The cost of care in the US is exorbitant compared to its developed peers, many of which have single-payer systems. And those other countries' citizens rate their satisfaction with their healthcare at or above ours.

 

Those costs often don't take into account the taxes funding them.

I am not debating that. My posts are strictly numbers oriented on this subject.

 

The program is and has been underfunded for years and years.

 

The problem is no matter how feel good the program is it is financially non-viable in its current structure. At some point the numbers have to balance.

I don't think the numbers ever will balance, but certainly the deficit has to shrink.

I mean chairman of one of the most powerful committees in DC. I mean one of the architects of the presidents signature legislation. He's powerful and a top Dem. No debate on that no matter how you want to try. Yes, McCain is a top Rep.

He was an 'architect' of the President's legislation because he's the chairman of the Senate committee it passed through. He's chairman because he's the senior most member of the majority party on that committee. He's on that committee because he's one of the senior most members of the majority party (second only to Patrick Leahy) and the Democrats put more weight on seniority than Republicans do on committee memberships. If Max Baucus were a Republican and had an equivalent record, he would not enjoy the same status.

 

Not that it matters. Since he last won election (on 2008's wave and with a huge war chest advantage) Baucus has divorced his wife, nominated a staffer for US Attorney, withdrawn the nomination once it came out that they'd been an item since before his divorce and then married that staffer. He's under 50% already against all announced Republican candidates, which is always a bad sign. I don't think we'll have ol' Max Baucus to kick around too much longer.

I don't think the numbers ever will balance, but certainly the deficit has to shrink.

 

There is no law of man or nature that indicates it 'has' to shrink. That is the problem. Nothing, even the most aggressive and draconian plans fixes this in the forseeable future.

 

Here is chart 1 of a starter kit of the situation:

 

 

Notice that HHS (Medicare/Medicade) becomes the primary budget element. Also notice that interest on the debt (Treasury) rises dramatically. Social Security spending goes up - but it is mostly 'off budget' and it does not drive the deficit calculations. All other spending goes down. Military, education, etc. all down (not that that has ever happened in history).

Here is starter chart number 2 - revenues.

 

 

The straight lines are trends (generated by excel) of the major revenue sources. The long term trends have been well established.

 

Notice that in the forecast there is a dip and then a dramatic (unrealistic) rise. And by 2016 the major revenue sources are well above the historical trend lines. To make these numbers you have to have the strongest post war boom in history. And even if you do and you make these numbers - there is still a major deficit. In sales these curves would be called 'hockey stick' curves. Overly optimistic sales projections basically.

 

The official forecast still never closes the gap on the deficit. And the forecast has some very unrealistic expectations on revenue.

 

No one likes these curves - including me. But the politicians need to wake up before we look like Greece. And we will when the dollar crashes.

He was an 'architect' of the President's legislation because he's the chairman of the Senate committee it passed through. He's chairman because he's the senior most member of the majority party on that committee. He's on that committee because he's one of the senior most members of the majority party (second only to Patrick Leahy) and the Democrats put more weight on seniority than Republicans do on committee memberships. If Max Baucus were a Republican and had an equivalent record, he would not enjoy the same status.

 

Not that it matters. Since he last won election (on 2008's wave and with a huge war chest advantage) Baucus has divorced his wife, nominated a staffer for US Attorney, withdrawn the nomination once it came out that they'd been an item since before his divorce and then married that staffer. He's under 50% already against all announced Republican candidates, which is always a bad sign. I don't think we'll have ol' Max Baucus to kick around too much longer.

 

Keep trying. You might even convince yourself.

Graph of the day: Medicaid, Medicare patients most satisfied with health costs

 

Medicare Beats Private Plans for Patient Satisfaction: Survey

 

Survey: Nine out of Ten Seniors Satisfied with their Medicare Advantage Coverage | AHIP Coverage

 

Those are all three different polls.

 

Yes, everyone likes things they don't pay for.

 

Somebody is paying for it though. Our health care system is broken and part of the reason it is is because of all the care not paid for by the end user.

You think making Medicare a single payer for all US insurance would contain cost??? Yeah, lack of competition has always driven down cost and raised efficiency...:ohbrother:

 

You can't argue with people who don't understand the basic concepts of Supply vs Demand. Medicad was a leaking plug on sinking ship. The only answer a few people have on here is for the government to spend more to fix a problem that spending caused. It would be hilarious if it wasn't sad.

The cost of care in the US is exorbitant compared to its developed peers, many of which have single-payer systems. And those other countries' citizens rate their satisfaction with their healthcare at or above ours.

 

Never mind the quality is inferior. I won't take any proposal serisously until it addresses cost. Spending and taxing does not address cost.

Graph of the day: Medicaid, Medicare patients most satisfied with health costs

 

Medicare Beats Private Plans for Patient Satisfaction: Survey

efficient

 

 

Survey: Nine out of Ten Seniors Satisfied with their Medicare Advantage Coverage | AHIP Coverage

 

Those are all three different polls.

 

I bet people on long term welfare love the program as well, it does not make the programs efficient or cost effective.

Go out to Florence Mall and ask 10 people at random the following question: "Which two provisions of Obamacare upset you the most?" What would the answers be? My guess is perhaps one person in 10 -- more likely one person in 50 -- could give you an intelligent answer. The others likely would mumble something about "too much government in our lives" or "I don't know but I don't like it." Obmacare in essence is a straw man for right-wing rancor. I'm old enough to remember that Medicare solicited similar comments when it was enacted, such as, "It will lead us down the path to socialism."

 

Honestly this comment in this whole topic got my attention the most. Somehow people thinking that the government is to big or is taxing to much makes them unintelligent? I could easily make the agrument anyone who believes the Federal government isn't to large, is lacking some reasoning and basic understanding of how our economy works. Do you understand what socialism is, or do you choose to ignore it? Medicare is socialism. The United States in many aspects has socialism leanings, and if more people don't start to see the path we are on , the problem will only grow worse.

 

I would say the most intelligent answer anyone could give to be against Obamacare is that it makes an already large federal government even larger.

Honestly this comment in this whole topic got my attention the most. Somehow people thinking that the government is to big or is taxing to much makes them unintelligent? I could easily make the agrument anyone who believes the Federal government isn't to large, is lacking some reasoning and basic understanding of how our economy works. Do you understand what socialism is, or do you choose to ignore it? Medicare is socialism. The United States in many aspects has socialism leanings, and if more people don't start to see the path we are on , the problem will only grow worse.

 

I would say the most intelligent answer anyone could give to be against Obamacare is that it makes an already large federal government even larger.

 

Lipton Bash, my new favorite poster!!

Honestly this comment in this whole topic got my attention the most. Somehow people thinking that the government is to big or is taxing to much makes them unintelligent? I could easily make the agrument anyone who believes the Federal government isn't to large, is lacking some reasoning and basic understanding of how our economy works. Do you understand what socialism is, or do you choose to ignore it? Medicare is socialism. The United States in many aspects has socialism leanings, and if more people don't start to see the path we are on , the problem will only grow worse.

 

I would say the most intelligent answer anyone could give to be against Obamacare is that it makes an already large federal government even larger.

The G.I. bill also is a socialistic program.

The G.I. bill also is a socialistic program.

 

If you can't see the difference between rewarding soliders who defend this nation vs. welfare programs, then we do not need to discuss any further because you do not want to have an intelligent conversation.

If you can't see the difference between rewarding soliders who defend this nation vs. welfare programs, then we do not need to discuss any further because you do not want to have an intelligent conversation.

Medicare (and Social Security) are earned benefits, not welfare programs. I paid into each for many years.