Investors Hangout Stock Message Boards Logo
  • Mailbox
  • Favorites
  • Boards
    • The Hangout
    • NASDAQ
    • NYSE
    • OTC Markets
    • All Boards
  • Whats Hot!
    • Recent Activity
    • Most Viewed Boards
    • Most Viewed Posts
    • Most Posted
    • Most Followed
    • Top Boards
    • Newest Boards
    • Newest Members
  • Blog
    • Recent Blog Posts
    • Recently Updated
    • News
    • Stocks
    • Crypto
    • Investing
    • Business
    • Markets
    • Economy
    • Real Estate
    • Personal Finance
  • Market Movers
  • Interactive Charts
  • Login - Join Now FREE!
  1. Home ›
  2. Stock Message Boards ›
  3. User Boards ›
  4. Political Debate Board Message Board

Yeah, no I don't 'suppose' that at all, no matter

Message Board Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Replies (1)                   Post New Msg
Edit Msg () | Previous | Next


Post# of 65629
Posted On: 06/24/2016 3:43:30 PM
Posted By: Bhawks
Re: cashclan #12822
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'.

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.



(0)
(0)








Investors Hangout

Home

Mailbox

Message Boards

Favorites

Whats Hot

Blog

Settings

Privacy Policy

Terms and Conditions

Disclaimer

Contact Us

Whats Hot

Recent Activity

Most Viewed Boards

Most Viewed Posts

Most Posted Boards

Most Followed

Top Boards

Newest Boards

Newest Members

Investors Hangout Message Boards

Welcome To Investors Hangout

Stock Message Boards

American Stock Exchange (AMEX)

NASDAQ Stock Exchange (NASDAQ)

New York Stock Exchange (NYSE)

Penny Stocks - (OTC)

User Boards

The Hangout

Private

Global Markets

Australian Securities Exchange (ASX)

Euronext Amsterdam (AMS)

Euronext Brussels (BRU)

Euronext Lisbon (LIS)

Euronext Paris (PAR)

Foreign Exchange (FOREX)

Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX)

London Stock Exchange (LSE)

Milan Stock Exchange (MLSE)

New Zealand Exchange (NZX)

Singapore Stock Exchange (SGX)

Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX)

Contact Investors Hangout

Email Us

Follow Investors Hangout

Twitter

YouTube

Facebook

Market Data powered by QuoteMedia. Copyright © 2025. Data delayed 15 minutes unless otherwise indicated (view delay times for all exchanges).
Analyst Ratings & Earnings by Zacks. RT=Real-Time, EOD=End of Day, PD=Previous Day. Terms of Use.

© 2025 Copyright Investors Hangout, LLC All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy |Do Not Sell My Information | Terms & Conditions | Disclaimer | Help | Contact Us