bacha29

Well-Known Member
Let's see how it goes. What's for certain is we'll no longer be able to grow the nanny state.
Tell me something VT. You like the rest of us will get old and sick and the cost of healthcare will continue to rise. Now do you or do you not have sufficient personal wealth to pay for that care out of your own pocket? If you do not then how will healthcare services be provided, who will provide them and most importantly who will pay for them?
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Tell me something VT. You like the rest of us will get old and sick and the cost of healthcare will continue to rise. Now do you or do you not have sufficient personal wealth to pay for that care out of your own pocket? If you do not then how will healthcare services be provided, who will provide them and most importantly who will pay for them?
You're right, they need to come up with a better system. However you aren't going to live forever and it's not the government's job to help you live as long as possible. It is what it is. If people want longer, healthier lives they have to watch what they put into their system, exercise, avoid behaviors that lead to disease. I have diabetes because I ate way too much sugar and other carbs. It caught up with me and my ancestry makes me more vulnerable to it. Not the government's fault and they don't have to try to delay what's inevitable anyways. For the sake of younger generations we need to curtail spending now.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
You're right, they need to come up with a better system. However you aren't going to live forever and it's not the government's job to help you live as long as possible. It is what it is. If people want longer, healthier lives they have to watch what they put into their system, exercise, avoid behaviors that lead to disease. I have diabetes because I ate way too much sugar and other carbs. It caught up with me and my ancestry makes me more vulnerable to it. Not the government's fault and they don't have to try to delay what's inevitable anyways. For the sake of younger generations we need to curtail spending now.
Yes to an extent but many disease are hereditary and there's not much that can be done about. I do commend you for admitting that in the end you too will be seeking pain relief as well as life extension and will most likely be on Medicare and Medicaid when you're money's gone.... same as the rest of us..... This too is the "nanny" state and when people run out of youth money and options they too will become part of it,
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Yes to an extent but many disease are hereditary and there's not much that can be done about. I do commend you for admitting that in the end you too will be seeking pain relief as well as life extension and will most likely be on Medicare and Medicaid when you're money's gone.... same as the rest of us..... This too is the "nanny" state and when people run out of youth money and options they too will become part of it,
I most likely will be living where there's a limited safety net and pay as I go. And for now there's no talk of eliminating Medicare or Medicaid, just limiting what they can do.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
I most likely will be living where there's a limited safety net and pay as I go. And for now there's no talk of eliminating Medicare or Medicaid, just limiting what they can do.
And how do you limit what it can do? You cut the funding down to almost nothing thereby you're not "limiting" what it can do you eliminate altogether what it can do.if the American people were to take the time to actually read Paul Ryan's plan to 'save" and "reform" Medicare they would respond with absolute revulsion but they won't pay attention until his plan becomes law and by that time it will be too late. " Pay as you go" Yes, you'll do that until you've run out of money and sold every possession you have and when that's all gone at which point Medicaid kicks in that's if it's still there and still has some money left in it's after the proposed 1.4 trillion dollar funding has been applied.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
And how do you limit what it can do? You cut the funding down to almost nothing thereby you're not "limiting" what it can do you eliminate altogether what it can do.if the American people were to take the time to actually read Paul Ryan's plan to 'save" and "reform" Medicare they would respond with absolute revulsion but they won't pay attention until his plan becomes law and by that time it will be too late. " Pay as you go" Yes, you'll do that until you've run out of money and sold every possession you have and when that's all gone at which point Medicaid kicks in that's if it's still there and still has some money left in it's after the proposed 1.4 trillion dollar funding has been applied.
You're obsessing over things highly unlikely to happen. Are you of the opinion that no one, including Democrats, will read the bill? That it'll somehow pass unnoticed? Or if it's as onerous as you say Republicans won't pay a huge price for it? The sky isn't falling, and stress kills. Do yourself a favor and relax.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
You're obsessing over things highly unlikely to happen. Are you of the opinion that no one, including Democrats, will read the bill? That it'll somehow pass unnoticed? Or if it's as onerous as you say Republicans won't pay a huge price for it? The sky isn't falling, and stress kills. Do yourself a favor and relax.
Remember, you party controls all 3 branches of government and powerful members of your party have stated over and over again that at the top of their agenda is "entitlement reform" which means severe cuts in funding . Cuts needed to offset the revenue losses from the tax cut plan, a plan in order to succeed will require 4% annual growth in GDP for many years along with keeping inflation in the 2% range. Something that hasn't happened often . BTW, they are not enough Democratic votes in Congress to stop the carnage.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Remember, you party controls all 3 branches of government and powerful members of your party have stated over and over again that at the top of their agenda is "entitlement reform" which means severe cuts in funding . Cuts needed to offset the revenue losses from the tax cut plan, a plan in order to succeed will require 4% annual growth in GDP for many years along with keeping inflation in the 2% range. Something that hasn't happened often . BTW, they are not enough Democratic votes in Congress to stop the carnage.
You don't think Democrats won't make political hay from this? Throw grandma off the cliff sort of stuff? And when they get back in power won't change it back? Democrats are so energized right now they may very well take back Congress this year. There will most likely be a huge amount of Democrat candidates for president in 2020 and probably a few Republicans challenging Trump too. Unless the economy does really well. Better hope people's lives don't improve so we can get back to spending what we don't have for programs that don't solve anything.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
If I were the democratic leadership, I would insist that the republicans do their budget cutting right now. In fact, I'd tell them that even if they lose House and Senate, we will push through whatever they have come up with. Let's see what happens. Half measures avail us nothing but more mess.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
You don't think Democrats won't make political hay from this? Throw grandma off the cliff sort of stuff? And when they get back in power won't change it back? Democrats are so energized right now they may very well take back Congress this year. There will most likely be a huge amount of Democrat candidates for president in 2020 and probably a few Republicans challenging Trump too. Unless the economy does really well. Better hope people's lives don't improve so we can get back to spending what we don't have for programs that don't solve anything.
You have already admitted to grandma getting thrown off the cliff. It's why you intend to move to a more socially conscious country.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
You have already admitted to grandma getting thrown off the cliff. It's why you intend to move to a more socially conscious country.
It's not about the lack of social services here, but the cost of living. And most developing nations have extremely limited safety nets, if any. Social Security recipients who rely primarily on SS would do themselves a huge favor moving overseas.
 

Nolimitz

Well-Known Member
It's not about the lack of social services here, but the cost of living. And most developing nations have extremely limited safety nets, if any. Social Security recipients who rely primarily on SS would do themselves a huge favor moving overseas.
So all SS payments would benefit overseas economies?? Busting a gut!
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
So all SS payments would benefit overseas economies?? Busting a gut!
We are free to live wherever we want with the SS we're entitled to. If the U.S. doesn't want an elderly exodus it has to stop being so greedy. You may get by fine when you're working full-time. A whole different world for those on limited fixed income.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
And then comes "entitlement reform".
If SS comes down to employee contributions and employer match, which would be 75% of promised payment, it's better than nothing and it's a self sustaining program. A program started by Democrats to alleviate elderly poverty. Or do you think older people who can't work anymore should just starve?
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
If SS comes down to employee contributions and employer match, which would be 75% of promised payment, it's better than nothing and it's a self sustaining program. A program started by Democrats to alleviate elderly poverty. Or do you think older people who can't work anymore should just starve?
In America, nobody should have to starve.
 
Top