Republicans vote to eliminate Medicare, give more tax breaks to wealthy

[The T]

Again? WHY must Gubmint be involved...AT ALL for personal choices?

 

[kiwiman127]

Do YOU have a problem with CHOICE? Vouchers of the recipients choosing tailored to their needs...or must GUBMINT BE the Final authority on everything for you Statist idiots?

Wait, I thought the "tightly regulated exchanges" Ryan is calling for are statism from the contemporary reactionary's point of view. Exchanges are back to be a good conservative idea now?

Oh the irony!

 

[The Rabbi]

At present, seniors enjoy a guaranteed health benefit through a public insurance plan known as Medicare.

The House today voted to rescind that guaranteed benefit and to eliminate that public insurance plan (i.e. eventually, no one would have Medicare as their insurance plan; instead seniors would have BlueCross or Aetna or whatever else they could find in the private market). That is indeed the end of Medicare.

What will this new program be called??

It's called "BlueCross" or "Anthem" or "Aetna."

Informally, it's called "whatever private insurance plan you can find now that Medicare is no longer an insurance option."

Can you link to Ryan's plan where he eliminates Medicare?
Of course you cannot you dishonest shit. You have been called on this about 5 times in the last week. And yet you continue with the fiction that Ryan's plan eliminates Medicare. It does not. It changes Medicare to a sustainable system, unlike what we have right now.

 

[The Rabbi]

Do YOU have a problem with CHOICE? Vouchers of the recipients choosing tailored to their needs...or must GUBMINT BE the Final authority on everything for you Statist idiots?

Wait, I thought the "tightly regulated exchanges" Ryan is calling for are statism from the contemporary reactionary's point of view. Exchanges are back to being a good conservative idea now?

Then you have no problem supporting his plan. Right?

 

[EriktheRed]

A liberal source, but I'm posting it anyway:

Last year....

Minority Leader Boehner and the rest of the House leadership are working to have it both ways -- on the one hand saying that Ryan's budget is full of great GOP ideas and ways the GOP would kick butt on the deficit (which is a play to the base and pundits who haven't read it) but also insisting it's not the official GOP budget so he and his caucus aren't on the spot to justify what it contains. In other words, the question is whether the entire 2010 congressional mid-term is going to be fought out as a colossal bait and switch gambit.

So why is it so important?

For two basic reasons.

First, all evidence suggests that the Ryan budget is in fact what the great majority of the House Republican caucus believes and supports. It was the plan in 1994. It surfaced again with overwhelming support in 2005 and repeatedly, though with less fanfare, since then. And they have a very decent chance of becoming the majority party in the House next year. Second, and even more important, the Republicans have been running all year as the party to dramatically cut deficit spending. And the simple truth is that if you want to significantly move the needle on deficits and you rule out tax increases, you simply have no choice but to embrace a Ryan-like budget. There's no other way to get the kind of money they claim they're going to trim.

What's the Deal with The Ryan Budget? | Talking Points Memo

This year...

It was pretty clear that it was going to be the official GOP budget plan if Republicans took over the House. The key point is that very few House Republicans in anything remotely like a competitive district was willing to embrace the thing.

In fact, there was a big effort to claim that it was false to identify it as the Republican "shadow budget." Anyway, now it's the official GOP budget plan and now all but six House Republicans have voted for it. That's going to be a key element of next year's election.

Crossing the Rubicon | Talking Points Memo


Josh Marshall nailed it, IOW.

 

[The Rabbi]

Do you expect to be taken seriously when you quote "Talking Points Memo"???

 

[Greenbeard]

Then you have no problem supporting his plan. Right?

I don't favor requiring seniors to give up their guaranteed benefit to enter an exchange, particularly with a subsidy set administratively.

Now, if you want to set up exchanges but not dismantle Medicare, instead letting seniors choose whether or not to enter the exchange or retain public insurance (and setting exchange subsidies through a competitive process), that's at least something worth considering. Simply ending Medicare, however, is not worth considering.

It's interesting to note, however, that you have no issue with regulated exchanges. I wouldn't have anticipated that before this month.

 

[The T]

Then you have no problem supporting his plan. Right?

I don't favor requiring seniors to give up their guaranteed benefit to enter an exchange, particularly with a subsidy set administratively.

Now, if you want to set up exchanges but not dismantle Medicare, instead letting seniors choose whether or not to enter the exchange or retain public insurance (and setting exchange subsidies through a competitive process), that's at least something worth considering. Simply ending Medicare, however, is not worth considering.

It's interesting to note, however, that you have no issue with regulated exchanges. I wouldn't have anticipated that before this month.

BUT YOU favour giving GUBMINT final say...just as in OBAMACARE for choices that should be private and PERSONAL...that the REST OF US don't need to be paying for.

You're a PAID SHILL Statist Greenteeth. You have already admitted it in your posts.

 

[JimH52]

It is the Republican way. Give the rich tax breaks at the same time that you cut programs from the disadvantaged. It is the Republican way...

 

[EriktheRed]

Do you expect to be taken seriously when you quote "Talking Points Memo"???

Well, stupid, a couple of points on that:

1) I said this at the beginning of the post...

A liberal source, but I'm posting it anyway

...so go ahead and dismiss it, but I wasn't trying to pass it off as an objective source.


2) Josh Marshall was still right: What started off as something that was held at arms length by a good many Republicans a year ago is now their platform because it's the only thing they can go with if they want to significantly deal with the deficit on spending cuts alone. And that's really the only thing he was saying.

 

[EriktheRed]

Do YOU have a problem with CHOICE? Vouchers of the recipients choosing tailored to their needs...or must GUBMINT BE the Final authority on everything for you Statist idiots?

Wait, I thought the "tightly regulated exchanges" Ryan is calling for are statism from the contemporary reactionary's point of view. Exchanges are back to being a good conservative idea now?

Then you have no problem supporting his plan. Right?

Oh, and there's another good TPM post about this issue, too:

The GOP Proposes 'Obamacare' For Seniors -- Just Don't Tell Democrats Or Republicans That | TPMDC

 

[kiwiman127]

It's amazing the far right can trust Ryan. Look at the deficit causing legislation he voted for;
Medicare Part D (Will the corporate welfare program be eliminated by Ryan?)?
Two wars (Iraq & Afghanistan)
Bush tax cuts three times
AND, AND,
TARP!!!!!!!!
That's about over 5 trillion debt!
Paul Ryan has contributed to the problem.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Ryan's plan increases defense spending, demands ZERO sacrifice from the wealthy and all the sacrifice from the rest of us.

That's the failed ideology of the Reagan crowd, on steroids.

ANy proof, other than what Rachael Maddow tells you?

Which part is wrong?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do you expect to be taken seriously when you quote "Talking Points Memo"???

Do you expect to be taken seriously when you attack the messenger instead of the message?

 

[jillian]

Well...if the shoe fits and all....

Wait.

What?

There's shoes?

Damn it, no one told me there would be shoes! Does Jillian know? That girl loves her some shoes.

shoes???



where?!?!?!

 

[Valerie]

Well...if the shoe fits and all....

Wait.

What?

There's shoes?

Damn it, no one told me there would be shoes! Does Jillian know? That girl loves her some shoes.

shoes???



where?!?!?!

 

[jillian]

yay shoes!

 

[Harry Dresden]

Didn't medicare come about because seniors simply can't afford insurance? Not sure what their aim is here except to eliminate medicare and let grandma drop dead because she can't afford to go to the doctor.

How long can any country hope to exist, that is spending more money than it takes in? How well off will grandma be in hyperinflation? You would have her starve to death! She will when her fixed income won't pay her bills. Either make massive cuts in everything or continue down this path to financial ruin. That's the choice.

Agreed.

We spend more on "defense" then every country on the planet combined.

We expecting the death star to arrive soon?

I'd say we start there.

Then round up the tax cheats and make them pay up.

You probably could find some 700 billion dollars right there.

and getting rid of the massive waste in Govt would probably find another 700 Billion.....

 

[Valerie]

yay shoes!

Funny, my parents and grandparents use to tell us stories of walking uphill both ways to school while wearing the soles of their shoes so thin they had to cut out cardboard from the macaroni boxes...

 

[Zona]

Let the FEARMONGERING BEGAN.

I'm sure they want our Seniors to eat cat food too and poor childreeeeen to go without an edumacation..

Did you not read it? Seriously.