Yeah, no I don't 'suppose' that at all, no matter who is elected.
FEMA, SS, Medicare, Military, NASA, CDC, which do you want to sh*t-can?
Oh yeah, I forgot, ACA repeal and replace.
Anyway, take a look at Ryan's 'beginning of the conversation'.
FEMA, SS, Medicare, Military, NASA, CDC, which do you want to sh*t-can?
Oh yeah, I forgot, ACA repeal and replace.
Anyway, take a look at Ryan's 'beginning of the conversation'.
Quote:For those of you wringing your hands over what you believe Dems are doing to Medicare…….. read what the guy who would ACTUALLY be calling the shots wants to do.
Here’s Exactly How Terrible Paul Ryan’s Obamacare Replacement Plan Is
by Thomas Huelskoetter - Guest Contributor Jun 23, 2016 9:51 am
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2016/06/23/37...alth-plan/
Fewer people eligible for Medicare
Paul Ryan also wants to raise the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67. In 2012, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that this change would affect 5.4 million seniors, forcing them to find alternative sources of coverage. The Center for American Progress estimated at the time that almost 435,000 of these seniors would be at risk of becoming uninsured. Yet since these estimates assumed that low-income seniors could rely on Medicaid expansion in states that had chosen that option, Ryan’s Medicaid proposals would even further limit choices for seniors pushed out of Medicare.
Furthermore, such a change would cost the rest of the health care system — including patients, employers, and states — twice the amount that the federal government would save.
Although Ryan justifies this change by the fact that average life spans have increased since the creation of Medicare, these averages mask deep inequities across society.
Some socio-economic groups have seen little to no increase. Furthermore, lower-income workers are more likely to have physically demanding jobs, where an extra two years is much more strenuous than, say, an extra two years spent voting repeatedly to repeal the ACA.[/ b] Love the sarcasm there!
Furthermore, similar to his previous budget proposals, Ryan includes an even more dramatic proposal to shift to a premium support model for Medicare.
Similar to a voucher system, under this model seniors would have a set amount of money to purchase health insurance either from private health insurers or from traditional Medicare, with seniors on the hook for any costs not covered by the premium support payment.
Since the growth in these premium support payments would be slower than the growth in health costs, these payments would be worth less and less over time — shifting costs from the federal government to seniors.
Analyzing a 2012 version of this proposal, the Center for American Progress estimated that it could raise costs for new beneficiaries by up to $1,200 per year by 2030 and $5,900 per year by 2050.
In a follow-up analysis, CAP found that the proposal could increase lifetime Medicare costs by up to hundreds of thousands of dollars for new beneficiaries after 2030.
***
As all of this makes clear, this isn’t a real plan. The lack of details is embarrassing, and the details that do exist are worse. Even more embarrassing is the fact that Paul Ryan knows it’s not a real plan — that’s why he starts off the paper by calling his broad outline “the beginning of the conversation, not the end.”
The rest of the country moved past the beginning of this conversation six years ago.
It’s time for congressional Republicans to catch up.
