Skip to main content

View Diary: Medicare age from 65 to 67... (45 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And what is supposed to happen to those who turned (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pistolSO, George3, themank, slinkerwink

    65 this year? Are they to be chucked off for another two years?

    •  If the Medicare Eligability Age is raised (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      George3, VClib

      those who are currently eligible will very likely stay on Medicare

      For those who are 60, they'll likely be told "OK, you will be eligible for Medicare when you turn 65 and six months."  Or maybe 66.

      For those who are 55, "You'll be eligible for Medicare, when you turn 66 and six months".  Or maybe 67.

      This will likely make things a little more costly on health care for those 55 and under.  But if those 55-60 are delayed from being able to join Medicare for a year, that would be more costly to them too.

    •  Any increase would probably be gradual (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Catte Nappe

      I forget where I read it, but I think the plan they considered in 2011 would have raised it gradually, increasing 2 months every year. So, someone who turned 65 this year would still get Medicare now. Someone who turns 65 next year (if it even goes into effect right away, which is unlikely) would get it at age 65 and 2 months. Someone who is currently 63 would get it when they turn 65 and 4 months.

      It's still a bad proposal, but the impact is not as drastic or immediate as you might think. By the time it goes up to 67, people who turn 65 that year will have had 12 years to plan for the later age. Still far from ideal though.

    •  I may be wrong (0+ / 0-)

      But the way I understand it is if states accept expanded Medicaid, won't pretty much everyone who is under a certain income be covered?
      Please tell me if I'm wrong.

      •  There ar other impacts (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        For example, Medicare becomes more costly when the younger and healthier users removed from the program; so those remaining end up with more expensive premiums (or the government has to pay more - fat chance)

        " can’t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don’t open. I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem." Mitt Romney

        by Catte Nappe on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 08:57:48 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Instead of holding out for dignity at 65 (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Throw The Bums Out, PhilJD

        sure just get shuffled into the always underfunded Medicaid and try to find a provider that accepts it.  

        The reason we have Medicare and Social Security is so seniors may live out their old age in dignity and not be beggared into poverty after a life of hard work.

      •  You are aware that Medicaid does not (0+ / 0-)

        provide enough funding to even cover marginal costs, right?  That means Medicaid care is actually charity care as far as hospitals are concerned which is why they have to limit the number of Medicaid patients they accept (and raise rates for everyone else to compensate).

        You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

        by Throw The Bums Out on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 11:09:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It might be pegged to the rise in Social Security (0+ / 0-)

      eligibility, which is already in place.

      •  But you can receive Social Security (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        scribeboy, PhilJD

        at 62.  Huge numbers of people take Social Security at 62 because they have little other income.  Then they try to bridge the 3 year gap to Medicare.  Now you increase that gap to 5 years and you totally wipe out their other assets.  

        It is cruel!  The assumption is that everyone is able bodied and employable with lots of money for private health insurance until the age of 67.  That is just the cruelest fantasy ever.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (128)
  • Community (61)
  • 2016 (46)
  • Elections (38)
  • Environment (35)
  • Media (35)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (33)
  • Republicans (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Law (28)
  • Barack Obama (27)
  • Iraq (27)
  • Civil Rights (25)
  • Climate Change (24)
  • Culture (24)
  • Jeb Bush (24)
  • Economy (20)
  • Labor (19)
  • Bernie Sanders (18)
  • Senate (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site