Debt Rattle August 26 2017
- This topic has 6 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Vincent van Gogh Self-Portrait with Straw Hat Aug-Sep 1887 • Draghi Warns Of Serious Risk To Global Economy From Rising Protectionism (CNBC) •
[See the full post at: Debt Rattle August 26 2017]Vincent van Gogh Self-Portrait with Straw Hat
Love that painting.
Rickard’s is still wrong and an idiot! The god’s be good; who follows this moron?“The future’s are so bright you just got to wear shades.”
That got a pretty good chuckle out of me. Thanks…
The rest…meh…We’re witness to a world in a death spiral; what’s not to get about that?
Keep ignoring that; keep acting like naive idiots; the denial won’t help; it just makes the coming reality the harder to accept…@Arnold
(A Simple change) 😉
We’re witnessing an expensive supportive bra, what’s not to get about that?Keep ignoring that; keep acting like naive idiots; the denial won’t help; it just makes the coming reality the harder to accept…
I went and used the AARP calculator mentioned in the Fidelity retiree medical cost article and it projected only a $30,000 “shortfall” for my wife and I as a couple after factoring in the value of our High Deductible Plan F Medicare Supplement policies. If you keep weight in check and eat right you can stick with the cheapest drug plan available in your area and that, along with the HD Plan F provides very comprehensive and affordable coverage. I have almost $20,000 in that HSA, so things look OK.
The article doesn’t reveal the assumptions used. My wife and I are 70 and I projected death for both at 90. Also, the AARP calculator provides very different results for people with higher BMIs (fat/total weight ratio). I suppose Fidelity probably used from age 65 to 95 and more average BMIs than what we enjoy, not being overweight at all. Also, I bet they used more comprehensive Medicare Supplement plans like regular F or G as opposed to HD plan F. If your above average health and savings level allows the use of a High Deductible Medicare plan, your premium savings compared to deductible amount paid plus the premium for more comprehensive Medicare Supplement plans can be very significant.
I’m sure you know your business, but you could blow $20,000 in a few days of intensive care. At your ages, if you live close enough to a hospital to get there, it’s quite likely. So thanks to our system, you could go from flush to broke in 30 days, a life change perhaps faster than you can adjust to it or liquidate assets.
“If we’ve got growth at trend, which most places appear to have, if we’ve got the unemployment rate at full employment, which most places appear to have…”
Stop right there, because you don’t. Real US GDP has probably been declining 5% a year for a decade, and half of it is probably statistical rigging and paper-churning. 100M out of work and 25M on food stamps is only full employment in the looking glass world you Ceasar Flickerman types live in, and if you don’t believe me ask Sears how 100% employment leads to sector-wide retail bankruptcies. The only mystery here is how people like you get away with lying for so long without someone storming your Bastille. I don’t mean to sound alarming, but outside the glass tower you can tell which way the wind blows.
Diablo,
You obviously know nothing know little about how medicare works. Part A of medicare which pays for hospitalization has a $1316 deductible after which no further out of pocket payments are required until the 61st day of hospitalization. Part B which pays for out-patient care has an annual deductible of $183 after which, basically, there is an 80% / 20% split with medicare paying 80% and the individual paying 20%. My Medicare supplement policy has an annual deductible of $2300 after which any outstanding Part A or Part B deductibles or co-pays are paid 100% by the insurance company. Therefore withdrawals of tax-free income from my HSA will go a reasonably good distance in terms of covering my out-of-pocket exposures.
I was simply stating the facts as they current apply to my situation so as to point out that for many people the Fidelity study was scare mongering.
You may apologize to me now for casting undue and factually incorrect aspersions my way.
By the way, just for the sake of full disclosure, I will post below my suggested reforms of the medical cost financing system:
PREMISE:
Medical service providers are just that, service providers; and in that regard are no different in the market than automobile mechanics whose average income depends on the average income in the workers (their clients) in their society. Every country, though, has figured out some way to pay medical service providers more than car mechanics. That way the poor get some access to the care that only the rich can afford. Calls in the USA for market-based reforms to the health care affordability problem conveniently overlook this basic fact which is not surprising considering the long oligarchic traditions of the USA.Instead of floundering in our traditional economic cynicism we could undertake simple and effective governmental reforms in order to keep health care spending down to a reasonably low percentage of GDP like every other developed country in the world. No constitutional roadblocks would have to be overcome. Government established systems don’t need to unconstitutionally block medical service providers from contracting with patients in whatever way they wish. Well-structured public systems will just make it unnecessary and uneconomical for them to do so. As the reforms listed below are read, please reserve judgement as to their political viability until you get to the end.
REFORMS:
1. Lower Medicare age to 55. This would most efficiently remove the most difficult to insure group from the reform process faced (as suggested at item #3 below) by the individual states.
2. Simplify the Medicare benefit structure so that there is one simple annual deductible for all parts of Medicare (A,B,and D) based upon a progressive income and asset test; and also re-set the Medicare Part B premium so that it is also based upon a progressive income and asset test based.
2.1 This would make the need for Medicare Advantage, Medicare Supplement, and Medicare Prescription Drug plans obsolete; saving the government and consumers hundreds of billions year in and year out.
2.2 Some percentage of current insurance workers could be leased by current insurance companies to the government during a transition phase, while those losing their jobs could get direct transition assistance.
3. For everyone through age 54 each state individually or in concert with other states could adopt some form of the proven models provided by other developed countries. Large states, who have larger populations and economies than many model countries, have the tax base and economies of scale which should make it easier to establish such model systems compared to smaller states. Therefore, if smaller states run into difficulty they should be allowed to join together with other small states, whether regionally proximate or not, to adopt models that work best for them as a group.FACTORS:
I believe these reforms could be politically viable because they feed into hot button issues of both the right and left. Right wingers in red states would like the individual state control aspect and burn themselves out on pushing for a return to a cash-based system for the poor and concierge plans for the highly paid employees and wealthy individuals which will ultimately prove economically and politically unsustainable compared to the socialistic systems established in the blue states. Left wingers in blue states will jump at the chance to bring forth successful plans and thus help the blue brand and motivate blue voters nationwide. Big health insurance companies would continue to have an advantage over smaller firms as they find a way to profitably downsize to basic employee leasing enterprises that provide administration services to Medicare and the state model plans. They, like all the companies in the healthcare market, would be faced with the need to either adapt or die. I believe the big companies seeing the writing on the wall would actually support the reform process since they would be in the best position to morph into profitable survivors of the process. Big Pharma…well big pharma would take a hit, but so be it…they will just have to deal with bulk discounted sales to Medicare and the state plans who in turn can just have the discounted drugs fulfilled through the existing pharmacy outlets.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.