Seniors, Health Reform and the AARP

Being over 65 and not at all senile, I resent the agist responses noted here and in other Blogs.

If HR becomes a bill that enriches the established, I will be against it. If it omits a public option, it should be sunk. Perhaps when we are desperate we will go with a single-payer which to this old f*rt who happens to be a retired M.D. is the only long-term option.

Ignorant people are easy to scare. They become increasingly irrational as they grow older. The Republican party is case-in-point.

Don't miss something here though. Older people grew up trusting the news media. Now our news media takes something that an idiot posts on her facebook page and leads with it for weeks and weeks. When journalists writing about health care reform start passing out blame for why seniors are "confused" or "scared" they ought to start off with an apology for not doing their damn job.

Try scaring me, twit.

We simply don't trust people such as you to run our lives.

Sorry t' be breakin' this t' ye, jlbrumb, bu' yer comment b'lievein' anyone wants t' be takin' o'er th' runnin' o' yer life be demonstratin' 'ow out o' touch wi' reality so many seniors be an' 'ow susceptible t' misinformation.
.
yarr.

Just like those DFH Media Matters. Going out their way to do research and debunk sh*t. I hate them.

No one promised you a responsibility free life.

Try doing what I and most other seniors did; pay for your own healthcare insurance and medicare taxes at the same time for 40 years or so.

Then come back to see if anyone values you selfish rational.

I do pay my own healthcare insurance -- despite scouring round for the best coverage I can afford, I still get thousand-dollar bills from the ER when I break a toe. If you're a senior, then apparently you've missed out on the fact that healthcare rates have skyrocketed since you had to pay your way.

"Responsibility free life", is that how you're truly framing it? We're talking about a basic level of healthcare, not a trip to Aruba. Unless of course you're one of those who truly has no problem with people dying in the street if they don't have the money to cure an illness -- are you one of those, jbrumb?

Shorter jlbrumb:
.
Get Off My Lawn!

"So they're just got absolutely no clue of how many people under the age of 50 have totally inadequate healthcare, or how many under 30 have been shuffled into freelancing or contract positions that mean their premiums are sky-high (can't bargain as a group)."
.
No clue? Oh we Seniors have a clue. The clue is clearly defined by Obama.
.
Obama wants to simply cut and gut Medicare, Medicaid and Medicare Advantage so that you may have subsidized healthcare insurance travelingatalanta.
.
How many years have you paid into Medicare travelingatalanta? Have you paid anything at all?
.
You see travelingatalanta, Seniors like us have been paying into Medicare all of our working lives. 30, 40 even 50 years of payments. With the expectation that the money would be there when we need it most in our later years of life.
.
Perhaps instead of advocating for Obama to raid the Medicare program and take that money to fund and subsidize your insurance, you should write to Obama to come up with a different plan of action.
.
Why do you hate your Grandmother and Grandfather, travelingatalanta?

Ha! That's a very Scientology technique, "Why do you hate your grandparents". Sounds just as unhinged in this debate.
.
Yes, I pay taxes, at quite a high bracket too. However I've also been lucky enough to live in the UK, where half of my family (including grandparents) have survived quite well on the NHS. I love the NHS, it's awesome. My aunt loves the NHS, she got a new knee through them. My grandmother lived to the age of 98 with NHS care. Sometimes a procedure takes a little longer than it would in the US, but the option to go OUT of the system and pay to fast-track is always there. Most people don't bother, because staying in is FREE.
.
I know you paid in. But clearly the system that was established is not working. You're running through money like it's going out of style, and the generations following you are getting knocked out by untreated ailments and bankruptcy. Yes, it totally sucks that some of the things you now enjoy through Medicare will be curtailed, but is your other suggestion that we just keep going the way we're going until... Until what? Until the current Medicare patients have passed on? Until the entire system runs out of money? Until the sun goes supernova and solves all of our problems?
.
You do realize you're basically saying "screw you, youngsters -- go into massive debt to give birth, to treat cancers, we don't care if you regain a healthy physical state and lead a productive (and taxpaying) life"? The system is broken. The way to deal with this is not to make sure you got yours, and to hell with the rest.

No travelingatalanta:
.
I am not saying to "screw you youngsters". I am just simply saying that to gut and cut medicare, medicaid and medicare advantage as your "plan" is not the way to create Healthcare Reform.
.
Unfortunately, (and fortunately for you), the US has not had a system in place for healthcare as you say you enjoy in Great Britain.
.
Although I am not in the least a proponent of any healthcare system that mirrors what you have in England or Canada, I do believe that reforms must occur.
.
I even believe that creating an insurance program which puts all non-insured people into a pool together, as one huge health plan would be great. If done properly it would drive down the costs. Is that a cooperative? I don't have those answers. But to simply gut and cut medicare, et al, in order to fund Obama's pipe dream is not worth the risk.
.
The current Administration needs to come up with a Plan. A clearly defined plan, written out and posted on the web so everyone can read how it will affect their lives. Until that happens, no healthcare reform will be realized.

Then we're not actually that far apart, Rusty -- obviously I'd like to see the plan too, and I don't think it's as simple a transaction as gutting Medicare to shore up the uninsured. From what I'm hearing, there are a lot of taxes and loopholes to be rolled back on the top levels of earners (whose margins have gotten pretty shocking over the past 20 years), savings to be made in Medicare, and probably a gradual and escalating scheme that will make the under-50s sacrifice as well. Hell, I'd pay higher taxes for healthcare, happily. But I don't think the White House has been recalcitrant in not putting out a bill before now -- frankly, the amount of venting about total fabrications makes me think that a bill would've gotten trashed if Obama had rolled it out earlier. At least this way, opponents have had to erect their own windmills before tilting at them, and progressives now have a better idea of where the red meat is.
.
But even the idea that a bill would gut Medicare seems to be one of those falsely erected windmills. Who on earth is going to piss off one of the main voting blocs in the US by putting something out there that says their government health will be ruined? It just doesn't make sense, and I'm pretty sure it would never be allowed to happen, which is why the hyperventilating CERTAINTY of the right wing is so weird. It's just plain not going to happen, it's political suicide and wouldn't even get the 50 votes for reconciliation.
.
I'll willing to bet there's $500 million of savings in Medicare, largely in the Medicare Advantage program and places that do not directly affect patients. But we'll see when the bills finally come through. For now, I'd be happy with a national sanity check that some sort of major reform needs to happen soon, or we're shooting ourselves in the (uninsured) foot.

There's a helluva difference between cutting Medicare costs by eliminating giveaways to insurance carriers, and actually cutting Medicare services. I think the former would be a fine idea as a stand-alone proposal, and the latter is pretty much a figment of the fearmongers' creative imaginations intended (with some apparent success) to scare seniors who can't (or won't) grasp that fundamental distinction.

Thank you sgwhiteinfla and Paul.

Along side of death panels will be "you can keep your private insurance " or "we will cut costs by spending a trillion dollars" more.

Throughout this blog there is the same arrogant, condescending we know better attitude that has set people off. And from several comments concerning what seniors expect, it becomes clear again there has never been a more self-centered narcissistic group of folks who have stripped this country of every advantage while sacrificing nothing, than the Baby Boomer generation.

Guess what? Time to grow up! You are not that smart and you don't get everything you want. Deal with it.

What a surprise...rusty depends on Medicare.
.
Which party wants to do away with Medicare? Why the same one that opposed creating it in the first place.
.
Here's another hint, rusty: it's the same party whose death panel lie you are shamelessly repeating.
~

In 2008, when those seniors who were stupid enough to vote for Obama are now seeing that their worst nightmare has been realized.

It is too bad they do not listen to you stuart.
.
The problem is communication without a doubt. Obama and his merry band of socialist infidels thought that he was riding on a wave of mandated "change we can believe in".
.
However, with the first stimulus bill that the Democrats pushed through Congress without even reading the bill, people are scared.
.
They are scared number one because there truly IS NO PLAN
.
They have a bill alright, but it is full of legalease. Words that only a Harvard educated President might understand.
.
But, stuart, thank you for trying. Thank you for pointing out that Obama clearly does not have the experience or "Community Organizing" understanding of even the basics about our people.
.
Thank you for clearly pointing out that a teleprompter speech, outlined in Democrat talking points will not suffice.
.
What is the plan Mr President. Spell it out in black and white, in clear un-mistakeable language exactly what you will do with Healthcare. Then and maybe only then the citizens of the great country will support you.

How many years have we put up with liberal and special interest group lies? 50? 70 years?

What truly irritates liberals now is their idiocy does not go unchallenged. So they revert to name calling. Everyone is an idiot or liar who disagrees with their know it all attitude.

Liberals never fess up to what the real plan will be. Instead they write something like HR3200 which can be intepreted broadly. People then review what Obama or Emmanuel or any of the Czars have said in recent history and realize it is lunacy.

There will never be a health plan that liberals want without rationing, rising debt and horrendous deficits. Any response to the contrary is either a lie or plain ignorance.

Actually, it would be a whole lot easier for (senior) Americans, if there weren't a huge cottage industry of rightist media liars dedicated to linking the First Lady to Vince Foster's suicide...I mean, telling seniors about death panels and nazi plans.
.
All I'm saying is that we knew all of this already.
.
When did Ann Coulter's "Treason" book come out again?

"Why should people trust us?"
.
Well, for one thing, we're the only game in town. Any rational person would have to conclude that Republicans are wholly unserious about governing the country except to the maximum advantage of monied interests to the detriment of nearly everyone else. Plus they are proven, serial liars, i.e., they are completely untrustworthy.
.
The problem you can't seem to wrap your mind around, in spite of excellent examples right here on this blog, is that right-wingers are not rational and no "messaging" is going to change the minds of liberal-hating authoritarian followers or old, white racists.
.
Robert Reich has a similar take that is more-or-less correct but it doesn't expect certain right-wing constituencies to ever see the light:

You want to know why the left has ideas and the right has discipline? Because people who like ideas and dislike authority tend to identify with the Democratic left, while people who feel threatened by new ideas and more comfortable in a disciplined and ordered world tend to identify with the Republican right. Democrats and progressives let a thousand flowers bloom. Republicans and the right issue directives. This has been the yin and yang of American politics and culture. But it means that the Democratic left's new ideas often fall victim to its own notorious lack of organization and to the right's highly-organized fear mongering.

shepherdwong:
.
Help me understand, then.
.
What is your understanding of the Democratic Party and liberals' strategy for significantly undermining the influence of committed, organized rightists/corporatists on public opinion regarding health care reform?
.
...I'm not talking about converting hard-core rightists, to be clear, I'm talking about effectively neutralizing their control/influence over the debate?

"What is your understanding of the Democratic Party and liberals' strategy for significantly undermining the influence of committed, organized rightists/corporatists on public opinion regarding health care reform?"
.
Well sure, let me put away my desktop fusion reactor first. First, there can be no single democratic Party and liberal strategy because they are two (or many) different animals, e.g., only a part of the party is liberal.
.
I believe that the liberal strategy is to continue to try to correct the public record and cajole and shame the corporate press into reforming its corporate propaganda-friendly conventions, as well as use grass-roots organizations to try to replace "conservative" democrats with more liberal ones. It's not just about health care, it's about a return to a public landscape that values important truth and populist principles and puts corporate interests into more healthy proportions and, although it appears to be taking hold even as the right continues to devolve into it's crazy, anti-democratic and racist essence, it is unclear whether it has advanced sufficiently to create adequate public pressure for the public option.
.
But you tell me. What message and what sort of bi-partisan outreach, that hasn't already been tried, would persuade the persuadable?

I can actually see your internet spittle on my monitor.
~

It never ceases to amaze me how liberals who have had uncontested airwaves and print media for years, now whine. The public was force fed liberal drivel as gospel. Now anyone who has the temerity to offer an opposing opinion is a liar and stupid.

While the death panel title may have been extreme HR3200 called for use of a government effectiveness panel which would determine protocols and payments for treatments of folks. It is not a stretch to assume that policies similar to posted VA policy would ensue.

Obama and liberals have stated (lied) that abortions or illegal immigrants would not be covered under the bill. They are correct in there is no specific language in the bill. It is also true that specific amendments that would disallow either to be covered were voted down by Democrats.

If this bill gets passed, the details will be left to a czar and all these supposed lies that the opponents of HRC are spouting will indeed become fact.

"liberals who have had uncontested airwaves and print media for years"?!?!?!
Barney Frank asked the right question for you, freep – on which planet do you spend most of your time?

Flownoverf:

One with whiny know-it-all condescending liberals. And you?

And really using B. Frank (prime example of my above response)? The same Barney Frank who claims ignorance with Fannie and Freddie' s demise while on the record saying they are financially strong?

@freeinpa

Whiny liberals? You've got your poles crossed. All I hear is whining from the right. Not a single good idea or shred of accountability. You've party is a travesty to common sense.

Sum it up

Yes playing the race card is page 1-100 in the Dems playbook. )The balance says refer to pages 1-100)

Watch for Obama use now to save his plummeting ratings.

Yes, when all else fails, just simply call them a bunch of redneck, trailer trash RACISTS!

The data don't lie. If you're white, the older you are, the more likely you are to harbor racist feelings and beliefs. That's what they report about themselves so it make little sense to blame Democrats. So what else is new?

Ah yes, playing the race card: http://is.gd/2LxAl

Yes, when all else fails, just simply call them a bunch of redneck, trailer trash RACISTS
.
As opposed to "Hard Working Northern European Stock" eh, rusty?

You are right to a certain degree but so is KT. traditionally seniors have sided with Democrats, but that's because they know full well who it is that supports medicare. You are right that 2008 was first time the GOP candidate won the cohort. However, let's face facts -- they went for McCain for the same reason they are so susceptible to the health reform lies, and it doesn't have anything to do with age except that they are from an era when race was a principal factor in determining trust, reliability, and competency.
.
So I think it is a bit disingenuous for the media to promote this notion that seniors are really Democratic but they is something about health care reform that has them worried. They know darn well that its Democrats that have created the program, protected all these years and if the GOP had its way they would jettison the program faster than Senator Vitter can strip down to his diaper in the company of his favorite call girl.

Sorry Dee but you are wrong about 2008 being the first time senors went Republican.
2004
R- 54%
D- 46%
2000
R- 52%
D- 46%
In 1998 and 92 the combined Republican Perot vote among senors was larger than the Democratic vote. Reagan won the senor vote by large margins. Old people vote Republican and have for many years.

@dfh

It's seniors, not senors. Unless of course you men señors, but the Hispanic vote did not go to the Republicans in the last two elections.