Dear Americans age 55 and younger. You need to keep something in mind from now on:

[Stinky The Clown]

The repubicans want to FUCK YOU UP.

They want to set the stage so that it is more likely you will die sicker and earlier than you will now.

They want you to get a small check from the government and use it to try to buy health insurance. They want you to find someone who will cover a diabetic with heart problems and cancer. They want you to find affordable care as you have a heart bypass looming. They want you to find some benevolent company who will cover the cost of your heart-lung transplant for a few hundred bucks - maybe a thousand, if you can afford it - a month.

You're good with that, right?

If you're not, then you ought never vote for another repubican again. Because it is now a repubican value to FUCK YOU UP when you get old.

[zeemike]

1. But most of all they want the money

The SS money that comes out of your paycheck...they want that to prop up the Stock Market for a few more years and then they intend to fluctuate you out of it.

[pacalo]

12. Adding to that, I see a lot of materialistic young couples spending like there's

no tomorrow. I fear that they're not disciplining themselves adequately to save for their retirement years, while not paying attention to how their parents' stability (thanks to generations of good Democratic representation) is being chipped away & will not be there for them.

[eridani]

16. For many, it's less lack of discipline than lack of income

I suppose you think you have the "discipline" to leave your retirement money alone after you run out of unemployment benefits and other savings?

[pacalo]

22. That's the other side of the coin to which I was referring.

I was referring to the young couples I know personally.

[JDPriestly]

48. I'm very proud of how thrifty my children are.

They are very careful with money. We never had any, so they never got in the habit of shopping for no good reason.

[pacalo]

104. In my family's case, we were perhaps TOO thrifty -- we didn't have much, but my

husband & I were never materialistic, which is one thing we liked about each other when we were getting to know each other.

Now that my husband's daughter & our older son have good jobs & households of their own, they're the extreme opposites of how they were raised. They both have told us they're saving, too, but I privately worry, considering they don't seem to appreciate how horrible the Republicans are in their ideas & the way they govern.

[WinkyDink]

82. I don't "fear" anything for any young greed-heads, whoever they are. They must be Republicans.

[abelenkpe]

83. Really?

Most of the 20-40 year olds I know are very frugal, hard working, and already have a cynical view of governments intentions regarding social programs. So they actually save more than my parents generation did.

[cyberpj]

102. Are you sure? I think they see food and water shortages coming along with end of oil and

just want the poor to die off due to lack of proper health care, savings or support from a government. Sometimes I just think this is a new kind of war - declared by our own rich on our own poor in the interest of future sustainability.

[peace13]

2. AND they want me to continue to pay double Social Security and Medicare..

er shall I say donate, while I keep my small business afloat. Go figure. That insures that I can not afford to fund my own retirement.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

28. +1

it is insanity.

[AlinPA]

3. Well said. This would go right over the heads of teabaggers if they heard it now.

[Enthusiast]

53. Teabaggers do not live in the real world.

They live in a stealth Muslim Obama world.

[abelenkpe]

84. All the teabaggers

I know are old pasty middle class bigots who openly support denying social security n Medicare to their children while happily living off social security and using Medicare today.

[AlinPA]

109. All the teabaggers I know are bigots. Most are at the age of Social Security and I can't believe

they are voting (for republicans) to eliminate SS and Medicare.

[chelsea0011]

4. Does Ryan specify how much his Medicare vouchers will be?

Or is it left to our imagination?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

9. MedicareFunBucks!

I can see it now.

[sakabatou]

112. It's worth 5 British Pounds. Right after they kidnap their QUEEEEN!

[subterranean]

95. He didn't specify, but it's not hard to imagine.

You will have to be living in poverty to qualify for the full voucher amount. There will be different levels of coverage, and most people will only be able to afford the ones with the highest deductibles and co-payments (euphemistically called "consumer-driven" health plans). Only the very wealthy will be able to afford the "gold" plan. I don't know if he said whether insurers would be required to issue policies, or if it would be left to the "free market" to decide whether you're worthy of coverage. But I can guess.

[Corgigal]

107. I took a survey about it

the number is 11,000 dollars. Done..good luck getting insurance for the rest of your life with that.

[Bonhomme Richard]

5. They are going to try and buy offf the 55+ hoping they.......

are willing to screw their children and grandchildren. I know of at least 30% that are willing to do that in a heartbeat.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[provis99]

61. 30% sounds about right.

That's the famous 30% that consistently support republicans,no matter what they do.

[54anickel]

70. Hmmm, I thought the comment was about 55-plus. Are you making the assumption that the 30%

hypothetical "Bush Republican base" carries evenly across all demographics? I believe the elderly and the college students are the two main demographics being targeted for disenfranchment via Voter ID legislation because they tend to vote for Democratic candidates. There are a heck of a lot of "elderly" in that 55-plus group.

That fact aside, the poster paints an ugly stereotype of entire population unjustly. The post is both mean spirited and, according to your reasoning, based on an incorrect assumption. My original complaint is that the post is divisive. I'm curious as to what motivated you to post a reinforcement of a divisive message?

[provis99]

105. 30% is the Republican base.

I see no reason why that wouldn't carry across the 55+ age group, too.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MedicalAdmin]

65. Welcome to DU. You're new so please read the rules...

I appreciate your input but personal attacks are not allowed.

[TBF]

67. I think you misread post #5 -

what the post said is true. He is not accusing YOU of anything. He is talking about the Congress "dividing and conquering". THEY are the ones who are going to sell out those of us under 55. They don't want the AARP on them. They will pay off the baby boomers and those of us who are younger will have to deal with the cuts. It makes me furious.

[54anickel]

71. I don't believe I misread it yesterday.

Though, my reply has gone MIA today. What is divisive is the poster's statement, "I know of at least 30% that are willing to do that in a heartbeat." I simply questioned the divisiveness of the comment (perhaps it was my use of the term "effing"), and how the person could actually know the mind of 30% of a population.

[TBF]

75. Yes, that part of his comment

really didn't add anything, and is somewhat hyperbolic. It's not that older folks would sell out the young, it's that Congress (and the very wealthy) are ready to do so. Totally understand where you're coming from now.

[54anickel]

78. Yup, agreed. I'm in agreement with the Opening post, hell I was one of the first recs. It was

the divisiveness, stated so "matter-of-factly", of the post I originally replied to that I was taking issue with. Not sure why my reply (41) was deleted this AM after being there since yesterday. It's obvious from a few of the posts below it that I wasn't the only one that considered the post to be an attack on a specific group of people (that my husband happens to be a part of).
I guess I'm just a bit more touchy about comments that tend to pit groups against each other since my home became part of the occupation known as Fitzwalkerstan.
Thanks for your understanding.

edit for typo

[quakerboy]

46. Despite the flack you got, I think I agree

I daresay there are at least 30% of the 55+ that would screw over the younger generations for a little personal buy off. I have no doubt that there are at least 30% of the under 30's that would screw over the older generations for a little personal buy off. And the 30-55... same deal. In fact, I would say that you would probably find at least 30% of any subgroup willing to screw everyone else to get theirs.

Truth is there are a whole lot of selfish ash holes in this country, mixed in with all the decent folk just trying to do the right thing and live a decent life.

[JDPriestly]

50. I am 67, and I am on to the scam.

Remember in Wisconsin how Walker didn't try to bust the unions for the police and firemen. That's the way Republicans think: I've got mine. Too bad you lost yours.

But Democrats don't think that way. And older Democrats care very much about their children and grandchildren. I don't think that the over 55 can be bought off that easily. We want the Social Security system to function well for our children and grandchildren. We are not falling for Ryan's scam.

I support raising the FICA taxes on higher incomes -- all the way up -- and on capital gains income too.

[TBF]

69. Spot on -

it's exactly what they'll do. They're not going to mess with AARP and the over 50 crowd who make it to every election. Those of us who are younger (I'm in my 40's) are going to be the ones hurt. I've been paying into SS since I was a teen working part-time, 45 years old this year, and I'll be the one getting the cuts and my retirement age raised.

[JDPriestly]

111. Instead, the limit on the income subject to FICA tax should be raised.

I think FICA should be lowered as a percentage and then placed on all income. We could probably actually demand a considerably lower tax if all income, including capital gains income and corporate profits (before deductions of course) were subject to FICA taxes. That would be fair. The burden for supporting the basic social net would be equally shared by each dollar earned.

[TBF]

116. Yup, that would make a lot more sense. The cuts to taxes on capital

gains was the reason "W" was so loved by his party - they made so much money from that.

[RaleighNCDUer]

97. That's the thing - because they know THEY can be bought off

they assume ANYONE can be bought off - the old "everyone has a price" thing.

They really believe that if they tell us that they are not going to touch OUR SS, that we'll allow them to fuck with our grandchildrens' SS. I understand the mind set, but I really don't understand that mind set.

[savannah43]

101. They think everyone is as greedy and selfish

as they are. That's how they justify their own behavior.

[TBF]

68. Capitalism rewards selfish assholes - that's why there are so many of them. nt

[JDPriestly]

49. The older the person, the more afraid they are of losing Medicare

and Social Security.

[Enthusiast]

54. What do you mean?

Buy us off? Are you saying those receiving social security are taking away from younger Americans? We paid for it already. We even paid extra. What are you saying. Are you repeating what the Republicans want you to repeat? Explain yourself.

[Bonhomme Richard]

85. Jeez, people need to lighten up. What I meant is that the...

repugs are trying to buy off the over 50 crowd by leaving their/our SS and medicare alone while screwing those younger. They want to negate the resistance that the over 50 age group would put up if it affected them directly.
"They are going to try and buy offf the 55+ hoping they are willing to screw their children and grandchildren."
I think I explained that.
"I know of at least 30% that are willing to do that in a heartbeat."
This is that same 30% ( hell, maybe 25%, maybe 20%...it doesn't matter) that thinks W was great, the right can do no wrong and really just don't get it but do respond to authority. This bunch exist in every country.

[Enthusiast]

89. Thank you for explaining your position.

I am on guard for evil Republican pretenders on DU with the goal of spreading misinformation and disrupting the discussion. Sorry.

[eilen]

73. They already have with second to fifth tier pension

and benefit programs, new GI bill, TANF, changes in the public college system in which tuition and fees have climbed exponentially while more and more jobs are now requiring degrees and more certifications.

[russspeakeasy]

76. You are so correct.

[Bonhomme Richard]

81. I was speaking about the percentage that always goes repug, that

still thinks that W was a great President and such. Maybe 30% is too high but I think it cuts across demographics and I stand by what I said.
LOL, and someone accuses me of being a teabagger.

[54anickel]

93. Wasn't an accusation of being one, but that your over the top rhetoric was as

divisive as the teabaggers. I'm sorry if you mistook my comment regarding the divisiveness of your claim to be no different than the teabaggers to mean I was calling you one. It appears you've had to invest in plenty of posts explaining that comment, so I'd assume I wasn't the only one to take issue with it.
Thank you for your explanation.

[damntexdem]

6. And if that happens, there goes support and funding for those older.

The Repukes only pretend to wait to hurt future elders -- they plan to hurt us all.

[Enthusiast]

55. Most of us 55+ understand

that the greedy fucks won't stop at people less than 55. We know they will come after it all. First they will try to divide us as they have so clearly already accomplished. Geesh.

[patrice]

7. They want them to have no say in how their own tax dollars are invested in U.S.

The rich are supposed to decide everything about who/what we are.

[Marr]

8. It might be more accurate to say the establishment has decided to fuck you up.

They own the GOP and most of our well-known Democratic politicians as well.

[Stinky The Clown]

13. Well said

Point taken.

:thumbsup:

[Enthusiast]

56. PLUS ONE!

All you have to do is turn on the TV to hear politicians from both parties whining about "entitlements".

[tpsbmam]

100. My thoughts exactly -- there are plenty of Democrats aiding and abetting

the Republicans.

[Shagbark Hickory]

10. I don't even think they want to do *those* things. Those are concessions.

LEft to their own devices, they're not going to do anything about healthcare.

[Golden Raisin]

51. Left to their own devices

anyone other than them could die in the streets. Just as long as it wasn't near their gated community or country club.

[shraby]

11. Then we should have a national referendum to decide

whether the congress critters should have to take those vouchers as well if they do that, as well as fund their own retirement. No more tax dollars going to them for either.

[Enthusiast]

60. No

The politicians need to represent US. We don't need to decide. We already decided in poll after poll.

[alsame]

14. I expect that from the

Republicans. What's making me furious is the prospect that the "Democrats" will adopt this value too. Of course, they'll be more 'moderate' about it - death by guillotine vs. death by a thousand cuts (pun intended).

[progressoid]

15. Yup. +1

[WillyT]

17. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

:kick:

[woo me with science]

27. Thank you. nt

[Imagevision]

18. repubicans want as many boomers as possible to die now because there are so many retiring at

the same time.

[spanone]

19. the thugs big schtick right now is 55 & up won't be affected.....

but everyone else gets fucked

they want to privatize medicare and medicaid...and destroy social security

[GreenTea]

20. Republicans either want you to work for their corporations for slave wages or simply just DIE!

That it work as a peasant and consume their product or DIE (no tax dollars for your health care) The rich don't pay taxes but they want your tax dollars.

[lapislzi]

21. I reserve the right to take myself out.

I have my little stash of Percocets and Vicodins, hoarded from tooth extractions and a surgery or two. I have some Valium and a few other benzos from here and there. When the time comes, I'll make the arrangements for my kitties, buy a bottle of good wine, and take myself out.

I will not die like my mother did, in a public hospital, in a tissue paper gown, on a gurney, behind the other Medicaid cases. And that was back in the day when Medicaid actually existed. They can kiss my cold, dead ass.

[Daphne08]

23. They're going to set one generation up against another.

It's as plain as day to me, and it's evil.

[Juche]

24. I'm thinking of emigrating when I'm old

It will be 30+ years before I retire, but this country is so fucking plutocratic, misinformed and short sighted it makes me nauseated to think how bad my nieces will have it when they are my age. Another 30 years of stagnant wages, income inequality, unavailable health care, disabled middle class, etc. will not bode well for them.

The COL in various developing countries really isn't much lower than living in the sticks in the US (you can live a decent life for $1000-1500 or less a month in the US if you plan it right and live in a non-metro area). But health care is the wild card that destroys so many lives and savings here.

I'd rather move to Latin America and get in on their universal coverage plans for $50 a month when the time comes. Of course when I'm old, Latin America will be far more developed. But it is safe to say their health care will still be far cheaper than ours.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

44. Best to do it before you're old

If I could live my life over again, the main change I would make would be to take one of the three chances I had to move overseas in the 1980s. I could kick myself around the world for not doing that.

[femrap]

25. The age of the average American

is going to start to decline. Unless TPTB decide to lie about the statistics.

[JHB]

26. Already knew that

[Kip Humphrey]

29. Also, when they talk about the elderly, they're talking about THE FUTURE YOU (if you are lucky!)

[annabanana]

30. Yuppers!. . .k&r. . . n/t

[geckosfeet]

31. I think 99% of people here will never vote rethug.

I know I won't.

I might hold my nose for the democrat but I KNOW I won't vote thug.

[RowdyRacer]

32. Whatever...

Yeah, the GOP is a collective sack of shit. But, if you think the Democrats are gonna "save" you, don't hold your breath.

[geckosfeet]

33. Oh. Thanks for the insight. But forgive me if I don't hang my hat on your advice either.

[Enthusiast]

57. Democrats created social security

and medicare. They have fought for decades to keep Republicans from destroying these programs. Now Democrats have had to adopt a Republican style pro-corporate stance to get elected. We don't need two Republican Parties. We need to make that clear to every single office holding Democrat.

[Crunchy Frog]

34. If this actually gets through, then there's no reason to vote for Democrats either.

I'm so damn sick of the Surrender Party.

[unkachuck]

35. K&R....Stinkster, you da best....n/t

[JamesJ]

36. 55 and younger?

Hell, I'm 61 and I'm wondering if Medicare will be there for me in 4 years!

[Mulhane]

38. Take the early choice (62) next year

I don't think that changes.

[road2000]

108. You can't get Medicare at 62.

You have to wait til 65. The only exception that I know of is SS disability. If you are approved, you are eligible for Medicare two years after date of approval.

[Pakid]

37. 55 and older

At the age of 57 I am lucky both SS and Medicare are so called safe for me. But that fact does not count. I will fight to make sure that Medicare and SS is there for everyone. As a small business owner with employees I get to pay all of my own plus half of my workers SS and Medicare and I for one do not mine paying half for my worker after all without them I would have not have a business I wish that I could do more for them. I will never understand why so many business owner seem to resent paying in for their workers. No one can earn an honest living without the help of others you need someone to buy your goods and someone to produce them. I guess the rich think that they can get by without us. The jokes on them when they have broken us they will not be far behind.

[Mulhane]

39. "Will work for food"

Then we sell our labor for cheap food and shelter (slavery). Except for a few small outbreaks, slaves didn't revolt. We really should have kept the South under harsh garrison. Now they are taking over the whole Union...can we still say union?

[Enthusiast]

58. The PTB are trying to divide us.

Now they are using age. We will see more of it. I have heard several stealth Republican DUers try to characterize baby boomers as 'selfish'. This is their MO, divide and conquer.

Welcome to DU.

[democracy1st]

40. K & R

[livefreest]

42. before all health care needs, education is becoming impossibly expensive

[ProudDad]

45. And keep your eye on the Enabler in Chief too... (n/t)

[JDPriestly]

47. Here is how the Republicans want to provide for the health care of seniors:

By making their kids choose between either paying for heart bypass surgery and cancer or letting mom and dad die without the surgery or the cancer treatments.

And all so that the top 1% can pass their fortunes on to their kids and grandkids.

[Enthusiast]

59. What did Grayson say?

They want you to die quickly. He was right on the money. And that is why he is no longer in office.

[Enthusiast]

52. Way to tell it, Stinky!

This is the kind of plain speaking we need from our Democratic politicians.

[mwb970]

62. I cannot understand why regular people would ever vote for a republican.

Are they ignorant? Stupid? Or just suicidal and self-destructive?

It's like chickens turning out en masse to vote for Col. Sanders. He kills them and serves them for dinner, then blames Chick-Fil-A. The remaining chickens re-elect Sanders.

:shrug:

[RoccoR5955]

63. WRONG-- They want you to DIE quickly! n/t

[Swede Atlanta]

64. Bingo.............

I am 54, a healthy cancer survivor. Yes I suffer from the usual ailments of high blood pressure and fluctuating cholesterol that I am working to control with weight management and exercise.

But fast forward 10 years even if I am relatively healthy, what insurance company is going to offer me broad coverage with a reasonable premium? None.

So despite all their wailing during the HCR debate about "death panels", the real death panels will be bureaucrats at the private insurance companies.

This isn't the picture I want to see as I enter my "golden years" nor what I have planned on.

I have been saving for retirement with an expectation that I will have at least a reduced social security benefit from what comes in the annual social security report.

But I had not planned on having to spend potentially hundreds if not thousands of dollars every month beyond my expected premiums for the basic Medicare and Medicare RX programs.

Can I save that much additional in 10 years? I can try but I have no control over what the insurance companies will do.

[flamingdem]

96. It's cruel to spring this on anyone much less those with 11 years to go until Medicare

any Republican who ties themselves to this is toast.

[rasputin1952]

66. There is a longer vision and a larger picture in this...

it is not just those at 55 and below that will suffer, at the rate of consumption of our natural resources, with a serious lacking of recycling and effort to protect some resources, the youth of this planet will inherit a cinder.

We've reached Peak Oil; we consume with complete disregard for for the impact this has on the planet; we procreate at a rate that is unsustainable worldwide; the list could go on for pages.

The point is, soon, there will be nothing left to consume, except ourselves. We will have destroyed the sphere we live on, depleting the ecosystem that has kept life here for billions of years, we will eventually eradicate ourselves and a new species will emerge as the dominant one. We're on a runaway train and no one wants to get a hand on the brake.

40 years ago we had an "oil crisis", and in the ensuing years, all we've done is consume more, and in much more various ways. Humanity always does this, a crisis comes, we dodge the bullet, and forget about it...until the next bullet comes along, and if it doesn't get us, we just carry on as if nothing happened.

[deutsey]

72. It's PNAF

Project for the New American Feudalism.

Serf's up!

:evilfrown:

[Javaman]

74. You only now figured this out?

I'm 47 and I have known this for 30 years.

[harmonicon]

77. Who are you addressing? I don't think a lot of Republican voters read this site. nt.

[Mason Dixon]

79. Maybe I'm crazy

But doesn't, at some point, the retirement age need to reflect the growing life expextancy.

When the retirement age was established at 65. The life expectancy was 62

[Swede Atlanta]

86. I'm not sure I understand your point...........

The issue is Ryan wants to convert Medicare into a voucher program. Seniors will get a check from Washington for some amount of money that is indexed to the general inflation rate, not the rate of inflation associated with health care and health care premiums.

So regardless of what age one is eligible for "senior health care", the problem is private insurers don't want to insure older, sicker Americans. If they do insure they will do so with very high premiums and many carve outs.

I would be fine with a gradual increase in the age at which one is eligible for Medicare and Social Security. As you point out Americans are living longer and their healthy years during which they can work continue to be longer as well.

[Urban Prairie]

90. Just because they "can" work longer because they live longer

doesn't necessarily mean that they "will" be able to work longer. Some jobs are very physically demanding, and cause employees to become unable to continue to perform them as efficiently and quickly as they age, often from repetitive stress and their bodies' aches and pains from years/decades of doing the same work. Many businesses are loathe to hire those above 50, especially due to their increased likelihood of using any employer-provided health/dental care coverage, and causing a rise in premiums paid. Many companies also want to 'legally' discover the means, sometimes through intimidation, increased work loads, unrealistic deadlines for projects, conspiring to create set-ups for making errors or mistakes, or failing to meet higher new business quotas/deadlines giving employers reason for their termination and as a result, rid themselves of long-term employees, whose longevity has earned them higher salaries, longer vacations and built up sick leave credits.

[Swede Atlanta]

91. Point well taken..............

I completely agree with you. I am 54 and continue to watch co-workers in my age group being disproportionally let go when there are 'reductions in force'. I am sure it is for the exact reasons you outline. Age discrimination is of course illegal but employers do it all the time. And with increased work stress, etc. older workers face significant challenges.

At the same time I understand that any program designed to provide some level of financial support for seniors as well as senior health care is going to face challenges if participants are in the program for 20-30 years. As we live longer something will have to give - eligibility age needs to go up or we need to find funding to provide for that extended participation.

I have no easy solution but we are pressed between systems that were never designed to have participants on them for 20-30 years (like my elderly father who is 86) and a labor market that increasingly disfavors seniors.

[NorthCarolina]

80. Unfortunately, I don't believe these goals are limited to JUST the Republican Party. nt

[Corruption Winz]

87. Solid post... However,

I'd disagree with these people wanting you to die younger. They want you sicker, but they want you alive with that sickness for as long as possible. They want as much money for that sickness they can get and the longer you are sick, the more they make.

[Chipper Chat]

88. My dad was on kidney dialysis for a year. The total bill - $190,000.

What insurance company is going to cover that? Answer: the ones that cater to millionaires. Sorry, average murcans.

[Kolesar]

92. Uh...details please...eom

[gemdem]

94. Ain't it the truth?

I'm 50 this year. I have a major heart issue (growing aneurysm on my aortic root -- my brother, a physician's assistant says that they don't even bother to call people like me "dead men walking") that will require surgery, but am trying to put it off as long as possible for a number of reasons -- one is the risks of surgery, and the other one is cost. Depending on how much my insurance will cover, I have some decisions to make -- either arrange to make payments over time and be forever in debt, file bankruptcy and deal with the effects of that as I enter my "golden years," or opt to not have the surgery and risk aortic dissection. As totally fucked up as it sounds, I'm probably going to opt for option 3.

I have enough life insurance to provide for my family after I'm gone, but not enough to settle medical debts and provide for them. I have squat in the bank because of being laid off numerous times in my career. My family means more to me than life itself, so rather than leave them destitute I'll opt to shuffle off this mortal coil when my time's up.

My Repub co-workers (I hesitate to call them friends) recoil at the very notion that I would choose to die, but will "fight to the death" at anything that hints of government-provided healthcare. They tell me that I should be able to find insurance that will cover me (at a cost that is more than I can afford, thanks), or that there are co-ops in which I can participate (if I were younger and heathier, again thanks). As it is, there is insurance that would be of great benefit to me (long-term care, etc.), but the grand joke is that I can't get it because I need it.

So, consider me fucked. Such is life.

[Swede Atlanta]

98. My thoughts go out to you...................

This is the problem I have with conservatives that bristle at the idea of government involvement in health care. So many of the abusive and sometimes violent "protesters" at the town hall meetings in 2009 were seniors that were already on Medicare. They seem oblivious to the fact that Medicare is a government health care program and hence the mantra "Keep the government out of my Medicare".

Conservatives equate reasonable regulation and government structural support to create consumer-friendly markets as socialized medicine. Socialized medicine is when hospitals and clinics are owned and operated by the government and doctors, nurses, etc. are government employees.

The reforms under the HCR legislation come nowhere near to being socialized medicine. They place certain mandates and limitations on employers and insurance companies to play responsible and should I say moral roles in the area of health care. The legislation calls for the creation of exchanges that would enable those that don't have employer-provided health care or are otherwise under-insured to purchase coverage as part of a "group" in an effort to achieve affordable healthcare.

It is a sad day when people like you have to make these choices simply because we as a society fail to recognize affordable health care as a right and not a privilege. At your age this should be a no-brainer. We can afford your required surgery and recovery. You still have many productive years (both as a potential employee but as a father, brother, etc.) ahead of you.

At the other end of the spectrum the protesters rallied against "death panels". Well if we turn senior health care over to private insurers, not only will the cost of premiums serve as de facto death panels but the private insurance bureaucrats and bean counters will be death panels.

I had a friend who died of kidney cancer last year at age 44. A year before he died his private insurance company called him and asked him to go to hospice because the chemo that kept him alive for 3 years was too expensive. He worked full-time up until a month before he died. So there are your death panels.

[yardwork]

99. Some Democrats want to do these things to me, too.

I will not forget the Cat Food Commission co-chaired by Erskine Bowles.

We are in an all-out war between human beings and corporate profits. It is much more complicated than Democrats vs. Republicans.

[Stinky The Clown]

106. You know . . . .

Its good to see you back and posting again! :hi:

[yardwork]

110. Thank you!

[FrenchieCat]

113. I hear what you are saying, but when it comes right down to it......

It is actually that simple......it is exactly the choice
we will have, regardless of how much we wish it wasn't so;
Democrats vs. Republicans.

Democrats are the only thing keeping us from being turned
into a nation of slaves....and I will never believe differently.

[yardwork]

115. Democrats aren't doing nearly a good enough job and I intend to keep telling them that.

[cyberpj]

103. Really?

I think they see food and water shortages coming along with end of oil and just want the poor to die off due to lack of proper health care, savings or support from a government.

Sometimes I just think this is a new kind of war - declared by our own rich on our own poor in the interest of future sustainability.

[Chris_Texas]

114. And the Democrats just want to force me to give my money to insurance companies

For nothing. In other words, until our side starts offering something BETTER maybe we should shut the hell up about how evil the other guys are.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

117. You go right ahead and think that

If it works for you to tell yourself that, far be it from me to stop you. After all, look how good that mentality has worked out for Democrats in Texas. Myself, I can still see a difference between what the Republicans have to offer and what the Democrats do. Between the two the choice is clear to me.