FinanceDude
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2006
- Messages
- 12,483
The joke with this argument is that subsequent administrations increased the benefits substantially under those programs. It's not accurate to say that the original cost projections in 1965 were too optimistic when the program itself is deliberately changed in a way that adds expenditures. You positioned it as a fait a compli that costs would exceed current estimates by 4x based on the history of medicare. But that only makes sense if we assume the same deliberate expansion of benefits, in which case those subsequent administrations will have to deal with the costs involved.
ALL THE MORE reason NOT to give the govt a crack at this Pandora's Box, it will make the problems in others pale by comparison...........
Social Security was never intended to be the primary source of retirement income, it was meant to be a safety net, much like Medicaid is. It has turned into an albatross because once you start an entitlement program, you don't get a "do-ever". There is no "bending of the cost curve" in the Health Care Bill, or any other entitlement program, for that matter.......
The real issue is whether health care is a RIGHT, or a PRIVILEGE, for citizens of the US. Just because European countries went that route doesn't mean it will work for us. They have highly punitive taxing structures in place to help fund it..........