In addition to the nationwide protest of April 5 (Hands Off!), there were also nationwide protests in early May (May Day!) including here in Fxburg on May 5. On June 14 the next nationwide protests, are planned to coincide with the bank-breaking military parade in DC ("NO KINGS DAY!"). I expect the American people will keep speaking up and showing up to protest the many ways in which this administration has, indeed, lost the plot.
All around the world, Norway, Japan, United Kingdom, Kuwait, Sweden, Bahrain, Canada, United Arab Emirates, Denmark, Finland, Slovenia, Italy, Portugal, Cyprus, Spain, and Iceland manage to provide health care for all - single payer health care. They spend less money for health care and EVERYONE has access. They have ZERO medical bill bankruptcies.
Universal health care supports a healthy work force and allows small businesses to flourish - attracting workers who currently must stay where they are to keep their health insurance.
The research is impeccable - single payer health care is more efficient, cheaper, and produces better outcomes. Just check a comparison of maternal and neonate death rates around the world if you want to open your eyes.
Yes, we have the best health care in the world in the USA - but only for the RICH!
Medicare loses an estimated $58.5 billion to $83.9 billion per year due to fraud, errors, and abuse. While the exact amount of fraud is difficult to quantify, studies estimate that between 7.66% and 8.58% of Medicare payments are improper. This translates to billions of dollars lost annually to fraudulent activities and errors. Verifying one's eligibility for benefits would seem to be a small price to pay to keep such an important program solvent.
Republicans are working to ensure that Medicare is sustainable by ensuring that only people eligible under the original Plan continue to get the care they need. It was largely Democrats who added able-bodied, non-elderly, non-disabled persons to gain benefits and thereby bring closer the day that the program will be unsustainable. It is Democrats who are fighting against removing those who are ineligible or should be ineligible from the rolls.
Some people just don't deserve health care, am I right?
I mean if you are not employed, or if you're making minimum wage, or are contingent labor, you are unworthy, right? You don't really deserve health care do you?
And this is even more true if you are younger than 65 and/or able-bodied, right?
I mean what if you are riding a bicycle because you can't afford a car and you get hit by a uninsured drunk driver? Well obviously you are able-bodied and probably under 65 and not disabled, riding a bike and all, so if you don't have health insurance . . . well bad on you.
Maybe would could screen out these uninsured wastrels from getting into the emergency room, right? Just a drag on the economy, right?
We need to economize these kind of ridiculous expenses so we can give tax cuts to billionaires, right? I mean they ARE the winners - they proved it by becoming so rich!
If you can't afford a car and can't afford health insurance, then you most likely fall into an income category where existing programs cover your medical expenses. Existing laws require emergency rooms to treat life-threatening conditions. Are you OK with letting the system go broke without trying to eliminate ineligible beneficiaries?
Well, that's certainly the propaganda that Republicans are hoping people will fall for. They certainly want folks to believe that there are loads of undeserving people on Medicare, and that if we just remove them, that will solve our problem.
That misses that actually going through and removing people isn't free, that there aren't actually that many people who should be removed, that getting this wrong means we're going to be denying healthcare to people who desperately need it, and that another way to stave off insolvency would be increasing how much money we take in, not just cutting social programs.
Medicare is an entitlement program. It's a government-funded health insurance program that provides benefits to people aged 65 and older, and certain younger people with disabilities. Entitlement programs: provide benefits to individuals who meet specific eligibility requirements established by law, guaranteeing access to those benefits. The only changes being proposed are to include work requirements. You can argue against those work (school, job search, etc) requirements, but you cannot argue that this change will affect anyone on Medicare who are eligible. If, as you suggest, there aren't that many people who would be removed, then the budget savings will be less than is being projected.
Of course this change will affect people on Medicare who are eligible; now they will have to waste time and energy continually proving that they still meet the criteria. It's an unnecessary and expensive inconvenience.
If the entire point of this cruel nonsense is to keep the program solvent, then surely having it save less money than is being projected, or actually cost money, is pretty relevant.
In addition to the nationwide protest of April 5 (Hands Off!), there were also nationwide protests in early May (May Day!) including here in Fxburg on May 5. On June 14 the next nationwide protests, are planned to coincide with the bank-breaking military parade in DC ("NO KINGS DAY!"). I expect the American people will keep speaking up and showing up to protest the many ways in which this administration has, indeed, lost the plot.
YES!
This is a powerful piece of writing. I hope it will be shared widely.
Thank you!
M4A
All around the world, Norway, Japan, United Kingdom, Kuwait, Sweden, Bahrain, Canada, United Arab Emirates, Denmark, Finland, Slovenia, Italy, Portugal, Cyprus, Spain, and Iceland manage to provide health care for all - single payer health care. They spend less money for health care and EVERYONE has access. They have ZERO medical bill bankruptcies.
Universal health care supports a healthy work force and allows small businesses to flourish - attracting workers who currently must stay where they are to keep their health insurance.
The research is impeccable - single payer health care is more efficient, cheaper, and produces better outcomes. Just check a comparison of maternal and neonate death rates around the world if you want to open your eyes.
Yes, we have the best health care in the world in the USA - but only for the RICH!
Medicare loses an estimated $58.5 billion to $83.9 billion per year due to fraud, errors, and abuse. While the exact amount of fraud is difficult to quantify, studies estimate that between 7.66% and 8.58% of Medicare payments are improper. This translates to billions of dollars lost annually to fraudulent activities and errors. Verifying one's eligibility for benefits would seem to be a small price to pay to keep such an important program solvent.
Republicans are working to ensure that Medicare is sustainable by ensuring that only people eligible under the original Plan continue to get the care they need. It was largely Democrats who added able-bodied, non-elderly, non-disabled persons to gain benefits and thereby bring closer the day that the program will be unsustainable. It is Democrats who are fighting against removing those who are ineligible or should be ineligible from the rolls.
Some people just don't deserve health care, am I right?
I mean if you are not employed, or if you're making minimum wage, or are contingent labor, you are unworthy, right? You don't really deserve health care do you?
And this is even more true if you are younger than 65 and/or able-bodied, right?
I mean what if you are riding a bicycle because you can't afford a car and you get hit by a uninsured drunk driver? Well obviously you are able-bodied and probably under 65 and not disabled, riding a bike and all, so if you don't have health insurance . . . well bad on you.
Maybe would could screen out these uninsured wastrels from getting into the emergency room, right? Just a drag on the economy, right?
We need to economize these kind of ridiculous expenses so we can give tax cuts to billionaires, right? I mean they ARE the winners - they proved it by becoming so rich!
If you can't afford a car and can't afford health insurance, then you most likely fall into an income category where existing programs cover your medical expenses. Existing laws require emergency rooms to treat life-threatening conditions. Are you OK with letting the system go broke without trying to eliminate ineligible beneficiaries?
Well, that's certainly the propaganda that Republicans are hoping people will fall for. They certainly want folks to believe that there are loads of undeserving people on Medicare, and that if we just remove them, that will solve our problem.
That misses that actually going through and removing people isn't free, that there aren't actually that many people who should be removed, that getting this wrong means we're going to be denying healthcare to people who desperately need it, and that another way to stave off insolvency would be increasing how much money we take in, not just cutting social programs.
Medicare is an entitlement program. It's a government-funded health insurance program that provides benefits to people aged 65 and older, and certain younger people with disabilities. Entitlement programs: provide benefits to individuals who meet specific eligibility requirements established by law, guaranteeing access to those benefits. The only changes being proposed are to include work requirements. You can argue against those work (school, job search, etc) requirements, but you cannot argue that this change will affect anyone on Medicare who are eligible. If, as you suggest, there aren't that many people who would be removed, then the budget savings will be less than is being projected.
Of course this change will affect people on Medicare who are eligible; now they will have to waste time and energy continually proving that they still meet the criteria. It's an unnecessary and expensive inconvenience.
If the entire point of this cruel nonsense is to keep the program solvent, then surely having it save less money than is being projected, or actually cost money, is pretty relevant.