SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Alighieri who wrote (434725)11/12/2008 10:02:40 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1574326
 
Without medicare my parent's medical bills would have bankrupted them and me in just a few months.

The same can be said for me. My wife. Both sets of inlaws' parents. In fact, everyone I know who lived past 65 would have bankrupted their families had not the government "paid" for their health care.

That ought to tell you something. After all, SOMEONE has to pay for it -- it isn't free.



To: Alighieri who wrote (434725)11/13/2008 1:35:27 PM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1574326
 
Al, you may not have noticed my own personal "nuance" between Social Security and Medicare. Health care in particular is something I'm still deciding on. But general welfare for the elderly will bankrupt this country as the worker-to-retiree ratio falls.

It's a problem countries like Japan are already facing, given that they don't have many children and their society is still not ideal for immigration.

Hence I think safety nets for those in poverty are just fine, regardless of age. Health care may need some sort of nationalization too, but once again regardless of age. What I object to, however, are handouts to those who think they deserve it simply because they're old and they've "paid their dues" to society. That sort of mentality leads to the generous 90% retirement pension programs that bankrupt local and state governments.

Tenchusatsu