Seniors were better off before Medicare?!
The New York Times
October 22, 2003
Workers Feel Pinch of Rising Health Costs
By Milt Freudenheim
The figures for big companies reflect a broader shift in the American economy away from mechanisms that for decades have spread the burden of health care costs onto more shoulders.
Largely because of the booming cost of prescription drugs, for example, Medicare covers less of its beneficiaries’ health care expenses than at any time since the program was established in 1965, according to Robert M.Hayes, president of the Medicare Rights Center, a patient advocacy group.
As a result, the elderly paid 22 percent of their average median income, or $3,757, for health care last year - a larger proportion than the 20 percent of income they spent before the advent of Medicare.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/22/business/22CARE.html?pagewanted=print&position
Comment: So now seniors are worse off than they were before Medicare was
enacted. Half of their care is paid out-of-pocket, and that one-half is now a greater percentage of their income than what they were paying in 1965 without Medicare. Insane.
We need one risk pool for everyone. The $1.66 trillion that we are spending
would provide a rich benefit package for everyone, if allocated appropriately. And Americans now, by a 2:1 ratio, would favor a universal, government-run and taxpayer-financed system.
What are we waiting for?