View Single Post
  #26 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to misc.invest.stocks,alt.politics.economics,sci.econ,soc.retirement,rec.food.cooking
Lawyerkill Lawyerkill is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default Supposed problems with Medicare

On Sep 15, 3:04�pm, Michael Coburn > wrote:

>
> I meant "D" obviously. �Pretty hard to confuse the proposition even with
> the typo. �But you _WILL_ run with this nit as much as you can.
>
> <<<<<<<<< pig prancing nit picking deleted >>>>>>>>>>>



No, you blame everything on the Republicans and Bush and the article
was clearly talking about Medicare HI and you either confused Medicare
HI with part 'B' and 'D' or you did it just to try and confuse the
issue.

> > PS I was againt the bill for 'D'. �Oh and the Democratic plan for part D
> > was unfunded also.

>
> A tacit admission that you _KNEW_ it was a typo and could not resist the
> posturing opportunity.



No, I just waned to clear up your confusion in trying to lump
everything together.


> > Again, regardless, the article was about Medicare HI going belly up, it
> > was going belly up with the help of part 'D'.

>
> The Article said _MEDICARE_ and Social Security and gave no link to the
> "supposed" Reports that on page ^$%^ said the Martians are coming to eat
> the kids.




I guess you are talking about the first article, it clearly says
Medicare HI.


"The Medicare actuaries then dryly note what would happen once the
trust funds for Social Security and Medicare's hospital insurance
program are depleted: "


"Medicare's hospital insurance program"


You claimed it was because of part B and D and tried to blame the
problem on Bush and the Republicans. Clearly part 'B' and 'D' are
another problem.



>
>
> HOWEVER!
>
> If there is an _HONEST_ desire to address Medicare "A" (called HI) the
> cure is simple:
>
> Whereas the benefits inure equally to all regardless of the AMOUNT of
> paid in taxes, regardless of income, and regardless of assets, then the
> Medicare tax should be assessed on _ALL_ income and not just wage income.
> At the current 2.9% rate that will probably put the "A" fund in a
> position of large excess in that 75 year time frame. �And the funds
> should be OFF BUDGET.
>
> PS. We would probably need a REDUCTION in the tax rate if we were fixated
> on Medicare "A" applying the tax in a JUST manner.



And how much do we have to increase taxes?

We have too many things off budget already, putting something, "OFF
BUDGET" doesn't pay for it.