Medi-Scare?

Among the many faults of Ryan’s plan is the cut off age for those to receive traditional Medicare. If he were sincere about making actual reform, the cut off age would be 40 years or less, giving fair notice to those under the cut off age to plan accordingly, because Medicare won’t be there for them when they retire.

Except for those with substantially high incomes, who wouldn’t need Medicare anyway, those between say 48 and 54 are in no position now to make any substantial savings to afford Ryan’s program once they’re 65.

So, yes, ‘Mediscare’ is apropos.
 
Among the many faults of Ryan’s plan is the cut off age for those to receive traditional Medicare. If he were sincere about making actual reform, the cut off age would be 40 years or less, giving fair notice to those under the cut off age to plan accordingly, because Medicare won’t be there for them when they retire.

Except for those with substantially high incomes, who wouldn’t need Medicare anyway, those between say 48 and 54 are in no position now to make any substantial savings to afford Ryan’s program once they’re 65.

So, yes, ‘Mediscare’ is apropos.

Well I is referring to the rhetorical aspects of it. I think we need a drinking game... Every time someone says "Obamacare" "Lame Stream Media" and now Medi-Scare you have to drink. We can all sober up after the election. :razz:
 
Among the many faults of Ryan’s plan is the cut off age for those to receive traditional Medicare. If he were sincere about making actual reform, the cut off age would be 40 years or less, giving fair notice to those under the cut off age to plan accordingly, because Medicare won’t be there for them when they retire.

Except for those with substantially high incomes, who wouldn’t need Medicare anyway, those between say 48 and 54 are in no position now to make any substantial savings to afford Ryan’s program once they’re 65.

So, yes, ‘Mediscare’ is apropos.

Here is the problem with that; what we would be doing is telling those under 40 that they will support everyone older so that those people can have Medicare, but when they retire, they won't get it. So those between 20 and 40 would have to pay into Medicare to support current or soon to be retirees while at the same time trying to find a way to fund their own healthcare through their own retirement. In other words, they get the double whammy.

Damn, why can't we just make it simple by gradually raising the retirement age to 70 or 71? I'm 48 and I'm willing to work until I'm 70 so long as I don't become disabled before then.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top