SAD DAY FOR THE TAXPAYER

[rainstorm]

the republicans passed a horrible vote buying scheme, the prescription medicare drug bill.
a-old people are the richest segment of society
b-in 20 years medicare/medicade will eat up 80% of tax revenues
c-young people can expect at the minimum a 37% increase in their taxes to pay for this vote bribe.
d-it wasnt needed in the first place
e-how did seniors survive without it?
f-just wait, the aarp has already said this is just a first step. every election the spineless politicians will be outbidding each other to buy more votes. this program will expand exponentially. the current medicare program is presently costing 7 times more than originally projected.
g-the current private insurance seniors have is better anyway.
h-just wait, this program will explode in costs.
i-the tax burden placed on younger people will be enormous, and will grow at an exponential rate.
j-this is a sad day, when the politicians are so openly buying votes. does anyone care about the taxpayer. oh well, the govt can just confiscate more of the money we earn. and remember, seniors are the richest segment of the population. should the govt provide everything for the less rich members of society?
WHAT HAPPENED TO INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY?

what % of a persons income is ok for the govt to steal?

[rainstorm]

the bottom line. when people become totally dependant on govt, our freedoms are gone, and the politicians own each one of us, lock, stock, and barrel

[Stephanie]

I sort of understand what you are saying Helen, that ultimately by having the government provide us with life's necessities, we're giving up our own freedoms. The problem is that the seniors are making decisions on a daily basis as to whether they are going to eat or purchase the medicine they need to stay alive. Personal responsibility is not the issue here. I truly believe that the majority of the people in America want to be able to afford a home, food, clothing, medicine, etc., but they can't. If we didn't have medical insurance, I'm sure 90% of us wouldn't be receiving the medical care that we need, nevermind getting medication. It would truly then be a system that can only be afforded by the rich. The thing is, as long as we don't give up our right to vote, the politicians will not "own" us. We put them in there and we can sure as heck take them out.

[blizzard]

the republicans passed a horrible vote buying scheme,

What's new.....all politicians are guilty of doing this. Dems and the GOP.

[stormchazer]

I sort of understand what you are saying Helen, that ultimately by having the government provide us with life's necessities, we're giving up our own freedoms. The problem is that the seniors are making decisions on a daily basis as to whether they are going to eat or purchase the medicine they need to stay alive. Personal responsibility is not the issue here. I truly believe that the majority of the people in America want to be able to afford a home, food, clothing, medicine, etc., but they can't. If we didn't have medical insurance, I'm sure 90% of us wouldn't be receiving the medical care that we need, nevermind getting medication. It would truly then be a system that can only be afforded by the rich. The thing is, as long as we don't give up our right to vote, the politicians will not "own" us. We put them in there and we can sure as heck take them out.

Do you know any? Where do you get this statistic? Today I am ashamed to say I am a Republican.

[mf_dolphin]

I know of several elderly in this situation. It's a real crime in the richest country in the world that this happens.

[streetsoldier]

I'm not "elderly", but I am on Social Security disability, and have no medical insurance. If the clinic I go to didn't have a deal with the drug companies to provide me with "samples", I couldn't get the Rx I need ($450 a month's worth).

And I don't have Medicare or Medicaid because they take out very needed money from my SS to implement it, yet the quarterly "spend-down" is so high that it's worthless for me to sign up. Thus, I am one of the 1/2% who "fall through the cracks"; too much income for "poverty level", but not enough to live AND have insurance.

Think on this, before anyone blasts ANY assistance bills, OK?

[Lindaloo]

I have some very dear elderly friends who are in the same situation you are Bill. I see what they have to face on a daily basis. They are much too proud to ask for any help, even though I have offered. It breaks my heart to see what is happening to them and nowhere to turn but to each other. The banks, grocery stores, drug stores and doctors do not help them either. They each survive on a SS check with no medical insurance for the very reason Bill has stated here. So, if the government can ease their burden, then who are we to down it. Not ALL our Seniors are wealthy!!

BTW.... very well presented Steph!!

[blizzard]

seniors are the richest segment of the population

I would like to know where you got this statistic. If it is true, they are taking a few peoples high income and adding it into the rest of the elderly population and averaging it out. This is not the proper way to do it. Find the exact number of elderly that are on either SS alone, or on public assistance and you will find that the majority are in need of a good prescription Rx plan. I personally know a high number of elderly that are in the sad situation of deciding wether to buy that extra loaf of bread so that they don't go hungry, or buy that over inflated prescription drug that will keep them alive and semi-healthy for another month.

IMO this is not anything taking away our freedoms, if anything it is adding to some of the elderly's freedoms of having a life.

[streetsoldier]

I might also add that Debi, also disabled, has a third kidney stone which she can't get taken care of now, for the same reason...no insurance.

The first two she had were supposed to have been covered by insurance she had through a part-time job (store is now defunct), but her specialist was unavailable when I had to have her admitted; they called our "family practice" MD to admit her, and since we didn't see HIM about it first, he wrote it out as "pre-existing condition" to get the insurance guys off the hook.

As a result, we have a whopping $8,799 bill we are contesting, but we can't get either of the MDs to call us back to correct the error (this was 2 years ago).

And she is in a LOT of pain...she's afraid she won't be able to cook and serve the T-Day dinner (and I sure can't "do the honors") much less wonders how she's going to make it through the end of this semester.

So, don't yell "taxpayer ripoff" to me about insurance..."talk to the hand."

[ColdFront77]

Both my parents are senior citizens and I am on SSI and have Medicaid. Neither one of my parents are "rich."

The majority of elderly people's money is on a continuous downward trend.

[rainstorm]

I sort of understand what you are saying Helen, that ultimately by having the government provide us with life's necessities, we're giving up our own freedoms. The problem is that the seniors are making decisions on a daily basis as to whether they are going to eat or purchase the medicine they need to stay alive. Personal responsibility is not the issue here. I truly believe that the majority of the people in America want to be able to afford a home, food, clothing, medicine, etc., but they can't. If we didn't have medical insurance, I'm sure 90% of us wouldn't be receiving the medical care that we need, nevermind getting medication. It would truly then be a system that can only be afforded by the rich. The thing is, as long as we don't give up our right to vote, the politicians will not "own" us. We put them in there and we can sure as heck take them out.

Do you know any? Where do you get this statistic? Today I am ashamed
to say I am a Republican.

that is just anecdotal evidence that cant be backed up. seniors are living longer and longer. i fail to see the stacks of seniors bodies in the streets because they cant get drugs. again, seniors are the richest segment of society. this program will continue to expand and taks more and more of our EARNED money.

[rainstorm]

seniors are the richest segment of the population

I would like to know where you got this statistic. If it is true, they are taking a few peoples high income and adding it into the rest of the elderly population and averaging it out. This is not the proper way to do it. Find the exact number of elderly that are on either SS alone, or on public assistance and you will find that the majority are in need of a good prescription Rx plan. I personally know a high number of elderly that are in the sad situation of deciding wether to buy that extra loaf of bread so that they don't go hungry, or buy that over inflated prescription drug that will keep them alive and semi-healthy for another month.

IMO this is not anything taking away our freedoms, if anything it is adding to some of the elderly's freedoms of having a life.

i know plenty of 20 yr olds that cant make ends meet. should the govt take care of everyone 24/7? the fact is seniors are the richest segment of the population. this is a vote buying scheme

[rainstorm]

interesting, just on fox. the govts own study last year showed 86% of medicare reciepients said they have no problem paying for their drugs. my guess is younger people have a harder time paying for things than seniors do. lets just double taxes on everyone. bush has dumped a looming disaster on the taxpayer 15-20 years from now, in order to buy a few votes in 2004

[azsnowman]

Have you ever volunteered at homeless food shelters, the Senior Center, worked in the retail grocery business?? I have and let me tell you, about 90% of the folks walking in the door are eldery in DIRE need of food, assisstance with their utility bills, rent.....why?? They have to choose between meds or food, rent and the basics of LIFE! I for ONE am HAPPY to pay my fair share, yes.....being a small business owner, I get RAPPED in taxes, workmans comp., SS and medicare BUT.....we OWE the eldery a "LOT". Take for instance, our FREEDOM! Take a look around you and take note of just how many WWI, WWII, Korean Vets are still alive (barely) and are eating, taken commodities from shelters, it's a SHAME what the drug companies have done to this country!

Dennis

[coriolis]

First a bit of trivia: In Pennsylvania, "proceeds from the state lottery benefit older Pennsylvanians" (that's a quote). There is a prescription program with that. My Mother in law, who lives with us gets her 8 (count 'em 8) regular prescriptions for $6 each.

When she was widowed she sold her house and basically gave the money away to her children. She gets $750/month in social security (hers + survivor benefits, I think) and is on medicare. From what I can tell, medicare basically pays the doctor bills. She gets a few bills for stuff medicare doesn't cover, but not many. Out of the socail security check, she is able to contribute to the household expenses, pay for her prescriptions, and her necessities. However with this income, there's no way she could be on her own.

My parents both worked hard all their lives, saved money, put money away for retirement, lived frugally, and both have pensions from the teachers union, and thankfully are in good health. I guess they are part of the % who are making it and don't need more help. But all it would take would be one major medical issue to cause this all to come crashing down. And sooner or later it will happen.

I suppose that before social security, parents traditionally stayed with their children, often giving the house to the child who kept them. Nowadays, that's seen as a burden and many of the baby boomers couldn't be bothered. Add to that the fact that older people stay alive much longer as a result of increasingly expensive medications.

Here's a couple of ideas:
1. Raise the retirement age. When SS was instituted, life expectancies were much shorter. I don't think that as many people actually lived to the retirement age or much beyond. I am not doing nearly as well as my parents did regarding preparation for retirement. (I won't get into the reasons). I'll probably be working until I'm 80.

2. Create some sort of incentive for children to take their parents in. Does anyone know how it's handled if a parent gives the house to the children? Are there tax implications? I think that a parent can sell a house to a child for $1.

3. Create flexibility in the system. A cookie cutter approach is not appropriate for all cases.

As usual, with these topics, everyone's individual cases are different. Some individuals make better preparations than others, some become disabled or widowed, some have bad luck, and some make their own bad luck, so its hard to make rules to cover everyone fairly.

There is a debt owed to our predecessors who worked hard, sacrificed, and made this country what it is. I don't see older people as greedy. Quite the opposite. I see the baby boomers and generations x and y as being more greedy than the older people. Of course there's dangers with generalizations. Individual results will vary.

You want to limit benefits to older people? Are you willing to take your parents in?

[rainstorm]

Have you ever volunteered at homeless food shelters, the Senior Center, worked in the retail grocery business?? I have and let me tell you, about 90% of the folks walking in the door are eldery in DIRE need of food, assisstance with their utility bills, rent.....why?? They have to choose between meds or food, rent and the basics of LIFE! I for ONE am HAPPY to pay my fair share, yes.....being a small business owner, I get RAPPED in taxes, workmans comp., SS and medicare BUT.....we OWE the eldery a "LOT". Take for instance, our FREEDOM! Take a look around you and take note of just how many WWI, WWII, Korean Vets are still alive (barely) and are eating, taken commodities from shelters, it's a SHAME what the drug companies have done to this country!

Dennis

purely anecdotal. seniors are the richest segment of society. their are plenty of examples of 20 30 40 yr olds in dire needs too. just double taxes?

[rainstorm]

First a bit of trivia: In Pennsylvania, "proceeds from the state lottery benefit older Pennsylvanians" (that's a quote). There is a prescription program with that. My Mother in law, who lives with us gets her 8 (count 'em 8) regular prescriptions for $6 each.

When she was widowed she sold her house and basically gave the money away to her children. She gets $750/month in social security (hers + survivor benefits, I think) and is on medicare. From what I can tell, medicare basically pays the doctor bills. She gets a few bills for stuff medicare doesn't cover, but not many. Out of the socail security check, she is able to contribute to the household expenses, pay for her prescriptions, and her necessities. However with this income, there's no way she could be on her own.

My parents both worked hard all their lives, saved money, put money away for retirement, lived frugally, and both have pensions from the teachers union, and thankfully are in good health. I guess they are part of the % who are making it and don't need more help. But all it would take would be one major medical issue to cause this all to come crashing down. And sooner or later it will happen.

I suppose that before social security, parents traditionally stayed with their children, often giving the house to the child who kept them. Nowadays, that's seen as a burden and many of the baby boomers couldn't be bothered. Add to that the fact that older people stay alive much longer as a result of increasingly expensive medications.

Here's a couple of ideas:
1. Raise the retirement age. When SS was instituted, life expectancies were much shorter. I don't think that as many people actually lived to the retirement age or much beyond. I am not doing nearly as well as my parents did regarding preparation for retirement. (I won't get into the reasons). I'll probably be working until I'm 80.

2. Create some sort of incentive for children to take their parents in. Does anyone know how it's handled if a parent gives the house to the children? Are there tax implications? I think that a parent can sell a house to a child for $1.

3. Create flexibility in the system. A cookie cutter approach is not appropriate for all cases.

As usual, with these topics, everyone's individual cases are different. Some individuals make better preparations than others, some become disabled or widowed, some have bad luck, and some make their own bad luck, so its hard to make rules to cover everyone fairly.

There is a debt owed to our predecessors who worked hard, sacrificed, and made this country what it is. I don't see older people as greedy. Quite the opposite. I see the baby boomers and generations x and y as being more greedy than the older people. Of course there's dangers with generalizations. Individual results will vary.

You want to limit benefits to older people? Are you willing to take your parents in?

again, purely anecdotal. and yes, the family should help. seniors should not be reaching in our pockets for a benefit no one can prove they need.
raising the retirement age? bunk!!
if ss were privatized all people would be much much better off. but, dems wont allow it. they know financially independent voters wont vote for them.
good luck if you are in your 20's now!! just think how wealthy you might be if you wernt going to pay for all these vote buying schemes for 50 years of your life.

[rainstorm]

the whole argument about raising the retirement age makes no sense.
how can seniors be living longer and longer if they are in such dire straights? by the anecdotal evidence presented here, you would expect piles of bodies lining the streets. the fact is, we are in for a financial disaster 15-20 years from now.

[coriolis]

I will add to that (again risking generalizations) that many younger people are in a bad way because of bad choices and not playing by the rules.

Take my stepdaughter. She had a bad attitude, dropped out of high school. Worked at numerous minimum wage jobs. Got frustrated with each of them after a couple months and quit. Got pregnant, is on welfare, wic, child support, and who knows what else, just quit another job, can't find affordable child care, and is just basically going nowhere. This frustrates me to no end. Does she deserve benefits more than an older person who played by the rules and worked hard all their life? We offered to take her in but she wants her "independence." In reality she's living in "dependence." She is a perfect example of someone who "deserves" assistance because she royally screwed up her life!