patrick.net

How many layabout leeches can dance on the head of a pin?

Wait Seniors have always had decent healthcare. There is no reason to support Commies ever. America has been doing what's right, since the second quarter of the last century.
The Left has a habit selling they are the only ones that want to take care of the sick and the helpless. They act like they are the champions of caring for them. But they really just change the eligible around. To the point it's not about the sick and the helpless. they want our tax dollars to pay the way for the sick and the poor. The Poor they encourage through subsidies and stipends, the left is trying to buy a class of voters. Then people who really need help aren't eligible, because the Left are going by Color charts, and Social Credits, and will swap out various ethnic groups as needed to expedite votes.

Bernie also wants to burden the healthcare system to the point they can't afford to operate. And their patients can't afford to pay them.

A large employer has bargaining power, and can wrangle a decent health plan for its employees. In a competitive labor market, employers have to measure up to attract workers with options.

Without employer provided health insurance, you are fucked. But the gubberment can provide under single payer. Business should back single payer, it their taxes go up less than their current costs for employee health insurance, in order to pay for single payer. This is the same calculus that taxpayers must make. And boomers who would ordinarily retire but for employer provided insurance may calculate they are better off under single payer.

If you insist then just take the money out of the medical industry. Make it off limits to invest in, make all hospitals not for profit, and just have the government provide free healthcare, and not one limp dick greedy investor makes on thin nasty penny on any of it from the cradle to the grave. I don't know why progressives insist on creating Monopoly Insurance providers and say it will best serve humanity with a straight face.

Middlemen are grifters. Private insurers add no value. Don’t harm pharma or biotech by limiting their returns, but get rid of the insurers.

All of my older relatives love their Medicare insurance. I am not hearing a preference for abolishing Medicare from them at all.

willywonka says

All of my older relatives love their Medicare insurance. I am not hearing a preference for abolishing Medicare from them at all.

That's like saying, "All the public sector workers who retired in their 50's love their fat six figure pensions!"

The problem is that the Medicare (and the municipal pension system) is unsustainable.

There is more annual fraud in Medicare each year than all health insurance profits combined.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/medicare-fraud-a-60-billion-crime-23-10-2009/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/03/04/private-insurer-profits-13-billion-medicare-fraud-48-billion-health-reform-priceless/#54b9b96c2f5a

And so boomers may be better off retiring, as the state will provide and others will pay.

Or the state will not provide because you are too old and not politically important.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/bolshevism-then-and-now/2017/11/06/830aecaa-bf41-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html

OccasionalCortex says

Feds are sitting on an estimated $125 TRILLION in real assets. THAT is just the conservative figure. Most is land but a lot are office buildings, power authorities, etc. They could lease and or sell off some of the juicy ones and easily bail out the SS and Medicare trust funds. Say, $25 trillion worth?

Heh. They could probably do that just by selling and developing Camp Pendleton in North San Diego County. Miles and miles of potential ocean front property, hills, valleys and mountains with soaring ocean views! I just got done camping with my son and a YMCA group at Del Mar beach in the base this past weekend. The place is huge.

Government ran care...

For illegals
For minorities
For trannies
Not for whites or middle class

Mark my words.

willywonka says

But under Bernie’s single payer, taxes on income will go up to pay for it. And so boomers may be better off retiring, as the state will provide and others will pay.

I would not assume that any tax increases would be less than any potential savings on health insurance.

Booger says

I would not assume that any tax increases would be less than any potential savings on health insurance.

Likely more folks than not will be worse off financially. Employers aren't directly paying for illegals and the uninsured, but the taxpayers will be under single payer. But the calculus for the pre-65 boomer is a bit different - would being taxed under single payer on a lower retirement income be better or worse than working now to access employer sponsored health insurance, if that is the only reason to be working now versus retiring.

Why would they need to raise taxes at all? Medicare is so efficient and wonderfully run amiright? Just require employers offering health insurance to offer a medicare option and if the employee selects it the employer + employee must pay into the plan an amount equal to what they would be paying for an equivalent private plan. That amount is adjusted annually by an independent insurance commissioner.

Anyone can buy into medicare at the same rate. Offer subsidies for people with low incomes. Remove free medicare for seniors with high income or lots of assets. I don't see why you get free healthcare just because you turn 65.

If medicare is as great as everyone says, we should easily be able to do this without raising taxes.

willywonka says

But under Bernie’s single payer, taxes on income will go up to pay for it. And so boomers may be better off retiring, as the state will provide and others will pay.

As if campaign promises are real? How many times do people need to be bullshitted until they figure out that it's all BS?

Commie never worked a day in his life

truthhurts says

If medicare is as great as everyone says, we should easily be able to do this without raising taxes.

As you know, the idea is to have everyone pay for a single payer plan that everyone can access, and not make it optional. Of course, as we have seen with Obummer care, younger, single, healthier folks will opt to not pay under a plan such as you suggest, given the choice. I would imagine that younger, single employees at companies that offer health insurance use much less of this benefit than older employees, and so are subsidizing the older workers who use more, and workers with families. But they aren't subsidizing illegals, the uninsured, and folks who don't work. Under single payer, where the program is paid by taxing earnings, the earners now pay for everyone, and not just the older workers at their place of employment. On the up side, you don't have to work to have insurance, typically the case now. And so you have more career freedom, or more freedom in general.

But my question regarded a subset of all workers, just those who could retire but need access to employer sponsored health insurance. Presumably they are earning more than they would when retired, but as earners will be taxed to pay for single payer, and presumably not lower earning retirees, should boomers who could retire before they are eligible for Medicare as it stands now, back single payer? That is, have Mikey pay for it.