Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (58705)	4/11/2008 6:32:22 PM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542819

Old data, but interesting numbers nonetheless. I think it is safe to say that some form of supplemental insurance would be needed even if Medicare was expanded to include everybody. content.healthaffairs.org Snapshot of supplemental insurance coverage, 1999. Lack of supplemental insurance. Although almost 88 percent of Medicare beneficiaries had some type of supplemental insurance in the fall of 1999, 4.3 million beneficiaries (12.5 percent) had only traditional FFS Medicare when the survey was conducted. This figure contrasts with the 2.6 million beneficiaries (6.8 percent) with no supplemental coverage in 1998 reported by John Poisal and Lauren Murray. Their estimates apply to beneficiaries who had no supplemental coverage during all of 1998, while our estimates apply to beneficiaries with no supplemental coverage at the time of their fall 1999 interview. The difference between estimates suggests that large numbers of beneficiaries have gaps in coverage at some point during the year.