So, what do you think of the privatization of Medicare?

Question

Isn't it wonderful that we've taken it out of the hands of the incompetent and inefficient hands of the federal government thus avoiding the hazards of socialism? Those on Medicare have so many choices now (usually over 50). Sure, those on Medicare may have a little trouble affording the team of lawyers and accountants they'll need to navigate the arcane terms of the policies available to them, and if they don't want to fall into the notorious "doughnut hole" they'd be wise to remain very rich or very poor, but on the whole the pharmaceutical and insurance industries should do very nicely for themselves. Three cheers for the U.S.A. where we don't ask the government for handouts. Instead we use our entreprenurial ingenuity to bankrupt those who do.

Sorry, I'm foggy on sourcing. I've been hearing about it on NPR (several different programs and guests). If you know anyone on Medicare, ask them about changes in their coverage.

Answer 1

Actually, its even worse. Now there's a lot less money for medical services--becase the shell "insurance" companies the neocon's friends set up are taking a big cut off the top. And we DON'T get a choice--the government tells us what company will hold our account.

Answer 2

The doughnut hole came about because of budgeting reasons. Congress only wanted to have basic or catastrophic coverage because they wanted the benefit to stay within a certain amount. Most people don't fall into the doughnut hole. Less than 40% of part D participants are effected by it.

Answer 3

This is something I haven't heard about, do you have a source? The idea is frightening as Medicare administrative costs are less than 3% while private health insurance carriers are on average 14% of costs for administrativer expenses.

Source, please.

Answer 4

The free enterprise system is great if you do lot like the price do not buy it.Tell that to some one who desperately needs medical attention.