Poll shows Americans oppose entitlement cuts to deal with debt problem

[Toro]

A Washington Post - ABC poll.

Poll shows Americans oppose entitlement cuts to deal with debt problem - The Washington Post

 

[uscitizen]

SS is easy to fix. Medicare not so easy.
Socialized medicine stands the best shot.

Sure, if you want to suffer and die

We all pretty much suffer and die, it is all just a matter of how much the medical industry gets out of you or the gummit first.

there are entire branches of the medical industry who make tens of billions per year from suffering and dying and prolonging it.

 

[MikeK]

It doesn't matter what the polls say. If we don't cut Medicare and other things necessary the balance our budget, the economy shall collapse. We are debasing the dollar at an alarming rate. Hyperinflation is going to happen in the near future.

Based on everything I've read and heard in recent months our economic problems can be resolved by restoring the progressive tax rate to pre-Reagan levels, cutting the Pentagon budget and appointing independent commissions to review all major federal spending and make recommendations to eliminate waste and "pork" projects.

 

[Political Junky]

That is because they have none. Their Plan amounts to Demonize the Opposition and Rape 500 Billion from Medicare to help fund the Next Big Government Health plan that is sure to fail.

That's not quite true. Democrats have long pushed the plan for buying medical supplies "in bulk", but Republicans have not only blocked that, they codified it into law in the Medicare Part D. It's one of the reasons that plan is so expensive.

It works like this. Say France, Great Britain and Spain need insulin. They consolidate their order and because it's in bulk, the cost is pennies.

Now say all the HMOs in Texas want to buy insulin in bulk because their cost would drop, NO CAN DO. Every HMO has to place their orders separately. Every state separately. Every organization separately. NO BULK ORDERS! This can raise the cost by a factor of a hundred. This happened because the drug companies lobbied Republicans who were in power to include that in their Drug bill. Anyone who followed this bill which, by the way, was, "passed through reconciliation" knows this was a major part of the debate.

$Republicans are for the drug companies. They know it hurts America, but just like those in the base who say, "We don't care about anyone else", the leadership also "doesn't care".

Of course we are for drug companies. We like the fact that they do research and develop treatments and cures for diseases.

Why on earth would any sane person be opposed to that?

I don't approve of the fact that we Americans spend far more for a pill than someone in France or Canada pays for it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I would presume that's because they don't know how bad the problem is or to the extent that the entitlements are causing the problems.

Looks like we need to keep educating people.

Exactly. How do we cover the $51-trillion dollar ponzi scheme we call Medicare?
I have not heard the dems' plan to save SS & Medicare over the long-term. What is it?

Sure, we could cut medicare. People will not get sick anymore and the cost will go away.

Cool.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Exactly. How do we cover the $51-trillion dollar ponzi scheme we call Medicare?
I have not heard the dems' plan to save SS & Medicare over the long-term. What is it?

That is because they have none. Their Plan amounts to Demonize the Opposition and Rape 500 Billion from Medicare to help fund the Next Big Government Health plan that is sure to fail.

That's not quite true. Democrats have long pushed the plan for buying medical supplies "in bulk", but Republicans have not only blocked that, they codified it into law in the Medicare Part D. It's one of the reasons that plan is so expensive.

It works like this. Say France, Great Britain and Spain need insulin. They consolidate their order and because it's in bulk, the cost is pennies.

Now say all the HMOs in Texas want to buy insulin in bulk because their cost would drop, NO CAN DO. Every HMO has to place their orders separately. Every state separately. Every organization separately. NO BULK ORDERS! This can raise the cost by a factor of a hundred. This happened because the drug companies lobbied Republicans who were in power to include that in their Drug bill. Anyone who followed this bill which, by the way, was, "passed through reconciliation" knows this was a major part of the debate.

$Republicans are for the drug companies. They know it hurts America, but just like those in the base who say, "We don't care about anyone else", the leadership also "doesn't care".

Medicare Part D is corporate welfare more than it is a benefit. It is the most expensive way to go.

Obamacare is also corporate welfare. It is the most expensive way to go.

 

[auditor0007]

SS is easy to fix. Medicare not so easy.
Socialized medicine stands the best shot.

Sure, if you want to suffer and die

We all pretty much suffer and die, it is all just a matter of how much the medical industry gets out of you or the gummit first.

there are entire branches of the medical industry who make tens of billions per year from suffering and dying and prolonging it.

You are starting to sound like you support "death panels". Seriously though, it is true. We spend billions prolonging people's lives for a few extra months, and most of them are miserable the entire time. Here is the funny thing; in most cases the patient has already accepted the fact they are about to die, and most of them don't even want it drug out any longer. But family will do anything they can with some false hope that a miracle will take place. I'm not talking about situations where there is some real hope that the patient might be given a few extra months with minimal pain. I'm talking about trying to extend the person's life for an extra couple of weeks, maybe a month, with the patient spending the entire time in their hospital bed fully sedated most of the time so they don't feel the pain.

 

[auditor0007]

That's not quite true. Democrats have long pushed the plan for buying medical supplies "in bulk", but Republicans have not only blocked that, they codified it into law in the Medicare Part D. It's one of the reasons that plan is so expensive.

It works like this. Say France, Great Britain and Spain need insulin. They consolidate their order and because it's in bulk, the cost is pennies.

Now say all the HMOs in Texas want to buy insulin in bulk because their cost would drop, NO CAN DO. Every HMO has to place their orders separately. Every state separately. Every organization separately. NO BULK ORDERS! This can raise the cost by a factor of a hundred. This happened because the drug companies lobbied Republicans who were in power to include that in their Drug bill. Anyone who followed this bill which, by the way, was, "passed through reconciliation" knows this was a major part of the debate.

$Republicans are for the drug companies. They know it hurts America, but just like those in the base who say, "We don't care about anyone else", the leadership also "doesn't care".

Of course we are for drug companies. We like the fact that they do research and develop treatments and cures for diseases.

Why on earth would any sane person be opposed to that?

I don't approve of the fact that we Americans spend far more for a pill than someone in France or Canada pays for it.

Without a doubt, we are subsidizing every country in the world. We should be telling the pharmaceutical companies that we will not pay more than the average price paid by the other industrialized countries. If they need more revenue, then force the other countries to pay more.

This gets to something else though. All I ever hear is how free markets work the best. The pharmaceutical industry is not free market by any means. Most governments tell them how much they can charge, and then Americans subsidize everyone else. How's that for free market?

 

[uscitizen]

90% want the winning lottery numbers too. So?

Doesn't mean that the country needs to be governed that way. Stupid argument.

I have a list of 100% winning lottery numbers I will sell.

 

[uscitizen]

That's not quite true. Democrats have long pushed the plan for buying medical supplies "in bulk", but Republicans have not only blocked that, they codified it into law in the Medicare Part D. It's one of the reasons that plan is so expensive.

It works like this. Say France, Great Britain and Spain need insulin. They consolidate their order and because it's in bulk, the cost is pennies.

Now say all the HMOs in Texas want to buy insulin in bulk because their cost would drop, NO CAN DO. Every HMO has to place their orders separately. Every state separately. Every organization separately. NO BULK ORDERS! This can raise the cost by a factor of a hundred. This happened because the drug companies lobbied Republicans who were in power to include that in their Drug bill. Anyone who followed this bill which, by the way, was, "passed through reconciliation" knows this was a major part of the debate.

$Republicans are for the drug companies. They know it hurts America, but just like those in the base who say, "We don't care about anyone else", the leadership also "doesn't care".

Of course we are for drug companies. We like the fact that they do research and develop treatments and cures for diseases.

Why on earth would any sane person be opposed to that?

I don't approve of the fact that we Americans spend far more for a pill than someone in France or Canada pays for it.

And many of our prescription medicines are made overseas.
By foreign owned corps.
And yet the right wing still seems to feel they need to pump up their profits at the expense of America?
Also Big pharma spends up to 70% of revenue on some products on advertising, not research and development.

 

[Harry Dresden]

And that differs from state employee pension plans how?

What?....i thought we were talking about the Elderly paying their dues.......your going to have to explain what you are asking.....what i said up there refers to Federal,State County, City,General Moters,GE,Boing.....wherever.....you worked the time,paid whatever into it IN GOOD FAITH.....you deserve what you were led to believe you would get when you Retire....if you feel it has to be changed....then change it with the new hires....not the people who have worked half their lives there.....

What I'm saying is that the two are comparable.

Seniors have not put enough aside to pay for their medicare. The unfunded liability of Medicare may be as high as $50 trillion.

Likewise, state employees have not set aside enough for their retirement, except by the most extreme forecasts, the unfunded liability is about $3 trillion.

Yet, the Tea Party focuses on the unfunded liabilities of the state employees. They don't focus as much on the unfunded liabilities of medicare. Why? Because the Tea Party skews older, many of whom are recipients of medicare. Instead, the chant platitudes such as "We paid into it," or "We paid our dues." Well, how's that any different from state employees? State employees paid into the pension plans as well, either directly or indirectly through deferred compensation. But the Tea Party wants state employees to pay more into their pension plans - or get less. They aren't as vocal about seniors paying more or getting less. They are applying a double standard because it affects them. Yet the unfunded liabilities of state employees pales compared to that of medicare.

I'm not passing a moral judgment. I'm just pointing out the contradiction which is rife throughout American politics at the moment. People want others to pay, but they don't want to pay themselves for the benefits they are receiving. It's not only Tea Party supporters doing that. Most Americans are. It's just that on this issue, its pretty blatant.

ok that made it clearer.....i see what your saying....

 

[Harry Dresden]

That is because they have none. Their Plan amounts to Demonize the Opposition and Rape 500 Billion from Medicare to help fund the Next Big Government Health plan that is sure to fail.

That's not quite true. Democrats have long pushed the plan for buying medical supplies "in bulk", but Republicans have not only blocked that, they codified it into law in the Medicare Part D. It's one of the reasons that plan is so expensive.

It works like this. Say France, Great Britain and Spain need insulin. They consolidate their order and because it's in bulk, the cost is pennies.

Now say all the HMOs in Texas want to buy insulin in bulk because their cost would drop, NO CAN DO. Every HMO has to place their orders separately. Every state separately. Every organization separately. NO BULK ORDERS! This can raise the cost by a factor of a hundred. This happened because the drug companies lobbied Republicans who were in power to include that in their Drug bill. Anyone who followed this bill which, by the way, was, "passed through reconciliation" knows this was a major part of the debate.

$Republicans are for the drug companies. They know it hurts America, but just like those in the base who say, "We don't care about anyone else", the leadership also "doesn't care".

Of course we are for drug companies. We like the fact that they do research and develop treatments and cures for diseases.

Why on earth would any sane person be opposed to that?

Dean is right on a few points Avatar.....my question is....why do we allow Foreign Countries to get a break on any stuff our Companies produce....but yet we here in the US have to pay top Dollar for the stuff?.....

 

[editec]

That's not quite true. Democrats have long pushed the plan for buying medical supplies "in bulk", but Republicans have not only blocked that, they codified it into law in the Medicare Part D. It's one of the reasons that plan is so expensive.

It works like this. Say France, Great Britain and Spain need insulin. They consolidate their order and because it's in bulk, the cost is pennies.

Now say all the HMOs in Texas want to buy insulin in bulk because their cost would drop, NO CAN DO. Every HMO has to place their orders separately. Every state separately. Every organization separately. NO BULK ORDERS! This can raise the cost by a factor of a hundred. This happened because the drug companies lobbied Republicans who were in power to include that in their Drug bill. Anyone who followed this bill which, by the way, was, "passed through reconciliation" knows this was a major part of the debate.

$Republicans are for the drug companies. They know it hurts America, but just like those in the base who say, "We don't care about anyone else", the leadership also "doesn't care".

Of course we are for drug companies. We like the fact that they do research and develop treatments and cures for diseases.

Why on earth would any sane person be opposed to that?

Dean is right on a few points Avatar.....my question is....why do we allow Foreign Countries to get a break on any stuff our Companies produce....but yet we here in the US have to pay top Dollar for the stuff?.....

Because we legislated that CASH BENEFIT to big pharma.

Anybody who really thinks our government is SERIOUS about solving this problem isn't paying attention.

NOBODY has a solution, folks.

The only real solution is to bring down the cost of HC.

But nobody knows how to do that in this kind of economy.

I'm not really sure it would be do-able in any kind of economy other than a complete top down fascistic society which imposed wage and price controls, and forced HC providers to make less money.

That ain't gonna happen.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Of course we are for drug companies. We like the fact that they do research and develop treatments and cures for diseases.

Why on earth would any sane person be opposed to that?

Dean is right on a few points Avatar.....my question is....why do we allow Foreign Countries to get a break on any stuff our Companies produce....but yet we here in the US have to pay top Dollar for the stuff?.....

Because we legislated that CASH BENEFIT to big pharma.

Anybody who really thinks our government is SERIOUS about solving this problem isn't paying attention.

NOBODY has a solution, folks.

The only real solution is to bring down the cost of HC.

But nobody knows how to do that in this kind of economy.

I'm not really sure it would be do-able in any kind of economy other than a complete top down fascistic society which imposed wage and price controls, and forced HC providers to make less money.

That ain't gonna happen.

Not true.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ag1WsN2_mU&feature=relmfu]YouTube - Elizabeth Kucinich talks about Universal Health Care[/ame]

 

[editec]

kids...we have had DEATH PANELS all along.

Only that isn't what the private insurance companies have been calling them.

They call their death panels DENIAL OF CLAIMS.

And yes, people die based on their decisions.

Yes, people who might otherwise have survived.

And those decision will continue to be made no matter HOW we finance HC.

Time to grow up and start honestly facing the problem.

 

[william the wie]

One of the surrealistic points of this debate is ignoring reapportionment. The Ds have been gerrymandered more thoroughly on the state level every census since 1960. Can the Ds temporarily seize power as they did in 2006? Certainly. Can they stay in power? No, safe Democratic seats in red and most purple states are constructed to elect people that put the lunatic in loony-left.

This strategy doesn't always work but increasingly the Ds are dominated by out of the mainstream wackos like Pelosi who is very close to the center of the elected Democratic party. Without a centrist base the Ds can no longer retain power on the national level and this problem will be much worse in the 2012 elections and beyond. In 2010 the DNC took money needed to ensure a good reapportionment and threw it away to retain the US senate. That has destroyed the D farm system in at least 30 states. So can the Ds regain power if the Rs reform entitlements, yes. Can they retain power for more than 6 years dominance of the senate? No.

 

[Toro]

Polls illustrate the conundrum faced by the Republicans. In survey after survey, the old folk largely embrace Republican rhetoric about reducing the size of the federal government and keeping taxation low. The elders especially despise what is commonly known as Obamacare, with 54% of likely voters in this age group favoring repeal in contrast to 51% of all likely voters, according to Rasmussen Reports. But when asked if they favor the Medicare reform plan by Republican Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and endorsed by GOP leaders in the House, they equivocate.

According to a recent Rasmussen, 33% of the likely voters 65 and older support the plan, 27% oppose it, and 40% don't know whether or not to embrace it. This is similar to the results from younger likely voters who would, in fact, be impacted by the Ryan plan. … The uncertainty is a big negative for the GOP.

Among all likely voters, only 47% say there is a need to make major changes in Medicare and 36% don't think any changes are needed at all. A Hill source says that polls conducted exclusively for the GOP produced a more startling result: A majority of likely voters believes that the budget can be balanced merely by eliminating all foreign aid.

Older Voters Balk at Ryan's Medicare plan - Barrons.com

Zowsers! If true, that means the public has a long, long way to go before being educated about what needs to be done, and the deficit isn't going to get solved any time soon.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Cut NASA and the ARTS.

NASA has already been cut....and besides that one Entity and all those who do work for them are responsible for a hell of a lot of Scientific and Medical Advancements.....its dam pathetic when Russia has to take our guys up to the Space Station....

 

[Toro]

Cut NASA and the ARTS.

NASA has already been cut....and besides that one Entity and all those who do work for them are responsible for a hell of a lot of Scientific and Medical Advancements.....its dam pathetic when Russia has to take our guys up to the Space Station....

Plus, by doing so, we've cut 0.001% of the budget!

 

[P F Tinmore]

Killing people is our priority.

Everything else must go.