• My favorite reaction to Rep. Ryan’s budget

      04/05/2011
      Austin Frakt

    It’s by Howard Gleckman. He asks some good questions. Anybody serious about this budget should be able to answer them.

     
      Economics
      federal budget
    item.php

    • by steve on April 5th, 2011 at 20:19

      The CBO analysis is here. Of note, by 2030 seniors, those under 55 now, will be paying 68% of their insurance premium, assuming I read this correctly.

      Link to CBO analysis here.

      Steve

      [top]

      • by Austin Frakt on April 5th, 2011 at 20:53

        Wow! I really do wonder why anyone under 55 now would willingly pay their Medicare payroll tax. It’s quite a step away from intergenerational equity. Facing the prospect of such high personal costs, many might rather sock the money away in their own personal health savings account (so long as it could be rolled over into retirement). Is that the logical next step here? Just playing it out.

        [top]

    • by Kevin Outterson on April 5th, 2011 at 20:39

      In the last 20 years, many employers just shifted a larger percentage of health care costs to employees and called it cost control. It controlled the employer’s costs, but not the over all costs.

      By tying USG health expenditures to a percentage of GDP, Ryan’s proposal essentially block grants Medicaid and caps Medicare government expenses.

      Who does the hard work of cost control? The IPAB is repealed. We’re left with private plan competition. What’s been the record on that tool the last few decades?

      [top]

      • by Justin Anderson on April 6th, 2011 at 00:45

        We’re left with two explanations here, neither of which are good.

        1- Chairman Ryan, and others who support his plans for Medicare and Medicaid, only care about the direct costs to the federal budget. Indirect costs related to uninsured individuals (poor, disabled or elderly), whether borne by providers, individuals or governments, do not enter into the calculation at all because Ryan et al are monomaniacal about the budget nut. (If one was so inclined one might ascribe a certain lack of caring about the poor, disabled and elderly here.)

        or

        2- Ryan et al simply do not understand the effects of these proposals.

        Pick your reason- spending fetish/potentially evil (Randian) or incredibly stupid. None are qualities we should hope for in members of Congress.

        [top]

    • by Scott Sanders on April 6th, 2011 at 10:23

      It seems (as usual) that the conservative leaders are thinking in terms

      of short-term results as opposed to long-term progress and

      efficiencies. This mindset is typical, consistent to pro-business profit

      models and unfortunately…has led to the downfall of this country in

      almost every aspect. This particular scenario (budget cuts)

      suggests that the conservative leadership in once again

      demonstrating their will to protect the interests of big business at the

      expense of the middle class that carries the burden of keeping big

      business successful.

      Do I have an alternate solution to the proposed cuts in

      Medicaid/Medicare? No, not without polling the American citizens. I

      do foresee however, the inevitability of making big business

      accountable for their success and high revenue – close tax

      loopholes so that they pay their fair share on taxes…not the present

      average rate of 8%. This could go a long way to resolving budget

      issues.

      [top]