Going for Broke.
12/10/12 16:36![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
dwer.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsIn yesterday's debate, moderator Martha Raddatz said:
And Paul Ryan responded with:
Wellllllll... not so much.
SSI is not going broke, as David Cay Johnson says:
And Medicare going bankrupt? Not so fast, says the Columbia Journalism Review:
Now, that last quote about Congress never allowing a Medicare trust fund to exhaust its assets is interesting, and I wonder what this current, do-nothing, insist-that-the-main-focus-is-defeating-Barack Obama GOP would do if they had no choice but to raise taxes or allow a Medicare trust fund to fail.
But what's the point? Why continue to push this idea that either of these two extremely successful social policies need to be reworked and revised?
Well, it's not about effectiveness; they're both very effective. It's not about efficiencies -- they're both fairly effecient, with low levels of fraud; in fact Medicare is far more efficient than private health plans. Do we need to worry about the costs of health care, which push up Medicare costs, just like it pushes up costs of other health insurance plans? Sure. But is it a flaw in Medicare? No. Same thing with SSI.
So it must be ideology. And it's a funny thing about that ideology -- it's been allowed to take root so long and so deep that even theoretical liberal journalists believe it needs to be paid at least attention to -- which is why Raddatz said it.
"Let's talk about Medicare and entitlements. Both Medicare and Social Security are going broke and taking a larger share of the budget in the process."
"Will benefits for Americans under these programs have to change for the programs to survive?"
And Paul Ryan responded with:
"Absolutely. Medicare and Social Security are going bankrupt. These are indisputable facts."
Wellllllll... not so much.
SSI is not going broke, as David Cay Johnson says:
Which federal program took in more than it spent last year, added $95 billion to its surplus and lifted 20 million Americans of all ages out of poverty ()?
Why, Social Security, of course, which ended 2011 with a $2.7 trillion surplus.
That surplus is almost twice the $1.4 trillion collected in personal and corporate income taxes last year. And it is projected to go on growing until 2021, the year the youngest Baby Boomers turn 67 and qualify for full old-age benefits.
And Medicare going bankrupt? Not so fast, says the Columbia Journalism Review:
First, CNN reported, as CJR has urged news outlets to do, that only one part of Medicare is in potential trouble—the Hospital Trust Fund, which is financed by payroll taxes. The other parts of Medicare, including Part B, which finances doctor visits, lab tests, and outpatient services, “are adequately financed for now,” Medicare trustees have said. CNN made that clear to readers.
CNN pushed further and asked a logical question that most reporters writing about Medicare have missed. When the magic date for “bankruptcy” arrives—2024 according to the Dems, or 2016 if the ACA disappears in a Romney presidency—would Medicare really disappear? Jonathan Oberlander, a health policy expert at the University of North Carolina, told CNN that repealing the health reform law “would in fact worsen Medicare’s financial condition,” but even so, he added, “Medicare is not going bankrupt. Medicare would still have most of the necessary funds to pay those expenses and other parts of the program would be unaffected. Medicare won’t go bankrupt in the literal sense in 2016 or 2024 or 2064—or ever.” The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs the Medicare program, said this year that even in 2024 the Medicare hospital trust fund could still pay 87 percent of its estimated expenditures, and noted that, “in practice, Congress has never allowed a Medicare trust fund to exhaust its assets.”
Now, that last quote about Congress never allowing a Medicare trust fund to exhaust its assets is interesting, and I wonder what this current, do-nothing, insist-that-the-main-focus-is-defeating-Barack Obama GOP would do if they had no choice but to raise taxes or allow a Medicare trust fund to fail.
But what's the point? Why continue to push this idea that either of these two extremely successful social policies need to be reworked and revised?
Well, it's not about effectiveness; they're both very effective. It's not about efficiencies -- they're both fairly effecient, with low levels of fraud; in fact Medicare is far more efficient than private health plans. Do we need to worry about the costs of health care, which push up Medicare costs, just like it pushes up costs of other health insurance plans? Sure. But is it a flaw in Medicare? No. Same thing with SSI.
So it must be ideology. And it's a funny thing about that ideology -- it's been allowed to take root so long and so deep that even theoretical liberal journalists believe it needs to be paid at least attention to -- which is why Raddatz said it.
(no subject)
Date: 12/10/12 21:40 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/10/12 21:52 (UTC)It's not this month's rent that I'm worried about it's next month's.
If/When the Boomers start retiring en-mass there will be more people collecting SSI and Medicare than workers to pay into those programs. Such a situation does not bode well for the program's long term stability.
(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 00:16 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 00:41 (UTC)Look at Japan. They have been in fiscal "crisis" for decades now, but:
As far as I can tell, the banks and investment houses are the most freaked about this shift from savings to spending because their capital will be liquidated (which is why, duh, it was saved to begin with.) Trouble is, they don't know how they'll make money in this world. So they're casting the freak-out lies in order to raid SS and MC/MA and artificially fatten their future coffers.
(no subject)
Date: 14/10/12 01:59 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 04:38 (UTC)Those dirty hippieeeeezz.
(no subject)
Date: 14/10/12 04:05 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/10/12 22:15 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/10/12 22:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/10/12 23:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 02:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 07:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 23:18 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/10/12 23:10 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 01:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 02:52 (UTC)That doesn't make your dude look any better, you realize that, right?
(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 03:09 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 03:14 (UTC)But I guess you gotta convince yourself somehow.
(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 03:31 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 03:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 03:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 03:55 (UTC)Facts must really suck for you.
(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 07:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 16:32 (UTC)and the fact that libs want to get pumped up about a VP debate is amusing.
(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:05 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:20 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:34 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:40 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:43 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 13:17 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 04:29 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 08:10 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 14/10/12 02:02 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 14/10/12 07:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 15/10/12 12:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 08:11 (UTC)In fact, you've already been shown that this is untrue.
(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 16:07 (UTC)Medicare Has Controlled Costs Better Than Private Insurance
.
Medicare Has Lower Administrative Costs Than Private Plans.
.
(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:10 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:21 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:23 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 15/10/12 12:43 (UTC)Oh, yes, I know. Because the elderly are an important voting block, but apparently the rest of the country isn't. *sigh*
(I know it's more complicated than that, but still...gah.)
(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 16:29 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:20 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 21:34 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 15:18 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/10/12 16:45 (UTC)