Republican budget proposal to phase out Medicare

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jnpy!$4g3cwk, Mar 17, 2015.

  1. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #1
    U.S. Republican Budget Cuts Social Spending, Boosts Military
    By REUTERS, MARCH 17, 2015, 3:15 P.M. E.D.T.

    Yup, that's right. Paul Ryan's 2011-2012 proposal to phase out Medicare, recycled.

    http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2015/03/17/us/politics/17reuters-usa-budget-republicans.html

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/17/usa-budget-republicans-idUSL2N0WJ17E20150317
     
  2. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #2
    Doesn't Obamacare. Take care of seniors as well?
     
  3. steve knight Suspended

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #3
    half our budget is to defense we have the highest spending of anyone on it and we still need more? Lets kill the economy by letting more people starve.
     
  4. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
  5. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #5
    Tell Obama to stop killing people instead of looking for people to bomb .
     
  6. sovereign macrumors 6502

    sovereign

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    #6
    Incorrecto.

    [​IMG]
     
  7. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #7
    Again, you've failed to read the article. From this and the article in the ACA thread, the budget proposal they've submitted repeals the ACA.

    BL.
     
  8. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #8
    Guilty as charged. No worries , obama will veto depending how far things get
     
  9. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #9
    No, Medicare covers seniors. Obamacare is for people who have not reached Medicare eligibility.
     
  10. jkcerda, Mar 17, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2015

    jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #10
    Well, per the quote it has almost no chance of becoming law, which begs the question, why are the republicans do stupid and insist on pissing off people , especially seniors who happen to get out & vote
     
  11. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #11
    Obama can sell his Nobel Peace Prize to offset some of our defense expenditures. How much gold is in one of those things, anyway?

    http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/03/are-chinas-missiles-bigger-threat-or.html
     
  12. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #12
    I'll be curious to see if this flies with AARP. I assume no. Any party who wants to spend more on the military is being irresponsible. We need to get our collective heads out of our asses.
     
  13. jnpy!$4g3cwk thread starter macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #13
    (see nice big graph above).

    Onceuponatime, entitlements (LBJ's word) were carried separately from the rest of the budget. Off-budget. In LBJ's time, some commission or other decided to make SS on-budget. It has been back-and-forth several times. This is the on-budget view. I prefer the off-budget view -- that is, that programs that have their own, fenced income/contributions be viewed separately. Because, the unified view hides the fact that the Federal government owes a huge amount of money to SS.

    AARP opposes using SS/Medicare as budget bargaining chips, and, wants to see the programs considered separately on their own merits.

    http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/advocacy/info-11-2013/medicare-no-bargaining-chip.html

    The Koch-inspired wing makes no secret of wanting to abolish SS and Medicare. ("Phase out". "Privatize". etc.) See original article.

    Regarding war spending: if "we the people" decide that national security requires occupying Afghanistan, Iraq, even Iran as some suggested back in 2003-2004 and may be hinting at again, then, we ought to be willing to tax ourselves to do it. I found it intellectually insulting that during the Bush years, the extra cost of overseas wars was effectively off-budget-- after all the budget negotiations over the regular budget, they would come back later every so often for many 10's of Billions of $$ in authorized spending with no new taxes (borrowed).
     
  14. Huntn, Mar 20, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2015

    Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #14
    In the eyes of the self-decietful, we are getting something for nothing. The reality is that a truly self describe fiscally responsible party such as the GOP should be screaming that we need higher taxes to pay for our foreign adventures. I could not be more disgusted. Any President (democrat or Republican) who requests higher taxes will be shouted down because higher taxes means they would not hold onto their elected offices, that fun wars would be nixed. Better to go with deceit while bad mouthing welfare mothers. We know the sheep are too stupid to call us on it. :mad:
     

Share This Page