What happens to businesses if they have to insure 65-67 year olds??

[SugarShack]

If they have to pay the healthcare of their 65-67 yr old employees, the highest, uninsurable group,
it will wipe out any payroll tax benefit they get on existing payroll. You'll see 60-65 yr olds laid off or fired. Who will hire the group that is the reason Medicare was created? Remember, the war on poverty? No one in the private sector would insure them! So they gave them public insurance, Medicare. Now...employers are suppose to pay for them? Whatever is left of business here in the U.S will be gone, unless they lay them off. Then what? How will a person without a job, pay for private healthcare, the most expensive policy a person can buy??? This is reform???

It's moronic! at best.....and this was a "jobs" speech? :puke:

[Hawkowl]

1. It doesn't matter

Since if you are out of work and over 55, you aren't getting hired anyway because of health care expenses. So expect more mass layoffs of seniors who can't retire. Hell, with global warming, we can't even just drift out to sea on an ice flow and not burden the kids.

[SugarShack]

9. exactly...but those now working will get let go.

[Enrique]

2. i predict many 65-67 year-olds will be uninsured n/t

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. I wasn't aware that there is a specific proposal to raise the Medicare age.

I absolutely agree that it's a bad idea. But I didn't hear anything in last night's speech to suggest that's part of the bill. All I heard was a comment about "minor changes" to Medicare. That could also mean changing how providers are paid, or taking steps to reduce fraud and waste, which would be a good thing.

I am getting close to needing Medicare. I recently had to accept an early retirement because my job is being moved to another city and I couldn't transfer - so of course I would be concerned about this because at my age I can't afford private insurance. But before I panic I want to see what is really being considered.

[SugarShack]

10. words were...must make changes but will not change it for those already in the system. that's

a "people" reform...not cost controls on big pharma, etc. What WAS said was regarding changes to PEOPLE in the system.

[truedelphi]

12. You need to realize that the decision was made to include some

Five Hundred Billion dollars of cuts to Medicare as part of the "selling" point for the Health Care Reform Act. We the Public were told that the huge sums of money would come from ending the "mismanagement" and the "waste" and the "fraud."

They don't have the money or time or the staffing to properly do the "fraud" end of the situation.

So for the last six months, what you are hearing is that they can easily cut the "exorbitant" amounts paid to providers.

If you understand the positon that doctors are in, that even some twenty years ago, the decent doctors that spent real quality time with older patients and who were trained in geriatric care, they were deciding to quit having MediCare patients because they had to have at least one staff memeber spending all day dealing with the billing. And then they receive only a fraction of themoney they would receive if the patient was not MediCare.

That meant that many people I took care of (I did elder care back then) had NO provider to go to. Unless the doctor kept them on as his older patients.

People here on DU have cheered the "common sense" of Pres. Obama in choosing to cut payments to providers rather than hit the elderly with price increases. And I truly don't see where the elderly would get the ability to cover the price increases.

But if most of the providers leave the field, then what? The providers are not being paid, and the billing is complicated. So who does someone on MediCare go to, if no one in their neighborhood will see them?

[SugarShack]

15. I'll steer them right here...start with Gov. Rick Scott of FLA who stole 4 BILLION from Medicare!

And to think, he's running the state they are using as a model for right to work, enviro slaughter, and election fraud.

[truedelphi]

18. Florida always shows the nation what is happening to us

A few years before its micro becomes the US macro.

Florida 2000 - first state to have its election results oepnly questioned, and never believed.

Then the US as a whole followed suit, 2004.

Florida 2010 - had candidates from both Parties running for governor, and both had criminal elements.
Vote Republican, and get a crook. Or else, vote Democratic and get a person whose closest associates were crooks. (This is what happens when the Republicans infiltrate the Democratic party.)

The US as a whole - I imagine what we will see in to 2012 is what went on in Florida in 2010.

[dana_b]

19. providers are already complaining that they

aren't paid enough by Medicare so this would just make it worse. You are 100% correct - more and more will refuse Medicare patients altogether. It will be a useless service to many.

[Yo_Mama]

23. Already a scheduled 29.5% cut to physicians next year

Currently, it's scheduled for January 1st, 2012. My doctor finally caved and told his staff that he could no longer accept new Medicare patients. He'll keep those he has but can no longer afford to keep taking on new patients.

What happens to the millions of aging Boomers?

Older patients generally need more careful care, longer visits, closer evaluations and much more careful medical evaluations. They're not cheap to treat if you are doing it right. At least 70% of those visits are already loss generators for the practice. Next year every single one of them will be - unless he misbills, which he is not willing to do.

There is no way businesses can afford to insure these people - they're already not hiring older people for jobs with benefits because they can't afford to pay the benefits.

So what now? Don't tell me that net costs to the system aren't going to be higher when these people can't get decent primary care.

[anneboleyn]

27. Yes, great post. In our area there is only one physician who accepts Medicare.

What do our seniors do? Or people with disabilities who are on Medicare? Our citizens are being thrown to the wolves.

[Yo_Mama]

29. All I know

... is that you don't save money when people on government insurance programs have to go to the ER to get medical care.

This is not even just heartless. It's ridiculous.

I do free computer and IT work for this doctor, because not only is he a great doctor, but he does a lot of charity work. Three weekends in a row we had to open the office when I was there to do computer work on off hours. He is open five days a week and half a day on Saturday. Each time it was a crisis that would have caused a visit to the ER if he had not been willing to see the patient and stabilize the patient. Further, in a least one case if the patient had had to go to the ER and wait it would have turned into a really serious problem.

We have to get real sometime, and IMO now is about the right time for that. Making realistic decisions about Medicare is the key to saving money overall on the program - pretend fixes are going to generate much higher costs. Forcing doctors either to cheat on billing or drop patients cannot be the answer.

Most docs in primary care are making more like 75K or 90K than the figures you see cited - that is, if they are really running a practice that doesn't cater to rich people.

[truedelphi]

32. Very good post.

I'd like to emphasize the last point you made, one which many people do not realize (Malpractice insurance eats away much of a physician's earnings)

Most docs in primary care are making more like 75K or 90K than the figures you see cited - that is, if they are really running a practice that doesn't cater to rich people.

[truedelphi]

33. Thank you. It hurts to know that anyone is thrown to the

Wolves especially since in the last fifteen months alone we as a nation were able to legislate:

1) Summer 2009, Thirty three billions of dollars to keep the non-winnable war in Afghanistan going
2) This spring, Sixty billions of dollars to our partners in the Mideast (Saudi Arabia) for weaponry
3) Last fall, Some 150 + billions of dollars that Obama offered to the nuke warhead industry so that he would find it "easier to negotiate with" the Republicans on his Salt Treaty.

That is over 240 Billions of dollars, a quarter of a trillion bucks for war and death.

All because our politicians are too namby pamby to stand up to the MIC. Yet despite how easy the Political Class finds the money for the MIC, we as a nation must "cut Social Security and MediCare System needs 'adjustments.' "

[Control-Z]

24. The only thing I've ever heard the president

say about changes to medicare was about provider side changes and means testing. That is it. The media started using the word "cuts" immediately after the speech last night, when in fact the president used the word change. Big difference. I'm so tired of assumptions.

[woo me with science]

28. It was already on the table once.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/what-obama-was-willing-to-give-away/?utm_source=Blog&utm_medium=twitter
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/92539/obama-boehner-debt-ceiling-press-conference-concessions-revenue

The 650 billion in cuts Obama put on the table for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security during the faux debt ceiling "crisis" definitely included a proposal to raise the eligibility age.

We can assume the Super Committee will *start* by considering options for spending cuts that Obama has already signaled he would accept.

[Broderick]

4. Single payer

The insurance companies are raping America.

[SugarShack]

11. Indeed. Medicare was a mess when it began, and was changed overnight to single payer.

[Broderick]

16. Medicare is a mess NOW

because it is apportioned by insurance companies raping America.

[dtexdem]

5. Some of them will drop health coverage for everyone.

It's time to strike back at ALL who advocate cutting the most-successful health coverage program our country has.

(Note: my Medicare just went into effect this month.)

[SugarShack]

13. Congrats!!! You paid for it! Obamacare they have to provide thus another reason to repeal it.

[Autumn]

6. I'm sure that waivers can be put in place

so the corporations can be protected.

[RebelOne]

7. I was receiving health care insurance at my job until I was

laid off at 70 years old. I was eligible for Medicare, but my employer's health care was a lot better. So when I was laid off, I had Medicare to fall back on. I was not laid off because of my age since three others were laid off at the same time and they were 20 to 30 years younger than me.

[SugarShack]

17. Rare so not costly ...yet. Please read what happened when ALL 65-67 yr olds had to be considered.

[truedelphi]

8. Three summers ago, I hit the streets with my resume

Which accented my experience as an elder care worker.

Fabulous references. Nineteen years of experience.

And at nursing agency after nursing agency, I was culled from the group that got to come back for a second interview.

At the end of the summer, no longer able to contain my frustration and disappointment, I went and sat at the back of the room to see what would become of the much younger job candidates who were being advised to sit together for a second interview.

And the woman who was managing the overall hiring came to me and said, "I'll tell you something, so you understand. Don't take this personally. You are in an age group whose health insurance premium cost is so staggering that you are "untouchable. This nursing agency cannot afford you."

Now granted, if I had my video camera with me, or one of the cell phone/camera devices, I would have a lawsuit against this agency. But just as "She said, she said" kind of lawsuit, I am without the ability t o pursue this.

However, it should be pointed out that I was 56 yrs old at the time. Imagine if I was 65 to 67!

[SugarShack]

20. So just how was this a pep speech for jobs? He has now scared the shit out of everyone 55 and up!

There are no jobs...and this congress will pass a jobs bill. They'll take the cuts, and not change the tax loopholes...just watch. And Obama makes is so damn easy for them.

[FiveGoodMen]

25. "Obama makes it so damn easy for them"

That's why they made it so easy for him to get elected.

Not kidding. McCain's behavior and choice of running mate seemed like they were throwing the election.

And I think that was the plan: Get puke policies implemented by "Democrats" and let the public blame the left for all the harm.

[SammyWinstonJack]

36. "That's why they made it so easy for him to get elected."

Exactly right.




And he has done their bidding to the detriment of the majority of Americans.

Heckuvajob Obama. You should be so proud! :puke:

[dana_b]

21. oh truedelphi - that makes me nauseous

I am so sorry that happened to you. I expect the same when I go back out to look for a job. I am also a nurse but was laid off a few months ago and couldn't find employment because I am partially disabled. Now I am fully (but temporarily) disabled and am awaiting surgery. After I heal, I hope to get back out into the working world but I'm not holding my breath. I'm 46 but I know that it will get harder and harder each year.

[enough]

22. This says it all. I wish Obama could hear this story. (nt)

[FiveGoodMen]

26. Wouldn't help.

Don't kid yourself.

He's not stupid.

He's not out of the loop.

He's on the other side.

[raccoon]

38. Please consider starting a thread with this. nt

[sarcasmo]

14. No worries, they won't hire 65-67 year olds. My friend who is 60 applied at my

brother in laws factory and the plant manager told my brother in law that my friend was to old, we all know that the plant manager was wrong. If you are 60-67 and need a job you are pretty much screwed.

[customerserviceguy]

30. They already have enough reasons

to get rid of the sixty-somethings. This doesn't affect that one bit. If a firm values the experience of it's sexagenarians, it keeps them, if it doesn't, it's figured out a way to phase them out by that point.

[jtuck004]

31. They still pay health care for 80 year old managers, and friggin' CEO's - so they

are making choices, not ending it for everyone. Certainly not for the CFO, the accountant, a few of those upper-management types.

Now, suddenly, they can't afford it for Susan out in the shop? Or Russ? Is the owner getting health care? And she is how old? But not enough for the workers?

Choices, choices...

From a worker perspective, if they think it is unfair, some might consider ending this asking for jobs stuff. Maybe pool resources and buy or make a business as a cooperative filling a need. A corp, but with a business structure where everyone owns shares (or can own, if they want - not everyone does) and tries to make those assets make money. People are paid fairly for the type of work they do, their shares accumulate value (we hope) and the company makes sure they can be purchased back at any time. Done well it can be done as cheaply (if that's your groove) as anyone inside the country. Market yourself as American made, and educate your neighbors in how it helps them to buy local.

If it can return sufficient profit it may be better than they get from a 401K, or even gold, for at least the next decade, perhaps much longer.

Maybe the co-op can afford part of a lobbyist, who can argue against big pharma and doctor fees which will hurt you whether owner or employee. (Perhaps our national "committee" could look there before they start re-allocating Social Security and Medicare, since there is barely enough of those services now).

[truedelphi]

34. Tiny kick to keep this topic alive. n/t

[tritsofme]

35. For most seniors, Medicare only becomes your primary insurance when you retire.

If you continue working into your late 60s or 70s, in most cases your employer's health plan (assuming you have one) will be primary over Medicare, you aren't just dumped into Medicare at age 65.

[pitohui]

37. nothing, people over 40 are fired and become unemployable already

business doesn't suffer from age discrimination, they get away with it boldly...and they will continue to get away w. it boldly, you can always make up some reason why the old uncool person don't fit in