Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This being the campaign season, there are a lot of charges flying back and forth regarding Medicare. This one intends to do X, the other plans to do Y. And we're caught in the crossfire. Or so it seems. Reuters as published a wire service article today entitled, "Top Six Myths about Medicare." It's always good to remind ourselves of facts as we seek to determine what's fiction and what's not. Here's a link to the article:
Not a bad article, but it reads a bit like a puff piece for Medicare. For example: "Myth Number One: Medicare costs are out of control". Well, O.K., they are not totally out of control, but a lot depends on how we define that. Medicare costs are very worrisome, at the least.
The average annual per-capita spending growth rate through 2019 is projected at 3.1 percent for Medicare, compared with 4.9 percent for private insurance plans, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. The 3.1 percent projection even includes higher payments to doctors as part of a long-term solution to the long-running problem of the sustainable growth rate (SGR) used under current law to control Medicare spending on physician services.
Not a bad article, but it reads a bit like a puff piece for Medicare. For example: "Myth Number One: Medicare costs are out of control". Well, O.K., they are not totally out of control, but a lot depends on how we define that. Medicare costs are very worrisome, at the least.
I thought it was kind of a dumb simplistic article. For example - with regard to point 1 - the actual growth of Medicare (and all medical expenditures) was less than expected in recent years. But the majority of intelligent (IMO) commentators have attributed this to the downturn in the economy. Many people have less money - and can't afford to pay (even small) co-pays/deductibles.
With regard to point 2 - not all health care delivery is private. We have many public hospitals in Florida (run by local governments and the state and federal government).
Etc. I guess this is what you get when you try to turn a complicated issue into a Powerpoint presentation. Robyn
Interesting Article but it does have very poor and misleading information as in:
" It is true that people are living longer, and Medicare's eligibility age is fixed for everyone at 65. But that does not mean Medicare costs are rising as a result. That is because nursing homes, which are the biggest area of expense incurred in advanced age, are not covered under Medicare."
Medicare does not cover Room and Board in nursing homes but it does cover medical care involved. The medical care in some cases can exceed room and board. So, as people live longer and in nursing homes, they will need more prescription drugs, more extensive testing and medical procedures. The nursing home patient is still seen by their Physicians and Specialist--that is all covered by Medicare. The patient still needs xrays, dialysis, injections and diabetic care--all medicare costs. The patient needs ambulance transport to hospital and clinics for tests and that is a cost of medicare. Many patients need visits from Visiting Nurses for Picc Lines and catheters, transfusions, and even cutting their toe nails--all medicare expenses. They need oxygen and durable medical supplies and that is all a Medicare Expense.
Also not all long aged recipients of Medicare live in nursing homes. They live at home or in Assisted Living and will consume Medicare.
The article is worthwhile simply for blowing the whistle on all the misleading propaganda that is out there about how the ACA cuts $700 billion out of Medicare. The first thing that is never mentioned is that this is over a ten year period. Than you break it down and you find out that most of the alleged cuts are simply reimbursement to healthcare providers. Nor, do those who bring this argument up ever mention what the ACA is giving to those on Medicare.
All healthcare costs are out of control period. Whether Medicare costs are rising at a rate less than other healthcare costs is misleading. Its kind of like saying that an inflation rate of 10% is good because its only half what a rate of 20% is. This will bury us as a country unless we can find some kind of solution.
The article is worthwhile simply for blowing the whistle on all the misleading propaganda that is out there about how the ACA cuts $700 billion out of Medicare. The first thing that is never mentioned is that this is over a ten year period. Than you break it down and you find out that most of the alleged cuts are simply reimbursement to healthcare providers. Nor, do those who bring this argument up ever mention what the ACA is giving to those on Medicare.
All healthcare costs are out of control period. Whether Medicare costs are rising at a rate less than other healthcare costs is misleading. Its kind of like saying that an inflation rate of 10% is good because its only half what a rate of 20% is. This will bury us as a country unless we can find some kind of solution.
I agree with your second paragraph. But how will cutting (already low) reimbursements to providers help people on Medicare in terms of finding providers that will treat them? Robyn
The best way to save on Medicare costs would be to drop Medigap.
That would really help average people:
Medigap policyholders tend to have low or moderate incomes, are more likely than average Medicare beneficiaries to be female, are older than average Medicare beneficiaries, and are more likely than average to live in rural areas. According to the 2003 MCBS, 20 percent of FFS Medicare beneficiaries with incomes below $10,000 had Medigap coverage. Almost 40 percent of FFS Medicare beneficiaries with incomes between $10,000 and $20,000 were Medigap policyholders (Exhibit 1⇓).
Just make sure all those older lower income women living in rural areas have to pay a lot out of pocket and they won't be able to afford to use Medicare. What a way to save money . Robyn
According to MedPac studies, in total Medigap costs 33% more than original Medicare. I don't expect Medicare to go away nor to evolve into the joke that Ryan has proposed. Mediicare is too embedded in the US economy. But the payment mode is going to change. High deduct F and plans M and N are 1st steps in that direction.
Current Medigap allows too much expense in healthcare without regard to cost savings. Even Medicare admits that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Robyn
