Sawfish
Member
- Location
- The bottom of the sea.
I've had some extended and frustrating exchanges on various forums with younger people currently in the workforce who call energetically for Medicare for All.
So, understanding enough about how the systems works to see that it's a cross between pre-paid insurance and a benevolent Ponzi scheme (and I mean no negative connotations by using the term--I honestly can't think of a compact term that carries the understanding of what "Ponzi scheme" means) I've tried to point out how they, at age 35, for example, could not expect the same system to work if they are recipients.
They either can't, or don't want to, consider what I'm saying.
Typically, they think that a) current Medicare recipients pay no on-going premiums; and b) that everything is covered.
Also typically, when I told them that I've paid a payroll tax without receiving any immediate benefits for as long as there has been a Medicare program, and that the act of paying into the system for decades, while receiving no direct benefits is an implied promise to some level of healthcare subsidy when I reached the age for Medicare, they seemed not to grasp the idea--which is the same idea as for SS.
When I also told them that I have to pay a premium ranging from ~170 per month, per person on Medicare, plus the monthly premium for an advantage plan (which provides much of the broad-based coverage that they assume I get for no charge, at all), and that depending on MAGI (gross income, essentially), I have paid up to 900+ per mo for the both of us, plus the advantage premium, they simply won't believe me. They think I'm lying to them to preserve what they think is a freebie for me, that they don't get.
Have you ever had this discussion re Medicare for All? What has been your experience.
So, understanding enough about how the systems works to see that it's a cross between pre-paid insurance and a benevolent Ponzi scheme (and I mean no negative connotations by using the term--I honestly can't think of a compact term that carries the understanding of what "Ponzi scheme" means) I've tried to point out how they, at age 35, for example, could not expect the same system to work if they are recipients.
They either can't, or don't want to, consider what I'm saying.
Typically, they think that a) current Medicare recipients pay no on-going premiums; and b) that everything is covered.
Also typically, when I told them that I've paid a payroll tax without receiving any immediate benefits for as long as there has been a Medicare program, and that the act of paying into the system for decades, while receiving no direct benefits is an implied promise to some level of healthcare subsidy when I reached the age for Medicare, they seemed not to grasp the idea--which is the same idea as for SS.
When I also told them that I have to pay a premium ranging from ~170 per month, per person on Medicare, plus the monthly premium for an advantage plan (which provides much of the broad-based coverage that they assume I get for no charge, at all), and that depending on MAGI (gross income, essentially), I have paid up to 900+ per mo for the both of us, plus the advantage premium, they simply won't believe me. They think I'm lying to them to preserve what they think is a freebie for me, that they don't get.
Have you ever had this discussion re Medicare for All? What has been your experience.
Last edited: