Biden Proposes Key Medicare Cut Just One Week After Falsely Accusing Republicans Of The Same Thing

Statistics don't lie, but charlatans and liars can create statistics. Mortality is predominately a result of maternal and infant mortality, and how that is counted varies all over the map among countries.

 

Yea they do. Yes. They. Do.

 

Biden is trying to destroy medicare, social security and the credit rating of the United States in the upcoming debt ceiling increase crisis that was deliberately brought on by Democrats who did not raise the debt limit enough to cover their planned spending when they passed the budget.

 

And mine!

 

They could care less because institutions are not capable of caring...only individuals have this ability. Unfortunately, all the checks and balances need to be renewed at times. In the U.S., they have been corrupted by enormous corporate wealth.

Not sure, but you really shouldn't need this. If the system is being run by individuals, these things take care of themselves [and this is not to say that bad things won't happen...after all, these are human beings we are talking about].

I am sure Aus has made many fine contributions but you wouldn't be doing any of that without our help. It is what it is.

Why do you think this is? If our population was as homogeneous as yours, it would probably be the same [or higher]. The one thing the U.S. HC system does well is extend life using super high technology. It's just not available to everybody [actually, it shouldn't be available to anybody because it is not affordable in the current system].

The U.S. is a pretty unique country...great positives and some negatives, but millions want to come here because they understand that going forward, the greatest opportunities [by far] are here.

 

OMG! Did you just post all the memes from a right wing site?
Let’s see - this started with me challenging you over the fact (and it is a fact based on life expectancy, infant mortality and maternal mortality) that UHCs are superior to the mess America calls a health care system.

What has been your come back?

IN- DAH-VID-U-ALS
Australia owes America for saving us in WW2 (wtf - talk about off topic!)
Denial of statistics in relation to general population health care indicators
And
Rah! Rah! America

Please explain where “individuals” have any real say in these huge corporations that run health care. Health care is an expensive business so it no longer is run by the local group of doctors. It is one of the reasons why rural America is rapidly losing its local hospitals https://www.usnews.com/news/health-...of-hospitals-could-close-across-rural-america

Meanwhile if I get sick in my state in a rural hospital that is unable to care for me , I get flown for free to a tertiary hospital for care

 

If you want to challenge my assertion please find a site that shows America is leading the world in life expectancy, infant mortality and maternal mortality

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2022/20220831.htm

Worse is what you are paying for this shitty outcome


https://ourworldindata.org/us-life-expectancy-low

 

Easy Peasy right Well not everyone rioght

Travelling to the city for hospital care: Access factors in country Aboriginal patient journeys - Kelly - 2014 - Australian Journal of Rural Health - Wiley Online Library

 

Yes, everything I post is directly from a right-wing site. Come on now. You can think things like that but writing them makes you appear silly.

No, my response was that these statistics are quite different for various segments of the population. Check it out yourself.

You are not one of these self-haters are you?

I didn't say we saved you in WWII, but we did make the world safe for you post-WWII and allowed the entire world to do business [relatively unimpeded] by patrolling the global oceans to make sure all countries that wished to trade could do so without fear of what used to go on before WWII. The U.S. made it possible for billions of people to be brought out of poverty. I get it that nobody cares. And I am glad that Aus was able to benefit, as well, and although I have never been there, I hear it is a very nice country.

Individuals do not have a say in corporations which is why I say what I say. HC should by run by as many individuals as is possible with only newly designed non-profit corporations handling what they must. Ideally, the health care system would evolve into a REAL health care system and large organisation would not be necessary.

And btw, you don't get flown for free. There is no such thing as, "free."

 

Check out my posting history - I have been doing this for a long long time and

I have but obviously YOU have not. Infant mortality should not be a variable in a fair and equal society

I suggest you read the rules of this forum as THAT may be considered a personal attack - to me though it is an Ad Hom and I know when my opposition starts posting ad Homs they have no other come backs

No you lot did that for yourselves whilst picking fight left right and centre and dragging US into them

https://anzacportal.dva.gov.au/wars-and-missions
Plus there was

https://www.mapw.org.au/files/downloads/Australia's wars.pdf

How many of those did WE start? How many of those were ultimately for our benefit?

And you are missing my point although finally back on health care

Health care is expensive - here the baseline cost for a patient in ICU is over $5,000 per day
https://www.health.vic.gov.au/patient-fees-charges/ineligible-patients

How many “individuals” can underwrite that cost if the patient is unable to pay? The very costings means that only large organisations are able to run healthcare and if you look at global data it is ALAWYS cheaper if it is a UHC

As for things not being free - what is the cost to the community if that service were not there?

 

So you are saying that there is absolutely no difference in infant mortality among any of the minority populations in Aus?

If I was attempting to insult you, you would know it for sure. And what did you follow that with? If you don't wish to continue the conversation, that's fine.

Doesn't matter. Aus is completely dependent on the U.S. protecting it. I don't like a lot of what we have done either, but you take the bad with the good. How about if you try to go it alone for a couple decades?

I am not missing the point. I just don't care about your narrative.

I know what health care costs. What I am saying is that these costs are not sustainable because technology is exploding and you are soon going to be able to spend an unlimited amount of money keeping people alive. What do you do then?

This present system would be like having a national automobile insurance system where people can completely trash their cars and the state will pick up the tab. How long would that last? Individuals need to be responsible for themselves. There is a finite amount of money that any society can spend on health care. You do the math.

And within the context of the present system, a market-based system where there is actual competition would be MUCH cheaper than the fascist system in the U.S. or any NHC system. Government is [in 99% of all cases with all things] THE most inefficient way to do EVERYTHING. Otherwise, they would be doing everything [just like in all the failed states that have tried such, e.g., the USSR, Red China, N. Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, etc.].

 

No I am not saying that - especially when “closing the gap” is a national initiative. But in an ideal world there should be no difference in health care outcomes. Our infant mortality rate is an OVERALL indicator - as is your and please do NOT even think about claiming Aus is a more “homogenous” society because we left THAT behind in the 1960s Andy now our population is now more diverse than yours.

Just a reminder that this is a moderated forum

And we STILL have already paid for that through being dragged into YOUR wars. BTW where were you in Bougainville? Timor?

Why? Because I am challenging your long held right wing misconceptions?

What we are already doing. Setting realistic goals for the patient and family. I have worked both public and private care - private has a tendency to “keep milking the cow” as long as there is a hope of getting money whereas public, where funding is pre set will sit down with the patient and family and talk of realistic goals i.e. We can do the surgery but because your lungs are so impacted by smoking your chances of serving are X your chances of ending on a ventilator for the rest of your days is Y your chances of living now beyond z are W

in the USA 1 in 5 people who die die in ICU. NOT 1 in 5 ICU patients die but 1 in 5 expected deaths are in ICU - why put a dying person through that?

You really have no idea do you? Here we put a LOT of money into preventative health care, care of chronic conditions etc etc etc - all UHCs do

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita
Why has no one shown this to you before?

I just do not believe that you have never ever checked tis out for yourself

 

Government virtually outlaws health insurance, especially for seniors.

The only option for seniors is to accept the government program or be bankrupted.

Government begins cost cuts, so people voice complaint.

Statist: "Hurr, durr, you love socialism!!!"

Socialism is a death cult.

 

Let's clarify a few things here...
1. Do you really believe that Americans do not understand what has been going on with our health care system over the past 60 years? Do you believe we are that ignorant, that only an elightened Aus can understand this? We are living it and WE UNDERSTAND.

2. The U.S. health care system is NOT a private system. It is a fascist system, that is, a cabal of corporate interests who have been given essentially monopoly power by the government and they have run ram-shod over the American people for decades now. EVERYBODY here understands this. It is called massive corruption.

3. Since the corporations run the system [and have bought off the leadership of the health care professions to this end], money is invested in those areas which provide the highest returns [and they make sure that the government and insurance companies are on-board, that is, reimbursing for those things]. This is why the U.S. has the best technology-related health care [it's the most profitable]. That's why BIG Pharma is what it is. We understand this.

If you have a solution for our problems, please use the space below and tell us what we might do to ameliorate them. Health care is enormously complex on multiple levels [even without all the corruption].

I get that UHC systems are performing better than ours, but understand that you have been the beneficiary [as has the ROW] of much of the technology that was invested here [which is fine]. As mentioned previously, NHC's are not sustainable due to the fact that everybody seems to want to dodge the demon of death and would like as much money spent as possible to this end. We are quickly reaching a point where it will not be possible to spend as much money as the increasing levels of technology will demand and somebody is going to have to decide who lives and who dies. Not a good thing.

https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Australia/United-States/People

Australia: white 92%, Asian 7%, aboriginal and other 1%

United States: white 79.96%, black 12.85%, Asian 4.43%, Amerindian and Alaska native 0.97%, native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.18%, two or more races 1.61% (July 2007 estimate)

Please note that included in the "white" population in the U.S., at least 20-25% of this is Hispanic [who have incredibly high rates of diabetes (and uncontrolled diabetes, at that]. Now do you see why the statistics are what they are?

Perhaps you need to up your defense spending [A$31.75B, 1.98% GDP in 2021] and go it alone. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/AUS/australia/military-spending-defense-budget

What kind of weak-ass thing is that to say? Do you consider yourself left-wing? I do not consider myself political in the least. I am for the most freedom possible [like most Americans].

What type of health care professional are you? And who exactly gets to set "realistic goals?" The ICU is the U.S. is highly profitable and over-used as a result [just like the reporting of C19 deaths [reimbursement].

Compared to what? A real private system would do 100x's better because people would actually care [through compassion and not through a government mandate].

 

The ACA's reductions in Medicare Advantage overpayments were fully implemented. Surprise, they didn't destroy the program. But they did save the taxpayers many tens of billions of dollars.

 

We've known for decades that this would be part of the solution.

Biden Pitches Tax Hike On High-Earners To Solve Medicare Funding Crisis

"The budget I am releasing this week will make the Medicare trust fund solvent beyond 2050 without cutting a penny in benefits..."

He could be lying about that, given that he lies about everything, but, still, let's see the size of the hikes and who they apply too.

'President Joe Biden on Tuesday proposed raising taxes on Americans earning over $400,000 per year, and granting the government new power to negotiate prescription drug prices as part of an attempt to keep Medicare afloat for the next two decades.'

'Biden's budget, set for release on Thursday, proposes raising Medicare taxes from 3.8% to 5% for those making above $400,000.'

That's an almost $5,000/mo tax bump for folks making $400k. Seems like these folks are always virtue signalling on how much they would love to pay more taxes, so, here's their chance!

'and would eliminate a loophole used by business owners and high-earners to avoid additional taxes, according to a White House fact sheet. In fact, it's the same loophole the Bidens used to dodge as much as $500,000 in taxes..'

Not to mention all the taxes the Biden's dodged by not declaring their bribery income.

'In addition to the higher Medicare tax rate on income above $400,000, Biden’s plan would eliminate a loophole that allows certain business owners who receive income through an S corporation, limited liability company, or limited partnership to avoid paying Medicare taxes on some of their income.'

That likely needs more clarity.

'The plan would also dedicate the proceeds from a tax created as part of Obamacare — known as the net investment income tax — to the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund. While doing so would not impact the overall federal deficit, since it amounts to diverting an existing revenue stream, the proposal does allow the administration to say it is extending the program’s solvency. -Bloomberg Law.'

That sounds like a wash.