Does Medicare Benefit the Poor?

[Narkos]

I've been having this ridiculously long argument with a winger about HCR. He claims that the program represents a "redistribution of wealth" by virtue of the Medicare taxes raised on those making more than 250K. He claims (without any supporting evidence) that those who will be hit with these taxes will get less out of Medicare than they put in, therefore it's the conservative bugaboo about "redistribution". I came across a paper (incidentally by the brother of former Bush press secretary McClellan) in which he states We find the distributional consequences of the Medicare program are roughly neutral in dollar terms; households living in high income neighborhoods pay more in taxes, but they also receive more in benefits." It gets complicated, but the paper argued that even though the rich actually receive more benefits, in terms of "utility", the poor actually end being the winners, therefore it is a redistribution from the rich to the poor. Here's the paper:
www.dartmouth.edu/~jskinner/Papers/medicare%20v5.7_revised.pdf

Any thoughts? I think I have a good argument that Medicare is not that progressive, but in fact is slightly regressive.

[napi21]

1. It depends on each individual case. Things like how long does

someone live after being on Medicare, or wether someone dies from a stroke or heart attack v/1 someone who gets cancer & requires chemo, or dialysis or some other long term EXPENSIVE treatment. Mwedicare in an insurance business, the same as all the others and with any7 insurance you want a big pool where those who rarely use it help pay for those who need it.

[Narkos]

2. On an individual level, of course anything goes.I'm talking about an

aggregate level and trying to undermine this guy's thesis that medicare is redistribution. I might be wrong, but I want to know if I'm wrong from real sources.

[katmondoo]

8. I am 80 and on Medicare

10 yrs ago I had serious Pneumonia, stayed 3 weeks in the hospital, lung had to be scrapped, 5 years ago I developed bladder cancer for which I am still getting treatments. I could never have afforded the care without Medicare. Yes, I have to pay my share, took me 3 years but I am alive and doing everything I want to do. I paint, make miniature furnitue, I sew, go to the beach, going to New york in July. I would be living in a tent today without Medicare.

[sam sarrha]

3. this is "redistribution of wealth"... >Link>> bottom 80% only has 7% of Americas Wealth..!! that is

why the economy is bad, the Rich have LOOTED nearly all the money ..this is the basic problem with Fascism=Corporations running the Government

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

the GOP's a Cargo Cult of Psychotic OCD Wealth Hoarders, the NeoCon's Dominionist control has indoctrinated it's followers to believe in an Ideology based on believing that Wealth is the Measure of God's Favor of a Man.. therefore it is a sin to tax a rich man/corporation. it is also a sin to help the poor because God is punishing them, poverty is a Vice to them. explains a lot doesn't it..??

this is the most revealing of what is at the heart..'Oxymoran'..of NeoConism

http://doggo.tripod.com/doggchrisdomin.html

"snip...Leo Strauss was born in 1899 and died in 1973. ... He is most famous for resuscitating Machiavelli and introducing his principles as the guiding philosophy of the neo-conservative movement. ... More than any other man, Strauss breathed upon conservatism, inspiring it to rise from its atrophied condition and its natural dislike of change and to embrace an unbounded new political ideology that rides on the back of a revolutionary steed, hailing even radical change; hence the name Neo-Conservatives.

Significantly, Dominionism is a form of Social Darwinism.<48> It inherently includes the religious belief that wealth-power is a sign of God’s election. That is, out of the masses of people and the multitude of nations, wealth, in and of itself, is thought to indicate God’s approval on men and nations whereas poverty and sickness reflect God’s disapproval.

(It was not until I read this article that I realized that this is a fundamental tenet of Dominionists.

Worldly wealth and power are signs of God's favor -- to attempt to limit or decrease one's wealth and power is to disrespect God.

On the contrary, God's elect on Earth are called upon to increase their wealth and power.

It is not sufficient for a man to be a millionaire, or for a country to have sovereignty within its borders -- a man must strive to increase his wealth as much as possible, and a Dominionist government's behavior toward its neighbors must be "invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity".

Furthermore, any attempt to decrease a person's or a country's wealth and power -- to take from the rich to give to the poor, to reduce military spending and power -- is a direct attack on God.)

If “Secular Humanists are the greatest threat to Christianity the world has ever known,” as theologian Francis Schaeffer claimed, then who are the Humanists? According to Dominionists, humanists are the folks who allow or encourage licentious behavior in America. They are the undisciplined revelers.

Put all the enemies of the Dominionists together, boil them down to liquid and bake them into the one single most highly derided and contaminated individual known to man, and you will have before you an image of the quintessential “liberal” -- one of those folks who wants to give liberally to the poor and needy -- who desires the welfare and happiness of all Americans -- who insists on safety regulations for your protection and who desires the preservation of your values -- those damnable people are the folks that must be reduced to powerlessness -- or worse: extinction.

What would a “reconstructed” America look like under the Dominionists? K.L. Gentry, a Dominionist himself, suggests the following “elements of a theonomic approach to civic order,” which I strongly suggest should be compared to the Texas GOP platform of 2002, which reveals that we are not just talking about imaginary ideas but some things are already proposed on Republican agendas.<60> Dominionism’s concept of government according to Gentry is as follows:

“1. It obligates government to maintain just monetary policies ... fiat money, fractional reserve banking, and deficit spending.

“2. It provides a moral basis for elective government officials. ...

“3. It forbids undue, abusive taxation of the rich. ...

“4. It calls for the abolishing of the prison system and establishing a system of just restitution. *...

“5. A theonomic approach also forbids the release, pardoning, and paroling of murderers by requiring their execution. ...

“6. It forbids industrial pollution that destroys the value of property. ...

“7. It punishes malicious, frivolous malpractice suits. ...

“8. It forbids abortion rights. ... Abortion is not only a sin, but a crime, and, indeed, a capital crime.”<61>
. . .

* Gary North describes the ‘just restitution’ system of the bible, which happens to reinstitute slavery,
like this:


“At the other end of the curve, the poor man who steals is eventually caught and sold into bondage under a successful person. His victim receives payment; he receives training; his buyer receives a stream of labor services. If the servant is successful and buys his way out of bondage, he re-enters society as a disciplined man, and presumably a self-disciplined man. He begins to accumulate wealth.”...snip"

it is not well known that many of Reagan's and Bu$h41/43's White House Cabinet studied under Strauss at the U of Chicago..

and read this.. it gets deep, explains even more

http://www.insider-magazine.com/ChristianMafia.htm
"snip...The United States has experienced religious and cult hucksters throughout its history, from Cotton Mather and his Salem witch burners to Billy Sunday, Father Charles Coughlin, Charles Manson, Jim Jones, David Koresh, Marshall Applewhite, and others. But none have ever achieved the kind of power now possessed by a powerful and secretive group of conservative politicians and wealthy businessmen in the United States and abroad who are known among their adherents and friends as The Fellowship or The Family. The Fellowship and its predecessor organizations have used Jesus in the same way that McDonald’s uses golden arches and Coca Cola uses its stylized script lettering. Jesus is a logo and a slogan for the Fellowship. Jesus is used to justify the Fellowship’s access to the highest levels of government and business in the same way Santa Claus entices children into department stores and malls during the Christmas shopping season...snip"

we are just F'n Doom'd the GOP has a factory making never ending models of Dubya style Ignorant Psychotic Narsisistic idiots.. to run for president/government.. we will never get all the rats W planted everywhere in the government before he destroyed the economy of the world.

Palin is obviously a Dominionist.. that is why she is so stupid, it is required to be stupid to join..!!

[valerief]

4. When everyone starts out with the same amount of wealth at birth,

you can talk about redistribution of it. Otherwise, since it's skewed from the start, it's skewed to the end.

[sandnsea]

5. Uh, they took FICA, gambled away the economy

Got us to bail them out.

I'd say it's time we got some of our money back.

[TreasonousBastard]

6. I have learned to never argue with these people. You can't possibly win...

since they are doing the same thing you are doing-- trying to teach you the error of your thinking.

It makes no difference how correct and logical your arguments are-- neither of you will ever give up and admit the other might be right.

So, when someone goes on and on about this sort of nonsense, what I often do is get them to the head-exploding stage by simply telling them to pay their taxes and shut up about it.

[JDPriestly]

7. You have to be very, very lucky and healthy to be able to manage your own money or

at the age of 95. We all need help in our final years. Medicare is one way we make sure that even the "wealthy" victims of the Madoff Ponzi scheme will not have to die without medical care. Medicare is for the wealthy as well as for the poor. Everyone gets the help they need, and everyone pays in a percentage of their earnings. I think it would be fair to have everyone pay a small percent of every penny they earn up to a certain age into Medicare and Social Security. It is an insurance fund, not an investment.

Remember, if I buy insurance on my house, I have to pay into a fund from which I, hopefully, will never receive any money. Let's say that I pay for house insurance and some extremely wealthy person also pays. The wealthy person may get a huge insurance pay-out and a new house and I may never need or get a cent paid out to me.

Similarly, a very poor person could pay a small amount into Medicare and die before becoming eligible for Medicare. Another very poor person could pay a small amount into Medicare and live very long and need very little medical care.

A wealthy person could have some horrifically expensive disease. (How many times has Cheney had heart surgery already?) The wealthy person who becomes seriously, chronically ill may actually receive much more from Medicare than the poor person who is healthy. The redistribution argument applies to all kinds of insurance. If you have a huge house, you pay more for your insurance. If you have a small house, you pay less. In either case, you are insured. And just who collects depends on a roll of the dice. Same with Medicare. It's an insurance policy that you pay for as long as you work.

[katmondoo]

9. JD the payments comes out of your Social Security

I advise people not to turn their Medicare over to a HMO. Medicare Advantage is an HMO, the worse kind.

[sam sarrha]

10. what are the best options, in an opinion only.. i nearly there

[JDPriestly]

11. I am with Kaiser HMO. That was my insurer before I went on Medicare.

The problem with straight Medicare in L.A. is that, first, some doctors won't accept you, and second when I was insured by other insurance companies under PPO plans, my doctors did not follow through on my treatment. This is a big city. Your doctor does not really know you unless you see your doctor a lot.

I was impressed by Kaiser because the first time I went to see a doctor there, I walked out without finishing one of my routine tests. I had not really understood that I was supposed to take the test on the same day the doctor told me to take it. The doctor called me a couple of hours later -- at home, mind you -- and told me to come back and take the test before 4:00 p.m. that same afternoon. I realized that my doctor no only knew who I was, but he cared whether I was getting good medical treatment. That sold me on Kaiser.

That was the closest thing to a house call that I have had since the 1960s.