Anyone over 80 and anyone with a terminal illness get palliative and hospice care only. Anything more they can pay for themselves.Let's balance the budget.
Medicare is THE problem. No more life saving health care after 80. That will do it.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Anyone over 80 and anyone with a terminal illness get palliative and hospice care only. Anything more they can pay for themselves.Let's balance the budget.
Medicare is THE problem. No more life saving health care after 80. That will do it.
So Medicare isn't really spending much on your mother's care. Your proposal wouldn't save much in her situation.No. Medicare does not actually pay much for her care. Her pension is. She does get some Medicare for the medical component.
Its not money well spent.
So a 80 year old person, who was otherwise healthy, falls in the street and breaks their hip. An ambulance is called and I get there. What’s palliative? Pain meds? Transport? You understand that if we don’t fix their hip they may live another 10+ years confined to a bed. Is that really cheaper?Anyone over 80 and anyone with a terminal illness get palliative and hospice care only. Anything more they can pay for themselves.
Eff this. Yeah lets take more stuff from the middle class.Let's balance the budget.
Medicare is THE problem. No more life saving health care after 80. That will do it.
In case you're not aware, a fall and broken hip is frequently the beginning of the end for old people. They can fund anything beyond palliative and hospice care on their own.So a 80 year old person, who was otherwise healthy, falls in the street and breaks their hip.
Eff this. Yeah lets take more stuff from the middle class.
This sounds awfully “Huxley/Orwellian” to me. And maybe even a little native Americanish....Anyone over 80 and anyone with a terminal illness get palliative and hospice care only. Anything more they can pay for themselves.
He's mad because she is selfishly spending his inheritance on herself.I'm not the one who's all pissed off. I also don't know all the ins and outs of problem so it would be difficult to find a true solution, but I do know your "solution" isn't really a solution. You're just pissed you mother is still alive and consuming resources. If you don't like it, then send her to hospice, they'll put her to sleep.
So Medicare isn't really spending much on your mother's care. Your proposal wouldn't save much in her situation.
I know dementia sucks, my mom had it at the very end of her life. It's really hard for family members.
He's mad because she is selfishly spending his inheritance on herself.
So she spent it all and you're mad.Lol...there is no inheritance. I pray that she has enough to cover her care. She isnt dead, but she isnt living either.
You don't get to decide who lives and who dies, Durwood.
It may be, in the sight of Heaven, that you are more insignificant and fit to live than MILLIONS of senior citizens.I send them and God sorts them out....
Bingo!Neither party has any interest in balancing a budget or spending less. They are full of shit.
Anyone that really wants to balance a budget means you need to increase revenue, so higher taxes. Which I am fine with. We need revenue for infrastructure.
Everytime GOP starts a war and cuts taxes, a baby cries
It may be, in the sight of Heaven, that you are more insignificant and fit to live than MILLIONS of senior citizens.
It's a variation on a movie quote, Durwood.Lol you are a moron
Who is significant in eternity and infinity?
Every time I see “ Durwood “ I burst out laughing. He changed his avatar…😄So she spent it all and you're mad.
You don't get to decide who lives and who dies, Durwood.
Yeah, I guess I had forgotten that. $380/mo is $4,560. Still a bargain for a "senior".They charge higher premiums for incomes that exceed 105 k.
That 150 you pay goes as high as 380 for someone like my mom when she has a higher income year.
Every time I see “ Durwood “ I burst out laughing. He changed his avatar…😄
That reference belongs to @83Hawk …I had been meaning to change it. I forgot that reference until you said it.
I’m actually in favor of lowering the Medicare age to 62.
I’m up for taxes to go slightly up on certain individuals but also we need to cut other items to achieve this. I’m sure there is plenty of government spending to cut if we look hard enoughYou up for more taxes then?
I’m up for taxes to go slightly up on certain individuals but also we need to cut other items to achieve this. I’m sure there is plenty of government spending to cut if we look hard enough
I’m up for taxes to go slightly up on certain individuals but also we need to cut other items to achieve this. I’m sure there is plenty of government spending to cut if we look hard enough
In addition to the “contributions” many of us have been making for 40 years or more…Yeah, I guess I had forgotten that. $380/mo is $4,560. Still a bargain for a "senior".
what "contributions"?In addition to the “contributions” many of us have been making for 40 years or more…
What’s typical here?
Not how it works, but, I am sure you think that wayEvery paycheck…
We have a progressive tax system lol, of course any added cost or current cost is carried by someone else. Also did you not see the cut spending part of my comment?Wanting something new with the assumption that the added cost will be carried by someone else...
We have a progressive tax system lol, of course any added cost or current cost is carried by someone else. Also did you not see the cut spending part of my comment?
Depends where they come from. If it’s from defense then doubtful. From the CBO and JCT it states that it would add to the budget deficit by $155 billion from 2026-2031 if we lowered that to 60 years old So it seems like it is totally doable to cut spending in areas and raise taxes a little bit if need be. For example, we just had an accounting error on an Ukraine package of $6 billion haha. I think if we are having small accounting errors of $6 billion then this is easily doable.I did notice that,.. Are you expecting those spending cuts to negatively affect your finances in any fashion?
To add, we have already sent $75 million to Ukraine with a snap of the finger lol.Depends where they come from. If it’s from defense then doubtful. From the CBO and JCT it states that it would add to the budget deficit by $155 billion from 2026-2031 if we lowered that to 60 years old So it seems like it is totally doable to cut spending in areas and raise taxes a little bit if need be. For example, we just had an accounting error on an Ukraine package of $6 billion haha. I think if we are having small accounting errors of $6 billion then this is easily doable.