Is changing the eligibility age for Medicare a "significant" change?

The correct answer is yes.

being discussed? Not according to Pelosi.

to me that's scary.

that was *my* side offering it as a concession.

and when was it changed last? How and when would the changes be implemented? Are there other changes, too?

There's so much floating around out there it's hard to know who's on first.

I.m.h.o., some aren't taking into account that a lot of us boomers have worked our *sses off for decades under highly stressful conditions, and have perhaps been exposed to more toxins than any previous retiring generation -- I already feel burnt out, and do NOT expect to live longer than my parents, or even as long.

least in part, to "the best health care system in the world".

the poorest of Americans (mainly in the South) have seen their life expectancies slip - linked most likely to obesity and smoking since the same demographic have higher rates of smoking and obesity. Thought I agree that the lack of decent medical care is a huge factor.

in the atmosphere are co-factors.

and I agree with you. We have been exposed to way more than our parents. I have wondered if the increase in breast cancer in women could be an outgrowth from the radiation exposure from CRT monitors.....and the list goes on and on. My father is 93, my grandmother lived to 100, I don't expect to live to 80, others of my generation in my family have already been dying off.

PLANNED our retirements. Our SS and Medicare are part of our planning. We may have other resources, but would be unable to survive without the SS and Medicare that have been promised to us since we were in our teens, working summer jobs.

We could be bankrupted without those things, or if we have to wait for them.

right at the same time that the 2014 Health Care Law goes into effect, would now have to buy insurance on our own. That should be fun when you are 65 years old. Imagine what those premiums would be?

The raise in Medicare age would be phased in and not reach 67 until 2038. The changes would not affect anyone who was 55 years or older now.

Sorry, but I cannot see where the people who are 54 years old have any less complaint about having to wait two more years to be able to retire since they will not be able to have health coverage. Us older people who will be lucky enough to get it at 65 should not be willing to throw all younger people under the bus.

SHE said SHE would not be eligible. That was false. Whether anyone likes it or not it is just a matter of time before Medicare is raised to 67. The full retirement age for SS has already been raised to 67. The original purpose of medicare was to have health insurance in line with SS. So as it stands right now people will be eligible for medicare before becoming eligible for SS. Congress never intended that and it will be changed at some point to reflect that.

Scrap this entire shitty system and have a civilized single-payer system for all.

medicare, will be ok if they push it down the road even further for the next generation? I thought I would actually die before I was eligible, my healthcare was that bad. Somebody needs to tell the powers that be, that seniors are not selfish. No way do we want our children to have an even harder time than we had. This is just ridiculous.

That is not acceptable.

We are going to turn into a third world country, but that is down the road a bit, so who cares?

:sarcasm:

Yours is no exception.

But attacking me personally is not acceptable.

Without substantial changes (and this is only one of them) it won't be around for our children and grandchildren, period.

we're spending gobs of money on those too.

but you never said we'll give up fighting those.

we have our priorities and you have yours.

You said it, Creekdog. Cut back on human needs so we can keep paying for wars. Sounds like a plan. ;)

Won't affect anyone now 55 or older. What a relief.

I'm fucking *FIFTY-FOUR* gawd-dammit!

I'm fucked. Roughly, without lube.

Reminds me of what an older co-worker told me 30 years ago... "FUCK you young people!"

Because of your age you can't retire at 65. But did you complain when that law was changed?

Even wrote Steve Buyer. And like now, nobody gives a shit.

no complaints. It was a matter of complaints being ignored in DC, which is par for the game these days. We no longer seem to have the right to petition our government, or I suppose we can.....they have a large circular file.

Maybe we should have tried pinning a $50,000 cheque to our letters, you know, like the Heritage Foundation does?

Excuse me while I pray for lower gas prices.

i apologize for my negligence.

however, upon reaching adulthood, i've always pressed for the expansion of the safety net, retirement/pension systems and health care universality to European standards.

So if you are 54 now then the eligibility age would be 65 and one month. If you are 53 it would be 65 and two months. And so on. It would not hit 67 until 2037 or so.

That is in line with most developed countries and is reasonable if we weren't involved in wars all over.

the future when we can find no jobs now, amid layoffs all over the place so corporations can reduce experienced workers' salaries. It is a race to the bottom, which we all need to halt in any way we can.

premiums for insurance would be based on community rating and i think with 3 age ranges. the uppermost age range would be the most expensive, i'm sure, but perhaps more affordable than without the law.

that said, adding 65-66 year olds to that private insurance pool will make the uppermost tier more costly to insure than without them and it will also take the healthiest (youngest) members of the Medicare pool out of that program.

there's just so much wrong with this --no, hopefully it won't happen...

i don't like that our president even put it on the table.

and it targets the MOST vulnerable among us.

I can NOT believe that a "Democratic" president would EVER suggest something like this.
I have lived too long.
The Democratic Party I joined 44 years ago is DEAD!



Who will STAND and FIGHT for THIS American Majority?
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

6 months to go.

Damn straight it's significant. And for what? So the wealthy can get a break when they buy their private jets.

Edit to add: Assuming the current proposal that it wouldn't affect those now 55 or older, and that it would be phased in over the next 20 - 25 years.

Instead of making 65 the eligibility age, we could change it to 1. Or zero. That would ultimately save money.

:hi:

Yes, I admit it's flawed, and certainly not the single payer that we need, but if a provision can be put in the law that Medicare eligibility does not rise to 67 unless HCR is left intact, would that be reasonable?

What difference does it make if people 65 and 66 get covered through HCR and not Medicare?

that the premiums for those two years between 65 and 67 would really be affordable. Let's face it, the private health insurance companies are still in control, even with HCR.

I'm not terribly sure that insurance for those 63 and 64 will be affordable, either. HCR did leave a lot wanting, as it was written.

Still, Medicare is going broke. The solutions come down to a combination of extra Medicare taxes and/or cutting payments to providers and/or reducing benefits, including co-pays and deductibles. None of those things is desirable, but we have to do something. Medicare will implode of its own dead weight way before I get to 65.

How about letting Medicare (the biggest buyer of drugs) negotiate prices? How about raising the tax rate? I do not have a problem with paying more while I am still working to preserve the program for when we are not longer able to work. How about arresting all those scooter commercial companies who are telling everyone that they can get a free scooter from Medicare (whether they really have a need for them or not)? And speaking of scooters, there are hundreds of other companies who are milking Medicare---and they seem to never get caught or punished. I cannot believe in this computer world that they are not able to find fraud.

And those are just a few off the top of my head.

But if Medicare negotiates prices, the drug companies will just pass those costs on to those who have insurance, or who pay out of their own pockets, just as doctors and hospitals currently do. Raising the tax rate is probably the most likely true solution, the rates just don't cover the burdens that the system will bear with the baby boomers. Your comments on excess scooters are duly noted. Plenty of other such giveaways, too.

Here's another idea: Why not have Medicare (or some other government insurer) provide malpractice insurance for providers who treat Medicare patients? Why not make arbitration instead of lawsuits mandatory? Why not have something along the lines of a worker's comp board to settle malpractice claims, quickly and fairly, without tying up the courts and making lawyers wealthy?

Most people in this age group have health issues, some serious. In the private sector insurance world
that means you pay more for what you get,, a lot more. This is another give away to the insurance companies.
An additional transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy.

Then those who do have insurance and/or pay their own way indirectly subsidize Medicare patients. Health care providers who take Medicare folks always third-party the losses on to everybody else, that's why "Medicare for All" simply won't work.

Anyone thinks this is okay is not really a Democrat. You can call yourself a Democrat. I can call myself Professor. But unless I actually do what a professor does, I'm not.

A congress critter or president who says raising the limit is okay is not a Democrat.

Now that is all off the table if you mean changing the eligibility age to zero. Medicare for all. Not that's a significant Democratic stand.

I can tell you that by the time you reach my age(54), 2 years is nothing.

you are suffering from a chronic illness and have no coverage at all.

energy level can change in 7 to 10 years.

It is totally ridiculous to raise the Medicare eligible age another 2 years to 67.

Given our leaders have off shored our jobs, and corporate America started firing employees at age 40+ --- are people supposed to wait now 27 years to get health care? INSANE.

There are no general practitioners within 20 miles from me accepting new Medicare patients. I called something like over 2 dozen of them. Just cancel my Medicare and refund all my Medicare taxes.

they will not accept new Medicare patients. Yet we keep hearing that one of the Medicare "reforms" being proposed is cutting back reimbursements even more. At this rate pretty soon nobody will be able to find a doctor who accepts Medicare.

I was with this family practice for 6 years and then turned 65 and they kept me as a patient.
Now we have moved 200 miles and I can't find a doctor within 30 minutes drive
who is taking new Medicare patients. I want my money back!

wow.

who will accept you as new patient. And no, I really
don't care if Medicare stays or goes, just myself personally
want to be excused out of the plan and refund all my taxes
minus any benefits they have paid. What good is Medicare to me
If I can't find doctors? And there are plenty of them in this town.

but you continually oppose social programs here, so I'm not surprised you're taking this tack.

Why should I be paying Medicare deductions if no doctor is
willing to take me on?

Actually if you read my past posts, I favored a nationalized health care system where all medical service people are required to be part of it. That is the only system which will work. It could cause rationing of healthcare as it has done in other countries with such systems, but at least everyone gets affordable basic healthcare. Right now, I have no healthcare because I can't find a personal physician. This Medicare system is broken and is worthless. I will have to visit emergency rooms even for non-critical health issues.

So you are again wrong in assuming I oppose all social services. I simply oppose the unworkable social systems.

because fixing your issue is the solution to your problem.

not eliminating health care for a vast portion of the elderly.

and i've been seeing your posts all over the place opposing social spending. you own those.

as is saying Medicare doesn't work

as is saying we should get rid of it and refund your taxes.

all Republican talking points.

thought you should know before you say them again.

I do not read their talking points, so I would'nt know.
I am simply going by my own personal and actual experience.
If you do not like to read my actual experience, please ignore
my posts.

And by the way I can document my ACTUAL experience with Medicare. I have records of all phone calls made to about 2 dozen doctors in this town. If that then becomes republican talking points, that is complete news to me.

This is just another gift to the private insurers - with more Boomers hitting the eligibility age every year & the insurance mandate kicking in in 2014 - let's all ask who benefits from this latest scam.

K&R

If you're a multi-millionaire who will be covered with the best private insurance available starting in either 2 or 6 years, then Medicare really doesn't matter.

On planet Mayonnaise.

If only a president would regulate that market....

Oh. Wait.

I am counting the years and months until I turn 65.

For myself using todays rates for company provided insurance when you retire it would mean an extra 15k out of my pocket for an additional two years in premiums. The thing is I'd say thats lucky for many they either won't have any insurance at all or will have to continue working just for some type of healthcare.

however I don't oppose all significant changes