Medicare at 55 would probably save my ass...BUT...

[OffWithTheirHeads]

I'm 59. I can retire with my full pension at 60. I honestly don't think I could make it to 65 paying full boat for my HC so if this happens, I will welcome it. Of course, it probably won't take effect until I'm 64 1/2 BUT, lets face it folks, it is still a huge giveaway to our corporate masters. If the insurance Vampires (and not the cool sexy ones on True Blood) get to dump all of the geezers who are really at a point in life where medical care, expensive, working on geezer medical care, suddenly get dumped on the taxpayer tit, they will only have to cover the (for the most part) young and healthy and the real expensive care will get picked up by the taxpayer. Once again, our corporate masters win.

Don't get me wrong, I, personally, will welcome this, but Health Insurance Inc. is shitting themselves with pleasure.

Oh, by the way, my current Health care (Union contract) is over $11.00 per hour. Do the math. I could buy a Ferrari and still have money left over each month. Instead, each member of my union buys some insurance exec a Ferrari, and gas (approx 8 mi per gal) + insurance and a few bottles of Chateau Lafite to wash it with.

[cutlassmama]

1. It's a "buy in" plan, meaning you'd still have to pay premiums each month

it's not free.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

2. Is the buy in $22,000.00 + a year? I doubt it.

I can afford a few hundred dollars a month. My current insurance is about $1,800.00 per month. I can't afford that on retirement.

[Meldread]

3. Heh, re: the old geezers and the taxpayer

"If the insurance Vampires (and not the cool sexy ones on True Blood) get to dump all of the geezers who are really at a point in life where medical care, expensive, working on geezer medical care, suddenly get dumped on the taxpayer tit, they will only have to cover the (for the most part) young and healthy and the real expensive care will get picked up by the taxpayer."

------------

You're right, of course. Although, keep in mind even on private insurance other people are still paying for the healthcare of the elderly. That's how insurance works: everyone pays into insurance, and things are paid for as it's needed. Thus, you never actually pay for your own healthcare, you're paying for someone else's, and they in turn are paying for yours. That's why larger pools lower cost, because ultimately there are more healthy people than sick people.

Also, seniors are placed on the taxpayer tit anyway (as you put it) because of Medicare. It's just a matter of making it to 65, currently.

What I worry about is how people will pay for it. Basically, right now we're in a situation where a lot of the people who would be eligible for Medicare (if it's lowered to 55) essentially have lost jobs that aren't coming back. In essence, they're now permanently under or unemployed. Lowering the age down effectively encompasses most of the Baby Boomers, requiring younger people to subsidize them, and they're out numbered by something like three to one. This means that one young person, in their twenties, with college debt, struggling to find a job in a difficult economy, start or raise a family, is now also being asked to shoulder the healthcare cost of thousands (millions?) of seniors or soon-to-be seniors.

Then there is the fact of the Medicare reimbursement rate, which is something like 80% of the total cost... which means that cost will be shifted to those who have to pay already over priced insurance, and/or somehow shouldered by doctors and hospitals.

Things might not be so bad if it goes how it is currently rumored, where you have to buy into Medicare, but what are they going to do with the millions of people who've lost jobs in that age range, but are never going to get them back? I'm assuming they're going to try and subsidize them.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

4. My whole point is that this lets the insurance Co's off the hook

They don't have to insure us anymore, the taxpayer gets to do it. Good deal if you are in the insurance biz.

[Meldread]

6. Absolutely.

That's why the insurance companies love the plan and are declaring victory. Since older folks are more likely to have medical problems, offloading them onto Medicare is a great way for them to increase their profits. Even if it means they'll lose some to Medicare, they make money by not having to pay for their medical bills. Effectively, the way insurance works, is that the healthy (typically the young) subsidize the sick (typically the old).

...but yes, they're declaring victory for the reason you've stated.

[amandabeech]

5. Those allowed to buy into Medicare will pay full freight.

There will be no subsidies.

[Meldread]

7. Yes, that's what they're saying.

...but then how do you justify to people who NEED medical insurance, but can't afford it, "Sorry, you're out of luck!"

Keeping in mind that the 50+ age is hit pretty hard by job losses, in particular jobs that are never coming back, and are also stuck in an unfortunate position where they are really to old to retrain to do something else... their retirement plans might be gone... really horrible situation. However, also keep in mind that this age group in particular VOTES... and it votes in every election. And when you don't have a job, you definitely have the time to go out and vote.... :P

Well, put yourself in a politicians shoes. Would you want to go back to your state or district, look that 55 year old man in the eye and tell him: Yes, you've done everything you were told to do, you were a good citizen, but no your job isn't coming back. Yes, your retirement is gone. No, the government isn't going to save your house because you had to take out a mortgage to pay for life essential medical treatment... and no, the government isn't going to let you on Medicare because you can't pay for it.

That's not exactly what those people want to hear, and so I wouldn't be surprised if there is some fiddling with the numbers to ensure that they can slip them in somehow. If it was young people, or some other group that wasn't a dependable vote, they'd probably be tossed under the bus, though. :P

[amandabeech]

8. Well, I'm one of those people,

and I'm hearing about what I would expect.

They can and will do just about anything to anybody. They'll find some way to justify it, and they won't really mind if some 50+ person, or any 20-something person, puts a human face to the dismal statistics.

The young are not being singled out on the excrement flowing downward, believe me.

Since Reagan, everything has been about economic class warfare. If you don't have cash, you lose, no matter what the age.

[spinbaby]

9. I think it would be good for Medicare

The 55-to-65 set would be generally healthier and need less medical care than the over 65s.