CNN.com

Monday, February 8, 2010

Obama is tackling healthcare... still?

Obama is having a "bipartisan" meeting to discuss healthcare reform on Feb. 25.  This is great!  Now instead of barring Republicans from the meeting altogether, he is going to have them right there in the room so that they can be ignored. 

Republicans have made it very clear that they have heard the people and will not support a federal take-over of healthcare.  This means that the entire legislative process needs to be restarted.  Obama still thinks that he can bribe Republicans enough to get them to sign onto this rediculous plan.  There is really no solution that will work in the long run because the fundamentals are the problem.  Neither the Democrat (Progressive) nor the currently recommended Republican plans for changing the system will work to fix the insolvency issue that is our current entitlement fiasco.

The fundamental issues are that as life-expectancy has increased, the retirement age has not and too many people have no "skin in the game" concerning medical costs.  This means that programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are eternally doomed. 

Look at Paul Ryan's "Roadmap for America's Future" lifted in part from here:
Medicare and Social Security would be preserved for those currently receiving benefits, or becoming eligible in the next 10 years (those 55 and older today). Both programs would be made permanently solvent.
Universal access to affordable health care would be guaranteed by refundable tax credits ($2,300 for individuals, $5,700 for families) for purchasing portable coverage in any state. As persons under 55 became Medicare eligible, they would receive payments averaging $11,000 a year, indexed to inflation and pegged to income, with low-income people receiving more support.
Ryan's plan would fund medical savings accounts from which low-income people would pay minor out-of-pocket medical expenses. All Americans, regardless of income, would be allowed to establish MSAs -- tax-preferred accounts for paying such expenses.

Ryan's plan would allow workers under 55 the choice of investing more than one-third of their current Social Security taxes in personal retirement accounts similar to the Thrift Savings Plan long available to, and immensely popular with, federal employees. This investment would be inheritable property, guaranteeing that individuals will never lose the ability to dispose every dollar they put into these accounts.

Ryan would raise the retirement age. If, when Congress created Social Security in 1935, it had indexed the retirement age (then 65) to life expectancy, today the age would be in the mid-70s. The system was never intended to do what it is doing -- subsidizing retirements that extend from one-third to one-half of retirees' adult lives.
Look at these common sense solutions, then look at the quagmire that is the 2,000 page Progressive solution to healthcare.  Tell me which one makes sense for both current and future stability.

No comments:

Post a Comment