Everyone pays into that system.

understanding that it will be available to them on reaching 65 yrs. of age. It is NOT an entitlement program as the pols are wont to call it, except people are entitled to have it on reaching the required age.

would have to pay more for a heart transplant?

...because the sheep hate "welfare". Same reason FDR made SS an entitlement for everyone.

But to answer your question: Insurance companies don't want to insure people over 65. The cost would be so great that I am not sure what limit you would want to have on means.

and say "everyone on his side 'no soup for you!', then the line will invariably be moved.

Also, Medicare/Social Security are not "entitlements". They are programs we all pay into. To take it away based on income would be like the life insurance company telling your family that they were wealthy enough, and that despite paying premiums for 30 tears, they were not going pay out.

I was thinking that means testing, with a required PUBLIC supplemental policy could help close the expense-to-revenue gap.

I certainly do see why that would look bad to those who paid in all those years. It would be a bit of a breach of contract.

is the drug portion passed by Bushco that forces medicare to pay top dollar for prescription drugs.
Allow Medicare to negotiate prices like the VA and you would see that hole close up in no time.
But, guess what? Our Republican congress critter friends have million$ and million$ of reasons to stop that from happening.

If what is meant that if a person has millions then they should pay their own way, they should want to pay their own way and not have to be made too but since many won't do that they need to be made to. I suspect many do that very thing out of respect for our country and the rest of us plus the fact that they are still good people even with all the wealth but some of the rich assholes are just that, assholes.
My apologies for using this kind of language but in my very limited vocabulary I have no options.

Part A, the hospital insurance, is paid for from the trust fund, without regard to income or wealth, but Part B, the Medical Insurance, is paid for through a combination of premiums and money from the general fund. Most people pay a premium of about $100, which is only about 25% of the total cost. Those in higher income brackets pay a higher premium. I think the largest premium now is currently about $320.

Contrary to what many here seem to believe, no payroll taxes go towards Part B, or for that matter, Part D, coverage. Misunderstanding about that seems to fuel much of the hostility to means testing.

Thank you!

Which part tends to run more overbudget, A or B?

And the sooner we start using that language (instead of 'entitlements') the safer those Earned Benefits will remain.

As soon as something becomes means tested, it always, always leads to regulations becoming tighter and tighter and more and more people being cut off.

They pay 80% of "usual and customary charges" which are set regionally. The other 20% is payable by the insured. Many states' Medicaid programs (primarily means tested) will cover the insured's 20% co-pay.

Those inelligible for Medicaid have 3 options - pay out of pocket, buy one of those Medicare Advantage supplements or request "assignment" (the provider agrees to accept Medicare's 80% as full payment).