- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why can't we just let younger people buy in to medicare?
Posted on 11/21/25 at 10:18 am to TigerintheNO
Posted on 11/21/25 at 10:18 am to TigerintheNO
quote:
isn't that because 80% of the people on Medicare are in their 70s & 80s
Pretty much.
This goes back to the discussion in another thread yesterday. To quickly sum it up, we've only had the medical technology that is routinely employed now for a really short amount of time —the blink of an eye—relative to human existence.
People my age and my parent's age take it for granted because it was being developed during our lifetimes (even though she was born in 1941, by the time my mother was old enough to need a heart stent, for example, they were available, etc.)
But IMO we've got to seriously ask ourselves whether it makes sense to assume that everyone is entitled to expensive medical services. No other technology driven industry works that way. Even cell phones took a long time to be viewed as essential items for everyone.
And one of the biggest areas of availability that would really move the needle is if we stopped covering massively expensive procedures and treatments to try to keep elderly people alive for another six months or a year. That practice is outrageously expensive.
If someone's 84 and you find out they have cancer, maybe that treatment should be on their own dime or not at all. If someone is 100 lbs overweight, whats wrong with requiring that they attend some kind of weight loss program and lose a certain amount of weight before you will cover their heart procedure? Heck, that could even be a requirement that is levied after the heart procedure. You have a heart attack, get treatment, then you have a year to lose X number of pounds or Medicare sends you a bill for what they paid for the heart procedure (or another alternative is that they just don't cover any more until you lose the weight)?
Everyone struggles to find solutions to health care/health insurance IMO because they never get out of the box of only ever thinking about insurance.
We've got to star thinking about availability entitlement and we've got to roll back some of that entitlement IMO. It's impossible to improve on the situation when the populace is as unhealthy as ours is. Forcing people to get healthier IMO is the single biggest improvement we could make.
This post was edited on 11/21/25 at 10:20 am
1
Posted on 11/21/25 at 10:47 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
wackatimesthree
Quick hijack. I want to apologize for the other day. I was out of it and really thought I was responding to someone else, not you. Nothing I wrote even applied to you and I'm sorry for being an a-hole. I know we don't really know each other, but I feel badly about that exchange and want you to know I didn't mean any of it.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 11:39 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
You beat me to it.
"Nobody thinks Medicare is a bad program." Yeah, they do. The people who need to get paid for the medical services they rendered think it's a bad program.
And again I return to the triangle of price, quality, and availability.
Increasing Medicare might mean improving price and availability, but to the extent that it does that, it also means decreasing quality.
This is something we're going to have to talk through and it's going to be tough for both parties. It might mean that doctors don't make $300k+ a year anymore. The number of doctors in the US is artificially constrained to keep earning/market place value high. Honestly, I think that's why you're starting to see more and more PAs and NPs out in the real world.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 11:40 am to BestBanker
quote:
No.
Good grief.
Turn the whole Healthcare over to the government. What could go wrong?
Do you somehow think that medicare is proving the actual healthcare? They are just paying for it. My mom and my inlaws both use it extensively...they see normal doctors.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 12:08 pm to kennypowers
There is an inherent conflict.
Insurance companies who want to keep earning. Medical professionals who want to keep earning (hospitals too).
And the American population who can't afford to pay for all of it.
I don't see why we can't do a voluntary Medicais OPTION.
If you want private health care, get insurance and get it. But Medicare will pretty much also give you the same thing, just without the same ease and comfort. Compare it to an airline business class vs economy, you still get to the same place, you get your hip replacement or whatever, but if you are private you get it quicker and your doctor might be a bit more experienced, but the "economy class" will also get it done.
But at least everyone would get some of what they want.
Insurance companies who want to keep earning. Medical professionals who want to keep earning (hospitals too).
And the American population who can't afford to pay for all of it.
I don't see why we can't do a voluntary Medicais OPTION.
If you want private health care, get insurance and get it. But Medicare will pretty much also give you the same thing, just without the same ease and comfort. Compare it to an airline business class vs economy, you still get to the same place, you get your hip replacement or whatever, but if you are private you get it quicker and your doctor might be a bit more experienced, but the "economy class" will also get it done.
But at least everyone would get some of what they want.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:40 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Quick hijack. I want to apologize for the other day. I was out of it and really thought I was responding to someone else, not you. Nothing I wrote even applied to you and I'm sorry for being an a-hole. I know we don't really know each other, but I feel badly about that exchange and want you to know I didn't mean any of it.
Apology accepted and thanks for offering it.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:49 pm to kennypowers
quote:
s. It might mean that doctors don't make $300k+ a year anymore.
That is what that choice would mean. That's why doctors in other countries generally do not make as much as their American counterparts.
And that's fine...as long as people understand that the best and brightest are going to go into finance or AI tech or something else instead of medicine going forward.
Again, there are three points on the triangle. You improve one, it's going to cost you on at least one other one.
That also has implications upstream. If doctors don't make $300,000+ anymore, it's also no longer reasonable to ask people to forgo 15-20 years of earning potential while in school/residency and for the total process to cost roughly half a million dollars, like it does now.
That's what happens when you socialize something. All aspects of it then have to be socialized as well. Doctors make what they make not just because the admissions process is rigorous (reducing supply, like you said), but also because they have to make up for a lot of lost time and expense by the time they are fully credentialed.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:52 pm to kennypowers
better idea you get a decent job with employer sponsored health insurance pay into medicare for 45 years before you ever file a claim on medicare and then when you're 65 you get medicare!
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:12 pm to Burt Reynolds
quote:
Because traditional Medicare is less efficient than a private insurer. Less program integrity and utilization management controls that allows for more waste/abuse.
a substantial number of current Medicare beneficiaries, over 30 million, “privatize” their Medicare by enrolling in a Medicare Advantage plan through Blue Cross, Aetna or Humana.
Medicare encourages beneficiaries to enroll in these plans. it eliminates a lot of the FWA.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News