Democrats & Liberals Archives

No matter how you try to argue it, there are getting to be too many old people and not enough revenue for medicare. I say end govt assistance for those over 75. You may call it a death panel, I would call it incentive to accumulate some wealth when your working - or raise good kids. Problem solved.

OMG, Schwamp that’s one of the best things ever said. Honesty can be brutal.

Good suggestion, Schwamp. What about 70? That would really save a lot of money. With a targeted date for termination of Medicare, seniors could schedule their by-pass operations and hip replacements before loss of coverage. If not, I am sure that most would have had the incentive to save a couple hundred thousand to take care of that stroke, heart attack or hip fracture.

Romney spends more money to spread his lie about cutting $716 billion from Medicare. This was once a lie about $500 billion but CBO revised it’s estimate to $716 billion. Romney is still lying about what the value means.

Rich,
Sarcasm noted. but they would only need to be able to pay premiums for insurance. i.e. pay their own way (horror) and they would have decades to figure it out.

I have an aged mother who consumes more medical resources than anybody could possibly pay. But we expect government to do it millions of times over. The math doesn’t add up.

But we live in a society where the natural course of nature is unacceptable. And interestingly, the Ryans of the world who want to address the problem have to do so by pretending that they are saving what they are actually tearing down.

“Romney is still lying about what the value means”

Na. He probably just hasn’t heard the lefts explaination of what it “really” means. You know, “God, guns and gays,” “you didn’t build that,” “putting YOU ALL back in chains,” lol.
God, I can’t wait to hear what Biden “really” meant.

kctim:

Once again the facts have their well known liberal bias. On this same subject watch Sununu look like a bully and an idiot on national television.

Well, CNN isn’t “national television” but you know what I mean…

Adam, once again liberal “facts” are based on liberal opinions. Somebody daring not fall in lock-step and agree with liberal opinion is not lying, they are offering a differing opinion.

If projections and theories do not work as hoped, there will be cuts and reductions or taxes and premiums will raise to cover them.
Funny how you guys never mention that part.

Adam,
Your link states that the “cuts” that Obama calls for are not actual cuts, but a decline in growth.

Is that not the same tactic used by libs when republicans want to decrease future spending to other programs? Why is it not a “cut” when Obama does it and it is a “cut” when others do it?

I havent looked up examples, but I will if you need them.

The irony about the Medicare plans Romney calls theft is that Ryan’s Budget also contains those cuts.

Oops.

Schwamp-
Who then pays? The need doesn’t magically go away.

Schwamp-
I had an elderly relative die recently. While I’m not going to go into the details, my feeling is, if the healthcare costs had been born entirely on their back, things would have been far worse.

We need to face up to the fact that what’s truly too expensive is healthcare itself, and for reasons that have little to do with advancements in medicine or rises in material costs.

One way or another, we have to realize that medical treatment, especially for the elderly, is a need, not simply a luxury, and that America’s productivity and personal wealth suffer for the fact that our system overbills and underdelivers for that cost.

Our system “overbills and underdelivers” because of government involvement.
$100 hammers and the DMV.

tdobson: “Is that not the same tactic used by libs when republicans want to decrease future spending to other programs?”

So it’s OK for Romney to lie because you’ve seen liberals use similar reasoning? I welcome examples.

kctim: “Somebody daring not fall in lock-step and agree with liberal opinion is not lying, they are offering a differing opinion.”

Wrong. It’s not simply an opinion that there is no 714 billion dollar cut to medicare. There is literally no cut. To stay there is a cut is not a matter of a differing opinion but a straight up distortion of the facts…or as some would dare to say…a lie.

Adam, so you are saying no money is now going to be taken out of Medicare and funneled into the ACA? If that is now correct, then I can admit I was wrong.
Thanks for the update, I will read up on these latest changes when I have time.

For me it is right to point out that Mitt is dishonest when he says that Obama cut Medicare. Of course he probably learned the trick from Democrats in the 90’s when they went after Newt for “cutting” Medicare. Remember the commercials?

Only in Washington is the slowing of growth of a government program considered a cut. And only in Washington can you say that the government lost revenue when it reduced a tax rate (it never had the money in the first place if it didn’t collect it).

One way or another, we have to realize that medical treatment, especially for the elderly, is a need, not simply a luxury, and that America’s productivity and personal wealth suffer for the fact that our system overbills and underdelivers for that cost.

Stephen,
Something structural needs to reign it in. Society has gone from thousands of years of ‘survival of the fittest’ to the polar opposite and maybe a little too far. Someone can gun down innocents including children in a public place and 50 years later we’ll still be providing them free surgery.

I proposed a harder edge knowing it’s not something society will accept from a politician. There’s also room for a market solution if somehow we can keep some patient incentive on skipping the extra tests that the doctor calls for so he can pay for his new expensive machines that diagnose more and more irregularities. But that’s a hard edge also because in those thousands of expensive tests that are eliminated at least a couple will result in an extra preventable death.

Adam Ducker now officially qualifies for the Stephen Daugherty “Dumbass” statement:

“Wrong. It’s not simply an opinion that there is no 714 billion dollar cut to medicare. There is literally no cut. To stay there is a cut is not a matter of a differing opinion but a straight up distortion of the facts…or as some would dare to say…a lie.”
Posted by: Adam Ducker at August 15, 2012 2:14 PM

“Oops: While Attacking Romney & Ryan on Medicare, Obama’s Deputy Campaign Manager Happily Admits Obama Stole $700 Billion from Medicare”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCEgidipc5g

“We’ve been having some fun with a clip of David Axelrod angrily denouncing the fact that President Obama gutted Medicare by $700 Billion in order to partially pay for a brand new entitlement program. Axelrod’s campaign colleague Stephanie Cutter refuted him on another show, calling the Medicare cuts an “achievement.” But pay attention to the argument Axelrod makes here:”

“Now let’s take a look at another video clip of a very unlikely culprit repeating this precise Republican “lie.” I featured this in a post yesterday evening, but I want to make sure it achieves an appropriate level of saturation. From ABC News in 2009:”

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/08/15/video_obama_admits_he_cut_billions_from_medicare_to_fund_obamacare

“TAPPER: “One of the concerns about health care and how you pay for it — one third of the funding comes from cuts to Medicare.”
BARACK OBAMA: “Right.”
TAPPER: “A lot of times, as you know, what happens in Congress is somebody will do something bold and then Congress, close to election season, will undo it.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
TAPPER: “You saw that with the ‘doc fix’.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
TAPPER: “Are you willing to pledge that whatever cuts in Medicare are being made to fund health insurance, one third of it, that you will veto anything that tries to undo that?”
OBAMA: “Yes. I actually have said that it is important for us to make sure this thing is deficit neutral, without tricks. I said I wouldn’t sign a bill that didn’t meet that criteria.”

Schwamp, I commented in another post that there are too many people in this country needing handouts of all kinds and not enough to cover it. I agree with your statements. Increasing taxes on the wealthy will not cover the whole nut. Not even close.

Frank:

I think what is so confusing is that the word “cut” is used in different contexts by Obama and by the liar Romney. What ACA “cut” from Medicare were the costs of the program. It did not “cut” funding or benefits. We can use the word “cut” if you want but the lie still stands. The Romney ad states:

So now the money you paid for your guaranteed healthcare is going to a massive new government program that’s not for you…

That’s a lie. Think of it like having $1000 budget for a project. If I find a way to spend only $286 instead of $1000 is that the same as having only $286 to spend because the other $714 was taken for something else? No.

I understand that context is hard for you as you’ve demonstrated over and over on Watchblog, but dig deeper into this lie and you should find no reason to defend Romney or call what I wrote a dumbass statement.

Adma Ducker: spin baby spin.

You need to get in touch the the leaders of your own party anfd tell them how to spin the theft of medicare funds. Try again…

Adam,
“… What is so confusing is that the word “cut” is used in different contexts by Obama and… Romney. What ACA “cut” from Medicare were the costs of the program. It did not “cut” funding or benefits.”

Precisely.

In exchange for receiving a smaller government subsidy, the insurance companies received the individual mandate, thus gaining tens of millions of additional customers.

From an end-user perspective, i.e., senior, Medicare will be exactly the same.

This is NOT the same as The Ryan Budget plan, which proposed replacing the current MediCare system with a voucher. From an end-user perspective, i.e., senior,l MediCare would be very different.

I wonder how long the conservatives will push this Big Lie. Maybe they’ll use all that SuperPAC money at Crossroads & Americans for Prosperity to push the Lie; those SuperPACs have more $ than all the rest of the SuperPAC’s combined, which is pretty amazing, if you think about it.

Adam, in your example above, the project represents Medicare…correct? Does the project (Medicare) still have the $714? NO! Where did it go? To another entitlement program (or project)! Can the project (Medicare) demand the return of the $714 if those savings are not realized? NO! How do we know the savings of $714 will actually be realized? We don’t!

The same strange logic is being used to claim that GM has paid back the American taxpayers for the bailout.

The CBO just released its finding that the taxpayers are still out $25 billion. The reason is simple. Government still owns about 500 million shares and the share price has dropped. Some day, perhaps, GM shares may be worth the $50/share needed to equal what is owed taxpayers but I doubt it.

The current financial thinking is that if reelected, obama will sell or dump those 500 million shares to use for some other scheme. Dumping that many shares will lower share price leaving taxpayers with a huge loss.

Frank: “You need to get in touch the the leaders of your own party anfd tell them how to spin the theft of medicare funds. Try again…”

What you should say is you reject my reality and you substitute your own. If the basic facts of this story don’t sway you then nothing will.

kctim-
No, the system overcharges and underperforms because Medicine is necessary, so people can’t just boycott it in protest (anymore than they can starve themselves to protest food prices).

Additionally, healthcare providing organizations are all too often organized along poor lines of logic, with the goal of withholding as much care as possible.

And those are the people who Ryan’s plan would deliver the healthcare system to, the people who have already proved Medicare Advantage a boondoggle.

Inefficiency is not a uniquely public sector problem. While the market successfully combats some kinds of inefficiency, others kinds can continue because consumers don’t have enough pull or will to combat them, and the people making money off the inefficiency profit too well.

Royal, he said “There is literally no cut,” so no, the money does not go to another project, the $714 million is still Medicare money. Not ACA money.

Apparently, Obama is wrong. Maybe he could avoid all the confusion if he would ask his people what he “really” means to say BEFORE he says it?

Schwamp-
We pay for it one way or another. I’m not big on single payer, but to be blunt, if people either can’t afford healthcare, or end up having to spend an inordinate amount to get it, there are both economic and non-economic consequences that society has to live with. As for taking a harder edge?

We don’t need further Darwinism. Masochism of that sort doesn’t have much survival value. I think we need to realize that folks are going to seek out healthcare one way or another. It’s a need, not something people can ignore indefinitely. We are are mortal, and we are not living in medieval times where we have no choice but to accept all the death, disease and the shortening of our productive, enjoyable lives. The truth is, only psychopaths can function with such an edge. We need to find a way to economically satisfy our conscientious need to help our fellow human being.

Stephen writes; “While the market successfully combats some kinds of inefficiency, others kinds can continue because consumers don’t have enough pull or will to combat them…”

Wow…what a statement. Sorry SD…but you simply do not understand “free” markets and should not attempt writing about them.

kctim writes; “Royal, he said “There is literally no cut,” so no, the money does not go to another project, the $714 million is still Medicare money. Not ACA money.”

OK Tim, now I understand. The CBO needs to re-score ACA without the money from Medicare. Romney/Ryan will have great fun poking obama/biden in the eye with all their lies.

Let’s see if I understand correctly. obmam took the money from Medicare before he realized that he didn’t actually take the money.

Frank-
The main difference, I would say, is that your average Medicare patient doesn’t feel the cut, offset, or whatever else you call it come out of their pocket.

That’s why it’s not a theft. Theft requires that something get taken from the Seniors. Obama’s law has actually given the Seniors more, and for lower cost to the taxpayer.

It’s from the Savings that Obama funds part of his healthcare plan, which has as its stated purpose and goal extending healthcare to millions more Americans.

I think what we see here isn’t dumbass arguments from me, but overzealous talking point addiction from you. You rely far too much on quotes I could have just as well picked up off the newswire from the Romney campaign.

The way I look at it, you can’t admit if Obama’s successful, because then that would mean that you were justifying the “big government” programs and affirmative spending programs that Obama employs to get his results, and that challenges your movement’s whole paradigm, it’s whole concept of what’s political truth, politically correct!

Your people are lying, and getting caught at it. Your only hope is to lie so endlessly your own people can’t come up for better perspective. That’s the unfortunate problem, because however much you lie, it doesn’t change what policies work, and what policies don’t.

Obama’s policies have extended Medicare’s life, with little sacrifice of benefits. Yours would not do the same. Those are the cold hard facts, the facts you can’t bear to have the senior citizens realize is the truth. You’re basically trying to gull people into following that “take the gubmint’s hands off my medicare” BS.

Americans deserve the truth. They deserve to know clearly and plainly that they haven’t seen their benefits diminished under Obama since The Affordable Care Act became law, but that they will see the benefits callously cut short by Ryan’s policy, if it ever becomes law. They deserve to see the contrast, and not be befuddled by the rank dishonesty of the propaganda you peddle.

To all Republicans and conservatives here:

Can I be blunt? Republicans, as they did before the 2010 election, are trying to scare seniors into opposing what amounts to the successful reduction of unnecessary taxpayer costs in Medicare and its other programs. Seniors have not had benefits taken from them at all, yet you term it a theft.

In truth, the GOP is trying to protect or restore, it seems, the money it was bleeding into corporate coffers unnecessarily on the taxpayers behalf. That’s what makes this argument truly sick, truly immoral.

Obama did what the Republicans should have done from the beginning, what could have saved the taxpayer billions of dollars from the outset. Now the Republicans are calling him a thief for doing that.

In truth, the real thiefs are those who would take billions of taxpayer dollars and shunt them to the rich and the corporations, all the while preaching the gospel of fiscal conservatism, and fighting corporate cronyism. Perhaps the Republican’s argument here is that with Solyndra, Obama only lost about half a billion dollars. He should be following their example, they reason, and losing America tens of billions of dollars.

Royal & kctim; the really sad thing is that working people have paid into Medicare for years, and required to pay a monthly premium at age 65; but Obama has taken that money and put it into obamacare which provides HC to people who paid nothing into ANY system. This is nothing more than re-distribution of wealth and in this case, the wealth of lower and middle income Americans. He is not robbing from th rich; he is robbing from all working families.

Frank, you are absolutely correct. I have paid into Medicare since it first began and now pay premiums from my SS check. I am not complaining about what I pay or the benefits I receive. I merely want others to pay for what they receive.

Stephen declares that seniors have not lost any benefits from the theft. I would add one little word to that…YET!

obama stole from the shareholders of GM and gave it to the unions. Taxpayers are still on the hook for $25 billion on that scheme.

Mr. Magic obama should take a few trillion from SS and fix that as well.

“Sarcasm noted. but they would only need to be able to pay premiums for insurance. i.e. pay their own way (horror) and they would have decades to figure it out.”

Schwamp,

You say, people should put aside some money earlier in their life in order to be able to pay for health care and health insurance later in life. Well, what is Medicare? Is it not exactly what you prescribe? Do we not prepay premiums (FICA taxes) throughout our working lives for Medicare when we reach retirement age? In addition, we still pay premiums, deductibles and co-pays when actively enrolled in Medicare.

The long term funding problems of Medicare are entirely due to health care cost inflation outstripping general inflation. The conservative Ryan budget recognizes that factor and addresses the problem by simply limiting Medicare outlays to general inflation. What a great solution! We cannot afford it, you seniors will have to pick up the tab.

Frank: “…the really sad thing is that working people have paid into Medicare for years, and required to pay a monthly premium at age 65; but Obama has taken that money and put it into obamacare which provides HC to people who paid nothing into ANY system.”

You just continue to repeat the same wrong ideas about the money. But I understand that this deficit neutral thing is a mystery to Republicans like yourself. Your side prefers to spend all they want because they know they can just blame a Democrat for it later when they’re out of power.

I wonder if Stephen has any thoughts regarding waste and fraud in Medicaid. Is it possible that Mr. Magic might find $700 billion, or more, in that program.

OH…WAIT, I forgot…no one has paid into Medicaid so there are no savings to be found.

Obama will end Medicare as we know it because he will take its money and let it go bankrupt. Granny is going over that fiscal cliff with Obama pushing the chair.

It is true that this was not a strong issue for Republicans, but it has become one. The choice is simple.

BOTH Obama and Reps will end Medicare as we know it. The difference is that Romney-Ryan actually understand what is beyond Obama-Biden’s ability. They will reform the system so that seniors will have something. Obama-Biden will talk a better game but in the end they will bankrupt the system and everybody will go over that cliff with them.

So Romney reforms medicare
Obama kills it (but praises it as it goes down)

C&J write; “It is true that this was not a strong issue for Republicans, but it has become one. The choice is simple.”

That’s true, Medicare has been a dem rallying point for decades of elections. They always painted Reps as trying to end or cripple it and themselves as the saviors. Now, we have found obama and his cronies with their hand in the Medicare cookie jar stealing from the very program they say they wish to save. What a turn-about this is. The magnitude of this change in positions is astonishing.

Gas and food prices are increasing with nauseating regularity. The dems deliberately worked to reduce fossil fuel availability and by their promotion of Ethanol have caused food commodities to skyrocket.

Once again the feds meddle in the market by buying huge quantities of corn and grains to support an artificial price which harms every American family with higher costs for food. American farmers know the risk of their occupation and many have insurance against crop failure. We have no insurance against government policies hitting our pockets. Tax payers are paying for the feds to store food taking it out of the market.

“Obama will end Medicare as we know it because he will take its money and let it go bankrupt.”

C&J,

Come on, you are generally reasonable. This is a bit over the top.

You are aware that the Obama “reductions” or “savings” in Medicare had to do with excess yearly per capita payments to insurance companies for Medicare Advantage plans. If he was wrong about that, please present the data. If not, please provide a drum role for saving waste in Medicare.

Do you have any information that Obama was wrong about the excess annual payments to private insurance companies for Medicare Advantage coverage of their subscribers?

Rich

I am just balancing. BOTH Obama and Romney will end Medicare as we know it. I am getting sick of the Obama line. I do honestly believe that Obama will end medicare as we know it in worse shape than Romney.

When you talk about “excess yearly per capita payments” it is like the bums asking for “spare” change. There is no such thing. If too much money was being paid in, it means that WE overpaid our Medicare taxes. It doesn’t belong to Obama and he has no moral right to redirect it.

C&J,

Medicare will be the battle ground for health care cost containment and our long term deficit problems. Neither party has a reasonable plan for addressing the issue. What is certain, though, is that seniors will press the issue. They are major consumers of health care, on fixed incomes and are extremely sensitive to changes in health insurance coverage, cost and out of pocket liabilities.

It is a can of worms that both candidates should be very careful about opening. The Republican Ryan plan is nothing more than passing the problem onto seniors. We can’t pay for it, you pay for it. It was and will remain DOA. The Obama Democratic non-plan is death by a thousand cuts.

Frankly, however, I for one, am pleased that the issue has come to the forefront. It is time that there is some real debate on the issue.

Royal said:

“That’s true, Medicare has been a dem rallying point for decades of elections. They always painted Reps as trying to end or cripple it and themselves as the saviors. Now, we have found obama and his cronies with their hand in the Medicare cookie jar stealing from the very program they say they wish to save.”

Royal, the funny thing is, if the left had not attacked Ryan and his Medicare budget proposals, the door would have never been opened to the discussion of Obama stealing money from Medicare to fun obamacare. But when Ryan took up the banner and declared the truth, the left was forced to respond to the questions of the media, and the media was forced to ask questions. We have the examples of Axelrod, Shultz and other liberal talking heads trying their best to move the conversation back to Bain. But as was said a few weeks ago, the Bain conversation meant nothing; it was simply a talking point to change the subject. After awhile the lies catch up with the left and they’re left with bumbling answers.

Here’s another Obama example of his complete incompetence:

“Examiner Editorial: To protect ethanol, Obama seeks to inflate meat prices”

http://washingtonexaminer.com/examiner-editorial-to-protect-ethanol-obama-seeks-to-inflate-meat-prices/article/2504906#.UCu5291lREP

I told a farmer friend two weeks ago; with drought conditions and corn crops devastated, the smart thing for Obama to do would be cancel the ethanol additive, this would allow the remainder of the corn crop to be use as feed or food. But Obama is not smart, his actions with ethanol show his complete incompetence and his actions will drive up the cost of food.

C&J is completely correct; Obama wants to destroy Medicare and replace it with obamacare. That way, the working Americans can continue to pay for a program that will provide HC for those who won’t work.

Re/Adam Ducker’s and Stephen Daugherty’s comments on Medicare and SS; the Democrats have used Medicare and SS in every election cycle for the past 40 years. If there is one thing that can be counted on; it’s that Democrats will try to scare old people every time we come up on an election. Adam and Stephen think this is something new; but it’s been going on since before Adam and Stephen were shitting yellow in their pampers.

Rich

“Medicare will be the battle ground for health care cost containment and our long term deficit problems. Neither party has a reasonable plan for addressing the issue.”

This is right. The statement that neither party has a good plan is also right. Therefore, when Obama attacks on this issue, we need to hit back, lest people think he really can do better than he has and/or his lies about Republicans are true.

IMO - Republicans need to be on offensive and not allow the Obama camp to define the issues. So rather than refute Obama camp lies, I plan to hit back.

Rich and Frank

It is true that the Obama attacks went over the top. It gives Republicans a chance to neutralize this issue. Neither side has a great plan. OF the two, the Obama plan will destroy Medicare as we know it faster and with more fewer options for seniors.

Rich:

“The long term funding problems of Medicare are entirely due to health care cost inflation outstripping general inflation. The conservative Ryan budget recognizes that factor and addresses the problem by simply limiting Medicare outlays to general inflation. What a great solution! We cannot afford it, you seniors will have to pick up the tab.”

There are two ways to limit healthcare costs. One is described above. This method will help drive down costs by limiting the amount people can pay. It may limit inflation of costs and certainly may make people more careful consumers (e.g., x-ray instead of CAT scan). This method still provides some level of individual choice.

The other way of limiting health care costs is to have the government dictate appropriate procedures and their cost. This is the method included in the ACA. Cynically, I have not seen much evidence that our elected representatives would have enough backbone to actually do this, based on evidence, and as long as the Chinese will buy our bonds. The long term prediction for going forward with this plan is a crisis a few years down the road.

“Obama wants to destroy Medicare and replace it with obamacare.”

Frank,

Ironically, that is basically what the Ryan plan is for Medicare. The government would issue vouchers that would be used to purchase private insurance meeting minimal gov. standards on a health exchange. Low income seniors’ vouchers would be subsidized by gov. The basic voucher amount would be capped at a level consistent with general inflation not at a level consistent with health care inflation.

Most critics are not concerned about the voucher program and private insurance providers for Medicare. We already have that with Medicare Advantage plans. It is popular. Almost a quarter of Medicare participants are currently enrolled in such private plans with Medicare paying an annual fee (voucher) for participants.

The sticky point of the Ryan plan is the proposal to tie the amount of the voucher to general inflation rather than the much higher rate of health care inflation. This will result (CBO) in much higher health care costs being passed onto seniors.

The Ryan plan is a deficit reduction plan. Pure and simple. It is designed to reduce future anticipated Medicare outlays exceeding general inflation. It does so by passing the anticipated costs onto seniors.

There is nothing very clever or unique about Ryan’s Medicare reform proposals. We already have the voucher approach and private competitive insurance providers (Medicare Advantage).

Frank: “Adam and Stephen think this is something new; but it’s been going on since before Adam and Stephen were shitting yellow in their pampers.”

Look. Everyone here notices how every day your comments become less informative and more filled with crudeness and personal attacks. You should dial that back a couple of notches before everyone just starts to ignore your ramblings completely. It’s your call really.

Mike in Tampa,

I agree that we are facing a crisis down the road. I don’t think either approach is capable of addressing the problem fully.

The Ryan blunt instrument approach of simply cutting off Medicare reimbursement in the future at the level of general inflation has the advantage of forcing the health care industry to adjust its costs and services to what the market will be able to bear in the future. The negative of that side of the coin is that investment in medical technology, pharmaceuticals, and other advances will dramatically slow. It will also be a massive shock to an economy in which health care is a huge component of GDP. Also, as you point out, consumer expectations of health services will have to be significantly lowered, particularly for seniors.

I might also note that the Ryan approach to management of Medicare reimbursement by linking it to general cost inflation is not unique. It is already the law for physician reimbursement under Medicare/Medicaid. But, it has never actually been implemented. Each year, Congress has passed a waiver of implementation and raised physician reimbursement rates consistent with health care inflation.

The ACA approach of attempting to finesse changes with reimbursements tied to effective or best practice research, expert review panels, limitations on overhead costs, end of life management, etc. runs into the traditional problems of government inertia. Good ideas tend to get buried in bureaucracy and vested interests.

I don’t see any proposals today that will fully address the problem. However, it is clear that we will have to address the problem.

Rich, Thank you for your calculated honesty with regard to this issue. Following it at traditional outlets seems to be deliberately confusing as evidenced by other more politically motivated posters within this thread. I for one have grown tired of the endless contortions of truth just to satisfy a political need. The politics make the issue entertaining but does little to address any true progress in relation to the real issue at hand. It is truly a pleasure and very refreshing to read an opinion and actually garner some real understanding and relevance in regard to the issue at hand.

I will carry your information over to some local discussion areas and see how well it fits into the mold. Just like here I don’t have much expectation of it surviving the political need for deliberate controversy that serves an agenda beyond the actual issue. Thanks again!

Romney: My Medicare plan is ‘the same if not identical’ to Ryan’s

From the link:

“I understand that this is a Republican talking point because I’ve heard it repeated over and over again,” O’Brien observed. “These numbers have been debunked, as you know, by the Congressional Budget Office. … I can tell you what it says. [Obama’s plan] cuts a reduction in the expect rate of growth, which you know, not cutting budgets to the elderly. Benefits will be improved.”

“Soledad, stop this!” Sununu shouted. “All you’re doing is mimicking the stuff that comes out of the White House and gets repeated on the Democratic blog boards out there. … Put an Obama bumper sticker on your forehead when you do this!”

“You know, let me tell you something,” O’Brien said. “There is independent analysis that details what this is about. … And name calling to me and somehow by you repeating a number of $716 billion, that you can make that stick when [you say] that figure is being ‘stolen’ from Medicare, that’s not true. You can’t just repeat it and make it true, sir.”

But of course, this is going to be repeated constantly by people on the right, here, there, and everywhere in an effort to try to make it sound as though it is true. And when and if you try to correct them with the facts they aren’t going to be interested. They know damn well that they are all lying, but when people call them on that they’re going to deny it, and it’s pretty likely they will also be called names.

Let’s face facts: name calling is something that the Right does now with ever increasing frequency — most especially every time these people are telling bold faced lies. It’s not just here in Watchblog that things are becoming so ugly. People like John Sununu now sound like internet trolls and actually feel free to do this to media people interviewing them on television. And, it’s not just when they’re unleashing insane yet typical amounts of farcical fury on Fox.

Adam to resident troll Frank the Crank:

Look. Everyone here notices how every day your comments become less informative and more filled with crudeness and personal attacks. You should dial that back a couple of notches before everyone just starts to ignore your ramblings completely. It’s your call really.

He doesn’t care, Adam. Not only is Frank the Crank a TROLL, but he and lots of the other rightwing trolls in this blog are taking their cues from what they’re seeing in the media from prominent rightwing figures all the time now.

I honestly think that folks on the left have to stop being so nice in the face of all this lying and name calling that is coming from the right. When these people shameless lie to us about everything they are disrespecting all of us. Disrespecting our intelligence and our ability to read and understand the actual facts. When people call us names with the assumption that we’re all too polite and well mannered to call them names back, they’re only taking advantage of all of us, and using our preference for refined behavior and civility against us.

When we see things like this:

Adam Ducker now officially qualifies for the Stephen Daugherty “Dumbass” statement

We should be able to tell them how mannerless, batshit crazy, and transparently dishonest we all know they are.

Here’s another link — you really have to watch the video.
Tim Pawlenty is trying to lie and spin on Medicare, but again, Soledad O’Brien understands the GOP is lying and tries to call it out as such, and is once more insulted, with Pawlenty suggesting that O’Brien doesn’t understand English.

This is hilarious. Paul Ryan is turning himself into a pretzel on Medicare:

Quote:

Paul Ryan, in his ongoing evolution from active supporter to newfound critic of the Affordable Care Act’s $716 billion in Medicare savings, now claims he actually opposed the cuts before he embraced them (and then turned against them again later).

I don’t see any proposals today that will fully address the problem. However, it is clear that we will have to address the problem.

Exactly Rich. And further, one person’s “plan” is never the final solution in a Representative Republic such as ours. It can’t be and just look at the ACA as a perfect example.

You can’t vote the plan, you can only vote the agenda. Which team is going to engage in what will be a bloody fight?

Why do some dems and libs not wish to require proper identification of voters? It puzzles me. How would folks at the polling place even know if the person is old enough to vote without an ID?

Is identification not required to collect welfare benefits? Why is that? Well…my guess is to prevent fraud. Fraud still exists, but my assumption is that it is less than it would be without requiring an ID.

obama’s executive order regarding some illegals, allowing them to legally reside here, requires not only proper identification, but much more. Why is that?

How do the folks at the polling place know if the person wishing to vote is legally allowed to vote if no ID is required? With no ID requirement how would we even detect fraud?

Rich: “Ironically, that is basically what the Ryan plan is for Medicare. The government would issue vouchers that would be used to purchase private insurance meeting minimal gov. standards on a health exchange. Low income seniors’ vouchers would be subsidized by gov. The basic voucher amount would be capped at a level consistent with general inflation not at a level consistent with health care inflation.”

Rich, I do not have a problem with a voucher program, and my understanding is that it would be just like the program that Federal Politicians have. I have never heard the politicians complain that costs have surpassed their vouchers. I do have a problem with Obama’s plan because it does away with Medicare and replaces it with a system paid for by working people and supplies HC to those who do not work or who are illegal aliens. The Ryan program would not affect those 55 years and older, including the many great generation and baby boomers already on Medicare.

“Most critics are not concerned about the voucher program and private insurance providers for Medicare. We already have that with Medicare Advantage plans. It is popular. Almost a quarter of Medicare participants are currently enrolled in such private plans with Medicare paying an annual fee (voucher) for participants.”

Medicare Advantage has some good points, but Medicare Advantage is one of those programs on the chopping block as part of obamacare. I know many seniors who are on Medicare, but refused to use the Advantage program because of its uncertainty. Advantage also has some pitfalls that the regular Medicare program plus a supplemental HC insurance does not have. So many choose to pick up Medicare A and B and pay for a supplemental insurance plan as well.

“The sticky point of the Ryan plan is the proposal to tie the amount of the voucher to general inflation rather than the much higher rate of health care inflation. This will result (CBO) in much higher health care costs being passed onto seniors.”

This is not just the problem with vouchers. Seniors are already suffering from the lack of accurate inflation numbers. SS and RR retirement COLA’s are based upon inflation and inflation is falsely calculated. When the cost of food and energy is not included in the inflation numbers, how can you ever get a real inflation number? Lower and middleclass senior’s main cost is food and energy. If we get the correct cost of living numbers, then allowances for Medicare vouchers and SS will be taken care of.

“The Ryan plan is a deficit reduction plan. Pure and simple. It is designed to reduce future anticipated Medicare outlays exceeding general inflation. It does so by passing the anticipated costs onto seniors.”

Rich, Ryan has presented a plan and Obama has not. Every election cycle we hear politicians talk about fixing Medicare and SS, but NOTHING is ever done. Obama has, in the past, talked the same talk, but nothing…at least Ryan has presented a plan; it does not mean his plan will be accepted. In fact, the Ryan Plan was shot down in the Senate, but it did receive a few Democrat votes; Obama’s budget, which contained very little on Medicare and SS, was also shot down in the Senate, with no Democrat support.

Adrienne said:

“Adam to resident troll Frank the Crank:

“Look. Everyone here notices how every day your comments become less informative and more filled with crudeness and personal attacks. You should dial that back a couple of notches before everyone just starts to ignore your ramblings completely. It’s your call really.”

He doesn’t care, Adam. Not only is Frank the Crank a TROLL, but he and lots of the other rightwing trolls in this blog are taking their cues from what they’re seeing in the media from prominent rightwing figures all the time now.

I honestly think that folks on the left have to stop being so nice in the face of all this lying and name calling that is coming from the right. When these people shameless lie to us about everything they are disrespecting all of us. Disrespecting our intelligence and our ability to read and understand the actual facts. When people call us names with the assumption that we’re all too polite and well mannered to call them names back, they’re only taking advantage of all of us, and using our preference for refined behavior and civility against us.”

Adrienne, your right, I don’t care. I believe turnabout is fair play. I have been listening to the left attack the right ever since the Democrats lost a 40 year control of the Congress. You talk about the name calling as if it is the worst think that has ever happened; yet the left has attacked, lied, and basically said the foulest things about conservatives. You personally Adrienne, have attacked Christians and called the Tea Party tea baggers for the past 2 years. Biden just spoke before an African American group and accused Republicans of wanting to place blacks in chains and back under slavery. As an African-America, I find it very sick; but I’m not the only one offended; there are many black leaders who are outraged over Biden’s comments. But, you will not side with the bipartisan complaints that Obama crossed the line on this one, you will defend him and at the same time speak outrage at the way conservatives are talking.

To all on the left; the winds of real change are coming. Conservatives are talking back contrl of their own party and liberals are being exposed for what they are.

Frank the Crank,
It doesn’t matter whether the clueless idiot Baggers take over the entire country, because you’ll still be the idiots who drove this nation into the ditch. The Tea Party simply doesn’t have the intelligence to lead America into any kind of a decent future. One way or another the vast majority of the American people WILL get wise to the dangers of Tea Bagger idiocy, and reject your brand of extremism eventually.

Just like Americans eventually rejected Father Coughlin when he began supporting the Fascists prior to WWII. Just like Americans eventually rejected the McCarthy witch hunts. Just like Americans eventually rejected the John Birch Society.

Frank,

You seem to miss an important point about the Ryan Medicare plan: it will, by design, cut government (Medicare) financial support for senior health services.

The whole point of the plan is to eliminate government expenditures in Medicare above general inflation rates.

Since health care has double the normal inflation rate, it would have a substantial impact on the long term deficit which is primarily driven by skyrocketing health costs incurred by Medicare.

Ryan’s proposal would be great for the federal deficit but not so good for fixed income seniors required to pick up the inflationary costs.

While Ryan’s proposal was DOA, it has the value of presenting a very unpleasant problem to the American public, namely that unless something is done about health care inflation and financing, there will not be sufficient funds in Medicare to pay for the current or even basic array of services for seniors in the future.

I might add, that while the focus is on Medicare, it is not unique to Medicare. It is a problem effecting all health insurance providers, i.e., group employer plans, individual insurance, etc.

If Medicare goes down, then so will all insurance plans.

Adrienne, what is “clueless”, “idiotic”, and “extreme” about people who are paying taxes and believe their taxes should not increase? Is our position really unintelligent? Is the intelligent position a desire to pay more taxes?

I understand that one can not be (T)axed (E)nough (A)lready if they pay little or no taxes, but why do you call us idiots who are paying the most in taxes?

What is so noble, giving, caring, and intelligent about those who receive the necessities of life (food, clothing and shelter) at taxpayer expense. I have paid taxes of all kinds for 53 years now. I have yet to hear one person who is living off my taxes say thank you to me or any other taxpayer. What we receive instead is ridicule and chastisement for not paying more to support their desired lifestyle. Why is that?

Adrienne

Tea Party has been very peaceful and is made up of mostly good people.

You defended those Occupy Wall Street people, many of whom were violent, virtually all of whom were dirty and who made a mess wherever they went.

I saw the pig-style left by the OWS in Washington and took a picture which I posted on this blog.

So you may disagree with Tea Party politics, but you really should lay off the name calling unless you don’t believe in the right of peaceful protest and responsible disagreement.

RF:

Is our position really unintelligent?

Yes, it is.

Is the intelligent position a desire to pay more taxes?

The intelligent position is to get the rich to pay their fair share of taxes. Currently they don’t (for example, Mitt Romney’s 13% tax rate is far lower than the average tax rate of most Americans).
There are also too many ways for the rich to engage in tax evasion and tax avoidance (For example, Mitt Romney’s offshore tax havens/shelters with Swiss Bank Accounts, and accounts in the Caymans, Bermuda and Panama), so the intelligent position would be to acknowledge this fact. Indeed, the latest studies claim that tax evasion costs the US $500 Billion per year. That’s a hell of a lot of money.

Only incredibly stupid people would choose to focus on the infinitesimally small amount that goes toward welfare programs for the neediest people in US, while totally ignoring, or even making excuses for, the enormous amounts of money that America’s rich hide from the US Treasury.

More on the article topic: Mitt’s dishonesty regarding Medicare:

Mitt Romney: Paul Ryan Medicare Plan And Mine Are The Same, ‘If Not Identical’

Romney initially misstated the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the cost increase — $716 billion — that a repeal of the Obama health care law would entail for Medicare over 10 years. That reduction doesn’t come from patient care, but changes in hospital payments and Medicare Advantage payments to private insurers.

Romney did not answer why he did not object to the $716 billion cut when it was included among the savings in Ryan’s proposal.

“I think the $716 billion that our seniors have paid for should stay with our seniors’ program. It should be restored to the Medicare trust fund … to make its solvency last longer,” he said.

That’s precisely the opposite of what would happen, according to an analysis by the Associated Press. Repealing Obama’s health care law would cause the Medicare trust fund to become insolvent eight years earlier, in 2016, rather than in 2024 if it were to stay in place.

Adrienne just loves to be wrong on so many issues. She talks as tho she lived during the 30’s 40’s and 50’s and you can tell by the vile stuff.

I presume you are talking about Charlie McCarthy or maybe Eugene McCarthy. You did not make it clear about the person you spoke about.

The John Birch Society has not been rejected by people. It is alive and well. Again you come up with some really unintelligent remarks. Getting to be a habit I guess.

Maranatha

Rich; “The whole point of the plan is to eliminate government expenditures in Medicare above general inflation rates.”

Yes it is, because the current system is failing.

“Since health care has double the normal inflation rate, it would have a substantial impact on the long term deficit which is primarily driven by skyrocketing health costs incurred by Medicare.

Ryan’s proposal would be great for the federal deficit but not so good for fixed income seniors required to pick up the inflationary costs.”

I believe I answered this question earlier.

“While Ryan’s proposal was DOA, it has the value of presenting a very unpleasant problem to the American public, namely that unless something is done about health care inflation and financing, there will not be sufficient funds in Medicare to pay for the current or even basic array of services for seniors in the future.”

So does the non-existent Ryan plan do away with payments into Medicare, even if vouchers are given to those who chose to get them?

Another question; what happens to the cost of insurance premiums when people are given vouchers and the Insurance companies have to compete?

Adrienne:
“The intelligent position is to get the rich to pay their fair share of taxes. Currently they don’t (for example, Mitt Romney’s 13% tax rate is far lower than the average tax rate of most Americans).
There are also too many ways for the rich to engage in tax evasion and tax avoidance (For example, Mitt Romney’s offshore tax havens/shelters with Swiss Bank Accounts, and accounts in the Caymans, Bermuda and Panama), so the intelligent position would be to acknowledge this fact. Indeed, the latest studies claim that tax evasion costs the US $500 Billion per year. That’s a hell of a lot of money.

Only incredibly stupid people would choose to focus on the infinitesimally small amount that goes toward welfare programs for the neediest people in US, while totally ignoring, or even making excuses for, the enormous amounts of money that America’s rich hide from the US Treasury.”

No, only incredibly stupid people fail to understand the difference between Federal Income Tax and Capital Gains Taxes. This is an example of the left’s raw hatred toward those who have created wealth for themselves and others.

I would suggest some of the neediest people in the US get off their lazy asses and get a job and stop expecting handouts from everyone else. I’m trying my best to be courteous, but Adrienne, your comments are really ignorant when it comes to economics.

Coach Handbags are one of the most popular designed bags all over the world. Giving you an overview of the various handbags you can verify, you will know that when you are talking about luxury bags, do not forget the

Be caution just for this particular season because it’s when you’ll get to find 50% discounts or far more than that. So you’d better start making plans for that Coach Purse, handbags or wallets you’ve often wanted but never got the chance to buy because the price was too high.

“So does the non-existent Ryan plan do away with payments into Medicare, even if vouchers are given to those who chose to get them?” No

“Another question; what happens to the cost of insurance premiums when people are given vouchers and the Insurance companies have to compete?” Well, there already is that experiment. It is called Medicare Advantage. According to some recent studies, the private insurance companies cost about 117% of Original Medicare for comparable services.

Rich, I am on Medicare Part A and B, but I chose to buy a supplemental policy which covers what Medicare doesn’t cover. I chose from many competing HC insurance companies and the differences were in the $100’s each month for the premium.

Re/Medicare Advantage; there are different plans to chose from, depending on what kind of coverage you want, but:

“Medicare pays a fixed amount for your care every month to the companies offering Medicare Advantage Plans. These companies must follow rules set by Medicare. However, each Medicare Advantage Plan can charge different out-of-pocket costs and have different rules for how you get services (like whether you need a referral to see a specialist or if you have to go to only doctors, facilities, or suppliers that belong to the plan for non emergency or non-urgent care). These rules can change each year.”

http://www.medicare.gov/navigation/medicare-basics/medicare-benefits/part-c.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

So it is not the individual who chooses the insurance plan, it is Medicare who picks from “approved” providers. When the government gets involved in the process, competition goes out the door. So Medicare Advantage is nothing like the proposed voucher system. But it doesn’t matter, because the Democrats in the Senate shot down this Bill.

Jack:

Occupy Wall Street

Hey, thanks for mentioning how the 1% have been waging class warfare on the 99%.

humes:

I presume you are talking about Charlie McCarthy or maybe Eugene McCarthy.

Senator Joe McCarthy — much less entertaining than the former, and way, way more stupid than the latter.

The John Birch Society has not been rejected by people. It is alive and well.

It’s always been rejected by decent, intelligent people. Although it may well have been revived again with the advent of the idiot Tea Baggers.

Again you come up with some really unintelligent remarks. Getting to be a habit I guess.

You’re a complete idiot, and your habit is being a troll.

Frank the Crank:

Federal Income Tax

We’ve seen only one year of Mitt’s Federal Income Taxes. He needs to show the nation at least a few more years if he wants to be taken seriously. He keeps coming out and saying “trust me, I’ve paid a lot of taxes” and then again refuses to provide actual proof of his claims. It’s so hysterical and ridiculous! America doesn’t owe Mitt Romney their trust — he has to prove he’s trustworthy FOR US. If he really wants to become president he needs show the nation at the very least five years of tax returns. Otherwise, no one should trust him. And he needs to stop talking about how former presidential candidate and fellow filthy rich guy John McCain only showed the nation two years — because nobody trusted McCain either, and he lost the election.
No, because Mittens continues to refuse to give more than a year he appears to be petrified about what those returns will reveal — and Americans should therefore assume the worst. In fact, he’s waited so long, they already do.

Just today Mittens came out and said: “The fascination with taxes I’ve paid I find to be very small-minded compared to the broad issues that we face.”
He’s not fooling America with that stuff. They’re the kinds of statements that only make him look like he’s doing a poor job of covering up his fear.

Capital Gains Taxes.

When Mittens released his 2010 return, it showed that he paid an effective tax rate of 13.9 percent on more than $21 million in income, most of it from capital gains and dividends. We don’t know as much as we really should about the mountains of money he’s been hiding in all those tax havens/shelters.

This is an example of the left’s raw hatred toward those who have created wealth for themselves and others.

Oh, so wanting to see Mitt’s returns is hatred? Nope, sorry idiot, it’s just refusing to be stupid by merely taking the word of someone who became insanely wealthy being a corporate raider and putting Americans out of work. A guy who has already proven himself to be a prolific and indeed chronic, liar. A guy who we know has been hiding tons of money in tax shelters and havens all over the globe.

I would suggest some of the neediest people in the US get off their lazy asses and get a job and stop expecting handouts from everyone else.

There are no jobs. Too many rich guys like Mitt Romney have outsourced too many American jobs, and continue to do so. Now what? Let people starve, and drop dead in the streets, right? Isn’t that how all you heartless and brutal Social Darwinists think?
Yeah, that’s brilliant idea — hungry, desperate people are how every single revolution against the greedy heartless rich have begun in the history of the world.
And, you rich Tea Baggers are sure to be the first targets — because the majority of you are rich enough to be loudmouthed, arrogant, thoughtless and cruel, yet not quite wealthy enough to have private security companies protecting you.

I’m trying my best to be courteous

You clearly know nothing about courtesy. Nothing.

but Adrienne, your comments are really ignorant when it comes to economics.

You’re the ignoramus — on every subject.
And that happens to be a prerequisite for becoming a relentless troll like yourself — suffering from a lot of intellectual insecurity.

So according to Adrienne, Romney should be paying income tax instead of capital gains tax on his investments.

Also, Adrienne is now calling for 5 years of tax returns. We have heard the call for 5 years, 10 years, 11 years, 12 years, 20 years, and all of his tax returns. Will the real leftist call for Romney’s tax returns please stand up? Why would Adrienne now call for 5 years; the answer is found in the daily Obama talking points:

“Obama campaign to Romney: Release five years of tax returns, and we’ll call truce on tax issue

An Obama campaign official offered to end criticism of Mitt Romney over his taxes if Romney will release five years’ worth of tax returns, instead of the two years he has already made public…

“Governor Romney apparently fears that the more he offers, the more our campaign will demand that he provide,” Messina said in the letter.

“So I am prepared to provide assurances on just that point: if the Governor will release five years of returns, I commit in turn that we will not criticize him for not releasing more - neither in ads nor in other public communications or commentary for the rest of the campaign.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/obama-campaign-romney-release-years-tax-returns-ll-call-truce-tax-issue-article-1.1138398#ixzz23oeRDkpe

Who believes this? Obama is trying to bring the conversation back to Romney’s taxes and away from his record. America has moved on and the left has not received the memo yet.

The intelligent position is to get the rich to pay their fair share of taxes. Currently they don’t (for example, Mitt Romney’s 13% tax rate is far lower than the average tax rate of most Americans).

Actually, that’s not true at all.

http://factcheck.org/2012/08/does-romney-pay-a-lower-rate-in-taxes-than-you/

a report based on 2009 IRS tax data that found 97 percent of American tax filers paid a lower rate of income tax than Romney did. The bottom 40 percent of tax filers pay no income tax at all, or receive a refund, Hodge told us in a phone interview, and so “by definition, those people are paying less than Mitt Romney.” On average people making between $100,000 and $200,000 paid about 12 percent in federal income taxes. That’s less than Romney’s 13.9 percent, and people making less than $200,000 represent more than 97 percent of all tax filers.

“Clearly the vast majority pay less than Romney,” Hodge said.

rhinehold; good Lord man, you have just subjected yourself to a real tongue lashing from Adrienne for providing facts in answer to her comment. She don’t do facts very well; unless they come from liberal blog sites.

Business Insider:
David Simon Explains Why So Many Jaws Dropped When Mitt Romney Said He Had Never Paid Less Than A 13% Tax Rate

Quote:

Romney confirmed what most people have long assumed, which is that he pays an extraordinarily low tax rate for someone who makes so much money.

Second, because the tax rate that Romney seemed proud to have paid was a lower tax rate than lots of vastly less wealthy Americans pay.

Also from Business Insider:
Here’s What I Think Romney Is Hiding By Refusing To Release His Tax Returns

For what it’s worth, my guess is that what Romney is hiding in his tax returns is not something that is clearly illegal or dishonest, but, simply the following reality:

* Romney has made hundreds of millions of dollars
He has paid very little of that (on a percentage basis) in taxes
* He has made hundreds of millions of dollars in part because he has structured most of his income in ways that enable him to pay the least amount of taxes possible
* This “structuring” of income has likely taken full advantage of things like the ludicrous “carried interest” tax exemption that allows private-equity investors to pay capital gains taxes on income that is actually fees [This tax treatment is one of the most outrageous and unfair elements in the entire tax code. There is no logical basis for it, and it benefits only the richest people in the country.]
* This “structuring” has also likely taken advantage of offshore accounts, the contribution of hard-to-value securities at low valuations to Romney’s IRA (whereupon they exploded in value), and other sophisticated tools. These tools are, theoretically, available to anyone, but, in practice, are available only to those with tens of thousands of dollars to spend every year on tax-and-estate planning.
* This structuring, which (let’s be honest) is done primarily to avoid paying taxes, will look bad to most Americans, who will know instinctively that it’s done to avoid paying taxes and that it’s not something they will ever be able to afford to do—and, therefore, will seem unfair.

Report: A quarter of U.S. millionaires pay taxes at a lower rate than some in middle class

All told, 94,500 millionaires paid a smaller share of their income in taxes than 10 million households with moderate incomes, the report found.

Millionaires, on average, paid about 30 percent of their income in federal taxes, while households earning less than $100,000 paid closer to 19 percent.

But the averages hide wide variations within income categories, Hungerford wrote, with millionaires paying anywhere from 24 percent to more than 35 percent of their income in federal taxes. The lower tax bills are primarily the result of low tax rates on investment income, such as capital gains and dividends.

Although ordinary earnings are subject to payroll taxes as well as income tax rates as high as 35 percent, investment income — which constitutes the bulk of earnings for many very wealthy households — is taxed at no more than 15 percent.

Mitt Romney: 13.9 tax rate

Romney and GOP: don’t get into any specifics on Medicare and our intention to decimate the easy to use, well run program with our crappy, flawed voucher plan! Letting America in on any details is political suicide.

Adrienne writes; “The intelligent position is to get the rich to pay their fair share of taxes.”

This was in answer to my statement that the TEA party believes that we are taxed enough already. She now changes the subject to taxes on the rich.

Adrienne may disagree with the TEA party regarding taxes but that will hardly change our belief.

And then, there is always the subject of what is the “fair share”. Liberals seem to know what is fair and what is not better than anyone else. Why is that?

I will ask Adrienne a question that I really don’t expect her to answer.

Adrienne, what percentage on your own earnings did you pay in taxes last year? Do you feel what you paid (or received) in taxes was fair?

Frank,

There is no basic difference between the current Medicare Advantage plans and Ryan’s proposed voucher plan. In both instances, the government (Medicare) provides a fixed amount that it will pay to a private provider chosen by the Medicare eligible individual. In Ryan’s proposal from an approved list of insurers meeting certain minimal coverage standards on a health exchange set up by the government. In the current case of Medicare Advantage from an approved list of providers on an exchange managed by Medicare.

Rich, there is a difference; the so called Ryan plan is just like the plan that Federal politicians have; they can choose and shop around for whatever ins policy they want. The recipients of the voucher (VOUCHER GOES TO RECIPIENT) use the voucher to pay for their insurance, (THE RECIPIENT PAYS FOR THE INSURANCE WITH THE VOUCHER).

Medicare Advantage insurance policies ARE PAID FOR BY MEDICARE, and the money never touches the hands of the recipient.

In fact, the insurance that Federal Politicians have, when paid for by the voucher, if they get insurance for less than what the voucher is for, they get to keep the extra money.

Admit it rich, you have no idea what you are talking about. But, as I said, it doesn’t matter; there is no Ryan plan, it was voted down by the Democrats in the Senate.

“Admit it rich, you have no idea what you are talking about.”

Frank,

How about canning the insults. If you actually took the time to read Ryan’s Medicare proposal you would not be so certain of your position. In the most simple terms, Ryan proposes to give everyone Medicare eligible a voucher of a certain fixed amount that can only be used to purchase an insurance program on a government market, i.e., health exchange. Those insurance programs offered on the market must meet certain minimal standards established by the government. By the way, you aren’t actually going to get cash under the voucher program, you are going to get a credit that can be used to purchase on the exchange.

You can try to counter facts with opinion all day, Adrienne, but you are wasting your time. The facts are clear that 97% of the citizens in the US paid a lower percentage tax rate than Romney.

Adrienne

“But the averages hide wide variations” This is the nature of average. Of course, I think that the better measure is the median, but in this case it is about the same.

But let’s get to the hard part. Most of the time, half of all people are below average. This will never change. Exactly half of all people are below the median, always.

The article you sight is dishonest or ignorant of how statistics work.You can tell an article re statistics is dishonest when they move from talking about averages to talking about some.

Let’s talk some statistic truth about things you like.

The average woman is paid less than the average man, but SOME women are paid very much more than the average man. This is true. Does it mean anything to you?

How about this - the average man has fewer than two legs. This is statistically true.

Now let’s talk about tax rates. Who pays more, a man earning $1 million who pays a 10% rate or a man who earns $50,000 who pays a 30% rate?

Who has more left over to spend on food and shelter once taxes are paid C&J?

j2t2, that seems irrelevant, I suppose the best way to ensure ‘fairness’ if that is the way of measuring it would be to put all ‘income’ into a central governmental agency and give everyone the same amount every week no matter what they do, if anything.

I don’t think that system will be very good though.

j2t2

Nobody really has trouble affording food in the U.S. Those that would have trouble can get food stamps.

If you earn $50,000 a year, you should have no trouble buying food and shelter, unless you live in Manhattan, or you have 10 kids or you are the unluckiest person in the world.

Besides, my example is to illustrate the math. I person earning $50,000 will be in the 15% bracket. If that was you Taxable income (after dependents etc) you would pay $6654, which is about 13% of that income, but If you earn $50,000 gross, you will be in a much lower tax group and probably will pay no taxes or even get money back from the government.

Again, if you have a taxable income of $50,000, you have enough left over for food and shelter if you act in any kind of reasonable way.

seo , | ar condicionado automotivo, http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php ar,ar condicionado automotivo, http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php, de ar bomb ar condicionado automotivo | | | http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php | http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php ! ! ! seo fuck http://google.com.br | http://google.com.br http://google.com.br ar condicionado automotivo, de ar condicionado automotivo ar,ar condicionado automotivo, ar condicionado automotivo,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar ar de carro, de ar bomb ar condicionado automotivo | | | | | | | , , , , http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php , , - ar condicionado automotivo, de ar condicionado automotivo ar,ar condicionado automotivo, ar condicionado automotivo,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar ar de carro, de ar bomb ar condicionado automotivo | | | | | | | ! ! ! ! | ! ! ar condicionado automotivo, de ar condicionado automotivo ar,ar condicionado automotivo, seo fuck ar condicionado automotivo,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php, de ar bomb http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php | | | http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php | | | , , , , , ,seo fuck ,
seo , | ar condicionado automotivo, http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php ar,ar condicionado automotivo, http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php, de ar bomb ar condicionado automotivo | | | http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php | http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php ! ! ! seo fuck http://google.com.br | http://google.com.br http://google.com.br ar condicionado automotivo, de ar condicionado automotivo ar,ar condicionado automotivo, ar condicionado automotivo,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar ar de carro, de ar bomb ar condicionado automotivo | | | | | | | , , , , http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php , , - ar condicionado automotivo, de ar condicionado automotivo ar,ar condicionado automotivo, ar condicionado automotivo,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar ar de carro, de ar bomb ar condicionado automotivo | | | | | | | ! ! ! ! | ! ! ar condicionado automotivo, de ar condicionado automotivo ar,ar condicionado automotivo, seo fuck ar condicionado automotivo,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php, de ar bomb http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php | | | http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php | | | , , , , , ,seo fuck ,

seo , | ar condicionado automotivo, http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php ar,ar condicionado automotivo, http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php, de ar bomb ar condicionado automotivo | | | http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php | http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php ! ! ! seo fuck http://google.com.br | http://google.com.br http://google.com.br ar condicionado automotivo, de ar condicionado automotivo ar,ar condicionado automotivo, ar condicionado automotivo,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar ar de carro, de ar bomb ar condicionado automotivo | | | | | | | , , , , http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php , , - ar condicionado automotivo, de ar condicionado automotivo ar,ar condicionado automotivo, ar condicionado automotivo,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar ar de carro, de ar bomb ar condicionado automotivo | | | | | | | ! ! ! ! | ! ! ar condicionado automotivo, de ar condicionado automotivo ar,ar condicionado automotivo, seo fuck ar condicionado automotivo,-,ar condicionado automotivo,- ar condicionado automotivo, carro ar http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php, de ar bomb http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php | | | http://nikweinstein.com/cl/google.php | | | , , , , , ,seo fuck ,