up sharply and food prices are also increasing. This is another blow to those who suffer on S.S. The inequality gap grows much bigger.
3
In Chicago, it's all due to taxes,. Rahm needs huge amounts of money to make payments to public employee pension funds, so they're taxing everything they can think of.
People already on Social Security having their Part B premiums deducted from their check will not see any increase in Part B premiums.
2
They will if they have total income including required IRA withdrawals and "non-taxable" municipal income exceeding $85,000 per year for a single person or $170,000 for a married couple filing jointly. You might want to read the full article before commenting.
1
Pete: $85,000 per year in mandated IRA withdrawals would have to be on something like $1.2 MILLION in IRA assets.
You are talking about really, really rich people. $170K in withdrawals would be on something like $2.4 million in assets.
You are talking about really, really rich people. $170K in withdrawals would be on something like $2.4 million in assets.
What I said was that ANY AND ALL IRA distributions ($1 or $millions) were included in the calculation of your modified adjusted gross income (MAGI). I said nothing about getting a premium increase when you have IRA distributions of $85,000 or more.
Interestingly enough the taxable part of your monthly social security payment is included in this income calculation meaning a typical teacher or fireperson pension plus their social security income could get them to the $85,000 level with increased premium.
Interestingly enough the taxable part of your monthly social security payment is included in this income calculation meaning a typical teacher or fireperson pension plus their social security income could get them to the $85,000 level with increased premium.
1
The cost of living figures are purposely gimmicked to minimize the appearance of inflation. Despite the lower cost of gasoline - which many seniors do not buy - the cost of other essentials - food, for example, is through the roof. After those of us on Social Security pare our grocery shopping down to the bare minimum and can no longer even afford to do that, I guess the next step is the humiliation of trying to get food for nothing at the food pantries. This is a hell of a country to get old in.
61
At age 78, I'm concerned about sucking everything out of the system so there is nothing left for my children and grand children. Raising taxes on everyone but those of us who benefit or, as Congress (Democrats and Republicans) loves to do, kicking the can down the road by piling on more debt should come to an end. It's time for us to start paying up.
7
Russ, I'm afraid that ship has sailed. I'm concerned for my 2 sons also.
Yeah just throw another 8 to 12 billion dollars more into the black hole created by Obamacare
11
The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) has nothing to do with Medicare. Zero.
What the government is spending 8 to 12 billion dollars on, however, is the continuing presence of troops in Afghanistan (which was announced today). That black hole remains all-consuming, and Congress always seems able to find the money to support an effort that does virtually nothing to prevent domestic terrorism, provides no good will in the Middle East (something jobs would do -- like the ones we now outsource to Vietnam, so why not Iraq and Afghanistan?), and eliminates funds that could be used for education (on a global scale, the US ranks abyssmally low), infrastructure improvements, air and water quality, and countless other things that we never have money for... because the tax base has been eroded for the last 30 years.
What the government is spending 8 to 12 billion dollars on, however, is the continuing presence of troops in Afghanistan (which was announced today). That black hole remains all-consuming, and Congress always seems able to find the money to support an effort that does virtually nothing to prevent domestic terrorism, provides no good will in the Middle East (something jobs would do -- like the ones we now outsource to Vietnam, so why not Iraq and Afghanistan?), and eliminates funds that could be used for education (on a global scale, the US ranks abyssmally low), infrastructure improvements, air and water quality, and countless other things that we never have money for... because the tax base has been eroded for the last 30 years.
3
This is absolutely disgusting. I'm paying $104 of my Social Security check of $1,110 a month towards Medicare. If the Government takes $50 more away from my meager check then I'll have no other choice but eliminate some things like medication and food. The increase in medical costs is not my fault. The medical system is entirely broken in the U.S. There's no way to justify charging people a co-payment of $300 or more for one single prescription every month, NO WAY. If Social Security, Medicare and Congress wants a solution then they should pull back the reins of big pharmaceutical companies and focus on controlling health care costs not simply taking more away from Medicare recipients.
37
Say where's that $2,500 per family savings that the President said we would realize? Folks, we're been snookered big time and hopefully some adjustments can be made to this legalistic nightmare. Next time you're at your doctor (you know the one you could keep), ask him or her what they think of the new billing codes. Just make sure they are not holding a scalpel.
15
It's bizarre to say COLA hasn't gone up, when health care costs are skyrocketing. Isn't health care expense part of the 'Living' aspect of that acronym?
It's always seemed odd to me that energy costs, food costs, etc. are often not considered as cost-of-living expense.
I can't imagine a lot of people, be them of modest or even more 'middle class' means, would say day to day living is getting a whit cheaper. Only the very wealthy, or very benefit-protected (gov't. employees) are insulated from these issues -- oh, in other words, the members of Congress! Living in a bubble ...
It's always seemed odd to me that energy costs, food costs, etc. are often not considered as cost-of-living expense.
I can't imagine a lot of people, be them of modest or even more 'middle class' means, would say day to day living is getting a whit cheaper. Only the very wealthy, or very benefit-protected (gov't. employees) are insulated from these issues -- oh, in other words, the members of Congress! Living in a bubble ...
26
At some point, not so far away, the poor health of Americans and the high cost of medical care is going to bankrupt this country. This is the downside of the free market where you can sell packaged garbage and call it food and a medical profession that will not address prevention but focuses on controlling symptoms. It's a perfect storm of ignorance that will continue because everybody's making money and money is the only thing that matters in our system.
43
If you're paying for the care of those over 65, they're all going to get sick and die sooner or later. They will have huge medical expenses whether they die at 70 or live until they're 110,
I worked my entire adult life to earn my Social Security and Medicare benefits. Yes, I am highly entitled to receive that for which I have worked. Anyone who wants to cut my Social Security benefits or cause unreasonable increases in Medicare premiums in messing with my well being. Anyone who is not working to insure the integrity of these benefits for which millions of Americans have worked to earn should be removed from office.
46
I feel the same way. Seemly, it's OK to raise my Medicare premiums 50% but its not OK to tax the "carried interest" of Hedge Fund managers, or to raise the $118,500 "cap" on wages subject to the Social Security tax.
1
its not so much that you earned your benefits as that you paid for them by your payroll deductions over the years to provide benefits. If you had paid the same money into a private plan your benefits would be much larger, but then the government wouldnt have the money to blow on all the plans they want since LBJ got congress to pas a bill to transfer the funds into the general fund to spend on whatever they want
Protecting the elderly should be a national priority. Advice to office holders: older adults vote and they vote their wallets.
23
@Karen
Protecting the elderly is a national priority, but so is educating the young, providing job training and opportunities for the poor, new jobs, etc.
Protecting the elderly is a national priority, but so is educating the young, providing job training and opportunities for the poor, new jobs, etc.
Younger people vote too. And they want lower taxes
Still wish for term limits so Congress would do more than worry about their next election...and start doing the right thing! Then go back home and get a job at a place that must conform to the laws they just passed!
1
I live in East Tennessee and every retired and disabled person I know watches Fox News and supports the Republicans without question. If they don't listen to Paul Ryan and Jeb Bush to learn how they want to erode benefits for seniors while giving former hedge fund managers who paid low income taxes the keys to the health care system that is their problem. People get who they vote for!
56
It is complex. Here is some info:
"The top 10 percent pays 53.3 percent of all federal taxes. When looking at just federal income taxes, they pay 68 percent of the burden. The top 1 percent pays 24 percent of all federal taxes compared to 35 percent of all federal income taxes."
What is fair? Democrats believe that more is fair. Republicans believe that less if fair. But neither bothers to define fair.
I do think that the rich have too high a proportion of money. But I am not sure that taxes are the only reason.
"The top 10 percent pays 53.3 percent of all federal taxes. When looking at just federal income taxes, they pay 68 percent of the burden. The top 1 percent pays 24 percent of all federal taxes compared to 35 percent of all federal income taxes."
What is fair? Democrats believe that more is fair. Republicans believe that less if fair. But neither bothers to define fair.
I do think that the rich have too high a proportion of money. But I am not sure that taxes are the only reason.
1
When social questions lower my cost of living, let me know ! That is all the gop depends on----single issue voters.
1
EdnaTN Back up your assertions with facts,if you have any.
BTW Millions of Americans young and old are getting health care premium and deductible increases due to Obamacare.
BTW Millions of Americans young and old are getting health care premium and deductible increases due to Obamacare.
Yes, we seniors on SSA fixed income are just goingthrough gasoline like no tomorrow. Rediculous. Why? Last year's Medicare plans included mandated minimum $15 office copay...up from $5 for me. Specialist went up from $50 to $75. Lab fees went up. RX copays on branded pills went from $125 for 90 day supplyto $264. Of course beef, veggies and fruit, milk are all up. Thank God beer is holding steady!
27
Those fees are a function of the Part B Medigap and Part D plans you selected. Spend some time on the Medicare website and you can find better, lower cost plans.
The House of Representatives might consider serving the people of the United States occasionally.
Have their mothers' sat down with these precious, little congressmen and explained that on some level many Americans will resent their levels of functioning with or without a leader.
Have their mothers' sat down with these precious, little congressmen and explained that on some level many Americans will resent their levels of functioning with or without a leader.
21
I'd like to know who this country actually represents. It's not representing the middle class forced to compete with a dollar an hour wages in Asia. It's certainly not youth with their skyrocketing tuition costs. It's not the elderly. Who exactly is being represented?? Nobody but a tiny fraction of ultra-rich. And now that Obama has opted to continue to siphon hard earned tax dollars to shore up a corrupt state like Afghanistan, there's no doubt - despite all his denials - that he really is just another shill for might makes right aka the military industrial complex and the rich, just like Hillary Clinton, another Wall Street hostess.
19
Why didn't Boehner quit over the summer break or the upcoming winter break so the knuckleheads could choose a new leader when they reconvened? If Boehner cares so much about "the institution" he has harmed it by making it even less functional, which previously no one thought possible!
8
Ryan and Romney got their wish anyway.
4
I will vote for the candidate that is going to increase social security. My insurance, medical expenses and medicine equal my social security income.
we need to cut drug costs by using the buying power of medicare and the government. Right now we pay more than any other developed country.
we need to cut drug costs by using the buying power of medicare and the government. Right now we pay more than any other developed country.
27
Sue
I am going to vote for the candidate who lowers my taxes.
I am going to vote for the candidate who lowers my taxes.
But Congress members (most who are very rich) and who already have platinum healthcare, have NO problem giving themselves raises year after year!
Why don't all their constituents have that same healthcare?
Are Reps and Senators' lives more important?
This inequality is profoundly immoral and unjust.
Why don't all their constituents have that same healthcare?
Are Reps and Senators' lives more important?
This inequality is profoundly immoral and unjust.
50
When are we going to set a national priority on the health of our people instead of the accumulation of government-created dollars in some fund? JFK proposed that we go to the moon, he didn't propose that we stockpile dollars. FDR stated we had nothing to fear but fear itself, not that we should fear a lack of our own currency.
We blunder when we allow our accounting system to take precedence over physical reality and mislead us into thinking our national wealth can fairly be measured in dollars. If we want a healthy populace, we can have it. And we will truly be wealthier because we are healthy. If we instead accumulate dollars we will truly be poorer.
We blunder when we allow our accounting system to take precedence over physical reality and mislead us into thinking our national wealth can fairly be measured in dollars. If we want a healthy populace, we can have it. And we will truly be wealthier because we are healthy. If we instead accumulate dollars we will truly be poorer.
12
Over $14 Billion to "fight" in Afghanistan next year - a CUT in Social Security. Republican Dictator "no new taxes" Grover Norquist loves this. When asked how he would feel if his grandma was hurt by his despicable tax-cutting pledge he said, "sorry, Grandma". That is the kind of people who have taken over OUR government at all levels through financial coups and by buying operatives, destroying voting rights and democratic strongholds, and spending OUR hard-earned money on ridiculous "committees" to try to destroy their opposition. How did we let these treasonous less-than-human-beings get control? The cost of food, healthcare and lodging go up daily and that is what hurts 99% of seniors. Time to kick every "conservative" operative out of every elected office in the land and time for OUR government to use a new consumer price measurement for Social Security that actually reflects seniors' costs. November 8, 2016 cannot come soon enough when we can VOTE to get rid of the BIG democracy-destroying money masters operatives and restore democracy in America. CLINTON/SANDERS 2016 and socially conscious democrats/independents in office across America.
25
I worked at public hospital systems for much of my medical career. No one got perfect Health Care but everyone got what they needed. I guess that this was Socialized Medicine. There were inefficiencies, but morale and motivation were pretty good and there was very little motivation to do more procedures for more money. Everyone else gets whatever Health Care they desire and Mirabili Dictu it is expensive! Don't take a walk, get an electric chair. New medicine, switch to the expensive new sexy pink pill. If Medical researchers study the effects of change they invariable get positive results for new stuff. The Media loves Health Care, everyone loves Health Care. Why Republicans have almost brought down a fairly successful president on Health Care issues. And now it is a major part of our economy the cost is sinking industries counties, cities, states, and the answer is make it a market economy. That is what it is. NFL, Big screen TV's, I Phones, expensive restaurants are all expensive items that are not decreasing in demand, because of good marketing. Medicine is doing the same. Imagine Health care costing 35% of GDP! The answer is to get a grip and trim Health Care to what it should be not what is the most profitable.
6
Like so many of America’s socio-economic policies, its insane patchwork quilt of healthcare (or total lack thereof) is nothing short of BARBARIC.
For-profit healthcare (like for-profit prisons and education) is a monstrous evil.
It's ridiculous that our oldest and most vulnerable citizens, already struggling terribly, should be gouged further just to maintain their health and in too many cases, simply stay alive.
It’s ridiculous that the RICHEST nation on earth provides cadillac healthcare for some, others must endlessly bleed money to get and keep ever-shrinking benefits, while the rest get none at all, unless it’s the last resort ER before they die!
How does one separate our constitutional right to life from health - from healthcare? Impossible.
This latest premium outrage perfectly illustrates why UNIVERSAL healthcare for ALL (a public good paid for by ALL) is the only sane answer.
Seriously, it’s way past time for the US to join the rest of the modern industrialized world and step into the 21st century.
For-profit healthcare (like for-profit prisons and education) is a monstrous evil.
It's ridiculous that our oldest and most vulnerable citizens, already struggling terribly, should be gouged further just to maintain their health and in too many cases, simply stay alive.
It’s ridiculous that the RICHEST nation on earth provides cadillac healthcare for some, others must endlessly bleed money to get and keep ever-shrinking benefits, while the rest get none at all, unless it’s the last resort ER before they die!
How does one separate our constitutional right to life from health - from healthcare? Impossible.
This latest premium outrage perfectly illustrates why UNIVERSAL healthcare for ALL (a public good paid for by ALL) is the only sane answer.
Seriously, it’s way past time for the US to join the rest of the modern industrialized world and step into the 21st century.
50
An earlier comment posted by "DVG" asked why - when Medicare is short on money - the government is thinking about offering healthcare to illegal immigrants. This excellent question startled me because I had never thought of the possibility of a conflict between providing healthcare for people who enter the U.S. illegally and people who are citizens or are lawfully in the country. DVG suggests that Americans need to reach a consensus on their priorities. I agree. Although clearly providing healthcare for everyone would be the humanitarian path, I find myself suddenly willing to toss aside my liberal principles if adhering to them would mean that people I know might be forced to accept less or worse medical care because funds were lacking to assist them.
If the U.S. government is suffering financial difficulties to such an extent that it must choose between keeping long-standing promises of care for its own people or providing care to people who are not in the country by right, I would argue that American tax revenues should be reserved for assisting citizens and lawful immigrants. Alternatively, Congress should bite the budgetary bullet and make available money from other sources, such as financial assistance to foreign countries (including Israel, which does not need it), military enterprises (including use of private "contractors" and engaging in "nice little war[s]"), and, yes, even raising taxes on wealthy individuals and imposing new ones on large corporations.
If the U.S. government is suffering financial difficulties to such an extent that it must choose between keeping long-standing promises of care for its own people or providing care to people who are not in the country by right, I would argue that American tax revenues should be reserved for assisting citizens and lawful immigrants. Alternatively, Congress should bite the budgetary bullet and make available money from other sources, such as financial assistance to foreign countries (including Israel, which does not need it), military enterprises (including use of private "contractors" and engaging in "nice little war[s]"), and, yes, even raising taxes on wealthy individuals and imposing new ones on large corporations.
11
We're paying for uninsured coverage right now, whether the patient is here as a documented immigrant, an undocumented immigrant, or a tourist who winds up in the ER and cannot pay. The cost of treating uninsured people is actually paid by insured people, whose premiums rise to meet the total cost of delivering medical services. Most uninsured people visit emergency rooms, although their medical issue may not be dire; but they have no way to access health care otherwise. In Texas, "cost shifting" of this kind drives premiums.( Lawsuits against doctors have no effect on consumer premiums whatsoever, so only doctors are helped by legislation limiting malpractice judgments.) We need a new system, preferably single payer, and we need to wake up and see that our prifit-driven system is just silly in terms of delivering reasonably priced health care to keep the nation reasonably healthy.
17
So let me get this straight. In "Normal" inflation numbers that the Feds give us, monthly food and fuel(Gas,diesel,heating and what not) are not included in those numbers because of the volatility in those markets.
But when it comes to cost of living increases or decreases for the calculation of SSI benefits THEN the feds decide to incorporate the numbers regarding fuel in their inflation numbers
I love how the Feds do their calculations
But when it comes to cost of living increases or decreases for the calculation of SSI benefits THEN the feds decide to incorporate the numbers regarding fuel in their inflation numbers
I love how the Feds do their calculations
21
Anyone want to wager that the health insurance premium paid by current and retired members of congress holds pretty steady? Maybe the 15 million people who are affected the most will vote for candidates that will do something helpful?
9
What system of morality (or what people without any) would judge it acceptable to protect 70% of Medicare beneficiaries from the rising costs of the program by putting it all on the remaining 30% of beneficiaries, even without regard to a beneficiary's ability to pay? It's beyond me how a decent person could vote for such a thing. Who doesn't think this is wrong? Who are the people responsible for it? Please name them.
14
Seniors may have to start demonstrating. We can't go on strike me but boy do we have TIME on our hands. And boy do we vote!
I'd like to see seniors call for demonstrations in towns and cities. Come with your wheelchairs. Come with your walkers.
And they better not post legions of police all over the place! Or taze anyone. Or try to handcuff people or arrest them.
Things are going from bad to worse in this society, where greed is all, money is speech and corporations are "people". Republicans are round the bend. Their politicians do nothing. And the needy, the elderly, the disabled, the homeless get short shrift.
Time to man the barricades, Elders!
I'd like to see seniors call for demonstrations in towns and cities. Come with your wheelchairs. Come with your walkers.
And they better not post legions of police all over the place! Or taze anyone. Or try to handcuff people or arrest them.
Things are going from bad to worse in this society, where greed is all, money is speech and corporations are "people". Republicans are round the bend. Their politicians do nothing. And the needy, the elderly, the disabled, the homeless get short shrift.
Time to man the barricades, Elders!
19
I think I recall that those on Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are a powerful voting bloc. Maybe a reduction in those benefits are what it will take to put pressure on medical providers to hold the line on predatory price increase.
6
Let medicare negotiate fees and drug prices for everyone in the program. Increase efforts to root out corruption and theft. That could save as much as 30% of the total cost.
13
Mr. Pear's statement that Congress cares about this issue undermined his article so much that I didn't bother to read it because Mr. Pear's article has no credibility.
5
What a ridiculous expensive for-profit healthcare system we have. Medicare is doing the best it can within a broken system. We need a single-payer system before we bankrupt more individuals and eventually the country. The US system killed my wife in two months and ten days. She probably would have lived for two years in 30 countries with a better, faster, less expensive systems and she had great insurance. You don't realize how bad the US system is, until you really need it.
23
Medicare IS a single payer system.
What the heck do you think "single payer" means????
What the heck do you think "single payer" means????
This is just sad to take money from struggling seniors, most of whom are still trying to make ends meet after a devastating recession, and hit them with a 50% increase in health care premiums! Your most vulnerable group of people! Yet, on the same day of this announcement, there's no pain in announcing the continued funding of billions into an endless war in the Mideast. I guess these are the priorities.
This is certainly No Country for Old Men...or Women.
Honestly, I can't figure out who this country is ideally suited for, but it appears to neglect the well being of people who worked hard all their lives and survived long enough to retire and hoped to enjoy their waning years with a modicum of comfort and joy.
This is certainly No Country for Old Men...or Women.
Honestly, I can't figure out who this country is ideally suited for, but it appears to neglect the well being of people who worked hard all their lives and survived long enough to retire and hoped to enjoy their waning years with a modicum of comfort and joy.
21
Those earning above $85,000 single and $170,000 married are the ones receiving the increase and can handle it in most cases. Those below those income levels, those "still trying to make ends meet" will not be required to pay increased premiums. It is always helpful to read the entire article before commenting.
If both parties would get serious with Big Pharma and pass a law that allows the Medicare to competitively shop for drug prices based on volume like all other major countries do the savings would easily offset this 50% forecast premium increase. Until politicians agree to not accept donations (bribes) from Big Pharma in order to keep the status quo these cost increases will continue.
29
It is beyond time to have universal health care for every American at no cost. And it is about time big pharma and the medical community (HMO, managed care, etc.) were regulated to keep costs appropriate. While we are at it we should be regulating the banks and financial institutions that have put us in a precarious position once again. Let's vote out the cronies in congress that do not have the American peoples best interest at heart.
23
The Congressional ban on Medicare negotiation of drug prices has become one of the biggest boondoggles in this ripped-off nation.
27
Medicare and Medicaid are what will bring about America's financial collapse and revolution. ISIS and Al Qaida are the least of our worries. Neither established political party has an answer to fix our broken system, nor do they want to find one. We have met the enemy and they are us.
5
As an 84 yr.old financially challenged senior whose health care costs in NYC
are $259 a month, that includes medicare, AARP plan B and Bushes
RX plan, my hair's on fire. With lunatics in the Republican party unable to
do their job, and enact policy that helps people - even old bats like me- and
by the way, I remember the Tea Party morons howling in the street that the
government not take away their medicare - hey, tea party, get to work on those
republican nihilists you're linked with, and the Freedom jerks too. And of course
some of your commenters are blaming Obama, so what else is new. Shameful!
are $259 a month, that includes medicare, AARP plan B and Bushes
RX plan, my hair's on fire. With lunatics in the Republican party unable to
do their job, and enact policy that helps people - even old bats like me- and
by the way, I remember the Tea Party morons howling in the street that the
government not take away their medicare - hey, tea party, get to work on those
republican nihilists you're linked with, and the Freedom jerks too. And of course
some of your commenters are blaming Obama, so what else is new. Shameful!
20
Meanwhile, our trade deficit with China alone will be near 400 billion dollars this year or, about 80% of what we spend on Medicare. We are hemorrhaging money through endless wars and cheap imported goods with their "too good to be true" prices.
4
This article, with the headline about "soaring" premiums, is meant to frighten and anger people. Most people on Medicare will not have to pay the additional premium, as the article does note. And even if everyone had to pay the additional premium, Medicare is still a good deal. Even if you buy a supplemental plan and one of the pricier Part D plans, it will come to significantly less than if you had to buy a healthcare plan yourself. At the time I finally got employer-sponsored health insurance several years ago, my husband and I had been paying $650 per month each ($1300 total). I am sure that rate has gone up since then.
2
Attention Congress: fund Medicare Part B. That is what this issue is all about. Just because most of the people getting the higher Part B monthly cost are higher income is no reason for Congress not to do its job.
You have been excellent at cutting funding for everything except unnecessary defense appropriations. Take some of that money, which is not even wanted by the Pentagon, and do your job.
You have been excellent at cutting funding for everything except unnecessary defense appropriations. Take some of that money, which is not even wanted by the Pentagon, and do your job.
8
Here we are wasting so much money on a war that might never comes to an end ( as we learn today) and yet we can't find money to fund our health care system? Way to go for having our backs!
9
To all those who are crying about increased costs under Obamacare, I shopped around for Part D drug coverage for next year and will see my premium go from $65/month to $18. per month. Do your homework and stop trying to increase the burden for those who need help the most.
3
The article dealt with Medicare or did you miss that? Medicare dates from the 1960's. But blame it on the mixed race guy. and so-called "Obamacare". Apples and oranges.
2
Yes, you can shop around and get a cheap anything. Quality is something you must pay for. When I shop I not only look for a reasonable price but the quality of the health services, including Part D drug coverage, that will be provided to me and my Spouse. There is way, way too much emphasis upon the cost and little or no discussion by the media about the quality of the medical services provided or not provided. The rich get quality and the middle and poor get the crumbs. Welcome to the USA medical services. But lets face it, life is not fair, is it!
1
However, those of us on Medicare cannot "shop around." We're stuck with a potential 50% increase in premiums just because of a "glitch" in the way Social Security calculates the cost of living.
2
PK ATLANTA
You say “why shouldn’t older people face the same economic burdens the rest of us do? … Let the premiums rise; don’t burden the middle class with such additional expenses.”
First, the middle class would be much larger if so many of its members aren’t being pushed out of their livelihoods by corporate “dump the geezers” policies. Older people “face the same economic burdens as the rest of us …” in addition of being shut out of the labor market that makes finding a job equivalent to winning the Lottery.
Second, premiums do not rise – they are raised – by the medical, pharmaceutical and health insurance establishment that feels free and entitled to charge what the traffic will bear. Better you should demand that the medical, pharmaceutical and health insurance establishment be burdened with price controls.
You say “why shouldn’t older people face the same economic burdens the rest of us do? … Let the premiums rise; don’t burden the middle class with such additional expenses.”
First, the middle class would be much larger if so many of its members aren’t being pushed out of their livelihoods by corporate “dump the geezers” policies. Older people “face the same economic burdens as the rest of us …” in addition of being shut out of the labor market that makes finding a job equivalent to winning the Lottery.
Second, premiums do not rise – they are raised – by the medical, pharmaceutical and health insurance establishment that feels free and entitled to charge what the traffic will bear. Better you should demand that the medical, pharmaceutical and health insurance establishment be burdened with price controls.
13
Why doesn't Obama own the healtcare cost increases? He tries to put the blame on Congress, while the driver is his half-baked "cost saving" plan.
This is ridiculous: it's everyone else's fault but his.
This is ridiculous: it's everyone else's fault but his.
6
Errmm.... because Medicare costs are governed by Medicare laws, which are passed by Congress? Sounds like a good reason to me. Google: separation of powers.
3
Also, Medicare and the Affordable Care Act are two different things. If you want to talk about the ACA, Obama just said, I want coverage for uninsured Americans, and I want to prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage for preexisting conditions and I want young people to be covered by their parents' policies till they're 26. After that, you guys figure out what works. So the Republicans and the Blue Dog Democrats (remember them?) came up with the ACA, which Congress passed. It includes the conservative and reasonable principle of individual mandate, which the insurers wanted to avoid adverse selection (people signing up only when they're really sick). So we're stuck with that. Let's make it better. One way is: substitute Medicare for the ACA, then fund Medicare properly by eliminating the cap on premiums when salary goes over $118,000 or whatever it is now. Problem solved.
1
There currently is no cap on earnings for the Medicare portion of the payroll tax.
i wonder if before america becomes a smoldering heap of ash americans will finally realize that socialsed medicine is th only answer
17
So, who are the 30% who will be paying more medicare premiums. in 2015, people whose individual income tax was $85,000, or Joint tax return was $170,000 did not have to pay more for their Part B. Those filing tax returns of greater than $85K/$170K paid more for their Part B.
Not true. Read the article. There are at least three separate groups making up that 30%.
Also, individuals new to Medicare in 2016 (i.e., new retirees) will be hit with the premium increase.
Fix the cost of living indexing system categories, I don't drive, why am I being penalized with my benefits being short changed
5
A worse surprise is found in your Midicare package. My out-of-pocket maximum goes from $3400 in 2015 to $5500 in 2016. For chrinically ill people, such as those on dialysis, this is a disaster. All the other insurance plans in the state (Maine) have similar increases.
3
Since, seniors either drive a little or don't drive at all, they do not benefit economically from the drop in energy prices so they are more hurt by no cost of living adjustment. In addition, Obamacare's cost is coming home to roost. Somehow and someway, the people who earn their income will shoulder more and more of the cost of Obamacare as the Affordable Heathcare Act has minimal provisions for cost containment.
4
Yup, my 94 year old aunt who lost her right leg about 6 years ago, will really be able to use that extra "gas savings" to pay for things she needs. (She hasn't driven for 10 years!) And if you think this "non increase" is bad, wait until you see the costs for Obamacare next year! Although, in typical Dem fashion, you won't see that until AFTER Nov 3rd. All of you blaming the Republicans alone are part of the PROBLEM!
8
Medicare is separate and distinct from the ACA but don't let facts trouble you. They sure don't trouble Faux News or talk radios entertainers, the likely source of your confusion.
3
Congress could just let people buy their meds in Canada. That would be a politically painless way to alleviate costs for many seniors and let them get away with no COLA in SS.
11
As usual, the elderly come last. And government once again fails to care for its people. It is shameful.
8
Wow the wheels are coming off all over the Obama administration as 7 years of incompetence catches up. Not enough free stuff to placate all the people getting hosed by Omabanomics , he is just trying to run out the clock and get out of town leaving the next POTUS with the bag
15
he learned that trick from his predecessor, old eat and run georgie
2
this has to do with Congress' ineptitude not Obama's. And what about Reaganomics? You fail to address that incompetent, mentally ill President's economic failures, from which we are all suffering today- remember the 2008 crash? Reaganomics at its best.
7
And the GOP solution?....crickets........
10
I am 62, and paid to Medicare so that when I reached 65, I would not have to pay any medical costs. That is what it should be, but apparently the powers that be in congress have whittled that away. It consider it a "breach of contract".
14
If this were a breach of contract, and there was no immunity, you'd have to sue Barack Obama, because "Congress" could argue successfully that Obamacare broke the chain of causation.
In other words, everything was fine until Obamacare came along, sucked the money out of medicare and left the elderly holding the bag.
In other words, everything was fine until Obamacare came along, sucked the money out of medicare and left the elderly holding the bag.
3
Not sure why you thought that joining Medicare would result in your "not hav[ing] to pay any medical costs". Besides the premiums, you would still be responsible for 20% of the Medicare-approved charges. Unless you bought a supplemental plan, which you would also have to pay premiums for.
1
Medicare has always had co-pays for many services.
There is another way to cover these expenses without drawing down reserves or putting more burden on folks who would have to pay out of their Social Security checks.
About one-quarter of Medicare beneficiaries also buy supplemental insurance (i.e., MediGap policies) so that they face no or very low deductibles and co-insurance. Having no exposure to out-of-pocket cost drives up the utilization and cost of Medicare. Numerous studies have found this to be true. A study by the Medicare Payment Advisory Committee of beneficiaries' costs before and after purchasing MediGap coverage found that it increased Medicare costs by 33%.
An excise tax on supplemental health plans could collect the additional revenue needed and/or reduce utilization and cost of Medicare if people drop supplemental plans.
United Healthcare (the biggest insurer of supplemental plans) could decide whether to absorb the excise tax or to pass it on to buyers of their plans. United Healthcare (UHC) could afford to absorb some of the excess. In 2014 it had profits of $5.6 billion, and profits in the first quarter of 2015 increased 29%! Even if UHC were to increase premiums by the full excise tax, buyers would have the choice of purchasing the more expensive supplemental plans or purchasing Medicare like most Americans do. If they choose to not purchase supplemental plans that should reduce the cost to Medicare. Either approach would be more fair for the 30% now targeted to absorb big premium increases
About one-quarter of Medicare beneficiaries also buy supplemental insurance (i.e., MediGap policies) so that they face no or very low deductibles and co-insurance. Having no exposure to out-of-pocket cost drives up the utilization and cost of Medicare. Numerous studies have found this to be true. A study by the Medicare Payment Advisory Committee of beneficiaries' costs before and after purchasing MediGap coverage found that it increased Medicare costs by 33%.
An excise tax on supplemental health plans could collect the additional revenue needed and/or reduce utilization and cost of Medicare if people drop supplemental plans.
United Healthcare (the biggest insurer of supplemental plans) could decide whether to absorb the excise tax or to pass it on to buyers of their plans. United Healthcare (UHC) could afford to absorb some of the excess. In 2014 it had profits of $5.6 billion, and profits in the first quarter of 2015 increased 29%! Even if UHC were to increase premiums by the full excise tax, buyers would have the choice of purchasing the more expensive supplemental plans or purchasing Medicare like most Americans do. If they choose to not purchase supplemental plans that should reduce the cost to Medicare. Either approach would be more fair for the 30% now targeted to absorb big premium increases
2
Choosing not to buy a supplemental plan (assuming you can afford the premium) is making a bet that you won't have any major medical expenses, of which you will be responsible for 20%. All it takes is one hospitalization or one rehab stay, for the wisdom of purchasing a supplemental plan to become apparent.
2
What planet do you live on? Those of us who pay for "good" supplemental insurance do not use it recklessly. We purchase it so that if we have a catastrophic illness, we can get the best care. We use it for wise preventive care. We don't use our insurance any more than our friends with lesser coverage who pay less premiums for it. Private supplemental plans already make a killing. Medicare negotiates the price of health care way down, then pays 80%, only then does our supplemental plan kick in, and they do not have to cover anything that Medicare does not cover. They may include a drug program and thus you might get some needed vaccines. I assure you that in your older years sitting in a doctor's office for any reason is the last thing you will care to do with your time that is left. I am there for blood pressure checks, checks on my labs for possible diabetes or other diseases so it can be caught and treated early or reversed, and a nerve condition from an old accident. I had my gallbladder out as an outpatient which is the only intervention I have had since the 1980s. I come from the generation of walking, living frugally, and my husband and I still maintain our own yard and modest home. Remember, some day you will be us, and an extra tax on insurance will dwindle what little savings you have.
3
I'm a senior living on my social security payments. I have been blessed with good health, but as I age, there is no guarantee that will continue to be the case. Meanwhile, I must pay for rent, food, utilities, car insurance, and gas. Luckily I only need to fill my car once per month, so the cost of gas is not an issue for me. What is an issue is the exorbitant cost of food, utilities and rent. These consume the major portion of my monthly payment, leaving little to save for "a rainy day."
What I don't understand is the resistance to raising the payroll tax rate on Medicare and Social Security. It is at a ridiculously low rate. Raising it to even a $200,000 per year cap (although I think $250,000 would make more sense) would fund both programs to such an extent that the rise in the cost for medical care could be covered and the government would not need to make up the difference from the lowest income tiers. I would like to see a major push through the resistance to implement this beneficial change.
What I don't understand is the resistance to raising the payroll tax rate on Medicare and Social Security. It is at a ridiculously low rate. Raising it to even a $200,000 per year cap (although I think $250,000 would make more sense) would fund both programs to such an extent that the rise in the cost for medical care could be covered and the government would not need to make up the difference from the lowest income tiers. I would like to see a major push through the resistance to implement this beneficial change.
31
The reason the cap on payroll taxes hasn't been raised is that congressional Republicans, beholden to the wealthy for paying for their campaign expenses and assuring them lucrative jobs after they leave, won't allow payroll taxes to be raised on their patrons.
If you want the cap on payroll taxes raised, vote for Bernie Sanders. His only commitment is to the American people -- and his platform includes raising the payroll cap.
If you want the cap on payroll taxes raised, vote for Bernie Sanders. His only commitment is to the American people -- and his platform includes raising the payroll cap.
3
C'mon, people! The Republicans say that any money for this Medicare premium problem must come from somewhere else in the budget. We can do that. I say take it out of the budget for military interventions in nations which have not attacked us. Next, raise taxes on rich people, and increase taxes on estates over $10,000,000. Also, raise tariffs on all imports from China, Japan, Germany and Saudi Arabia. That ought to be enough to give every citizen Medicare and eliminate all the premiums, too.
35
Obama should apply those massive savings realized by implementing the ACA to Medicare.
Amen, sister.
Wait - I thought Obamacare was going to rein in the cost of healthcare.
12
when did he say that? He sold out when he made a deal with the Rx and health care companies to get their support for his Health Care law. RX companies know a cash cow when they see one.
1
My Obamacare premiums go up more than $50 per month every year. Why isn't the Times highlighting that fiasco? Oh, they supported ACA lock, stock and barrel and lied about it along with O and Emmanuel and the rest of the Editorial page.
7
Because according to the NY Times and Krugman, you either deserve to pay more, don't exist or are lying.
They also don't tell you that if you cancel your Obamacare plan and you were receiving a subsidy, there is a two-week waiting period before it is actually canceled. If it spills over to the next month, *you* are responsible for refunding that month's subsidy to the government. The insurance company gets to keep it.
All this fuss over a measly $50 per month medicare premium increase? I paid my private Blue Cross health insurance for 3 DECADES with never ending premium increases, benefit reductions, and rising deductibles. Not only that, I had to pay INCOME TAX on the money i earned to pay those Blue Cross monthly premiums. Last year i paid an additional $100 per month in income tax on the $430 i earned to pay my health insurance premiums. Individuals who buy their own health insurance on and off the exchanges are STILL being penalized huge amounts of money every month by having to pay income tax on the money they use to buy health insurance. This has been going on for DECADES -- just google "tax bias on health insurance buyers at disadvantage" to read a great newspaper article on this topic from 23 years ago - 1992! Wake UP People! many of you are paying huge additional monthly income taxes that congress and other Americans escape paying, and you will pay that additional money every month till you reach age 65 and have to "suffer" a measly $50 per month government Medicare premium increase.
3
Yes, but you are working. When I worked, I had those increases also. I also had the SS tax increased. I absorbed it. As a federal employee, civil service insurance was always more expensive than our private sector friends' coverage but it covered things like pre-existing conditions so we didn't complain. Be careful what you wish for. If you don't pay tax on your insurance premiums, if they are taken out pre-tax, you don't pay SS and Medicare on it either. Thus, when your SS is figured when you retire, you would get less. That happened to many of us the last few years of our working years. When I understood it, it was too late. I would gladly have paid it if I had understood the ramifications. $50 might not be much to a working person, but if you fall into a category (not just the rich will pay this but certain others at a more moderate level--read the article), it is a lot considering your supplemental insurance goes up every year, your utilities go up every year, and food goes up. Try working all your life, never asking for a handout, being loyal to an employer who never set up a 401K, and now living at almost poverty level, deciding between food and certain medications, like some people do on Social Security with little or no savings. The rest of us, however modestly we live, working or retired, are indeed fortunate.
1
The Medicare part D (medicine) rose 20% for 2016. I'm sure the uber liberals will blame G. Bush. It's odd that the government extends health benefits to illegal immigrants. Last but not least in prior years when gasoline prices were soaring the government did not figure those increases into COLA. This year with prices crashing they are figuring them into their calculations. What is the most annoying is that the republicans and democrats call SS an entitlement as if they are giving us welfare. I could have sworn my employer and I were paying into the fund.
8
Undocumented migrants are not eligible for social security or Medicare. Where did you get the idea they were?
1
When Congresscritters pay the cost of their guaranteed healthcare, I might give them a listen. Not before.
If you like your plan, you can keep your plan, plus it will not cost any more than what you are currently paying.
6
People on Medicare are not part of Obamacare (ACA)
2
Where do you think the money came from to jump start Obama-care (ACA)? The estimated amount taken from Medicare was about 600 billion dollars over some period of time. Your right Medicare is not part of Obama-care, but Medicare recipients have paid dearly, and more than its fair share to fund Obama care. I hope voters remember this theft by the Democrat controlled Congress when they are considering who to vote for in November 2016. Who knows may Micheal Bloomberg will throw his hat into the Presidential race so we can all (Democrats, Republicans and Independents) finally have a real leader to consider when we all go to the polls.
This is another "fine" (sarcasm intended) example of the complexities of any Federal Government calculations, the Tea Party Republicans and the Consumer Price Index creating a perfect storm for legislation causing the exact opposite of it's intention and impact upon the Public receiving benefits. We do have certain social commitments and promises that must be kept. Medicare has been expanded through the years to cover more than just Senior Citizens. All of this thanks to the lobbying of State Leaders.
3
So a couple of important lessons should be learned from this.
1. Republican congressmen/women are committed to reducing Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits to the American people by reducing tax levels to the lowest they have been in over 50 years. This is their stated policy position.
2. While the ACA is proving successful in enrolling millions more people and slowing the rate of healthcare costs, the annual increase of healthcare costs under our current system still exceed inflation. Until we go to a universal Medicare for all, healthcare costs will never, repeat never be brought under control.
3. America needs more general practitioners willing to make house calls as advocated by another NYT opinion piece. Actually, we need more MDs and more RNs in general.
4. Related to the spiraling healthcare cost reality, we need legislation that forbids doctors from owning and profiting from healthcare related businesses which they benefit from simply by prescribing the service to the patient. Conflict of interest doesn't begin to characterize the problem.
Last, and most important, citizens affected by these changes should stop whatever they are doing today and contact their senators and representatives and tell them they are accountable for this sorry state of affairs. That means all citizens if you think you will ever need affordable healthcare.
1. Republican congressmen/women are committed to reducing Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits to the American people by reducing tax levels to the lowest they have been in over 50 years. This is their stated policy position.
2. While the ACA is proving successful in enrolling millions more people and slowing the rate of healthcare costs, the annual increase of healthcare costs under our current system still exceed inflation. Until we go to a universal Medicare for all, healthcare costs will never, repeat never be brought under control.
3. America needs more general practitioners willing to make house calls as advocated by another NYT opinion piece. Actually, we need more MDs and more RNs in general.
4. Related to the spiraling healthcare cost reality, we need legislation that forbids doctors from owning and profiting from healthcare related businesses which they benefit from simply by prescribing the service to the patient. Conflict of interest doesn't begin to characterize the problem.
Last, and most important, citizens affected by these changes should stop whatever they are doing today and contact their senators and representatives and tell them they are accountable for this sorry state of affairs. That means all citizens if you think you will ever need affordable healthcare.
31
Universal Medicare's ability to control healthcare costs will be extremely limited if the government is forbidden by law to negotiate prices, as it is now. (I say this as a proponent of a single payer plan.)
2
so why are the Repubs. the majority in both houses of Congress? The dumb American voters put them there therefore they are responsible for this mess also.
4
The voters put Majority Republicans in the Senate and the House because the dumb Democrats messed with EVERYONE'S healthcare programs (except of course the Federal Employees, all Federal Elected Officials and of course certain privileged Unions who are all exempt from Obama care.
1
Good heavens.....of all the criteria that could be used to determine retirees' benefits, the lowered cost of gasoline is what's driving the non-increase this year? That's insane. Not only medical costs, but real estate taxes, food, home insurance, have all increased, and in some categories, quite significantly. There has to be a better way!!
35
i agree as per my posted comment below.. the way the COLA increases or lack thereof are determined are outdated and inaccurate, but leave it to a Congress out of touch with the realities of everyday living for the common folk to come up with the current formula.
5
Declining gasoline prices help everyone, but they help older Americans the least. Male drivers over 65 averaged about 10,000 miles per year compared to 18,000 for people aged 20-54. For women the difference is even more dramatic -- about 5,000 miles per year for women over 65 compared to about 12,000 for those between 20 and 54. I suspect some of this gender-related difference reflects the larger numbers of women who live on into their 70s and 80s, and whose comparatively low driving rates bring down the overall average for women over 65.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm
http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.x...
So while the fall in energy prices has left more money in consumers' wallets overall, the effect is much less substantial for people eligible for Medicare. This is just one example of how an inflation index designed for urban wage-earners is fairly irrelevant when it comes to measuring trends in the prices older Americans face.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm
http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.x...
So while the fall in energy prices has left more money in consumers' wallets overall, the effect is much less substantial for people eligible for Medicare. This is just one example of how an inflation index designed for urban wage-earners is fairly irrelevant when it comes to measuring trends in the prices older Americans face.
9
CPI is connected to so many things that it is no surprise whatsoever that it is at this point a useless number, utterly non-related to the world we live in.
The only more useless number is the Fed Rate.
Neither number will change anytime shortly. The stack of cards that is the economy could not withstand increases in benefits or debt payments if either were moved.
I second the call for Congresscritters and Federal Employees to have to be in the Medicare for all plan. It is the only way we'd ever make sure it works.
The only more useless number is the Fed Rate.
Neither number will change anytime shortly. The stack of cards that is the economy could not withstand increases in benefits or debt payments if either were moved.
I second the call for Congresscritters and Federal Employees to have to be in the Medicare for all plan. It is the only way we'd ever make sure it works.
5
I wish the Federal Government would just simply leave us alone!
3
Great! I volunteer to take your Social Security payments. And I'll call you when we need the next freeway expansion.
3
You can have my Social Security check as long as you can assure me that the Federal Government will leave us senior citizens alone. President Obama and the Democrats stole 600 billion dollars from Medicare to set-up their failing Obamacare Program. Now it is being reported that Medicare Premiums may soon soar for a large segment of this Country's Senior Population. In fact, the question is, Why is everyone's Health Insurance Premiums soaring? Like Congresswomen Pilosi indicated when Obamacare was being discussed in Congress that the Congress members did not needs to read the 2,000 page bill. Now because of Democrats lack of due diligence all medical costs and medical Insurance Premiums for almost all insured Americans are soaring and from all reports I have seen will continue to sky rocket.
With regard to you comment about freeway expansion, who knows, if Plan Parenthood encourages enough POOR young women to murders human beings residing in their wombs before they are born, maybe you won't need a freeway expansion. Of course they will be careful not to damage or destroy any of the organs or tissues they remove from the womb. After all it has monetary value, now doesn't.
With regard to you comment about freeway expansion, who knows, if Plan Parenthood encourages enough POOR young women to murders human beings residing in their wombs before they are born, maybe you won't need a freeway expansion. Of course they will be careful not to damage or destroy any of the organs or tissues they remove from the womb. After all it has monetary value, now doesn't.
Fine, go live on your own savings and don't file for Social Security or Medicare if you are age eligible. You are not forced to take it, As for the payroll deduction, we all pay taxes for lots of things, like unnecessary foreign trillion dollar wars we don't like. You could always emigrate to another country with a weak government.
1
Obamacare looted Medicare of nearly half a trillion dollars to make the "affordable" goal.
Buying votes just got more expensive for the elderly.
Buying votes just got more expensive for the elderly.
12
He looted Medicare Advantage, which is an over priced ripoff of Senior citizens and generates great profits to the medical industry. It was the right thing to do.
4
Howabout we leave Afganistan now and put the savings towards medicare?
16
Such are the problems with not having a single payer system with some controls over privatized operation of medical services. The U.S. needs to have a system which is Federally financed and controlled.
Here in Canada we are seeing our once envied health care system being undermined by attempts, with some success, what was once one of the finest in the world.
Here in Canada we are seeing our once envied health care system being undermined by attempts, with some success, what was once one of the finest in the world.
7
we can thank the 2 Conservative Democrats in the Senate who refused to vote for a health care law that mandated a single payer system.. Yes, it only took 2 fools, along with the Republicans to lead our health care system to ruin. I also include the prohibition of Medicare to negotiate for reduced prices for drugs under Part D, the Repubs were also against that.
1
Really?? You mean like the wonderfully gov. run healthcare system called the VA?
Ask any of those veterans what they think about gov control of their healthcare system
Ask any of those veterans what they think about gov control of their healthcare system
The problem is not of money, but of labeling. If this were framed as a "war on seniors" the republicans would be pulling money out of every orifice in order to fund it, thinking that it must have something to do with Muslims or terrorist threats - because that's all the other wars they support are directed at.
6
Yet here you are complaining about how the country is going.....and you've had your candidate in office for 7 years! What happened??
How about the U.S. government giving up its foolish and destructive and wasteful habit of meddling in the affairs of countries that are no direct threat to our shores and letting regional powers take care of conflicts?
The literal trillions spent in Iraq and Afghanistan and Lord knows how much in the Pentagon's black budget and the costs of those military bases on every continent could have gone a long way toward improving the quality of life of all Americans.
The literal trillions spent in Iraq and Afghanistan and Lord knows how much in the Pentagon's black budget and the costs of those military bases on every continent could have gone a long way toward improving the quality of life of all Americans.
13
I actually think that back on 9/11 Afghanistan by enabling Bin Laden did become a direct to the US. But you are right about not standing in Putin's way as he takes over Eastern Europe and the middle East.
Boo Medicare. There are certainly concerns when our polarized government cannot agree on a fix to a real problem. We know that the Freedom party is willing to hold real people hostage to conservative policies.
But let's not overlook that all of this should be considered as the expected outcome when a system as large as Medicare is lives front and center within the government sector. We need systems to avoid leaving people uninsured, but Medicare is not it. While it can certainly claim lower costs than the private sector, Medicare is largely to blame for the high cost of healthcare in this country. It dictates costs and mandates record systems and documentation policies, which transfer costs to every physician and medical system in the country. Providers are left paranoid while trying to avoid fines and make payrolls. This is a system that essentially funds an absurd, procedure driven type of healthcare practiced in this country every day.
Medicare, and now the ACA, should have focused on the microeconomics at the bedside, instead of continuing to pay for a broken system. They point to improved macroeconomics, but this won't change until providers are incentivized to practice good medicine instead of focusing on making every case a financial interaction.
The fact that costs tax our elderly is expected in an environment of a non-governing, overspending, government financed, solidified, and broken political-healthcare industrial complex, featuring Medicare.
But let's not overlook that all of this should be considered as the expected outcome when a system as large as Medicare is lives front and center within the government sector. We need systems to avoid leaving people uninsured, but Medicare is not it. While it can certainly claim lower costs than the private sector, Medicare is largely to blame for the high cost of healthcare in this country. It dictates costs and mandates record systems and documentation policies, which transfer costs to every physician and medical system in the country. Providers are left paranoid while trying to avoid fines and make payrolls. This is a system that essentially funds an absurd, procedure driven type of healthcare practiced in this country every day.
Medicare, and now the ACA, should have focused on the microeconomics at the bedside, instead of continuing to pay for a broken system. They point to improved macroeconomics, but this won't change until providers are incentivized to practice good medicine instead of focusing on making every case a financial interaction.
The fact that costs tax our elderly is expected in an environment of a non-governing, overspending, government financed, solidified, and broken political-healthcare industrial complex, featuring Medicare.
2
Now? Now can we have a simple, normal, civilized, single-payer system?
26
For the 100th time to Obama supporters who struggle to comprehend basic English and reality.
The ONLY way to single payer in America because of Barack Obama is a FULL REPEAL of the Affordable Healthcare Act.
Republicans calling for repeal of Obamacare are called terrorists.
Liberals who now want to scrap Obamacare for single payer are now the terrorists.
The ONLY way to single payer in America because of Barack Obama is a FULL REPEAL of the Affordable Healthcare Act.
Republicans calling for repeal of Obamacare are called terrorists.
Liberals who now want to scrap Obamacare for single payer are now the terrorists.
1
Just for the record, how much & hope often have our non-representing representatives given themselves raises? I wonder if their raise was at the same low-rate that the middle class has gotten. Do they also get hefty pensions & lifetime medical care--all paid by our taxes?
13
To your last question, yes they do. It's the ultimate in hypocrisy, isn't it? I don't understand why they don't just raise everyone's Medicare premiums by a manageable amount, say $5. to $10. a month every few years? Bet that would cover it and it would be far more fair.
@at out of stater, they usually do that. Whenever we receive a COLA, if Medicare is slated for an increase which is every few years we pay it or as much of it as our COLA is. Medicare costs are negotiated down but they are also indexed. But remember, seniors always have two insurances, and the supplemental insurance goes up almost every year, anywhere from $5 to $50. Plus, utilities and food go up. Gasoline increases or decreases don't mean much to the lower end of the Medicare spectrum. They don't drive much. To the doctor, to the grocery, and maybe to see nearby family, or go to church. Some of the people this will affect never actually paid into SS or Medicare or they have a pension that was exempt from SS and Medicare and get benefits through their spouse and thus get Medicare. It is not fair, but don't blame the people who are at the lower end of SS and Medicare and paid in all their lives. Blame the politicians in both parties who should be finding ways to fund this from other sources and to assure Medicare and SS will be there and pay a decent amount so people at the lower tier get so little they are given SSI, not only for us, but for you.
1
Why are governments considering health benefits for illegal immigrants when adequate financing for Medicare remains unresolved? Cant we at least agree on priorities? This is surely paramount!
20
I ca 't think of a more important question. What is going on in D.C.?
2
They aren't viewed as "illegal immigrants" by Obama & Co, but as "future citizens who will vote Democrat."
4
Another case of faulty math and faulty NYT headlines. If the 50% increase was spread over 100% of the people instead of 30%, we might be discussing large increases but without the stupid alarmist sound bites for Republicans to use against any form of national health benefit plan. And why should the 30% bear 100% of the cost simply because inflation was too low to justify a benefit increase for retirees? Why shouldn't they just pay their pro rata share instead of everyone's?
9
" Why shouldn't they just pay their pro rata share instead of everyone's?"
When this is the case with Obamacare then come back here with your suggestion.
When this is the case with Obamacare then come back here with your suggestion.
Presumably, the 30% must take the hit because it is legislated that way.
Not only are the monthly premiums going up for the 30% of Medicare beneficiaries who have elected not to receive SS payments, but also are the copays and deductibles going up.
Change you can believe in.
Change you can believe in.
11
Co-pays going up? Not with Medicare. It's still 20%. And the increase in premiums and deductible are based on a formula that was written well before the Obama administration and Obamacare.
1
Reading the NYT is like a journey into the Twilight Zone.
Obama reneges on promise to end war, NYT doesn't even mention why the troops are staying in Afghanistan (i.e. Obama's plan has failed).
Medicare premiums set to soar, leaving the elderly out in the cold. The NYT doesn't bother to mention that the medicare increases (some estimates as high as 300%) are because Obamacare drained the nation's purse and the big insurance companies and medical providers aren't about to lose a penny of their profits, so the elderly are left holding the bag.
Everything Barack Obama has done, in 54 years of life, has either failed right away or been exposed as a con. The man fails at everything he does, and the NYT will never write a news article that holds Obama responsible. For anything he screws up.
Obama reneges on promise to end war, NYT doesn't even mention why the troops are staying in Afghanistan (i.e. Obama's plan has failed).
Medicare premiums set to soar, leaving the elderly out in the cold. The NYT doesn't bother to mention that the medicare increases (some estimates as high as 300%) are because Obamacare drained the nation's purse and the big insurance companies and medical providers aren't about to lose a penny of their profits, so the elderly are left holding the bag.
Everything Barack Obama has done, in 54 years of life, has either failed right away or been exposed as a con. The man fails at everything he does, and the NYT will never write a news article that holds Obama responsible. For anything he screws up.
25
Yes, after all his two runs for presidents were failures with him garnering a clear majority of the popular vote and landslide in the electoral college. Your hate is blinding you.
4
This has nothing to do with Obamacare. But the reactionary wing of the GOP will try to establish a link as part of their ongoing quest to do away with Medicare entirely and replace it with what amounts to an insurance discount-coupon program that can only benefit the insurance industry.
1
The Republicans will fix all that.(:
This is a outrageous unfair burden on someone like me: 67 years old, low income my entire life, not on Social Security because I'm waiting until I'm 70, not a burden on Medicare because I'm healthy and take no prescription drugs.
Also, I don't directly benefit from low gas prices because I don't own a car, live in New York City, ride a bike and take the subway. It makes me especially angry at the disfunction in Congress caused by Republicans!
Also, I don't directly benefit from low gas prices because I don't own a car, live in New York City, ride a bike and take the subway. It makes me especially angry at the disfunction in Congress caused by Republicans!
16
Take your SS benefit now, rather than wait until 70. Just to cover the risk.
1
The TPP will actually lead to more escalation in costs of providing medical care by extending patent protection on proprietary drugs and by solidifying the monopolistic protections availed of by big Pharma.
But then, it will be the hot potato on another president's hands.
As long as the government plays shell game with costs of medical services by reallocating from one program to another, we will not have solved this problem.
But then, it will be the hot potato on another president's hands.
As long as the government plays shell game with costs of medical services by reallocating from one program to another, we will not have solved this problem.
4
This story is not very clear about who the 70% are and who the 30% are. Its hard to think about policy choices without clearer information. Since I am high income my Medicare payment is something like $364 a month.
Your reporter could do a better job explaining what is happening.
Your reporter could do a better job explaining what is happening.
5
Since a large part of the medicare increase is for drugs let Medicare bargain drug prices. That will benefit the country as a whole. Oh but the drug companies need billions in profits to subsidize research! NO, most of the research is done with NIH funding, then a small company develops the drug and, if it looks promising, a major drug company buys the small company out. PHARMA's biggest expense is advertising and we would all benefit from a massive reduction in drug advertising. Far too many drugs are drugs of marginal effect, AKA drugs that don't do much to extend life or to improve it.
16
they are prohibited from doing so, the Repubs made sure of that.
Take it out of the military budget. It's chump change there.
17
The assumption that those who are getting hit with the increase are all affluent is erroneous. First, this group includes Medicaid recipients, the least affluent and most vulnerable. Second, the people that qualify for Medicare but are still working are many seniors who are continuing to work because they do not have enough money to retire. Maybe the recession took away their savings, maybe they divorced and had to start all over again. There are relatively few in that 30% who are part of the 1% or are extraordinarily wealthy, people. They are called the 1% because that's how many of them there are!
4
Wende, since when did Medicaid recipients pay a dime for their healthcare? The taxpayers are paying for their care.
1
As I understand it, right now everybody is paying $104.90/month, unless they have income over certain thresholds. As I am not collecting my social security yet, my payment could go up by 50%. What then happens in the future? We would now have a two-tiered system. When I start collecting SS will my monthly premium remain higher than those that were collecting before the disparity?
If I'm going to get stuck paying $50/month more for the rest of my life, it may pay to quickly start collecting SS before the end of the year, and not wait, as I was planning to do.
This needs to be made clear.
If I'm going to get stuck paying $50/month more for the rest of my life, it may pay to quickly start collecting SS before the end of the year, and not wait, as I was planning to do.
This needs to be made clear.
5
I'm in a similar boat. My understanding is that you would need to be starting to receive SSA for two months prior to 2016 (i.e. starting November 1, 2015) to be eligible for the "hold harmless" provision. This also assumes your adjusted gross was less than $85,000 in 2014. If neither of these conditions apply, then you (like me) are hosed.
How about Medicare tax increases for those who earn over the Social Security FICA tax cap amount of $118,500 since they get an effective and progressive tax cut for every un-FICA taxed dollar over that amount?
And, it would be really nice if everyone had to pay SS FICA taxes on 100% of their income like the poor saps who earn under $118,500.
So many rich folk love the idea of a flat tax...except where Social Security and Medicare taxes are concerned.
And, does anyone know if the guys earning carried interest instead of wages pay FICA and Medicare taxes at all?
And, it would be really nice if everyone had to pay SS FICA taxes on 100% of their income like the poor saps who earn under $118,500.
So many rich folk love the idea of a flat tax...except where Social Security and Medicare taxes are concerned.
And, does anyone know if the guys earning carried interest instead of wages pay FICA and Medicare taxes at all?
21
The US can't manage a health care system so the should outsource it to Canada where everyone is covered at half the cost per capita, or to put it another Americans pay twice as much per capita and tens of millions of people are not covered.
12
Canada's health care system cannot hold a candle in comparison to ours.
Lots of Americans went that route http://independentbloggersalliance.blogspot.ca/2009/11/americans-filchin...
What are the criteria for inclusion in the 30% of Medicare recipients that are to face increased premiums?
2
Those 30% are not receiving SS payments, and medicare premium increases are not linked to increase in SS payments for them. So, they bear the brunt of increase not faced by the other 70% whose medicare premiums are deducted from SS payments. Given that there is no increase in SS payments thanks to close to zero inflation, their medicare premium increases are also protected from increase of more than 0%. Get it?
Don't forget to include the 2.9 million that will be turning 65 in 2016.
A big problem for seniors who will not receive a cost-of-living increase is that minimum wage for many workers will increase to $15.00 an hour. That means the cost of food will rise, the cost of shelter will rise, etc. in an attempt to get some of that new money. Seniors who on average make less than $15.00 and hour and count on that cost-of-living increase just to stay even will automatically fall behind. More of us this year will have to decide rather to purchase food or medicine. Foreclosures for seniors will rise.
8
The government must take action to stop this mindless increase in yearly premiums for Medicare. The same exorbitant increases are going on in the Federal Health Insurance program for both current employees and retirees.
The Federal Health Program is adding a new option for 2016 called Self Plus One. It's for people who don't have kids, just a man and wife. The cost was supposed to be less than the option for Self And Family. The reality is that this Self Plus One is
for those who switch to self plus one will pay $231.31, $18 MORE per pay period than the 2015 cost of Self and Family coverage. Of course the 2016 premium for Self And Family is jumping way up also.
Some insurance companies somehow report losses while other report profits, really large profits, every quarter. For example:
"Anthem, the largest BCBS company, reported better-than-expected profits for the first quarter of 2015, posting a net income of $856.2 million, up from $701 million for the first quarter last year." See: "25 things to know about Blue Cross Blue Shield
Written by Emily Rappleye, June 10, 2015"
http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/payer-issues/25-things-to-know-abou...
On a yearly basis, that $856.2 million would be $3.4 Billion in profit. How many Billions of dollars should insurance companies be making on Social Security and Federal retirees who will not even be getting a COLA for 2016?
The Federal Health Program is adding a new option for 2016 called Self Plus One. It's for people who don't have kids, just a man and wife. The cost was supposed to be less than the option for Self And Family. The reality is that this Self Plus One is
for those who switch to self plus one will pay $231.31, $18 MORE per pay period than the 2015 cost of Self and Family coverage. Of course the 2016 premium for Self And Family is jumping way up also.
Some insurance companies somehow report losses while other report profits, really large profits, every quarter. For example:
"Anthem, the largest BCBS company, reported better-than-expected profits for the first quarter of 2015, posting a net income of $856.2 million, up from $701 million for the first quarter last year." See: "25 things to know about Blue Cross Blue Shield
Written by Emily Rappleye, June 10, 2015"
http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/payer-issues/25-things-to-know-abou...
On a yearly basis, that $856.2 million would be $3.4 Billion in profit. How many Billions of dollars should insurance companies be making on Social Security and Federal retirees who will not even be getting a COLA for 2016?
14
The way the government determines COLA is out of date and inaccurate. A convoluted method contrived to make sure the beneficiaries get as small of any increase if at that. Obviously congressional members don't shop for themselves or pay premiums for their health care for they get it for free, and have aids or their servants do the shopping for them. Yet still, congress and this President want to use another formula that reduces COLA increases even more thereby saving the gov't billions each year. They want it used because both political parties are at a stand still as to what to do about Social Security and Medicare. The Social Security Disability trust fund will run out of money next year with no remedy in sight resulting in a 20% reduction benefits and still no congressional action mainly due to Conservatives not wanting the gov't transferring funds from the main SS program. Not much being said regarding this by the press. I wonder why?
7
The other way to look at this situation is that Medicare is functioning particularly well, with an increase last year of only 2.6% in actual costs, compared to a 5.3% increase in medical costs for the general population. The latter figure is, nevertheless, still the lowest year to year increase in the history of the Milliman Medical Index. This reduced rate of inflation is due to the improved efficiencies and larger pool of insured citizens that the ACA, (however flawed it is), has afforded us. The takeaway here should obviously be to keep expanding medicare, thus further reducing cost increases by both streamlining the system, cutting out some of the middlemen and enlarging the pool of people served by the same bureaucracy. It's a no-brainer that would go a long way towards solving this issue. It's profoundly and inexplicably sad that neither the Democrats nor the republicans have the sense to and responsibility to get this done. They are governed by the shortsighted greed of the insurance companies to whom they are beholden.
99
If they lowered the age for Medicare eligibility to 55, they would reduce premiums in both pools: Medicare, because the younger folks have lower costs per beneficiary, and the ACA, because the 55-64 folks have the highest cost.
The total cost to the government would still rise, since the gov picks up more of the cost to provide Medicare, and that population would go up. The number of subsidized people on the exchanges in the ACA would go down, but by fewer people (unsubsidized people, for whom the government pays nothing in the ACA, would switch into Medicare).
Might free up some jobs, too, as some older people continue to work to Medicare eligibility because they cannot afford health insurance in the private market.
The total cost to the government would still rise, since the gov picks up more of the cost to provide Medicare, and that population would go up. The number of subsidized people on the exchanges in the ACA would go down, but by fewer people (unsubsidized people, for whom the government pays nothing in the ACA, would switch into Medicare).
Might free up some jobs, too, as some older people continue to work to Medicare eligibility because they cannot afford health insurance in the private market.
Put all government employees, any age, on Medicare. That should include all veterans, and especially Congress.
12
I'd point out that the essential problem here's very simple: it's that because things change over time, from time to time every successful program (and Medicare is more than popular, it's successful) needs tinkering with.
When Congress does its job, there's lots of squawking and politicking and posturing, and in the end, a fix gets done. This happened with Social Security under Reagan and Tip O'Neill, which is where a chunk of my benefits went away.
But fair enough, more or less--now, though, Congress isn't doing its job. And this isn't on Nancy Pelosi, it isn't on Harry Reed, it's on the "Freedom Party," and the lazy catering to those loons in the House.
This came up with the Doc Fix. It came up with an infrastructure bank, with the ExImBank, with the Law of the Sea (did you know CHINA es the sea!!!???), it came up with a zillion things.
For crying out loud, these lunatics and their apologists are about to make it come up again, refusing to do a budget and refusing to do the debt limit so that we can pay for what we already spent!
This is an easy legislative fix, and it isn't even expensive. So if you're cheesed off about nothing getting done, look straight at the GOP.
When Congress does its job, there's lots of squawking and politicking and posturing, and in the end, a fix gets done. This happened with Social Security under Reagan and Tip O'Neill, which is where a chunk of my benefits went away.
But fair enough, more or less--now, though, Congress isn't doing its job. And this isn't on Nancy Pelosi, it isn't on Harry Reed, it's on the "Freedom Party," and the lazy catering to those loons in the House.
This came up with the Doc Fix. It came up with an infrastructure bank, with the ExImBank, with the Law of the Sea (did you know CHINA es the sea!!!???), it came up with a zillion things.
For crying out loud, these lunatics and their apologists are about to make it come up again, refusing to do a budget and refusing to do the debt limit so that we can pay for what we already spent!
This is an easy legislative fix, and it isn't even expensive. So if you're cheesed off about nothing getting done, look straight at the GOP.
15
Vote them out of office, then. If you can't, accept what our republican form of government delivers.
$152 is a small price to pay when you consider what you get in return for that. Seniors today get far more from both Medicare and Social Security than they ever put in, even when you account for the time value of money and inflation. It's a money transfer from workers to the elderly, plain and simple.
When you take a big step back here, what we're looking at is something along the lines of "why is my free stuff more expensive?" The simple answer is: "Because you have helped make medical care more expensive." Knee and hip replacements, statins to control lifestyle choices, and the "save your life at any cost" approach to medicine has helped push these costs inexorably higher.
We will never get a hold of medical costs in this country unless there is some restraining mechanism. In a private system, that restraining mechanism is price (as in, the more expensive it gets, the less people consume). In a public system, that mechanism is rationing (yep, you know the evil word but it's the only way to regulate unlimited demand in the face of limited supply). One or the other has to happen, because we simply can't provide unlimited healthcare to people no matter how much we want to.
When you take a big step back here, what we're looking at is something along the lines of "why is my free stuff more expensive?" The simple answer is: "Because you have helped make medical care more expensive." Knee and hip replacements, statins to control lifestyle choices, and the "save your life at any cost" approach to medicine has helped push these costs inexorably higher.
We will never get a hold of medical costs in this country unless there is some restraining mechanism. In a private system, that restraining mechanism is price (as in, the more expensive it gets, the less people consume). In a public system, that mechanism is rationing (yep, you know the evil word but it's the only way to regulate unlimited demand in the face of limited supply). One or the other has to happen, because we simply can't provide unlimited healthcare to people no matter how much we want to.
56
Spoken like someone who hasn't felt the twinge of arthritis, or the sharp grab of a chest pain, despite trying to lead a healthful lifestyle - because no matter what you want to think at 30 or 40 or 50, 75 feels a lot like 75 felt 50 years ago. Parts wear out. But let's check back in, when you or you're wife are laying in that bed - wanting more life, knowing that the hip replacement, the bypass, the pricey but effective cancer treatment, could yield another 10 good years to enjoy this world - how will it feel to hear the doctors say "sorry, it's a routine procedure, but we can't afford it. Too bad you made the wrong lifestyle choice of not being really rich."
13
Dear Chris: You are obviously not over 65. And you are obviously not very involved in the kind of health care your parents may or may not be receiving. But let me explain a few things. No one chooses to have their hip or knee go out. And the high cholesterol that statins reverse is based on human genetics not a lifestyle choice.
3
Life is really simple. Just change your diet and, voila, zero heart attacks and strokes!!! Couldn't be simpler. Let's ban statins - they're superfluous! Chris for president!!! Chuck all knee replacements and stay crippled!!! Chris for president! Real problems identified, no workable suggestions offered. Certainly not every person with a high cholesterol needs statins and not everyone with a less than perfect hip needs surgery. The problem is that the sellers of statins and artificial knees are committed to selling to anyone and everyone. The insurance companies don't care -they just up their prices. We need to control the healthcare entrepreneurs in order to fix the problem.
1
This is exactly what Bernie was talking about-expanding S.S. The cost of living does not measure food, rent, drug costs and they are all going up. Under Obama-he suggested several times to slow down the increases of S.S. That is just nuts. Remove the cap and let the system, that doesn't add one dime to the budget, expand for all. Seniors and people with disabilities are suffering.
9
Incorrect. The CPI-W (of course) does measure changes in the cost of food, rent and many other living expenses. The BLS has posted a detailed explanation of this.
The baby boomers want to have their cake, they want to eat it, they want your cake, and they want the next 3 generations to pay for it all. The boomers have borrowed and spent more money than any generation in the history of the world. They truly continue to commit multi-generational theft.
5
Surprisingly, they don't treat their friends well either. After having "Wall Street" deliver 1,000%+ returns to their retirement portfolios while they worked and saved, they want to strangle the golden goose for every subsequent generation. Their outsized consumption of resources knows no bounds.
1
How judgmental and off base.
"Boomers" could not control when they were born, or what society taught them to do. The vast majority have worked, paid their taxes, brought up kids, and run their lives as best they could. If the country's system is failing, it's not because individuals in the private sector are thieves. They are certainly scared, and to stay safe most want to insist that the government try to make good on its promises. Most might well agree that we can no longer afford what some people expected. But just tossing all seniors in the trash after mislabeling them thieves is morally much worse than their efforts to preserve some promised social security benefits.
"Boomers" could not control when they were born, or what society taught them to do. The vast majority have worked, paid their taxes, brought up kids, and run their lives as best they could. If the country's system is failing, it's not because individuals in the private sector are thieves. They are certainly scared, and to stay safe most want to insist that the government try to make good on its promises. Most might well agree that we can no longer afford what some people expected. But just tossing all seniors in the trash after mislabeling them thieves is morally much worse than their efforts to preserve some promised social security benefits.
1
Why on earth would you shield 70% of users from the reality of the need to increase premiums and instead shift it on the 30%. Logically isn't a modest increase spread across 100% of recipients a much better idea. People, young and old need to understand the true cost of health services. And the government needs to stop shielding segments of our population from the fact that medical services are not "free". I know so many seniors that are over medicated, over tested and running to specialists simply for something to do and simply because the doctors have figured out which procedures and diagnosis generate revenues. What a truly awful system. The government needs to stop picking winners and losers.
9
The Republicans better join the Democrats in fixing the problem with Medicare or they are in for a rude awakening in the next elections. They will be lucky to survive an election. Seniors will not forget!!
8
Are we really living in a country that would do this much harm to so many vulnerable, elderly people, a large number of whom are subsisting on social security alone? How can anyone at the policy level of the federal government not understand that the cost of food, housing, public transportation, and medicine has gone up, not down, during the past year? And the rationale is that the cost of energy has dropped! Many other comments on this story have clearly stated what should be done about this outrageous situation. Let's do it!
74
Evidence? Medicare premiums are income-dependent only at the extremes. Most well-to-do are rolled in Medicare. They are hardly "vulnerable".
1
The government puts money in your pocket, then takes it back out and hands it to the insurance industry. Can't they just cut out the middleman?
8
In case anyone was wondering about the increasing popularity of Bernie Sanders....
3
As usual the people who sacrificed and worked hard all their lives to secure a decent retirement are screwed. But if you're a laggard or one of the 47% you get subsidized up the wazoo at the expense of your more prosperous neighbors. The fact that 70% of Medicare recipients will be shielded from increases at the expense of 30% is immoral. Besides, there is no article in the US Constitution which says that your neighbor has to subsidize you if you squandered all your money living the good life before you reached 65.
1
The problem is with the middle man, the health insurance companies. This is an extra layer of bureaucracy, and all those folks do is to eliminate people. If we had Medicare for all, the expensive middle man would be gone and everybody would be covered. Vote for Bernie.
16
Just send the bill to the working class or print more money. sigh.
Now even the obtuse will understand the Sanders call for a revolution.
4
what will it take for the NYT to accurately portray health costs?? yes they are rising but at a dramatically lower rate than recent memory... the is a huge and important development, maybe a major newspaper should mention it in their health care coverage.
True but not the whole story.
The reason the cost of our heath care is dramatically lower is because Doctors who spent 6 or more years going to school beyond collage are getting shafted and as a result are not putting the effort they did in the past and the quality of our health care as a result has suffered.
The reason the cost of our heath care is dramatically lower is because Doctors who spent 6 or more years going to school beyond collage are getting shafted and as a result are not putting the effort they did in the past and the quality of our health care as a result has suffered.
Medicare premiums refer to the privatized part of Medicare Part C.... the Advantage plans where beneficiaries turn over their Medicare and the plans take care of them.
Beneficiaries pay a monthly premium AND Medicare sends these plans a monthly capitation amount of several hundred dollars. Here in my county it's about $800. They get this amount every month where beneficiary has used it or not!
In addition, if the beneficiary has medical problems, they are assigned a risk score and plans may get additional monies based on the score.
These premiums usually include health care and prescription coverage. So negotiations for rates is a collaborative effort of hospitals, providers, drug companies and pharmacies. Each party wants the maximum profit for their piece of health care delivery both for their employees and in some cases, shareholders.
Until the unhealthy profiting off health care delivery is regulated, consumers of all ages can expect to see premiums rise.
Beneficiaries pay a monthly premium AND Medicare sends these plans a monthly capitation amount of several hundred dollars. Here in my county it's about $800. They get this amount every month where beneficiary has used it or not!
In addition, if the beneficiary has medical problems, they are assigned a risk score and plans may get additional monies based on the score.
These premiums usually include health care and prescription coverage. So negotiations for rates is a collaborative effort of hospitals, providers, drug companies and pharmacies. Each party wants the maximum profit for their piece of health care delivery both for their employees and in some cases, shareholders.
Until the unhealthy profiting off health care delivery is regulated, consumers of all ages can expect to see premiums rise.
1
Yo, someone has to pay to keep the military/industrial/religion complex going. Heck, Afghanistan is going to cost another 100billion... can't leave THAT unfunded!
Give me socialism ....or give me death.
Thanks for nothing, vulture capitalists!
Give me socialism ....or give me death.
Thanks for nothing, vulture capitalists!
12
It's not just the Medicare portion of that is going up astronomically, supplemental insurance is as well. My elderly friend has a Humana Advantage plan. He was notified that his premiums will increase 52% next year. He is currently paying $460 for both himself and his wife. They will now have to fork over $700 a month. That is an outrageous amount for an elderly couple to pay. It's outrageous for any couple at any age. They are already consuming savings to pay the $460. This is really going to hurt them.
We have to raise the FICA tax for Medicare to spread the load out. If everyone takes care of everyone, no one is unduly burdened. We also have to put the hammer down on Medicare abuses. Specifically:
1) Negotiate prices for drugs. No more $100,000+ treatments.
2) Stop these predatory companies from bilking Medicare by selling goods and services that people don't need. TV is full of commercials for this stuff. I'm already getting phone calls for them.
3) Stop throwing out billions on people that are essentially dead. Hospitals make big bucks on these end of life services. Because of our advanced technology, we need a new definition of what death is.
4) Be realistic about cancer treatment. I know this sounds cruel, but there comes a time when further treatment does no good. I would not want to make that decision, but skyrocketing costs are driving that the decision be made.
We have to raise the FICA tax for Medicare to spread the load out. If everyone takes care of everyone, no one is unduly burdened. We also have to put the hammer down on Medicare abuses. Specifically:
1) Negotiate prices for drugs. No more $100,000+ treatments.
2) Stop these predatory companies from bilking Medicare by selling goods and services that people don't need. TV is full of commercials for this stuff. I'm already getting phone calls for them.
3) Stop throwing out billions on people that are essentially dead. Hospitals make big bucks on these end of life services. Because of our advanced technology, we need a new definition of what death is.
4) Be realistic about cancer treatment. I know this sounds cruel, but there comes a time when further treatment does no good. I would not want to make that decision, but skyrocketing costs are driving that the decision be made.
11
Raising FICA taxes will not produce revenues from the 94 million working age adults left on the sidelines of the Obama "recovery".
Seven years of hope and change have not been effective in putting people to work; we just quit counting them to make the unemployment number look good.
Seven years of hope and change have not been effective in putting people to work; we just quit counting them to make the unemployment number look good.
This is an occasion for Democrats to ask themselves, In response to Conservative demands that cushioning the premium increase be revenue neutral, what would Lyndon Johnson have done? And I think he'd have tried hard to let red-state congressmen know that as president he'd try his best to "save" federal dollars by cutting off the flow to their states.
1
Wait--The minority of Medicare beneficiaries that is subject to these huge premium hikes include seniors poor enough to be eligible for Medicaid? What? That makes no sense. How are the destitute supposed to pay for the premium hike?
17
I could be wrong, but I think if a person on Medicare is eligible for Medicaid, Medicaid pays the Medicare premium.
As usual the who will pay is obscured but not covered. Does any editor edit anymore?
It will be folks that have not claimed social security yet or it will be folks who earn above $100K or some number above that. That is why 70% are shielded...they don't earn much. But you will never learn that from reading this article.....
What ever happened to Who, What, Where, When, Why & How? It is so annoying to read an article like this and be able to connect the dots.
It will be folks that have not claimed social security yet or it will be folks who earn above $100K or some number above that. That is why 70% are shielded...they don't earn much. But you will never learn that from reading this article.....
What ever happened to Who, What, Where, When, Why & How? It is so annoying to read an article like this and be able to connect the dots.
19
Thank God for Medicare. My parents were retired with no health insurance coverage when Medicare was signed into law. As a result, my father could afford his cataract surgery, and both parents were able to see doctors when needed. My mother even had major surgery in her very late 80's. As for me? I had cancer at age 71, and was able to have the best of surgeons in a top of the line hospital although I was certainly not a high income person. Without Medicare, I would have most likely died. And, I have found the Medicare plans by big insurance companies to be a bit of a rip off. The original Medicare is quite adequate and you are free to choose. Dr. choice and timing are essential.
21
Agree. And improve your life style - move more, eat less.
1
Yes, indeed. And that is why we should have Medicare for All - cradle to grave.
Love the phrase "fiscally responsible." Is it fiscally responsible to have CEOs of insurance companies making multi-million-dollar salaries? Is it fiscally responsible to keep the minimum wage where it is instead of raising it to a living wage? Is it fiscally responsible to penalize 30% of people who can ill afford the pay double the amount? Stop tying things to decades-old formulas that no longer make sense in a country and an economy that makes less and less sense each day. Just use common, bipartisan sense to find, first, a short-term solution and then a long-term solution. Oh, right, we don't have bipartisan anything, let alone common sense.
28
Repeal the legislation that GW Bush and the Republican majority permitted the pharmaceutical industry to write into Medicare Part D that prohibits the government from negotiating drug prices.
When Medicaid - which, along with the VA, negotiates drug prices - shifted large numbers of patients to Medicare for drug coverage, the price shot up and BIg Pharma got an even bigger year-over-year increase in revenues.
This amounts to nothing but a gigantic taxpayer giveaway to some of the most profitable companies in the world, and ones that have no hesitation at all in increasing prices by obscene amounts to prey on vulnerable, sick people.
There is no need for this giveaway, and no reason for it other than the torrent of money that they bribe our officials with.
Repeal this legislation immediately and make a dent in the increasing medical costs of Medicare.
When Medicaid - which, along with the VA, negotiates drug prices - shifted large numbers of patients to Medicare for drug coverage, the price shot up and BIg Pharma got an even bigger year-over-year increase in revenues.
This amounts to nothing but a gigantic taxpayer giveaway to some of the most profitable companies in the world, and ones that have no hesitation at all in increasing prices by obscene amounts to prey on vulnerable, sick people.
There is no need for this giveaway, and no reason for it other than the torrent of money that they bribe our officials with.
Repeal this legislation immediately and make a dent in the increasing medical costs of Medicare.
29
We are trying too hard to save money for the wealthy elderly. Let their premiums go up enough to shield the poor. Progressive taxation is the fairest, but republicans fight it at all costs. It won't kill the wealthy elderly to pay a reasonable health care surcharge.
8
If it was just wealthy elderly -- yes.
But if you read this, the increase will fall on NEW BENEFICIARIES -- because they have never had the $105 Part B premium, they are not protected. So even POOR new beneficiaries will have to pay the 50% increase.
But if you read this, the increase will fall on NEW BENEFICIARIES -- because they have never had the $105 Part B premium, they are not protected. So even POOR new beneficiaries will have to pay the 50% increase.
sorry to point this out but drug costs account for 8% of Medicare costs so the clueless Clinton solution on drugs will accomplish absolutely nothing. By far the largest cost is in patient hospital stays followed by part B expenses, these account for 59% of the costs
3
Medicare should be allowed to negotiate prices with drug companies. This would help keep costs down substantially.
18
We have a Ponzi scheme for Medicare and SS that is running out of healthy young workers to pay for the retirement benefits and health care for older workers. Those who are now getting benefits have to pay more for their more costly benefits.
It seems to me the problem isn't the rise in premiums its the rise is put on the backs of a few recipients instead of all recipients.
Deductibles will go up and premiums will go up. A real fix would be 100% of recipients would receive record increases and those who can't afford the premiums would be subsidized through higher taxes on everyone else including Senior citizens.
The next shoe to fall will be the millions of baby boomers who are paying these premiums won't be able to get a doctor to take their Medicare coverage because the reimbursements are being gutted.
It seems to me the problem isn't the rise in premiums its the rise is put on the backs of a few recipients instead of all recipients.
Deductibles will go up and premiums will go up. A real fix would be 100% of recipients would receive record increases and those who can't afford the premiums would be subsidized through higher taxes on everyone else including Senior citizens.
The next shoe to fall will be the millions of baby boomers who are paying these premiums won't be able to get a doctor to take their Medicare coverage because the reimbursements are being gutted.
1
Hogwash
(1) There are now MORE works between the ages of 18 and 35 than there are people over 60.
The 18-35 workers now out number the Boomers.
BTW, the fewer the workers, the higher the wages they command.
(2) Soc Sec will never end unless an entire generation stops breeding.
Without Soc Sec, then YOU and all the other younger people would have to ante up out of your checkbook to provide for all your elderly relative - the way it worked through all recorded history.
No way - in some 2000+ years od know history - has the younger generation ever gotten out of supporting the elders.
(1) There are now MORE works between the ages of 18 and 35 than there are people over 60.
The 18-35 workers now out number the Boomers.
BTW, the fewer the workers, the higher the wages they command.
(2) Soc Sec will never end unless an entire generation stops breeding.
Without Soc Sec, then YOU and all the other younger people would have to ante up out of your checkbook to provide for all your elderly relative - the way it worked through all recorded history.
No way - in some 2000+ years od know history - has the younger generation ever gotten out of supporting the elders.
2
ALL insurance is a Ponzi scheme, fella.
1
Pure right wing fantasy that has no relevance to reality. All complaining. You see, there are no solutions offered at all.
1
Notice that the only times in the history of Social Security did not have a COLA were 2010 and 2011 during the Obama administration. Can it be another of congress' tricks to ruin Obama's tenure?
But ... in 2013 Obama issued an executive order giving a pay raise to Congress.
"As of March 27, 2013, federal employees will see a half-percent to one percent pay increase, marking the end of a pay freeze that has been in place since late 2010. Congress hasn't seen a pay raise since 2009."
It also ordered a raise to the VP and the military.
People on Social Security have not recovered from the 2010 & 2011 benefit freeze. Obama has the authority and must order a raise to the rest of us.
Write and call your members of congress and the senate!
But ... in 2013 Obama issued an executive order giving a pay raise to Congress.
"As of March 27, 2013, federal employees will see a half-percent to one percent pay increase, marking the end of a pay freeze that has been in place since late 2010. Congress hasn't seen a pay raise since 2009."
It also ordered a raise to the VP and the military.
People on Social Security have not recovered from the 2010 & 2011 benefit freeze. Obama has the authority and must order a raise to the rest of us.
Write and call your members of congress and the senate!
8
When is the media and congress going to learn that Medicare and Social Security are two very different programs; with very different goals and reasons for their existence in the first place.
Social Security is a payback; plain and simple. We pay in our whole working lives and when we hid 62/65 start to collect. We get back a sum of money based on how much we paid in. Deducting Medicare premiums from SS is simply a convenience.
Medicare, on the other hand is a health care insurance plan and the best bargain in this history of mankind. Many of us went from paying $500 or more a month to around $100 when we hit 65. Why not let Medicare operate as designed and keep Medicare solvent for years to come. Virtually anyone who has paid the max into SS over the years can afford a few more bucks on health care premiums.
On a separate note, Obamacare gives people an opportunity to get health care insurance before they hit 65 which should start to save us in the long run.
Social Security is a payback; plain and simple. We pay in our whole working lives and when we hid 62/65 start to collect. We get back a sum of money based on how much we paid in. Deducting Medicare premiums from SS is simply a convenience.
Medicare, on the other hand is a health care insurance plan and the best bargain in this history of mankind. Many of us went from paying $500 or more a month to around $100 when we hit 65. Why not let Medicare operate as designed and keep Medicare solvent for years to come. Virtually anyone who has paid the max into SS over the years can afford a few more bucks on health care premiums.
On a separate note, Obamacare gives people an opportunity to get health care insurance before they hit 65 which should start to save us in the long run.
9
so - are we still glad we don't have the medical system of Denmark or Norway, folks. Does everyone realize how crazy this is and especially in comparison to the rest of the world. Don't go building that wall in front of Mexico. Many of us will want to go there for our medicines.
33
Medicare for ALL! Stop all the silliness, just make it for everyone. No limit on income for medicare taxes.
37
Two thoughts:
1. Remove the $118,000 earned income limit on paying into Social Security, i.e. have the wealthiest pay a percentage of ALL their income into Social Security.
2. Create a single payer universal health care system, as all other developed nations except ours have done.
But I suppose that is too simple for those who control both the economy and the political system, and for the lawyers and accountants and technocrats who make a living off the current complications.
1. Remove the $118,000 earned income limit on paying into Social Security, i.e. have the wealthiest pay a percentage of ALL their income into Social Security.
2. Create a single payer universal health care system, as all other developed nations except ours have done.
But I suppose that is too simple for those who control both the economy and the political system, and for the lawyers and accountants and technocrats who make a living off the current complications.
58
Be aware that the $118,000 earned income limit is because when it comes time to take benefits from Social Security, it can never exceed an amount based on contributions from a $118,000 in income. In other words, the benefits are commensurate with the amount invested. If you want to raise the limit to ALL income, then you need to raise the benefits as well. If pay-out doesn't match investment to an appropriate degree then you'll lose support for the program from those who pay a lot more, but get a lot less in return.
1
Another bogus redistributionist program that should never have been started.
1
Try living without any public support if you go bankrupt from a personal or family healthcare crisis.
4
Yes, it would be so much better if elderly sick people who aren't rich would just die.
What ever happened to the idea of medicare savings through phasing out Medicare Advantage plans that use medicare funds for "advantaged" seniors' health club memberships and dental and eye coverage that those who cannot afford advantage plans do not have? There are still ads running in my area selling these plans with these benefits. Why should wealthier medicare recipients have the "advantage" of being subsidized while poorer recipients can't afford these plans? I am a medicare recipient and deplore the selfishness of seniors who insist they have a right to these benefits while others do not.
9
Social Security and, later Medicare, were never supposed to be BUDGETARY LINE ITEMS. Thanks to many Republican Congressmen and women, by pure erroneous repetition -- in speeches quoted in the press without correction -- the factoid morphed into "fact." Now, still wrong, Social Security and Medicare, for argument's sake. ARE budget items -- by design and intent and laziness, and after years of so-called borrowing/taking and never replacing the funds as "promised." This was no mistake.
Just as so many so many would-be (especially Republicans) running for Governor declare they "know" how to increase employment, uplift neighborhoods, put better teachers in every classroom as well as state of the art computers, etc., without raising taxes! THE HOLY GRAIL! When asked for details at press conferences or town meetings or in position papers, they stay vague and noncommittal. It's easy: Just steal from the Public Employees' Pension Funds. I am aware of an East Coast two-term Republican Governor who did that, and she later served in national government.
Must be something in the drinking water. They have never had to make their own -- or anyone else's -- payroll. I am hard-pressed not to say they are without any sort of conscience. I will say, though, that they are evenly balanced, with many chips on both shoulders.
pvan
Just as so many so many would-be (especially Republicans) running for Governor declare they "know" how to increase employment, uplift neighborhoods, put better teachers in every classroom as well as state of the art computers, etc., without raising taxes! THE HOLY GRAIL! When asked for details at press conferences or town meetings or in position papers, they stay vague and noncommittal. It's easy: Just steal from the Public Employees' Pension Funds. I am aware of an East Coast two-term Republican Governor who did that, and she later served in national government.
Must be something in the drinking water. They have never had to make their own -- or anyone else's -- payroll. I am hard-pressed not to say they are without any sort of conscience. I will say, though, that they are evenly balanced, with many chips on both shoulders.
pvan
6
So old people have to pay more for their healthcare. Big deal! What's wrong with asking them to pay more? Most of the American population lives on a "fixed" income - how much have wages increased over the last 5 years? For the most part, wages have been stagnant. Yet, working Americans are asked to shell out more and more money each year for their healthcare premiums. In my case, our premiums have increased between 10% and 20% every year.
Why shouldn't older people face the same economic burdens the rest of us do? It's grossly unfair to ask a working individual to pay an increased premium for his/her family, and then also an additional tax to make sure the premiums for the elders don't go up. If the premiums don't go up, the money is going to have to come form somewhere to pay all the providers - and that somewhere is going to be from the pockets of the middle and upper middle class. Let the premiums rise; don't burden the middle class with such additional expenses.
Why shouldn't older people face the same economic burdens the rest of us do? It's grossly unfair to ask a working individual to pay an increased premium for his/her family, and then also an additional tax to make sure the premiums for the elders don't go up. If the premiums don't go up, the money is going to have to come form somewhere to pay all the providers - and that somewhere is going to be from the pockets of the middle and upper middle class. Let the premiums rise; don't burden the middle class with such additional expenses.
11
PK; some day you too will (hopefully) be old. Imagine yourself at 90 years of age. You can't drive anymore. Your only income, since of course the five companies you worked for didn't have properly funded pensions, is your monthly SS check of $1200 and a pension guaranty check for $60. Medicare Part B rises to $150, Part D to $159, which has a donut hole, requires $4K out of pocket per year, and since your wife has Parkinson's, you sold your home to pay for her care and have only $50K in savings left. Her drugs and your heart med cost $600/month, even with Part D.
You live in a city where a one-bedroom, no-laundry facility apt runs $1200, so you have less than adequate housing costing $900.
Imagine yourself in this situation--now imagine your mother and father in it. Do you want to pay a slightly higher medicare tax, or do you want to move them into your home and help pay their medical bills?
Do you eat dog food or dumpster dive for your meals and hers? Do you run your heat in the winter and your A/C in the summer?
You live in a city where a one-bedroom, no-laundry facility apt runs $1200, so you have less than adequate housing costing $900.
Imagine yourself in this situation--now imagine your mother and father in it. Do you want to pay a slightly higher medicare tax, or do you want to move them into your home and help pay their medical bills?
Do you eat dog food or dumpster dive for your meals and hers? Do you run your heat in the winter and your A/C in the summer?
157
Two wrongs don't make a right. At least working folks have the ability to affect their income levels whereas retirees may not be healthy enough to supplement often inadequate Social Security income.
Where is the compassion in this country?
Where is the compassion in this country?
9
Be sure and send this post to your grandparents.
17
Medicare is a Single-Payer System.
8
Which is a large part of the reason it works so well.
Paul is correct. Got my Medicare Card yesterday. I expected Part B to cost $105, the 2015 rate: since my Medicare doesn't start until next year (my 65th birthday is in 2016) it will cost $125. I can afford that but many can't.
4
We are told by the government, and in this article, that there's no inflation. We've also be told that the ACA fixed all issues with healthcare costs. The cost of Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance were not only going to stabilize, they were going down and staying down. What a joke. This is what happens when government pulls massive amounts of money out of Medicare to bankroll a Heritage Foundation plan to massively expand private insurance and big Pharma instead of creating a single-payer healthcare system. Further, if you continuously misrepresent the rate of inflation, you get to constantly argue how much better everything is and how much the economy is improving when you're actually doing nothing but shifting costs to individuals for everything. Here the numbers have become so skewed the dishonesty can't be concealed any longer and so the government gets to say there's suddenly a crisis which requires a radical solution. Using the inflationary index employed in 1980 reveals that inflation is actually running at approximately 7% nationally, and is much higher in urban areas. Further, the inflationary index does not even try to account for the dramatic loss of buying power by Americans. It's all smoke a mirrors, what you see in the radical rise in Medicare rates is being reflected in a radical rise in private insurance rates. Again, all that has really happened is that the rate of inflation has been misrepresented and medical costs have been shifted to individuals.
20
I don't get the rationale behind the COLA structure. I'm a 82 years old female senior w/a 31 year old car. I drive to grocery stores normally once a week, prox. 5 miles round trip. Go to library and for coffee a mile away one or 2 times a week. Gas in San Diego is now about $2.65. I'd like to bet that most seniors spend lots more on food each week and month than what they spend buying gas.
I have had a Medicare Advantage Plan for last 2 years as could no longer afford well known Medicare supplement plan I had which cost me about $180 a month. I would have run out of money by now. My current MA Plan monthly premium is not going up but specialist doctor co-pays rising $10 per visit. Other costs, i.e. ambulance, emergency care, etc. are increasing. Specialist co-pays will count up if you need to see doctors other than your primary care physician often. The low gas price reason for no COLA increase is laughable. Yes, I am glad I'm not paying over $4.00 for gas as I had been but even with current low gas prices money is tighter now.
I have had a Medicare Advantage Plan for last 2 years as could no longer afford well known Medicare supplement plan I had which cost me about $180 a month. I would have run out of money by now. My current MA Plan monthly premium is not going up but specialist doctor co-pays rising $10 per visit. Other costs, i.e. ambulance, emergency care, etc. are increasing. Specialist co-pays will count up if you need to see doctors other than your primary care physician often. The low gas price reason for no COLA increase is laughable. Yes, I am glad I'm not paying over $4.00 for gas as I had been but even with current low gas prices money is tighter now.
21
$118,500 is still the cap for social security taxes on earned income.
Time to move it up so the retired elderly who drive little, don't have to
subsidize cheap gasoline for the young who drive, drive, drive!
Time to move it up so the retired elderly who drive little, don't have to
subsidize cheap gasoline for the young who drive, drive, drive!
18
And the Medicare increases will continue (although no one will talk about it as it is not politically correct) as the huge baby boomer ages and will need geriatric care, cancer care, diabetes, cardiology, etc. Healthcare is very expensive and wait until the Obama Care premiums continue to escalate for the general population who does not take care of their : weight, drug abuse, diabetes, alcoholic problems, etc.
1
No mention of the deliberate inability of Medicare to negotiate fair drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. Our government is bought and paid for by the 1% and it does their greedy bidding.
38
"Cost increases are often driven by new technology and expensive prescription drugs. "
Hmnn..maybe ALLOW Medicare ALLOW to negotiate lower drug prices!
Hmnn..maybe ALLOW Medicare ALLOW to negotiate lower drug prices!
21
Elders are burdened with unnecessary tests and procedures and then challenged with false hope and needless suffering at end of life. The medical industrial complex is in control.
1
Paul Ryan will twist this around to make his Medicare voucher plan sound viable.
Wanna bet?
Wanna bet?
10
How about stop using Medicare to bail out billionaires? It is currently illegal for the government to negotiate drug prices. This unlimited endless gift from Bush junior to the Wall street pharmaceutical firms was quickly, and somewhat secretly resigned by Obama in 2009. With this part of the 2005 Medicare part D act, Medicare is simply being sucked dry by Wall street. Every year some democrat in the house submits a bill to allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices but this is quickly squashed. Capitalism doesn't work when competition is against the law. Medicare simply can't survive as Wall Street's piggy bank.
30
Social Security will have no increased cost of living for 2016, how dare Congress stand buy when Medicare costs increase without a matching increase in Social Security payments. It's time to vote Congress out of office in 2016!
9
"Ron Thompson, president of the Virginia Alliance for Retired Americans, said the higher premiums would put “too much of a burden on seniors.”"
What nonsense. Wholesale fuel prices may have dropped, but the retail price of everything else, including health care, is going up: food, pharma, household items, motor vehicles, clothing, etc.
Plus, retired people on fixed incomes tend to use much less fuel than working-age commuters. Someone at SSA needs to look beyond the macro picture, and consider how the increase, not only in premiums, but of deductibles, will impact seniors who do not qualify for Medicaid.
What nonsense. Wholesale fuel prices may have dropped, but the retail price of everything else, including health care, is going up: food, pharma, household items, motor vehicles, clothing, etc.
Plus, retired people on fixed incomes tend to use much less fuel than working-age commuters. Someone at SSA needs to look beyond the macro picture, and consider how the increase, not only in premiums, but of deductibles, will impact seniors who do not qualify for Medicaid.
12
Before Congress makes any reductions to social security and medicare recipients, they should first reduce or eliminate their ultimate government handout: their life long pension and healthcare. Yeah, right.
29
This does not make sense, considering that the majority of gasoline consumers are people who commute to work. As Social Security is for seniors and the disabled, how do decreased prices at the pump make much of a dent in monthly living costs?
Meanwhile, the overpaid, over medically insured Congressional Crazy Caucus of 40 white men causes the government to cease functioning for the other 300 million of us.
Bernie Sanders is right that we need the kind of political revolution that will bring the majority of voters to the polls on election day 2016; it's our only hope for the near and distant future.
Meanwhile, the overpaid, over medically insured Congressional Crazy Caucus of 40 white men causes the government to cease functioning for the other 300 million of us.
Bernie Sanders is right that we need the kind of political revolution that will bring the majority of voters to the polls on election day 2016; it's our only hope for the near and distant future.
35
Just another piece of bad news for seniors on fixed incomes, zero interest for savings, increasing property taxes, sales taxes, and rising food costs.
35
Move to Colorado and buy a home. If you stay in it for 10 years, you get a 50% decrease in your property taxes. Better yet, Florida if you can stand the heat, humidity, bugs everywhere and snakes in your backyard.
Basically, the filthy rich don't care if the entire senior population dies in the street as long as they own the businesses that will get paid by the gov't for removing all the bodies. Why the American people aren't marching in the streets for a hundred different reasons is absolutely beyond me.
45
Learned helplessness.
1
Marching in the streets - how quaint. That's for the radicals. We are too busy texting about the Kardashians.
Sometimes the comments tied to articles like this really frustrate me.
Last year my wife and I paid Federal, State, Medicare/SS, Property Tax, Ad Valorem tax: effectively an all in tax rate of 45%. In addition to that I still pay $650 per month for health insurance (5k deductible, through my employer but all in all a good deal), have to save a 1.5k per month for my kid's college (no need base scholarships for us), and put a combine 3k per month into our 401K/IRA (max limit). About 5k in extras.
The Question:
How much is enough? Should each person regardless of income and age be taxed down to or supplemented up to, lets say, 2k of spendable "good living" money a month? Everything else provided via the State?
If that's the case I'd like to move to Key Largo for the rest of my life!
PS. We do live a good life no doubt.
Last year my wife and I paid Federal, State, Medicare/SS, Property Tax, Ad Valorem tax: effectively an all in tax rate of 45%. In addition to that I still pay $650 per month for health insurance (5k deductible, through my employer but all in all a good deal), have to save a 1.5k per month for my kid's college (no need base scholarships for us), and put a combine 3k per month into our 401K/IRA (max limit). About 5k in extras.
The Question:
How much is enough? Should each person regardless of income and age be taxed down to or supplemented up to, lets say, 2k of spendable "good living" money a month? Everything else provided via the State?
If that's the case I'd like to move to Key Largo for the rest of my life!
PS. We do live a good life no doubt.
The top one-tenth-of-one-percent take 56% of all income in the US. We should take half of that 56% and dedicate to social & medical needs. If we did we fix a lot of problems AND that top one-tenth-of-one-percent would still be very fat and happy.
20
Well, expect the House Crazies to screw this up big time.
17
This why it makes sense to have Medicare for all. If it is restricted to just seniors, then the sickest, frailest age group is its only insured population. If everyone were included, that would be TRUE insurance - spreading the cost over a group of millions, many of them young and healthy.
If the govt simply extended Medicare downward, enlarging the group by five years at a time, it would take only 13 years before everyone was included. Or sooner if you go backwards by 5 years till you get to age 25 and then just insure everyone the next year.
Every other advanced nation has already figured this out.
Not only does it make healthcare a snap, but employers are no longer in the business of providing health benefits, paperwork for which is a nightmare for small businesses.
As for raising the cost of Medicare while holding social security steady... How is a price hike not a rise in the cost of Senior Living?
If the govt simply extended Medicare downward, enlarging the group by five years at a time, it would take only 13 years before everyone was included. Or sooner if you go backwards by 5 years till you get to age 25 and then just insure everyone the next year.
Every other advanced nation has already figured this out.
Not only does it make healthcare a snap, but employers are no longer in the business of providing health benefits, paperwork for which is a nightmare for small businesses.
As for raising the cost of Medicare while holding social security steady... How is a price hike not a rise in the cost of Senior Living?
283
I totally agree with you perspectives, TheraP.
I had similar thoughts back in July 1976 when disabled beneficiaries became entitled to Medicare after 24 months of entitlement to their SS benefits. The difference was that we should have invested in the health of our children that included basic dental benefits, which Medicare does not cover. Then, there should have been a way to continue their health coverage after age 18 / age 22 similar to the ACA. By now, we could have stopped the insurance coverage through employers.
Unfortunately, there are the same people who would protest it would be the ones who only want to protect the unborn.
I had similar thoughts back in July 1976 when disabled beneficiaries became entitled to Medicare after 24 months of entitlement to their SS benefits. The difference was that we should have invested in the health of our children that included basic dental benefits, which Medicare does not cover. Then, there should have been a way to continue their health coverage after age 18 / age 22 similar to the ACA. By now, we could have stopped the insurance coverage through employers.
Unfortunately, there are the same people who would protest it would be the ones who only want to protect the unborn.
1
And everyone, except Republicans, wouldn't mind paying more in taxes. Employers would like it too. It would reduce their costs and they might not offshore so many jobs.
2
So, because Medicare is so poorly run and administered, let's use it to cover everyone. Hmmm.
Perhaps you are not in healthcare, so don't know what is going on around the world. Let me inform you; most EU countries are cutting care, and all countries that offer 'free' care continue to raise taxes to shore up the care they give out, but also cut what you can have and what the healthcare providers receive.
They are crushed.
Perhaps you are not in healthcare, so don't know what is going on around the world. Let me inform you; most EU countries are cutting care, and all countries that offer 'free' care continue to raise taxes to shore up the care they give out, but also cut what you can have and what the healthcare providers receive.
They are crushed.
John Boehner has two weeks before he takes off. Let him get off his dead butt, show a little bit of real leadership and get it resolved. Not all of us have the luxurious life he has, and will continue to have, at our expense.
13
So much for the argument that the Federal Reserve must raise interest rates to curb inflation. Either the CPI is a meaningful measure or it shouldn't be used to punish Social Security beneficiaries. Let's hope Yellen and the Fed. trolls are paying attention.
2
How about not taxing Social Security benefits? That would take the pain out of the increase in premiums.
7
its your paper, so you can write the headlines. personally I'd go with "most Medicare beneficiaries -- and all less affluent one -- will enjoy no increase in their premiums next year."
3
I love how the NY Times never fails to pick up the spin. This is not a "quirk" in the law. This is a prior policy decision that was enacted to shield Social Security recipients from increases in their Medicare Part B premiums above a certain minimal level. Its a wealth transfer from one set of Medicare recipients to another set. Or a subsidy if you prefer. So please don't say its a quirk - an unintended consequence - as this was a completely foreseeable and intended consequence. The only problem right now is that, without any form of cost control in pace, the impact is going to be more significant. Dare I say unfair?
15
There is a problem of course, but the problem is in the law that permits the 70% to avoid paying the increase in Medicare taxes next year. A flat CPI means the basket of prices, including both those going up (medical expenses) and those going down (energy) are flat overall. By singling out one expense, which was done for political reasons, the 70% received an unfair subsidy that now the 30% (which includes me) wants to receive also. Washington routinely avoids doing anything about the entitlement house of cards until it is forced to do so, and then it simply kicks the can down the road a foot or two.
3
Another reason why a single payer system is the best way to go. Drugs are
going up way more than inflation and so on. Hospitals add on to compete with other hospitals and add expensive equipment that stand idle most of the day.
Jesse James at least had a gun when he robbed people.
going up way more than inflation and so on. Hospitals add on to compete with other hospitals and add expensive equipment that stand idle most of the day.
Jesse James at least had a gun when he robbed people.
31
"Another reason why a single payer system is the best way to go."
So what do you think Medicare is?? Yep, single payer, for 65 and over.
So what do you think Medicare is?? Yep, single payer, for 65 and over.
You're Medicare Part B premiums are going to skyrocket, if you pay them with a check or credit card. Here's why it's so unfair:
http://investmentwatchblog.com/medicare-part-b-premiums-are-going-up-if-...
http://investmentwatchblog.com/medicare-part-b-premiums-are-going-up-if-...
1
How tiresome is all of this? We are one country, Isn't high time for us to act in our own best interests?
Of course the decline in gasoline prices puts more money in gas car driving families' pockets. But that price decline has taken an equivalent amount of money away from the oil companies and has hugely inhibited capital expenditures in petroleum production. (For better and worse.) Overall there is no evidence that lower gas prices have boosted the economy. Similarly, if gas prices increase, that by itself won't boost the economy either.
Of course it is good to put money into the hands of people. But our congress, allegedly representing us, operates as if we the people have mints in our basements. Taxes take money away from people. Appropriate taxes take money from those who can afford, inappropriate taxes take from those who cannot, or from all indiscriminately. Taxes can help ameliorate undesirable activities. Taxes can be used to prevent unreasonable inequality. But taxes never force the people into producing money. Money printing is the job of the federal government.
Raising Medicare Taxes cannot serve any positive function and would directly hurt elderly people. Higher Medicare taxes would slow the economy overall because the people, as a whole, would have fewer dollars.
Of course the decline in gasoline prices puts more money in gas car driving families' pockets. But that price decline has taken an equivalent amount of money away from the oil companies and has hugely inhibited capital expenditures in petroleum production. (For better and worse.) Overall there is no evidence that lower gas prices have boosted the economy. Similarly, if gas prices increase, that by itself won't boost the economy either.
Of course it is good to put money into the hands of people. But our congress, allegedly representing us, operates as if we the people have mints in our basements. Taxes take money away from people. Appropriate taxes take money from those who can afford, inappropriate taxes take from those who cannot, or from all indiscriminately. Taxes can help ameliorate undesirable activities. Taxes can be used to prevent unreasonable inequality. But taxes never force the people into producing money. Money printing is the job of the federal government.
Raising Medicare Taxes cannot serve any positive function and would directly hurt elderly people. Higher Medicare taxes would slow the economy overall because the people, as a whole, would have fewer dollars.
1
Most older Americans drive considerably less than younger ones. The lower gas prices are not as important... Duh
Mr. Pear's article which attempts to discuss the 2016 changes for both Social Security and Medicare fails miserably to inform the millions of people affected by both programs. It confuses readers about who is affected and what actions can be taken to prevent harm.
The basis for calculating an increase in Social Security payments to beneficiaries (who paid a tax on wages up to a maximum throughout their working years) indicates no increase in 2016. This calculation is criticized for not including the major costs of living for SS beneficiaries as opposed to the population as a whole. Separate Congressional action would need to be taken to change the cost of living calculation for SS beneficiaries.
The Medicare premium for Part A and Part B coverage apparently will rise in 2016 ONLY for newly covered people and for people whose income mandates a higher premium now. The Medicare program is financed by a separate tax on wages. This tax is criticized as not keeping up with actual costs. Congressional action separate from any actions on Social Security would be required to increase the Medicare tax on wages.
Despite the fear-mongering headline, the Medicare Part B premium will NOT increase for most covered people in 2015. This should have been made clear in Mr. Pear's poorly written and edited article.
The basis for calculating an increase in Social Security payments to beneficiaries (who paid a tax on wages up to a maximum throughout their working years) indicates no increase in 2016. This calculation is criticized for not including the major costs of living for SS beneficiaries as opposed to the population as a whole. Separate Congressional action would need to be taken to change the cost of living calculation for SS beneficiaries.
The Medicare premium for Part A and Part B coverage apparently will rise in 2016 ONLY for newly covered people and for people whose income mandates a higher premium now. The Medicare program is financed by a separate tax on wages. This tax is criticized as not keeping up with actual costs. Congressional action separate from any actions on Social Security would be required to increase the Medicare tax on wages.
Despite the fear-mongering headline, the Medicare Part B premium will NOT increase for most covered people in 2015. This should have been made clear in Mr. Pear's poorly written and edited article.
8
re: "The Medicare premium for Part A and Part B coverage apparently will rise in 2016 ONLY for newly covered people and for people whose income mandates a higher premium now."
And for those now covered by Medicare (over 65) who qualify for but are not currently receiving a Social Security benefit - like me who is still working!
And for those now covered by Medicare (over 65) who qualify for but are not currently receiving a Social Security benefit - like me who is still working!
1
Sorry, but the amount of ignorance in these comments is appalling.
1. All insurance--ALL insurance---depends on having relatively few people need benefits, and a lot of people paying into insurance programs.
2. It is impossible to raise Medicare taxes enough to "pay for the premiums," and other costs in advance. It would also be kinda stupid.
3. The prob with Medicare (and Social Security) costs boils down to this: Baby Boomers retiring in very large numbers, too-few young people in jobs paying Medicare taxes.
4. This particular prob is: the inflation in Medicare premiums is much less than the CPI, the CPI determines how much your benefit goes up, so premiums for some individuals is set to go up by about 50%.
5. Congress could easily fix this, but Congress is busy pandering to a clutch of far-right lunatics who want Medicare eliminated.
6. It is possible for the Administration to cover the costs out of a contingency fund. And if they do, half the people posting here will scream about tyrannical Obama, the other half will scearm about government spending, and pretty much everybody will scream that they want more bennies because $109 a month is much much too much.
Good grief.
1. All insurance--ALL insurance---depends on having relatively few people need benefits, and a lot of people paying into insurance programs.
2. It is impossible to raise Medicare taxes enough to "pay for the premiums," and other costs in advance. It would also be kinda stupid.
3. The prob with Medicare (and Social Security) costs boils down to this: Baby Boomers retiring in very large numbers, too-few young people in jobs paying Medicare taxes.
4. This particular prob is: the inflation in Medicare premiums is much less than the CPI, the CPI determines how much your benefit goes up, so premiums for some individuals is set to go up by about 50%.
5. Congress could easily fix this, but Congress is busy pandering to a clutch of far-right lunatics who want Medicare eliminated.
6. It is possible for the Administration to cover the costs out of a contingency fund. And if they do, half the people posting here will scream about tyrannical Obama, the other half will scearm about government spending, and pretty much everybody will scream that they want more bennies because $109 a month is much much too much.
Good grief.
13
"But with turmoil in Republican leadership ranks, touched off by Mr. Boehner’s plan to retire this month, Congress is barely able to function."
Once again we see 40 hard-right, nominally Republican congressmen holding the entire country hostage. And the rest of the Republicans just wring their hands and look worried. The GOP is on course to self-destruct. Whether it will take the entire country down with it is the urgent question.
Once again we see 40 hard-right, nominally Republican congressmen holding the entire country hostage. And the rest of the Republicans just wring their hands and look worried. The GOP is on course to self-destruct. Whether it will take the entire country down with it is the urgent question.
21
I doubt that very many of the folks making $118,000 and change in salary and wages each year would find themselves in draconian financial straits if the Social Security portion of the FICA tax was applicable to all earned income. Social Security would almost overnight return to solvency, with Medicare close on it's heels. Furthermore, ALL income should be subject to providing for the health needs of the population, and not just the elderly or disabled. With a 1.5-3% Medicare tax on dividends, capital gains, gambling winnings, and all the other accounting shenanigan ways of slipping executive compensation past Uncle Sam, the nation's health needs would would be financed without threatening those with the least ability to pay.
The sales of quarter-million dollar sports and luxury cars might drop by one or two cars per year in the United States, but then most of those cars are from Europe, where universal health care is, well, universal.
The sales of quarter-million dollar sports and luxury cars might drop by one or two cars per year in the United States, but then most of those cars are from Europe, where universal health care is, well, universal.
209
Glen, you are right. This is why Sanders insists that the $118,000. "cap" on Social Security taxes be raised so it covers those making hundreds of thousands of dollars more. Did anyone hear Hillary Clinton say "Amen" to Sanders' proposal? How come she was silent?
Social Security IS solvent!!
Your thinking is too reasonable and logical, we live in the greediest country on earth.
What is always overlooked is that while premiums have increased very little - or not at all without a COLA - the DEDUCTIBLES go up every year.
The deductibles ALWAYS increase -might be 58% more in 2016
Those whose premiums can increase by over 50% are
*individuals who enroll in Part B for the first time in 2016;
*enrollees who do not receive a Social Security benefit;
*beneficiaries who are directly billed for their Part B premium;
* current enrollees who pay an income-related higher premium;
* and dual Medicare-Medicaid beneficiaries, whose full premiums are paid by state Medicaid programs
At $159 a month for Part B + a Medicare Drug plan premium of around an average of $35 a month, that is $194 per month per person or $2328.
Now add in the deductibles in 2015 of $147 Part B & $1260 for Part A (hospital) & Drug plan of $320 for another $1727
PLUS Part B copays of 20% & Drug plan copays of $10-60 which are unlimited
Median single over-65 lives on around $18000 a year. $4055 a year in premiums & deductibles is 22% of their income not counting Part B 20% copays or drug copays.
Median couple over-65 live on around $35000 a year. $8110 a year in premiums & deductibles is 23% of their income not counting Part B 20% copays or drug copays.
Medicare ADvantage plans work out worse for someone who need care - additional premiums, lots of goodies like gym memberships & HUGE copays for everything & anything.
The majority who qualify for Medicare can NOT AFFORD it!
The deductibles ALWAYS increase -might be 58% more in 2016
Those whose premiums can increase by over 50% are
*individuals who enroll in Part B for the first time in 2016;
*enrollees who do not receive a Social Security benefit;
*beneficiaries who are directly billed for their Part B premium;
* current enrollees who pay an income-related higher premium;
* and dual Medicare-Medicaid beneficiaries, whose full premiums are paid by state Medicaid programs
At $159 a month for Part B + a Medicare Drug plan premium of around an average of $35 a month, that is $194 per month per person or $2328.
Now add in the deductibles in 2015 of $147 Part B & $1260 for Part A (hospital) & Drug plan of $320 for another $1727
PLUS Part B copays of 20% & Drug plan copays of $10-60 which are unlimited
Median single over-65 lives on around $18000 a year. $4055 a year in premiums & deductibles is 22% of their income not counting Part B 20% copays or drug copays.
Median couple over-65 live on around $35000 a year. $8110 a year in premiums & deductibles is 23% of their income not counting Part B 20% copays or drug copays.
Medicare ADvantage plans work out worse for someone who need care - additional premiums, lots of goodies like gym memberships & HUGE copays for everything & anything.
The majority who qualify for Medicare can NOT AFFORD it!
11
You added pharmacy costs in twice, and assumed that everybody uses their deductible every year.
Sigh. You also left out that under the PPACA, checkups, routine screening tests, and basic vaccines don't cost oatients anything.
Sigh. You also left out that under the PPACA, checkups, routine screening tests, and basic vaccines don't cost oatients anything.
Medicare is mandatory and it has been for some time.
If someone cannot afford the Medicare premiums, they can ask for state aid (Medicaid).
If someone cannot afford the Medicare premiums, they can ask for state aid (Medicaid).
Medicare Advantage is actually a very good program. There are no premiums for most plans, and the networks are very generous. My aunt had this -- I paid her bills and signed her up for Medicare (she had dementia) -- and I chose Medicare Advantage. If you don't have a hospital stay, you can end up paying thousands less than traditional Medicare. If you DO have to go into the hospital, there is a "cap" on your total expenditures of $4200. Regularly Medicare was $350 a month. DO THE MATH. It's the same amount! So worst case in Medicare Advantage, you pay the same amount. Best case, you save over $4000 a year.
Health care is really expensive. How about we ask both parties to put the cost of Medical care for Seniors in their budgets. Last time I looked both parties were in favor of gutting Medicare for other budget priorities.
3
The Dems have not tried, at all, to gut our Social Safety Net programs. In fact, they have been insisting that they NOT be gutted. I agree with them.
'The purpose of the automatic increases is to preserve the purchasing power of Social Security benefits.'
Here's an idea: if the government prevented the monopoly chokehold of the medical/pharmaceutical complex and ensured price controls, its purchasing power would be far greater.
As it is, the 99% are paying dearly -- with no end in sight -- directly into the for-profit medical coffers.
I personally resent my tax money being used to pay for company profits and CEO salaries rather than actual medical care.
Here's an idea: if the government prevented the monopoly chokehold of the medical/pharmaceutical complex and ensured price controls, its purchasing power would be far greater.
As it is, the 99% are paying dearly -- with no end in sight -- directly into the for-profit medical coffers.
I personally resent my tax money being used to pay for company profits and CEO salaries rather than actual medical care.
37
"Congress and the Obama administration are frantically seeking ways to hold down..."
I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe that ANY Republican inside or outside of Congress is frantically seeking anything that would hold down costs.
ALL G.O.P. members will be working feverishly to blame Mr. Obama and, if possible, Hillary Clinton because this is the G.O.P. message.
I will now look out my window to see if pigs are flying.
I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe that ANY Republican inside or outside of Congress is frantically seeking anything that would hold down costs.
ALL G.O.P. members will be working feverishly to blame Mr. Obama and, if possible, Hillary Clinton because this is the G.O.P. message.
I will now look out my window to see if pigs are flying.
24
What should they say in response to Obama making the wrong decision Every.Single.Time. ?
What's the connection between the Social Security freeze and the Medicare increase? Mr Pear has some explaining to do.
2
Yes, this was not explained. Medicare payments are deducted directly from Social Security recipients' monthly Social Security payment. The law does not allow *net* Social Security payments to decrease, so those receiving payments can't "contribute" to the (ridiculous) Medicare balance "problem". If you are not yet receiving payments from Social Security, yet are on Medicare, you have pay Medicare directly. People in that group would shoulder all of the (ridiculous) balancing costs.
Well, Obamacare dipped into Medicare cookie jar and what were the Obamaniacs thinking?
Obama's silence on this issue is deafening.
Obama's silence on this issue is deafening.
8
I'd be fascinated to know just how Obamacare did that, and what that has to do with the cost problem here.
Is this that whole, "the Commie Black President destroyed America by cutting Medicare Advantage overpayments to docs in exactly the same way Paul Ryan proposed," thingie?
Is this that whole, "the Commie Black President destroyed America by cutting Medicare Advantage overpayments to docs in exactly the same way Paul Ryan proposed," thingie?
1
That so called "dip" was a reduction in payments made by Medicare to hospitals and insurance companies in Medicare Advantage plans spread out over a ten year period thereby extending the life of Medicare many years.
No benefits were lost, in fact many were added, wellness benefits, preventative benefits with no co-pays.
Where else can you find health insurance for $104.90 a month?
No benefits were lost, in fact many were added, wellness benefits, preventative benefits with no co-pays.
Where else can you find health insurance for $104.90 a month?
Robert, I am a Black attorney in Washington DC.
There is no bigger disgrace, no bigger source of shame to me as a Black man than Barack Obama.
When we have jury trials, I have to take an extra step to try and exempt potential jurors who judge me as a Black man based on the Obama presidency. The ability for a Black man in a leadership position to be trusted, respected and treated as an equal has been diminished by Barack Obama for generations. I will not outlive the effects of the Obama presidency if I lived to be 100.
Back to Obamacare.
As Jonathan Gruber carefully explained, and you apparently did not understand, is how the insurance companies teamed with the Obama WH to write the ACA, and create provisions that send insurance premiums (including medicare premiums) through the roof while the US government subsidizes insurance companies with our tax dollars. We are paying for the same thing twice. Because Obamacare was really a Ponzi scheme, making young people like me pay the costs for the elderly, poor and uninsured, the money has to come from somewhere.
Young people are dropping coverage.
The penalty is unenforceable and uncollectable.
The enrollment numbers needed to make Obamacare solvent didn't happen.
Millions of folks jumped on Medicare to get freebies under the ACA.
The bill for that is coming due.
There is no bigger disgrace, no bigger source of shame to me as a Black man than Barack Obama.
When we have jury trials, I have to take an extra step to try and exempt potential jurors who judge me as a Black man based on the Obama presidency. The ability for a Black man in a leadership position to be trusted, respected and treated as an equal has been diminished by Barack Obama for generations. I will not outlive the effects of the Obama presidency if I lived to be 100.
Back to Obamacare.
As Jonathan Gruber carefully explained, and you apparently did not understand, is how the insurance companies teamed with the Obama WH to write the ACA, and create provisions that send insurance premiums (including medicare premiums) through the roof while the US government subsidizes insurance companies with our tax dollars. We are paying for the same thing twice. Because Obamacare was really a Ponzi scheme, making young people like me pay the costs for the elderly, poor and uninsured, the money has to come from somewhere.
Young people are dropping coverage.
The penalty is unenforceable and uncollectable.
The enrollment numbers needed to make Obamacare solvent didn't happen.
Millions of folks jumped on Medicare to get freebies under the ACA.
The bill for that is coming due.
2
"About 70 percent of Medicare beneficiaries will be protected against higher premiums in 2016. But Medicare actuaries predicted in July that the standard premium for other beneficiaries would rise next year to $159 a month. The premium for most beneficiaries is now just under $105 a month, the same as in 2013 and 2014."
If 70 percent of Medicare beneficiaries were NOT protected against higher premiums in 2016, this would be a no brainer and the money would magically appear. There's always enough cash around to pay for silly hearings like the Hillary Clinton email situation (what, four times already) and other useless committees, but when it comes to the American people, it's an entirely different scenario. Folks like my husband and myself have been paying into Social Security for over 50 years and where has that gotten us? I personally don't care about the 2016 COL, but a whopping 50% increase in premiums is beyond ridiculous - it's criminal and just plain wrong.
171
Typical Democratic politics; come up with too good to be true entitlement programs, sell it to the public and then walk away and let the congress figure out how to pay for it. The Obama administration is fortunate that there's a Republican Congress setting so he can blame the debacle on them.
4
Social Security has been around for 70 years and has worked very well.
Social Security is paid for (completely paid for) by FICA taxes and Medicare is mostly paid by FICA taxes.
Social Security is paid for (completely paid for) by FICA taxes and Medicare is mostly paid by FICA taxes.
To all those who snicker and/or roll their eyes when Sanders mentions the word revolution - it is coming, with or without him. There is just so much people can take.
32
It makes no sense that prices are said to be stable while the most expensive item for a large sector of the aged is going up. The Republicans wander around in their self made morass and hold the public hostage to their whims.
30
Medicare beneficiaries who have traditional medigap coverage - such as through Blue Cross-Blue Shield plans, are likely to have to pay significantly more for medigap coverage in 2014. It is time for action by the administration and the Congress to moderate the increases caused by the up-front costs of treating newly-insured Americans with pre-existing conditions.
2
Healthcare is much too expensive in this country and there are many well known reasons for that. Addressing it, however, is a sticky issue because of vested interests, ideology, and ignorance.
21
I'm 62 and make well under $75,000/yr. I don't think I'll be able to retire until I'm around 70, after looking at what Social Security pays me back for all my years of paying in (been paying since I was 16). My healthcare premium went up from $250/mo. to $600/mo. since the ACA passed. So my heart doesn't exactly bleed for people earning $214/yr. paying $100 less in premiums than I do.
7
What you have been paying in has gone to pay the current drawee's. There is no special account for you. This has worked, and worked well, for 70 years.
I can imagine demagogues are lining up to make this a fault of the government putting its hands on their Medicare and or President Obama's fault.
But what really is so very disturbing about unexpectedly revealed social financial issues, the national media uses fear rather than explanation as basis to sell advertising dollars.
However, they seem to overlook their families being part of tumult inflamed by omission of factual discussions for basis of these events.
But what really is so very disturbing about unexpectedly revealed social financial issues, the national media uses fear rather than explanation as basis to sell advertising dollars.
However, they seem to overlook their families being part of tumult inflamed by omission of factual discussions for basis of these events.
2
Makes one wonder if any other Western industrialized nations have figured out how to provide healthcare to all of their citizens, like a citizenship right, without denying care to some and placing an impossible financial burden on many? Imagine.
19
Big question - Healthcare is not free. SOMEONE has to pay for it. If the users don't pay for it then who does? The average person puts in about 1/3 of what the average person takes out........ are we Americans willing to pay the tax rates that our European counterparts pay to fund this?
7
Anita: I had cancer surgery with Medicare coverage. I paid 20% of the cost out of my own funds. Medicare insurance has copays...just like all others. However, the total charged is usually less. But, nothing is free in this World.
1
It seems the Government uses a computation that was devised half a century ago and has no real meaning in today's economy to steal money form senior citizens and disabled veterans etc. No wonder many of these same people continue to live in squalor.
10
Granted fuel prices are much lower, but this does not have the same economic impact on seniors on Social Security as it does on those still working. It is not too far fetched to assume that we do not drive daily to work, that our consumption of fuel generally is lower.
The cost of food and other necessary commodities has risen sharply, which far exceeds any reduction in fuel prices.
The metrics of the COLA determination do not reflect the reality of every day life of those on SS.
The cost of food and other necessary commodities has risen sharply, which far exceeds any reduction in fuel prices.
The metrics of the COLA determination do not reflect the reality of every day life of those on SS.
31
It's crazy that income is only taxed up to the first $118,500. With nearly all the gains going to those at the top, it's obscene to think that the bulk of that income is not contributing at all to Social Security.
99
There is no limit on Medicare tax. In fact, higher incomes ear taxed more. You pay 2.9% up to $250K, but 3.8% on amounts over $250K, without limit. And unlike social security, investment income over $200K is also subject to Medicare tax. So these affluent retirees,, in addition to paying the extra Medicare premium, may also be paying Medicare tax on their retirement income.
This is such a no brainer, Hillary, will you make this part of your campaign?
I wish they would stop calling it a Medicare premium when it's a tax since it's based on income. Once again the upper middle class living in high cost of living areas like the northeast get hit the hardest. Eventually, I'll have to move out of NJ because the taxes here are just ridiculous. I could just turn over all my hard earned and smartly saved assets to the government.
10
Create a national health service that works like the VA system. Fund Americans' health care through the income tax. Nationalize the pharmaceutical industry, the insurance industry and the hospital industry to control costs.
Overnight the problem would be fixed.
Overnight the problem would be fixed.
46
Except that the VA is a mess.
We already have that system. It's called Medicare.
Big gaping hole in your reporting. You failed to explain who the "other beneficiaries" are whose premiums are going up by $159.
41
This article does not provide much information. The "quirk in federal law" is never explained. Why are 70% protected and the rest heavily impacted? How do you know if you are in the 70% or the 30%? What is proposed for Congressional intervention? The NYT should be able to do better than this.
95
Agreed. The article does little to explain, and just causes more confusion.
Re-read the article. It clearly states that most SS recipients are protected from the rate hike; that only wealthier SS recipients will get a premium boost; the rest of the premium increase has to be spread across the non-SS recipients who are receiving Medicaid benefits (and the states that pay for many of these premiums). Now, I got that right from the article. What more do you need?
The quirk is explained later in the article. Premiums for non-affluent people who collect social security cannot rise by more than the rise in social security benefits.
1
I take my ease these days, because the government decrees
I get a monthly check to do with just as I might please.
It is a hefty sum, and buys me scads of Ken-L Ration;
I can live it up like anyone from Third World nation.
I'm chauffeured by the bus to any spot that I desire,
and I'm a sporty dresser with Goodwill's threadbare attire.
The doctor gives me pills for all my aches and pains while he
explains my operation can't be done without a fee.
Who needs a cost of living boost? My lifestyle's so majestic
that I can dine on canned sardines (as long as they're domestic).
I get a monthly check to do with just as I might please.
It is a hefty sum, and buys me scads of Ken-L Ration;
I can live it up like anyone from Third World nation.
I'm chauffeured by the bus to any spot that I desire,
and I'm a sporty dresser with Goodwill's threadbare attire.
The doctor gives me pills for all my aches and pains while he
explains my operation can't be done without a fee.
Who needs a cost of living boost? My lifestyle's so majestic
that I can dine on canned sardines (as long as they're domestic).
102
>
Not to worry, the blue hairs are predominantly Republicans. This will get fixed fast and may be the only thing that gets through Congress this year.
Not to worry, the blue hairs are predominantly Republicans. This will get fixed fast and may be the only thing that gets through Congress this year.
14
Lay off the blue hair comments. And we're not all Republicans. Have a little respect
3
My hair is grey, I'm on Medicare and I'm a staunch Democrat as are most of my "blue haired" friends.
2
WRONG! Don't insult senior Dems!
5
Unbelievable. No increase because no inflation, but my Medicare payment is going to inflate by 50%.
This is beyond reason. And I don't expect any action from a Congress who regards Social Security benefits as an evil socialist plot and (for only one example) farm subsidies as a good given right.
AARP to the barricades!
This is beyond reason. And I don't expect any action from a Congress who regards Social Security benefits as an evil socialist plot and (for only one example) farm subsidies as a good given right.
AARP to the barricades!
255
Why is your premium increasing? Mine isn't. Are you a high earner?
3
2016 is a tax year so trust me - they will act to reduce the increase - or else increase social security to compensate.
If there is one thing that Congress knows, it's that old people always vote and Democratic turnout is always higher in a Presidential election cycle!
If there is one thing that Congress knows, it's that old people always vote and Democratic turnout is always higher in a Presidential election cycle!
5
AARP is a fraud.
Never any shortage of money when it is time to go to war or bail out Wall Street banksters. Otherwise, money is too tight to mention...
448
Or, given that the Wall Street bailout was quite profitable for the government--they paid back their loans with interest--maybe we need more of those.
1
Dumb comment. Right now entitlements are 70% of the federal budget. Do you even know that?????
1
Also no shotage of money when Republicans go for tax cuts to the rich.
8
I'll be the one to say it... maybe we should actually raise the Medicare tax to the point where it actually funds the program?
68
By that logic let's also raise a War Tax, charged to the military industrialists like Mobil, Halliburton, General Dynamics, Boeing, etc. Let's pre-charge them for the wars of the future.
6
Closer to retirement than not, it is shocking to see how little I have paid into Medicare over all these decades of work.
Single payer for all paid for out of an increase on the Medicare payroll tax. Many people will drop their private plans, so their costs will be the same, while others will choose to keep their private insurance, which should not be deductible.
Single payer for all paid for out of an increase on the Medicare payroll tax. Many people will drop their private plans, so their costs will be the same, while others will choose to keep their private insurance, which should not be deductible.
Sure, as long as we make it a flat rate on EVERYBODY and we get Universal Healthcare out of it......
"but because of a quirk in federal law, nearly one-third of them could see big increases in their Medicare premiums unless Congress intervenes."
So what is the quirk? And how could it be fixed. I don't see this explained.
So what is the quirk? And how could it be fixed. I don't see this explained.
79
Good grief. The article says EXPLICITLY that this is a problem in the way that COLA for Medicare recipients is tied to the rise in CPI, that the CPI has been showing very low inflation largely because of abnormally-low gas prices, and that Congress hasn't got off its duff and fixed this.
Or to put this in crayon, all costs go up a little every year. For Medicare, those increases are spozed to be handled by small increases in...oh, never mind. Just read the darn article.
Or to put this in crayon, all costs go up a little every year. For Medicare, those increases are spozed to be handled by small increases in...oh, never mind. Just read the darn article.
5
"Since most people on Medicare have their premiums deducted from their monthly Social Security checks," they are protected because "federal law stipulates that, in most cases, the increase in a person’s Medicare premium cannot exceed the increase in the person’s Social Security benefit. "
1
Thank you NYT for expanding the story and clearing things up.
1
Why not state the real reason for the rise in premiums? They are across the board, not just for Medicare recipients. The working class is getting destroyed - by Obamacare.
23
No, it's the high cost of the private healthcare delivery system which the ACA, with help from the GOP, did little to address - it only addressed access, mostly not cost or quality.
14
Because there is nothing in the article that implies that this is true. Apparently there is technicality that requires a raise in premiums, even though it is not caused by a shortage of money. The article should be clearer.
5
Premiums for healthcare insurance have been increasing since well before "Obamacare" existed. Further, the business-side leaning research from the McKinsey Study (as quoted in Forbes) notes that •"Despite the cries of the Obamacare bashers that insurance companies would leave the exchanges in droves once they discovered how much money they are losing , it turns out that competition and choice are increasing as we head into 2015." Put the blame money-grabbing insurance companies.....
16
Congress should identify every occasion where it pilfered Social Security funds, in the last 70 years, pay it back, raise the debt ceiling and taxes, and make further efforts to force reasonable costs for health services and drugs, for every American.
263
This just goes to show that the CPI is a bogus measurement. Sure, energy prices have declined, but tell that to the elderly, many of whom no longer drive. Anybody living in the real world knows that property taxes, food, rent, and prescriptions continue on a relentless upward course.
325
Inflation is non-existent, it is just that everything costs more.
4
SS benefits are not based on the cost of living of the elderly.
True, energy costs are down - for the moment, and most of us need to heat or cool our homes, but those savings vanish in the kind of cold winters we've had, and don't make up for the increase in food prices.
Food prices, in particular, have gone up & will continue to do so, because of the widespread droughts and/or flooding across the nation. (Dog food prices , too. I don't have a dog: I'm adding this bit of info for those who suggest simply buying less expensive food, even if we don't like it.) We can't choose to cut back on rent or property taxes - not for long, anyway.
So, it comes down to cutting back on prescriptions or food or heat. Literally a question of 'choose your poison' for those of us with no other income besides Social Security.
I'd love to see the Council of Economic Advisors live on the amount of money they're deciding we should throughout all of 2016
True, energy costs are down - for the moment, and most of us need to heat or cool our homes, but those savings vanish in the kind of cold winters we've had, and don't make up for the increase in food prices.
Food prices, in particular, have gone up & will continue to do so, because of the widespread droughts and/or flooding across the nation. (Dog food prices , too. I don't have a dog: I'm adding this bit of info for those who suggest simply buying less expensive food, even if we don't like it.) We can't choose to cut back on rent or property taxes - not for long, anyway.
So, it comes down to cutting back on prescriptions or food or heat. Literally a question of 'choose your poison' for those of us with no other income besides Social Security.
I'd love to see the Council of Economic Advisors live on the amount of money they're deciding we should throughout all of 2016
103
I wish I could upvote this comment more. Cost-of-living metrics are at best misleading since the 1980s and likely for various political reasons.
8
Well you can see where this is going to go. The republicans are going to put Obama into a corner of damned if you do and damned if you don't. They'll scream either he doesn't care about seniors or he can't be trusted with the economics of running the country. Once again the faction that has no interest in governing will put making political points before the good of the people.
144
And 'the good of the people' in this case is what?
Raising taxes in order to pay our legal debts. Those legal debts include Social Security and Medicare.
Robert Pear in another one of his scare headline stories about healthcare gives even more reason to go single payer. The GOP has said no so many times that they don't know what they stand for. Don't look to any right wing or free market solutions because there are none.
160
And your plan for paying for single-payer would be...?
Hate to inform you but Medicare is single payer! That failed and bloated program is the model Bernie Marx, Hillary, and the other pitiful candidates on the stage Tuesday wish to inflict on the entire US health care system. The problem with Medicare isn't Republicans; it is simply increased utilization by seniors who live longer and consume more resources coupled with a wasteful system that panders to them and can't say no. Single payer works in Europe as there is both explicit and implicit health care rationing. If you want to go there be my guest, but at present health care demand is infinite and this problem will only get worse. Demagogues like Bernie just pander.
1
Robert, healthcare is 17-18% of the US economy. The US economy is slightly over $18 Trillion. So healthcare costs America $3.4 trillion.
$3.4 trillion. Do you need a road map to understand where the money will come from? Do you have any idea what kind of question you have asked?
Do you have any idea about the topic? Please, let us know and dispel any doubt.
$3.4 trillion. Do you need a road map to understand where the money will come from? Do you have any idea what kind of question you have asked?
Do you have any idea about the topic? Please, let us know and dispel any doubt.
It's pretty simple really. The government doesn't have the money to pay for all these things and intends to get it from me.
9
I hope by "all these things" you include the $600 billion or so in defense boondoggle spending and the untold millions we've decided not to collect in taxes from corporations and the wealthy.
6
Wrong. We are spending one billion dollars per war plane because the Republican Congress wants their rich friends to get richer. One billion dollars will pay for a lot of health care.
11
So are you going to pay for your own roads, police department, foreign wars, food inspection, border patrols, etc.? It's not simple except for the simple minded.
8
Once again the affluent of America cry poor. Excuse me by $85,000 to $214,000 per year income when you are retired looks pretty good to me.
The AVERAGE annual income of retired persons 65 and older is $22,240 for an individual and $36,895 for a household. Those at the averge and below are the people we need to worry about, not the whiners with multiple homes, new cars every other year, who take their $6000/person Viking cruises every year.
The AVERAGE annual income of retired persons 65 and older is $22,240 for an individual and $36,895 for a household. Those at the averge and below are the people we need to worry about, not the whiners with multiple homes, new cars every other year, who take their $6000/person Viking cruises every year.
147
Are you referring to the same 'whiners' who pay essentially all US income taxes, even into their golden years? You know, the ones who carry everyone else on their backs?
3
So according to you the whiners are the very people that pay more in the system but ask to receive the same benefits as those who pay less? Bizzarro world!
3
Most "affluent" Americans with income in that range in retirement live in areas where the cost of living is high (or lived in those areas before they retired). Many of them are retired teachers, government employees and other union workers who have very generous retirement benefits.
People who are making income like that in retirement are -- for the most part -- not living off investments, but are people who worked every day to earn that money. And who paid taxes and contributed to Social Security to earn it.
My mom is one of them. She owns one house (with a mortgage on it), hasn't bought a new car in ten years and seldom takes one vacation a year, much less an expensive one. She worked hard before her retirement and gets what was PROMISED to her, nothing more.
About 1/3 of her monthly Social Security check currently goes to various Medicare premiums, in addition to which she pays for private supplemental coverage. If this increase goes through, TWO THIRDS of her Social Security check will go to Medicare premiums. Why should she have to be even more frugal now because only 30% of those receiving Social Security will bear the brunt of this increase?
People who are making income like that in retirement are -- for the most part -- not living off investments, but are people who worked every day to earn that money. And who paid taxes and contributed to Social Security to earn it.
My mom is one of them. She owns one house (with a mortgage on it), hasn't bought a new car in ten years and seldom takes one vacation a year, much less an expensive one. She worked hard before her retirement and gets what was PROMISED to her, nothing more.
About 1/3 of her monthly Social Security check currently goes to various Medicare premiums, in addition to which she pays for private supplemental coverage. If this increase goes through, TWO THIRDS of her Social Security check will go to Medicare premiums. Why should she have to be even more frugal now because only 30% of those receiving Social Security will bear the brunt of this increase?
2
Great. And of course no cost of living increase because of the "rigged" formula. So who is out there standing up for the Americans in this country and willing to "fix" these problems?
31
But then again, per the article, a Social Security cost of living increase was given the last two years, while Medicare premiums remained flat during that period.
So the formula wasn't "rigged" then?
So the formula wasn't "rigged" then?
1
Bernie Sanders, that's who.
5
Allow medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices. Problem solved.
446
Except that that isn't the problem here.
5
not a bad idea, but no help here inasmuch as Part B doesn't pay for prescriptions.
4
Drug company executives like Mr. Martin Shkreli would rather Medicare not be in a position to negotiate prescription drug prices.
5
Medicare tax on workers should be more than the ridiculously low 2.9%, because unless a person dies quickly at age 65, a lifetime of such minimal contributions will not cover the next 20-30 years of medical care.
And carried interest should be subject to payroll taxes, so the .01% of the country actually pays into the system, for a change of pace.
And carried interest should be subject to payroll taxes, so the .01% of the country actually pays into the system, for a change of pace.
76
@FSM: you don't seem to understand AT ALL how Medicare works.
The 3% tax does not pay for your care. It is a "buy in" to the entire system, and "prepays" some (not all) of your premiums. After that, you must STILL pay $105 in Part B costs, a Part D drug plan and if you want comprehensive care, a Medigap policy which averages $350 a month.
DO THE MATH. Most of the cost of Medicare is the premiums, plus the "buy in" which you pay for over 40 years time.
The 3% tax does not pay for your care. It is a "buy in" to the entire system, and "prepays" some (not all) of your premiums. After that, you must STILL pay $105 in Part B costs, a Part D drug plan and if you want comprehensive care, a Medigap policy which averages $350 a month.
DO THE MATH. Most of the cost of Medicare is the premiums, plus the "buy in" which you pay for over 40 years time.
2
First, stop limiting income on those from 62-70 years old on Social Security. You should be able to make all you want and still receive your benefits if you have paid into Social Security for 40 years or more. Second, stop the madness and greed of ever increasing health care cost and prescription drugs prices and allow for honest negotiations for drug prices for those on medicare. Third, how about caring for the elderly in this country and take all of their care out of the greedy hands of the private sector.
217
Into the incompetent hands of the public sector?
2
And who, exactly, do you intend to have doing all the elder care? Pixies?
4
Robert, medical care of elders at their homes has been recognized as one of the best ways to save money and reach better outcomes for the patients involved. They are happy to be in their homes and basic, individual care for an elder patient. Much of this work can be achieved with home healthcare workers, nurses and yes, doctors can also do home visits again.
Better outcome, happy patients, lower costs. What is there not to like?
Please, no more of just complaining and try to do something that will help. Not impede progress.
Better outcome, happy patients, lower costs. What is there not to like?
Please, no more of just complaining and try to do something that will help. Not impede progress.
4
$7.5 billion! Why we could train seventy five Syrian rebels with that much money. Or pay for 10 days of the US adventure in Iraq. Or zero Comanche helicopters. Or about 25% of the Mexican border wall.
371
How many times in recent years have you heard a democratic politician claim that social security and medicare are in no way facing financial problems. So now they want more money, and in future years, ever more. Next time they propose adding a whole class of beneficiaries to the lot or a new set of benefits, remember their assurances.
What efforts have been made to reduce the absurd spike of disabilty claims during the recession? Can't find a job in the new normal? Claim a disability. That would free up some money.
What efforts have been made to reduce the absurd spike of disabilty claims during the recession? Can't find a job in the new normal? Claim a disability. That would free up some money.
16
Stubbs, obviously you have so much money that you will decline Social Security when you reach 65. The rest of us aren't so lucky, yest lucky.
7
The main reason disability payouts has increased is the increase in the Full Retirement Age. People receiving disability are transferred to Social Security when they reach their Full Retirement Age. This used to be 65 for everyone and is now dependent on your date of birth and is between the ages of 66 and 67. This means that people are staying on disability longer.
The U.S. has the most stringent criteria of the Western world to qualify for disability benefits. It also has the lowest payments. Yes, there is some fraud as there always will be, but it is estimated to be about 5% of the total claims.
The U.S. has the most stringent criteria of the Western world to qualify for disability benefits. It also has the lowest payments. Yes, there is some fraud as there always will be, but it is estimated to be about 5% of the total claims.
8
What absurd spike of disability claims has there been? What proof do you have of this?
Being awarded SSDl is not easy at all? What facts lead you to believe that it is? It took me over 4 years to be approved. And that was when all of my doctors and the SSDI doctors agreed that I could no longer work.
Being awarded SSDl is not easy at all? What facts lead you to believe that it is? It took me over 4 years to be approved. And that was when all of my doctors and the SSDI doctors agreed that I could no longer work.
2
Aside from the feds trying to shift the problem to the states and the partisan finger pointing, this article is unclear about who makes up the "thirty percent" who are facing large premium increases. Please clarify (or provide a source to explain) the impact of this situation on medicare recipients of differing incomes. How does the structural operation of adjusting medicare premiums affect both high income earners and medicaid recipients?
33
The 30% are people who file income tax returns with income more than $85,000, $170,000 for a couple. This article is ridiculous for not pointing that out. Those retirees can well afford a $50 month increase.
12
I guess anyone over the age of 65 who votes for a Republican should look at the proposed Ryan budgets and think again about their voting habits. The Medicare system is already in trouble because of larger than normal inflationary increases in health care costs over several decades in the US. The Republicans however want to curtail, cut, and slash Medicare and Social Security payments because they believe in eliminating these types of government expenditures. Of course they don't normally say that outright but use the euphemism of "privatizing" Medicare and Social Security and then limit government payments to the private companies. The rest would be shouldered by seniors. This might have already happened if not for strong opposition from Democrats.
As the article states premiums for Medicare part B insurance only cover 1/4 of the actual costs. So the rest is currently subsidized by the Federal government, i.e. this is an "entitlement" program. Medicare taxes on working adults have not covered the actual costs for some time.
We need to pay for the programs we want and this requires reasonable changes and increased taxes. But Republicans are opposed to any tax increases. They are also opposed to a government sponsored health plan for all that could actually significantly reign in costs.
As the article states premiums for Medicare part B insurance only cover 1/4 of the actual costs. So the rest is currently subsidized by the Federal government, i.e. this is an "entitlement" program. Medicare taxes on working adults have not covered the actual costs for some time.
We need to pay for the programs we want and this requires reasonable changes and increased taxes. But Republicans are opposed to any tax increases. They are also opposed to a government sponsored health plan for all that could actually significantly reign in costs.
80
You forgot to mention that Congress has forbidden the Medicare system to negotiate drug price with the drug companies. Big Pharma gives a whole lot of money to their Congressional friends.
24
"We need to pay for the programs we want and this requires reasonable changes and increased taxes."
Who says we all want this? As a millennial, I have been fastidiously saving 25%+ for retirement since 23yrs and paying off 25k in college loans in 2-3yrs, living a lifestyle at around the government assistance line with roommates by choice. The extra 15% from social security (employer 7.5% included) growing for 40 years would be more than whatever I will draw at 65yrs. It should be my choice how I want to spend my money and my life. If I want to live my senior years in poverty because I wanted to spend money in my youth, also my choice. Why can't I choose how I wish to live?
Who says we all want this? As a millennial, I have been fastidiously saving 25%+ for retirement since 23yrs and paying off 25k in college loans in 2-3yrs, living a lifestyle at around the government assistance line with roommates by choice. The extra 15% from social security (employer 7.5% included) growing for 40 years would be more than whatever I will draw at 65yrs. It should be my choice how I want to spend my money and my life. If I want to live my senior years in poverty because I wanted to spend money in my youth, also my choice. Why can't I choose how I wish to live?
1
B - Welcome to the real world where you're required to contribute to society, a world that does not bend to your wish to not contribute to programs set up to assist seniors and the disabled to meet basic living needs when the workplace will no longer employ them. Millions upon millions of U.S. citizens have been contributing to this plan that likely supports relatives & friends you know, and those who didn't have the benefit of a pension or 401k. Or perhaps spent all of their extra income on raising children like you. Or people like yourself who suffered a life-changing accident or illness and can no longer work and need assistance.
16
Premiums, deductibles, co-pays, all continue to rise uncontrolled for most health plans. As illustrated in this article ("expenditures were higher in 2014 and are projected to be higher in 2015"), the problem is costs. What is needed is strong political action to bring US health care costs closer to those in other developed countries. Unfortunately, Obamacare is a gift to the health care and insurance industries, which will probably increase the %GDP we spend on health care and exacerbate the problem of costs. Previous NYT articles by Elisabeth Rosenthal elucidated the central problem of costs in the US health care system, but apparently they are being ignored.
34
This simply isn't true.
7
This isn't about Obamacare. It's about Medicare part B premiums.
9
I guess it's safe to think that this is the moment the GOP has been waiting for to reveal their better, more cost efficient, plan that replaces Obamacare.
After 5 years of waiting for any detail whatsoever, I'll bet it will be just what we expect from the GOP.
After 5 years of waiting for any detail whatsoever, I'll bet it will be just what we expect from the GOP.
23
Nothing - that is the Republican plan.
8
galtsgulch - This has nothing at all to do with the ACA. These are Medicare supplemental plans for Part B.
3
Shall we continue to talk about how pharmaceutical companies raising the prices for generics and other drugs are "delivering value and innovation to the marketplace?" Or how about the a 32-year old parasite who might have to go one day without spending $500 or more for dinner because he could not raise the price of his newly acquired drug to the absurd level to which he wished?
By the way, paying $500 per month for Medicare when you are pulling in over $214,000 a year does not seem too onerous....that's 2.8% of gross income.
By the way, paying $500 per month for Medicare when you are pulling in over $214,000 a year does not seem too onerous....that's 2.8% of gross income.
138
"By the way, paying $500 per month for Medicare when you are pulling in over $214,000 a year does not seem too onerous."
In Cleveland, $214,000 may seem like a lot of money. In NYC, Boston, LA, and San Diego, where the cost of living is a lot higher, $214,000 provides the basics for an average household. Increasing Medicare premiums by $1000/per couple per month without another Social Security cost-of-living raise does not seem fair for 99% of the seniors who are no longer working.
In Cleveland, $214,000 may seem like a lot of money. In NYC, Boston, LA, and San Diego, where the cost of living is a lot higher, $214,000 provides the basics for an average household. Increasing Medicare premiums by $1000/per couple per month without another Social Security cost-of-living raise does not seem fair for 99% of the seniors who are no longer working.
3
'...pulling in over $214,000 a year...'
Almost $18,000 a month in retirement, when few people have a mortgage, and $500 is too much to pay?
Almost $18,000 a month in retirement, when few people have a mortgage, and $500 is too much to pay?
8
Median HOUSEHOLD income in NYC hovers around $50,000/year. We have a lot of rich people, but far more poor and lower middle class people. If you're pulling in $214,000 in retirement income, you're doing far better than the vast majority of WORKING New Yorkers.
8
"Medicare beneficiaries with annual incomes greater than $85,000 already pay more than the standard premium. The most affluent ones — those with incomes over $214,000 a year — pay premiums of about $335 a month. If there is no cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security, their Medicare premiums next year could exceed $500 a month, according to the annual report of the Medicare trustees, issued in July."
So what's wrong with that?
So what's wrong with that?
88
This increase would also apply to people who make less, are still working and have to be covered by medicare. Not just those with higher incomes.
5
Is that what we're talking about? People with retirement incomes of over $214,000 a year? I can feel the tears welling up in my eyes now. Probably an argument could be made for a flat rate premium across the board but since people in that group generally don't give two toots about people less fortunate than them don't look to me to make it
4
Will the US ever get affordable healthcare?
88
No. Way too many wealthy people earning millions off of the status quo.
11
Well, here we go again with the Obama administrations attack on seniors and their healthcare. Two weeks ago they were berating private insurance companies for their 2016 price increases. Now they follow that up with a price increase of their own on top of a ZERO cola increase for 2016. The average senior receives around $1250 per month from social security That doesn't leave much for any kind of price increase. We were told that the ACA was going to reduce health care costs across the board. Obviously this is not happening. The attack on seniors started with the ACA; many lost their doctor, hospital after the carnage of the ACA was completed. Now it continues with this latest news on Medicare premiums rising.
15
Seniors who kept traditional Medicare did not lose their access to physicians.
Seniors who bought commercial plans (you know, those Advantage plans that siphoned off about 500,000,000 in excess profit during the Bush years) are limited to their plan networks, just as non-medicare commercial insurers limit access. United Healthcare dumped many specialists with the sickest patients from their provider panels. Easy way to save money, support your stock price and CEO mega-salary. Very few seniors will see premiums rise. The ones who do are the ones who put the most into the system over their working lives and continue to have higher incomes.
Seniors who bought commercial plans (you know, those Advantage plans that siphoned off about 500,000,000 in excess profit during the Bush years) are limited to their plan networks, just as non-medicare commercial insurers limit access. United Healthcare dumped many specialists with the sickest patients from their provider panels. Easy way to save money, support your stock price and CEO mega-salary. Very few seniors will see premiums rise. The ones who do are the ones who put the most into the system over their working lives and continue to have higher incomes.
9
Any one with a $1250.month income, or even several times that will not be affected. Please Read the article before ranting.
10
They WILL be affected if, like me, they are signing on to Medicare for the first time...my older husband won't be affected because he signed onto Medicare years ago.
5
The system gets fixed.