This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Going Geriatricidal
Naked Capitalism featured a piece today by Matt Stoller (Link). The not so surprising conclusion by Matt was that moving the age for Medicare availability from 65 to 67 will actually cost some lives. The article concludes that the two-year change in federal medical coverage will result in 1,261 additional deaths each year.
I’m reading this, thinking, “Hey, that’s not so bad!” Matt saw it differently:
Or we could leave things as they are, with a Medicare age at 65, and no extra seniors need die.
CBO estimates that raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 would reduce federal Medicare outlays, net of premiums and other offsetting receipts, by $148 billion from 2012 through 2021.
Take the two estimates together, total Early Exiters (EEs) over ten years = 12,610. This means the overall savings comes to a very tidy $11.7m per EE. A big bang for the buck, so to speak.
When Congress raises the age limit for Medicare (this will happen in 2013) it will be the first step on what will prove to be a very slippery slope. There has been much talk about a dreaded "Death Panel" that will decide who "Wins" and who "Loses". Changing Medicare age availability is a Death Panel decision. It's interesting/fitting that a majority of Congress and the President will kick the process off.
The CBO should do some more studies on potential savings. Sort of roll up their sleeves and have a look, as it were. I wonder what the savings might be if some new "rules" were adopted. On the list might be:
-No new knees or hips after age 85.
-No open heart surgery for men over 82. (Forget about that triple bi-pass that will keep you around another five years.) Women would be eligible up to 85. (Think of the pissing match that would cause)
-A diagnosis of late stage Alzheimer's gets one on a fast track to "Hospice Care". (No meds, palliative only. Door to door, so to speak, averages three weeks)
This subject will be on the front page for the next year while the Medicare "fix" is tossed around. After that, it will come up regularly when other ways to "save" a few bil. are found. I figure someone has to make some black humor from this, I might as well start now. Before you toss a brick my way, consider that I'm 62 and in four years, I will be a real player on this stage. Who knows? I might even become an EE'er. This joke is on me.
- advertisements -



The "sick care" system is dragging the entire nation down. We can save money by denying grammy care and killing her, or we can introduce some free market reforms and save the nation.
Let's kill grammy, right Bruce?
I write blogs. Killing grammy is a job for congress...
The blog you write constantly cheer leads for killing grammy in various ways. You are culpable and don't ever think for a minute you aren't.
Pure horseshit -- Coming from the person who ALREADY made their fortune perpetuating fraud. You didn't kill grammy, you robbed her before she was a grandma, and in your mind she was vulnerable, and therefore deserved it.
Now that the cycle of death is returning, it seems every "banker" wants to launder their own conscience through blogs, or blame someone else.
Typical of psychopaths championing ill gains for themselves and injustice for the rest.
Nice try.
Or just turn our entire county into a giant hospital so everyone has a job in healthcare until they retire
Check the European data. Rationing everywhere.
I've got medical directive that will prevent some hospital from hooking my near-dead butt up to a bunch of machines in order to pump money out of an insurer. DNR on one wrist and AMF on the other (hint: Adios ~ ~).
get the DNR tattoo on your chest where it will be the most visible in likely situation like i've done
What happens when Medicare is cut 40% by inflation? By this guy's count, inflation will be the biggest killer in America.
Rest assured the model will change so no one can see it coming and every faggot in pinstripes gets their bonus for "not lookin'"
We certainly possess the technology to continue printing money FOREVER to put trillions of dollars worth of medical-care into aging bodies while the younger generations sleep in basements and skip annual checkups and dental visits.
I don't see any problem.
retirement age in N-Europe to be 71 years (planned)
Also to add, unless you're very sick, a doctor is more likely to kill you than help you. Iatrogenics is a bitch.
Right On!
Doctors are dangerous to your health/life.
Not quite that bad but I agree in principle.
Work out, train, run, do some sit ups. Get in shape make that your health care plan!
It's your choice if you want to be in good physical conditon. And it doesn't have to cost
anything! get on the floor and do some sit ups. Start with one sit up and then two three.
And work your way up to a few hundred in an hour. Anybody can do this.
Stop doing stupid shit like smoking and eating crappy food. Bloomberg is right about making cigaretts illegal and limiting the fat ass colas at the shitty McDonalds. Shut down McDonald's, that putrid crap they serve is disgusting. Barffff...
Javol Herr Fitler!
How about we eat what we want and die when we die. I promise I won't make you pay for my funeral.
"We're here to pump...YOU UP !"
http://img.geocaching.com/cache/large/70ab7f8e-9ab4-4886-93c1-db76f96312...
Aw, Dood. Shut up.
On a long enough timeline...
...you wont need healthcare(?)
... regardless, the .gov will approach taxation of all assets and transactions with the iimit of t = \inf .
- Ned
The new model will consist of a primary care physician who you will pay a monthly fee to directly, and they will take care of general issues, and a catastrophic care policy that covers hospitalization. In the free areas (of course). This will enable the providers to preclude those who are abusive to present 'sickcare' insurance programs. This directs all that cash to the doctor. And the doctor will be happy for his contribution to his community. Win/Win.
And man, think of it: $148 billion over 9 years! That's almost enough to make a downpayment on bailing out a TBTF bank!
Well of course anyone with money who wants those procedures can pay to have them done. It frankly sounds reasonable. Lack of care doesn't cause death, illness and age do. These procedures are a modern luxury, not a right. Care is an intervention, a consumption of services you can either afford or not. The system cannot afford to cure all ills for all people. Inasmuch as public resources are being used for health, they should be focussed on health, not cure -- especially early health and prevention. But not so much that it interferes with the carbo pushing food industry!
But seriously, you want support for austerity? Let's see Iceland style reform. Banksters and those who gave them trillions in jail. You want sacrifice from the public for the common good? Show some good faith and hang the bastards who bankrupted us.
If you have $, pay your own insurance for two more years. Means test bitchez.
Oh let's just means test everything -- food, cars, clothes, gasoline, ice cream, ......then we can get serious about re-distribution. Makes no sense to just means test one particular good / service. All hail the anointed one BHO.
So many on this site and the majority of Americans will not see any sarcasm in this post.
Exactly. Tyler keeps running articles about how old people are staying in the workforce longer and taking jobs from young kids.
Walmart has a great health plan I hear.
Bruce,
Great grafitti.
A Banksy from Bristol England.
lol...when statist bean counters & real humans collide...
CBO estimates that raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 would reduce federal Medicare outlays, net of premiums and other offsetting receipts, by $148 billion from 2012 through 2021.
The math doesn't lie: "late stage care consumes the budget." once the resources focus on keeping young and strong young and strong...thereby (hopefully) making them old and strong then we can start working towards what everyone agrees is the goal namely a healthier society as a whole. I find it odd that the "politics disagrees with this." it sure doesn't sound like a hard argument to win.
I agree the system should be efficient. The important message is this: the government lied to get private insurers out of the elder care market at the dawn of Medicare. Now that the economics don't work there is no where elders can turn. The government lied to get power and now it is fuck all, we got the power so do what we say....soon ... coming to EVERYONE under Obamacare. "DO AS WE SAY OR YOU DON"T GET THAT GANGRENOUS APPENDIX TAKEN OUT." all hail the almight state.
How about cutting the care off after a certain age?
Let's send them to Carousel - just let me have one time with Holly13 and/or Jessica6 before Last Day!
You can't be putting all kinds of money into providing care for the YOUNG. The unemployed ones haven't even paid into the system yet!
(Well, actually, it's OK to provide expensive emergency treatments for the worst exemplars of the species--drunk drivers, motorcycle daredevils, drug addicts, violent criminals, etc.)
But most young folks shouldn't be expecting handouts. When they're 65 we'll just pick up the pieces of whatever's left after 40 years of neglect. And anyway, who'd really even WANT health-care once *everyone* could get it?
Heh heh heh.
dog, the selectivity of the statz is really something to marvel upon.
You say "most young folks" but you actually ought to pull your head out of your dog-ass and understand about "expecting handouts" situations (ssssssss).
'cuz they do,
anyway, 4 legs good.
- Ned
My attitude is that everyone who "expects" a handout OF ANY KIND deserves a walk through an open-hand gauntlet.
If you're not ready for that, don't ask.
Keep in mind this would include every shareholder of every bank that had us in a headlock in '08.
I also mention that most stop asking the moment "the system" stops dropping sawbucks on the sidewalk. I'd say maybe read some more mafia autobiographies or something if you don't know what I'm getting at.
The Eloi must keep the old Morlocks numbers in check so they can enjoy the fruits of their theft. The young Morlocks will need to be nurtured down in their holes.
FORWARD REAPER!
Death panels onward!!!
Most everyone becomes old and weak at some point. Being a strong and vigorous 75 year old doesn't reduce government outlays because it just means you will stick around for another 10 years until you become a weak and frail 85 year old and require as much care as the person you outlived.
Perhaps the solution is to offer everyone everything up to a certain age and then say no more. Say medicare coverage until age 80 and then you are on your own.
The study of telomeres in genes point to the fact that when specific cells in your bodies have used their last telomeres to clone themselves, your on your last legs.
No more telomeres, no more cell division. When those cells in your heart, lungs, liver or other major organs have divided for the last time, you become subject to organ failure.
You can extend someone's life with organ transplants, but it will take growing organs from your own stem cells and using them to keep the grim reaper at arms length.
Technology that is decades away. The best way would be to grow the organ inside the body to take over the dying organ.
Yes telemeres seem to be the timeclock. Interestingly enough moles seem to be related. The more you have the better in terms of life expectancy. Women have more than men and while few of us think of them as advantageous they maybe a better indicator of lifespan than the gypsy palm readers 'lifeline' ( though that might have some truth to it as well)
Never heard that. If true, I'll be around for a long time.
UNLESS... nah, having 'em removed wouldn't affect life span, would it?
Would it????????!!!!!!
The solution is not to be found in dicking around with medicare. Moving the goal posts around is not going to fix an unsustainable system that feeds vultures in the Health Industrial Complex.
This post brought to you by the Scooter Store. "Either government pays for your Scooter Store Scooter, or it's free!" /2xfacepalm.
Let the people decide what level of service they want. Have 3 levels of medicare tax. Basic service level, mid point level and high coverage level. Require 30 years of tax payments at the mid or high coverage level to qualify for it. This means workers decide to ration thier care or spend more to get better care.
depend on the government for your health and you will be disappointed.
It's about; Do we want the same coverage that we now have after an older age, or less coverage starting at an earlier age. I think the more is worth waiting on.
Or dead.
well then you won't really care, don't cha' know.
- Ned