Saving Medicare and cutting the deficit by allowing younger people to buy in early?

[andym]

Why not add funds to Medicare by allowing younger people (say 55 or older at first) to buy in at rates 10% over government cost per year (including the increased cost of carrying more people). It probably wouldn't be cheap, since the trust fund for Medicare wouldn't pay for any of the coverage, but it would provide a quality service and it would help add funding to the program. It could be made available to both individuals and as a group plan to companies. Younger people are generally healthier, so it would presumably not add too much to total costs.

The best part is that it would send the US on the road to single-payer and help cover the deficit at the same time.

[lalalu]

1. This was proposed during the debate

over healthcare reform. Republicans and some democrats like Lieberman shot it down. I do believe we will get there eventually by Medicare being one of the proposed exchanges. Unfortunately this can't get down outright because it makes too much sense and would be real competition to private insurers.

[freshwest]

2. But the private insurers wouldn't get them anyway. Many people can't afford stand alone policies.

[lalalu]

3. It's true, most people can't afford stand alone policies.

[freshwest]

7. Logically, they would never get their business. But they will try to manipulate the system, always.

They've lost profit due to the ACA and there are even incentives for private insurance company employees to leave them as their share of the market decreases, to work for the government at the same wages with same benefits. This was locked into the provisions of the bill and is why the right went ballastic.

In the end, they will flee this investment vehicle and universal health care will be established, which Obama will fund as the EU countries do with higher taxes on the wealthy. He and his team worked legislation by piecemeal to come to a certain result. All could be lost if we don't attend to make the Congress more liberal in 2014.

Look to see the party of regression once against promoted by their media outlets. They are shutting down progressive voices on radio and television.

The net doesn't reach all Americans, sad to say. And the search results are heavily spammed by conservative bots, so that without a clear vision from a progressive/liberal viewpoint the person going online is not going to find the content needed to refute RW propaganda.

There is still a lot of work to do.

[lalalu]

8. I think your vision of where this is going in right on the mark.

I just hope we get enough people involved to get it done.

[lovuian]

4. Its brilliant and would allow people to retire and therefore

provide younger workers with a job

Many over 55 are working just for medical insurance

I like it lets do it

[Kber]

6. Or it would allow older, more experienced workers to go into consulting or start businesses

We wouldn't lose their expertise, but would in fact be able to better leverage it.

Many very well qualified and experienced experts would make great consultants, but won't take the risk because they would lose health insurance.

Some who could afford it might opt to retire early. Others might opt to go into business for themselves. And this would open the job market both by making room for younger workers and even by creating jobs because some of those consultants might become successful small business owners who hire other workers.

It's a win-win-win for the US economy.

But somehow, I don't think empowered, engaged workers with the ability to control their own destiny is really what the GOP is all about.

[PoliticAverse]

5. So if you are 55 how much would such a buy-in cost you ? n/t

[Kaleva]

9. I'm 53 and my Medicare premium is $99 a month

Of course, that is heavily subsidized other wise it's be much, much higher.

"For seniors, Medicare is a popular program. The rates range from $110 to $353 a month, depending on income, but those are subsidized. The government actually spends about $9,000 per year for each beneficiary, said Tricia Neuman, an expert with the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) told reporters premiums would total about $7,600 annually - or $633 a month - until federal subsidies became available in 2014."

One potential source of revenue that could be tapped to help subsidize Medicare for the 55-65 age group would be to increase the Medicare tax on those who make over $110,100 by 12.4%. This ought to generate about 100 billion in annual revenue.

In the year 2000, there were roughly about 25 million Americans in the 55-65 age bracket

I'm just guesstimating but I do think that 100 billion ought to be more then enough to subsidize Medicare for the everyone in the 55-65 age so that they'd pay about the same in monthly premiums as those who are retired or recieving disability do and who have the same earned income.