Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Except by the veterans who will do just about anything to avoid ending up in a VA facility.Look at the VA, considered one of the best HC in the world.
Idjit.
"The retirees are going to be taken care of; there's no ifs, ands, or buts about it," House Speaker John Boehner vowed in an interview with CBS last month. The plan's architect, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, has said time and again that the changes wouldn't affect anybody getting close to retirement. "We propose to not change the benefits for people above the age of 55," Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, insisted last week.
There's only one problem with the strategy: It's not true.
If Congress were to pass Ryan's plan and repeal the law, as House Republicans want, the 3 million to 4 million seniors left in the doughnut hole each year would immediately face significant out-of-pocket costs. They and all other Medicare beneficiaries would also lose access to a host of preventative-care benefits in the health care law, including free wellness visits to physicians, mammograms, colonoscopies, and programs to help smokers quit.
Perhaps more jolting, the Republican budget would cut spending on Medicaid—health care for the poor—much of which goes to long-term care for the elderly. Some 9 million seniors qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid benefits, and about two-thirds of all nursing-home residents are covered by Medicaid.
Are seniors safe under GOP Medicare plan? - Yahoo! News
And the GOP can't understand why the vast majority Americans are so OPPOSED to this bullshit. I sure hope the GOP continues pushing this garbage. It will send them packing for40 years.
.
"The retirees are going to be taken care of; there's no ifs, ands, or buts about it," House Speaker John Boehner vowed in an interview with CBS last month. The plan's architect, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, has said time and again that the changes wouldn't affect anybody getting close to retirement. "We propose to not change the benefits for people above the age of 55," Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, insisted last week.
There's only one problem with the strategy: It's not true.
If Congress were to pass Ryan's plan and repeal the law, as House Republicans want, the 3 million to 4 million seniors left in the doughnut hole each year would immediately face significant out-of-pocket costs. They and all other Medicare beneficiaries would also lose access to a host of preventative-care benefits in the health care law, including free wellness visits to physicians, mammograms, colonoscopies, and programs to help smokers quit.
Perhaps more jolting, the Republican budget would cut spending on Medicaid—health care for the poor—much of which goes to long-term care for the elderly. Some 9 million seniors qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid benefits, and about two-thirds of all nursing-home residents are covered by Medicaid.
Are seniors safe under GOP Medicare plan? - Yahoo! News
And the GOP can't understand why the vast majority Americans are so OPPOSED to this bullshit. I sure hope the GOP continues pushing this garbage. It will send them packing for40 years.
.
The GOP understand it quite well, it;s because the Democrats have been lying to the American public for so long that the American public actually believes that everything they get is free and that nobody has to pay for it. Truth be told, someone has to pay for it and the bill is due, we can no longer afford to take care of the elderly and the lazy at the expense of the ever decreasing taxpayer, you dumb fucking idiot. Do the math, due to Democrat policy the tax payer class is ever increasing while the recipient class is ever increasing, do you think that is sustainable you dumb fucking piece of shit? No, its not, but you'll suck off the government tit regardless, because you are a worthless piece of trash who supports this. In my area, we call folks like you target practice, because you are good for nothing else.
Also, do you think I give a rats ass for an elderly person who wishes to trade their liberty for prosperity? I dont, they are trash too, if they did not pay into it, they should rot without it, if that is not incentive enought to get someone to earn a living then they should rot also. There is no free rides dickwad, you will figure this out about 2 years after Obamacare kicks in and goes bankrupt sending this country into one big ass riot and the U.N. takes America over "For our own good" effectively making our constitution obsolete. And you will have yourself to blame, moron.
Of course, the above will not happen because Americans like me still have the balls to stand up for our constitution unlike you, you fucking worm.
And that's when you will become a "pea size balled" hypocrite. 
Gee, I had no idea changing medicare from a single payor fee for service program to a premium support program was "destroying" it.
Gee, I had no idea changing medicare from a single payor fee for service program to a premium support program was "destroying" it.
The GOP budget doesn't propose a premium support program (which actually does have a meaning, despite what Ryan would have you believe), it proposes a voucher program.
And yes, eliminating the public insurance and defined benefit of a defined benefit public health insurance program destroys it. But take heart: destruction is a kind of change.
Are seniors safe under GOP Medicare plan?
There is no GOP Medicare plan. Unless you consider getting rid of it a plan.
I really could give a damn what you want to lie to label it. It's a premium support plan, there are no "vouchers". And no changing it from a fee for service single payor vehicle to a premium support plan doesn't "destroy it" it just changes it. medicare will still exist, old people will still have insurance paid for by it. they will still go to doctors and still get care (likely even better care).Gee, I had no idea changing medicare from a single payor fee for service program to a premium support program was "destroying" it.
The GOP budget doesn't propose a premium support program (which actually does have a meaning, despite what Ryan would have you believe), it proposes a voucher program.
And yes, eliminating the public insurance and defined benefit of a defined benefit public health insurance program destroys it. But take heart: destruction is a kind of change.
I really could give a damn what you want to lie to label it. It's a premium support plan, there are no "vouchers".
And no changing it from a fee for service single payor vehicle to a premium support plan doesn't "destroy it" it just changes it. medicare will still exist, old people will still have insurance paid for by it. they will still go to doctors and still get care (likely even better care).
It didn't need to be "fixed". It's why Democrats created the well liked program, "Medicare". The one Republicans are trying to destroy.
Medicare (or CMS, rather) is a payer. It reimburses physicians and hospitals for services rendered to the elderly. If you eliminate that payer then no, it doesn't exist anymore. A voucher of eroding value to go buy an Aetna plan is not Medicare, no matter how badly the GOP faithful want to believe that calling it Medicare will make it so.
We used to have it. Trillions and trillions in unneeded tax cuts change everything. NOW we don't have the money.
Whatever you want to call Medicare is Medicare.
Here's a radical move: I'm going to call that program that's paid the hospital and physician bills of the elderly for 46 years "Medicare." You want to end that program and call your Anthem coupon "Medicare" in hopes nobody notices what happened. Talk about sleazy.
Here's a radical move: I'm going to call that program that's paid the hospital and physician bills of the elderly for 46 years "Medicare." You want to end that program and call your Anthem coupon "Medicare" in hopes nobody notices what happened. Talk about sleazy.
Whatever you want to call Medicare is Medicare.
Atrios nailed this one:
"When we replace the Marines with a pizza, well call the pizza the Marines.
Eschaton: When We Replace The Marines With A Pizza, We Will Call The Pizza The Marines
I really could give a damn what you want to lie to label it. It's a premium support plan, there are no "vouchers". And no changing it from a fee for service single payor vehicle to a premium support plan doesn't "destroy it" it just changes it. medicare will still exist, old people will still have insurance paid for by it. they will still go to doctors and still get care (likely even better care).Gee, I had no idea changing medicare from a single payor fee for service program to a premium support program was "destroying" it.
The GOP budget doesn't propose a premium support program (which actually does have a meaning, despite what Ryan would have you believe), it proposes a voucher program.
And yes, eliminating the public insurance and defined benefit of a defined benefit public health insurance program destroys it. But take heart: destruction is a kind of change.
Atrios nailed this one:
"When we replace the Marines with a pizza, well call the pizza the Marines.
Eschaton: When We Replace The Marines With A Pizza, We Will Call The Pizza The Marines
More like, when the Republicans change the camouflage pattern on their uniform, we'll accuse them of destroying the Marines.
The "Destroying Medicare" meme is a sleazy leftwing gambit.
Those mean nasty republicans are gonna throw granny down the stairs in her wheelchair.
YouTube - ‪kiss of death‬‏
not all premium support plans are equal, but they are all premium support plans. Your choosing this "one" model as the "only" model is disingenuous tripe.I really could give a damn what you want to lie to label it. It's a premium support plan, there are no "vouchers".
And yet the label is rather important, as it gets at the very heart of what the policy looks like. Which is why I linked to one of the originators of the premium support concept explaining the difference:
The defining attribute of the plans that Reischauer and I christened premium support was that the amount of support was to be indexed to average health care costs, not, as in voucher plans, to a price index or per person income. If savings were to result from the exercise of consumer choice and market discipline, that would be well and good, we argued. But savings should not come from erosion of the adequacy of support resulting from linking the payment to a slowly growing index. This difference is crucial. Voucher plans are virtually guaranteed to become increasingly inadequate; premium support plans will not.
A premium support with a sliding scale and gaurantteed coverage.Ryan has toyed with the idea of premium support before, but in the GOP budget he opted for a voucher approach.
You assume the support will have eroding value, a rather large assumption. Also, medicare will still exist, it will just be transformed from a single payor fee for services program into a premium support program with sliding scales and gauranteed coverage.And no changing it from a fee for service single payor vehicle to a premium support plan doesn't "destroy it" it just changes it. medicare will still exist, old people will still have insurance paid for by it. they will still go to doctors and still get care (likely even better care).
Medicare (or CMS, rather) is a payer. It reimburses physicians and hospitals for services rendered to the elderly. If you eliminate that payer then no, it doesn't exist anymore. A voucher of eroding value to go buy an Aetna plan is not Medicare, no matter how badly the GOP faithful want to believe that calling it Medicare will make it so.
