So.....Is This Accurate?

[uscitizen]

Alan is busy PM'mg for other right wingers to come to his aid with some insults and diversions.

 

[Care4all]

so Romney lied.

guess those on the right can stop their crying about obama saying lies about romney, when romney himself is lying about obama....yet romney wants civil discourse??

gosh, politics is scummy all around....

Yea.
Romney lied.


In DECEMBER 2011~~!!!!!!!!!

Another thing that stuck in my craw, reading the article???
****"The Affordable Care Act does reduce Medicare spending by $500 billion over the next 10 years. But here’s the catch: Those dollars aren’t taken out of the current budget, they are not actual cuts, and nowhere does the bill actually eliminate any current benefits," we wrote last month.****


WHAT BUDGET?????!!!!!!







Other than that?
Good article.

Politician lied.

yea, he lied during the Primary presidential debate. It is relative horty, or are you actually trying to make excuses for it?

 

[alan1]

From the linked article,

But that’s just it -- the cuts don’t come from the current Medicare budget, they put a leash on future growth and payment increases.

I'm going to tell my favorite grocery store that 5 years from now (regardless of market forces or inflation or the potential increased size of my family), they still have to sell me my groceries at the EXACT same prices that they sell them to me today.
I wonder if the grocery store will be ok with that?

You do not remember Nixon's wage and price freeze?

Actually, I do.
Mr Nixon put a wage freeze into effect and businesses responded by offering more benefits in lieu of salary (to attract employees). Now, it seems that the government wants to force businesses to offer benefits (or fine them). Another example of the government meddling and screwing things up that has resulted in more government meddling.
Do you get the picture?

 

[alan1]

Alan is busy PM'mg for other right wingers to come to his aid with some insults and diversions.

You are a despicable liar.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Just to be clear....Romney made that claim TODAY.

 

[alan1]

From the linked article,

But that’s just it -- the cuts don’t come from the current Medicare budget, they put a leash on future growth and payment increases.

I'm going to tell my favorite grocery store that 5 years from now (regardless of market forces or inflation or the potential increased size of my family), they still have to sell me my groceries at the EXACT same prices that they sell them to me today.
I wonder if the grocery store will be ok with that?

do you believe there is no fraud and waste in Medicare Alan?

I believe there is fraud and waste. If medicare didn't exist, how would people defraud the government for it?

do you believe that the high prices doctors and hospitals charge today, would have been able to rise so high, if there had not been ALL of the government subsidies and social engineering by the gvt?

Loaded question, Ms Care4All, prices rise for numerous reasons.

AS example, if the government had not created and funded medicare and medicaid, and had not given tax deductions to businesses for it, and had not funded research and development and had not funded medical schools, and had not given school grants to future doctors and nurses and had not funded Schip for children's health care, and had not paid for the healthcare for all gvt workers, and had not created the gvt funded medicare pill bill etc etc etc etc....that the free market, with no interference of gvt and government subsidies, the cost of health care would be as astronomically high, as it is today?

Would these Doctors be getting all the money they are getting today for each procedure and visit?

I think the Doctors bitching about having to lower their prices for medicare patients is wrong and price limits is more than reasonable, considering they wouldn't be able to charge any where close to even the medicare price, that they are getting today, if it had not been basically funded and fed by the gvt's tax dollars, allowing prices to go higher and higher and higher, with no free market restraints.

Good point. Why the heck is the government (AKA taxpayers like me and you) funneling money to these people? Let's remove the government influence (money) and see what happens.

 

[alan1]

also Alan, you do realize that the ''ryan plan'' has the same $500 billion to 700 billion in medicare cuts that obama's plan has?

Is ryan's plan unfair to doctors?

Where did I say that any plan was unfair to doctors?
This is just another post trying to pretend I said something that I didn't say.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

also Alan, you do realize that the ''ryan plan'' has the same $500 billion to 700 billion in medicare cuts that obama's plan has?

Is ryan's plan unfair to doctors?

Not quite the same.

Obama uses it to make real change that helps the middle class.

Ryan uses it to benefit the 1%.

 

[uscitizen]

Alan is busy PM'mg for other right wingers to come to his aid with some insults and diversions.

You are a despicable liar.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3Z2MP8vMWU]That's Despicable - YouTube[/ame]

Shoulda used that.

 

[alan1]

Why are you against plans that cut costs but do not cut benefits?

I didn't say that.
Why are you spreading lies about what I said?

You provided a bullshit example about some grocery store prices that has nothing to do with the subject.....Romneys lie. You did so in defense of the lie.

Obama's plan for Medicare cuts costs and does not reduce benefits. Support it or be known as against it. Period.

Analogy's escape you.
I am against any plan that forces people to participate, see my sig line for more clarification.

 

[Care4all]

only a fucking moron would think that the simultaneous theft of 700 billion dollars from the medicare fund to fund 30 million more people into the systems is "just slowing the growth" go sit in the back of the bus with Soledad. dummie.

tell us willow, what benefits have you lost....be specific.

AND YOU DO REALIZE that Ryan's health care plans include the SAME $700 billion in ''cuts'' AND it makes future recipients pay on average $6000 more a year, AND it gets rid of the medicare donut hole fix....?

 

[Care4all]

also Alan, you do realize that the ''ryan plan'' has the same $500 billion to 700 billion in medicare cuts that obama's plan has?

Is ryan's plan unfair to doctors?

Where did I say that any plan was unfair to doctors?
This is just another post trying to pretend I said something that I didn't say.

i'm sorry if I misunderstood your example of the grocer then....

could you explain your point of that example relating to medical care and doctor prices....pretty please.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Nobody will force you to pay for things that benefit society as a whole if you do not avail yourself of ANY of the things that benefit society as a whole. They are all connected.

Failure to understand this truth is, I think, a primary factor keeping in their bubble.

 

[Pheonixops]

Hmm but Obama has not even cut the growth of Medicare yet.
Isn't keeping it from getting bigger what the right wants?

LOL, they are all screwed up. One minute they want to advocate "less government", "keep government out of the way!", then they attack Obama for allegedly doing what they claim that they want to do.

Lest we forget, this is the crowd that produced "Keep your gubmint hands off my Medicare." Logical consistency is not their strong suit.

LOL, it's kind of like my "in-laws" and one of my neighbors. Both staunch republicans and "conservatives", anti-government programs yet both have never seen a government program they haven't used!!!! It makes for an amusing dinner conversation when I call them on it.

 

[Greenbeard]

So.....Is This Accurate?

Yeah.

More benefits, slower cost growth, better care, brighter future. Exciting times, provided the nihilists don't take back power.

 

[alan1]

also Alan, you do realize that the ''ryan plan'' has the same $500 billion to 700 billion in medicare cuts that obama's plan has?

Is ryan's plan unfair to doctors?

Where did I say that any plan was unfair to doctors?
This is just another post trying to pretend I said something that I didn't say.

i'm sorry if I misunderstood your example of the grocer then....

could you explain your point of that example relating to medical care and doctor prices....pretty please.

This piece that I snipped from the article.

But that’s just it -- the cuts don’t come from the current Medicare budget, they put a leash on future growth and payment increases.

How can they possibly put a "leash on future growth"? The baby boomers are just starting to retire, the number of people on medicare is going to grow. My grocery store analogy mentioned a growing family. If my family grows, I have to spend more on groceries, just as medicare will have to spend more as the pool of people using it (retiring baby boomers) grows.

How can they stop "payment increases"? It is natural for the price of things to go up, especially as new technologies (better and more expensive technologies) become available. The only way to stop payment increases would be to deny coverage (treatment). My grocery store analogy recognizes that grocery prices increase over time, and my grocer isn't going to give me the same package of groceries at the same price 10 years from now that those groceries cost today.

Edit to add,

How many government social programs actually cost less (to the tax payer) than they used to?
I can't think of any, but maybe you can.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Tedium.

 

[Greenbeard]

How can they possibly put a "leash on future growth"? The baby boomers are just starting to retire, the number of people on medicare is going to grow. My grocery store analogy mentioned a growing family. If my family grows, I have to spend more on groceries, just as medicare will have to spend more as the pool of people using it (retiring baby boomers) grows.

The number of people on Medicare doesn't affect what the reimbursement for an individual health service should be any more than the size of your family changes the price tag of an individual grocery item (unless you're buying in bulk, I suppose, in which case your groceries get cheaper on a per unit basis).

Enrollment growth isn't relevant here.

How can they stop "payment increases"?

They're not stopping them, they're slowing their growth over the next decade.

A significant component of increasing costs is bad design: inflationary payment mechanisms and flawed, fragmented delivery systems. Medicare reform is starting to address those deficiencies and in doing so it's going to start enabling--indeed, rewarding--providers to start delivering better care more effectively and more efficiently. That's how you get to slower growth.

 

[alan1]

How can they possibly put a "leash on future growth"? The baby boomers are just starting to retire, the number of people on medicare is going to grow. My grocery store analogy mentioned a growing family. If my family grows, I have to spend more on groceries, just as medicare will have to spend more as the pool of people using it (retiring baby boomers) grows.

The number of people on Medicare doesn't affect what the reimbursement for an individual health service should be any more than the size of your family changes the price tag of an individual grocery item (unless you're buying in bulk, I suppose, in which case your groceries get cheaper on a per unit basis).

Enrollment growth isn't relevant here.

How can they stop "payment increases"?

They're not stopping them, they're slowing their growth over the next decade.

A significant component of increasing costs is bad design: inflationary payment mechanisms and flawed, fragmented delivery systems. Medicare reform is starting to address those deficiencies and in doing so it's going to start enabling--indeed, rewarding--providers to start delivering better care more effectively and more efficiently. That's how you get to slower growth.

More people (that would be "the future growth" AKA the baby boomer generation) can't be leashed, halted, slowed or anything else related to reduction.

A more significant component of increasing costs is improved diagnostic technology and improved treatment methods/technology. That isn't going to change, unless you want medicare recipients to receive sub-par treatment.

Please quote me in entirety next time, your snippets are making me (somewhat) repeat myself.

 

[Care4all]

Where did I say that any plan was unfair to doctors?
This is just another post trying to pretend I said something that I didn't say.

i'm sorry if I misunderstood your example of the grocer then....

could you explain your point of that example relating to medical care and doctor prices....pretty please.

This piece that I snipped from the article.

But that’s just it -- the cuts don’t come from the current Medicare budget, they put a leash on future growth and payment increases.

How can they possibly put a "leash on future growth"? The baby boomers are just starting to retire, the number of people on medicare is going to grow. My grocery store analogy mentioned a growing family. If my family grows, I have to spend more on groceries, just as medicare will have to spend more as the pool of people using it (retiring baby boomers) grows.

How can they stop "payment increases"? It is natural for the price of things to go up, especially as new technologies (better and more expensive technologies) become available. The only way to stop payment increases would be to deny coverage (treatment). My grocery store analogy recognizes that grocery prices increase over time, and my grocer isn't going to give me the same package of groceries at the same price 10 years from now that those groceries cost today.

Edit to add,

How many government social programs actually cost less (to the tax payer) than they used to?
I can't think of any, but maybe you can.

You are not understanding what was done Alan....nothing was cut, no services were cut for medicare....

what is being discussed is a 10 year budget, where the gvt actuaries take how things are trending and estimate what they will cost in the future, year by year, if this trend continues.

When I worked for a Corporation, us department heads had to submit a yearly plan and a 5 year plan to the CEO. No department heads read tea leaves or looked in to a crystal ball to put the numbers in for their area's 5 year plan....we used trends to estimate what our 5 year plan would be, broken down by category....along with being on top of all that was going on around us in the world that would or could affect those trends, and then came up with our 5 year plan of estimated sales and expenses. (budget)

What the actuaries have done, is estimated what we had been trending on spending in areas of the budget for the next 10 years....keeping in mind the growth of Medicare recipients due to the boomers, and what kind of increases in prices health care has had for the past decade, along with any other factors or legislation involved like holding down costs that hospitals will charge, (but not reducing the reimbursement of Physicians,) and like reducing the amount Medicare will pay for the VERY COSTLY Medicare Advantage programs which on average costs 14% more for medicare services through these programs than it costs for the same services under Medicare, along with estimating what can be found in Medicare fraud to cut, and with what new taxes such as the increase in Medicare taxes by a miniscule amount for those who make over 200,000 a year and put the whole shebang together to come up with a NEW 10 year plan for Medicare, compared to let's say the 10 year plan they had for Medicare before the ACA was passed.

It's a reduction and "savings" from what the previous 10 yr plan was for Medicare....In other words if they had previously estimated that health care costs would go up 10% a year for the next 10 years for their 10 year budget, they are now taking all the legislation that was passed, and proposed reductions in the medicare advantage program, and estimating that it would now only have 5% increase a year in the cost of medicare for the next 10 years, then there would be an estimated 50% reduction in medicare spending....

the $500 billion estimated in savings.

IT IS NOT A CUT in spending, spending will still be going up by 5% a year in my example, but NOT 10% a year as previously estimated.

No benefits for medicare individuals are being cut, as the the republicans are claiming, the future estimated increases will be less than without the ACA....

Because I dealt with these kind of projections and planning for a $30 million dollar business unit for the corporation that I worked for, it all makes perfect sense to me.

I can understand how romney is counting on most Americans not understanding this and him lying and saying it is a cut to medicare, using the word cut....but it is not a cut in medicare, it is an estimated savings...and he's trying to scare people that are ignorant on how budgets are formed and estimated.