Yes I do!

I am agreeing with your last paragraph - Yes I do want the country to change its priorities so that seniors and the disabled can be adequately cared for!

A far better idea and much more to the Democrats liking: Put a tax on healthy people, and healthy behavior, just like tanning, charge all those pesky health nuts riding their bikes a toll for road use.
A bike license, $100 ea year, like a car, and don't forget start the police on handing out tickets for improper lane usage. Cha Ching$$$, Health club visit, $10. a week., Dog walkers, $1000 per dog annually. NO one likes to see dog poo! Easy for the cop's to give tickets to these folks too. Runners, again, tax the running shoes, $50 each shoe. have to buy a city token, screw it to the back of the shoe.

Legalize pot but tax it "fairly", Tax cigarettes, gasoline, and of course raise the food and sales tax, silly people have to eat and buy stuff, we're missing all the revenue a new tax here could generate too.
Once all these new taxes kick in, think about the benefits!

Punish the evil rich and healthy people, they don't deserve any of what they work for! Take it away and give it to the poor, the needy, the humbled masses, and extend unemployment indefinitely! Oh yes, Having to work is not fair!

Why work at all in fact! Unless it's for a labor union of course, cuz their benefits are protected, Pass the stimulus cookie jar again!

You can have an honest discussion about priorities and what we need to do to take care of our elderly and disabled, or you can make stuff up and let people suffer. I guess some people will choose the latter.

Carl, I can only hope you find yourself one day old, sick, and out of liquid assets. And with no where to go. Karma is a you-know-what.

Ms. Gill - I am all for supporting the elderly and disabled, but I question if our current, corrupt, medicaid organization can do it. We need to work on getting rid of those that should not be on it (don't live in IL, no longer qualify, etc). Plus, why do we provide "Cadillac" coverage. Children in IL on the "free" insurance get BRACES for free. This is NOT just to correct severe issues, but solely for cosmetic reasons. What cosmetic surgery is next. Until the IL democrats are willing to stop the corruption and focus on providing to the truly needy, I say no more.

From my college days, i recall one definition of 'economics' was the 'allocation of limited resources'. in this case, the limited resource we are discussing is the GDP (we’ve been living in the strange world of uber-debt for over a decade and that HAS to stop). in other words, what percentage of our economy do you want allocated to healthcare for the elderly?

while healthcare can be a very personal topic, it also needs to be discussed in a very frank manner and with all of the facts: over an average lifetime, total healthcare costs are currently running at $269,000 for men and $361,000 for women. Average annual healthcare costs at various ages are: $1448/yr (age 20), $2,601 (age 40), $10,245 (age 65), $17,071 (age 85).

Recent debate in this country has further sidetracked an open conversation by labeling people as supporting 'death panels'. In reality, America has a choice: spend "whatever it takes to keep everyone alive one extra day", or take a somewhat cost-benefit approach and ask: does it make sense to spend 11 times the amount on someone in their final years, compared to someone who has their whole life ahead of them.

I found it odd a few years ago that it was the Republicans (notably super-twit Palin) who were against Obama's plan on the grounds of the 'death panels' when in fact that was one of the elements that would have controlled costs the most. btw, i consider myself a fiscal conservative and social moderate

btw, here is a great chart that shows healthcare spending, as a % of GDP, by country, over the past 50 years:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/us-health-spending-breaks-from-the-pack/

Similar to spending on schools - our country spends more than most others but the results we get seem to be sub-par.

Perhaps in the case of healthcare, we spend too much on the elderly and not enough on the young and the poor. Just a thought.

My only point is: before you have a conversation about taxes and/or benefits - ask yourself - how much of our GDP should we spend on healthcare. Then ask, within that budget, who should benefit - or where should we invest those dollars? Does it make sense to authorize a $100,000 operation on someone who is 85?

I think supplemental insurance is a good option so people can buy additional coverage, but as far as Medicare, we need to start asking - and answering - the tough questions.

I ask the commenters to consider that I'm not talking about performing heroic life saving measures on the elderly. I'm talking Medicaid paying to keep them safe, comfortable and adequately housed. Medicaid is doing a very good job of that now. Cuts will kick the elderly out of nursing homes and the disabled out of nursing homes and supportive living facilities.

Ellen - the reason this country is in such a mess now is because the conversations (or debates) always start from the ground up and get personalized. All sides do it. You're doing it now by 'defining' what you're talking about as simply being "Cuts will kick the elderly out of nursing homes and the disabled out of nursing homes and supportive living facilities".

My point is that the conversation needs to be the same as any responsible family or business would do: from the top down. How much money do we have in total? What percentage should we spend on X and Y. Within X, there are certain to be a thousand sub-categories, then prioritize top down. Finally, you get to your answer as to what can and cannot be covered.

Using your method of "this is necessary or valuable so we should fund it" is akin to how children think. It's a completely value based way of thinking and why this country is always arguing.

Things are so messed up that we can no longer simply have the conversation every year about adding this program or scaling back this benefit. We need to reset everything because you can raise taxes across the board and our spending is simply out of control. Worse yet, we have a generation retiring (btw - the same generation whose terrible stewardship of this country got us in this mess) and who's contribution to the income side of the ledger is headed towards zero while their drawdown of benefits is going to skyrocket if we do not change expectations.

Ellen - as an example of what I am referring to -

you point out that you're not referring to "life saving measures" but rather "annual housing" type programs.

well there you go: instead of looking for more tax money - make a choice: how should the dollars already being allocated be used. imagine how many seniors could be kept in quality housing in lieu of one $100,000 medical procedure for someone of similar age.

Personally, I'm not suggesting an answer. What I am trying to do is frame the conversation away from: we need more money in the pot, to a new way of thinking: the pot is huge, bigger than every other country's, how do we want to use the money that's already in the pot.

Ellen (last post, i hope) -
to get back to your article, you seem to be down on 'block grants' as supported by Congressman Dold and House Republicans. but that's the only way the federal govt can establish a budget. they can't have an open-ended checkbook. first of all, the state organizations are about as corrupt as they come (Illinois is probably one of the worst, but they're all corrupt). but also, an open-ended budget does not force the hard decisions. And that is why this country spends more than everyone else for worse results -- American culture is afraid of making the tough calls. Our politicians are afraid because if they make the brave tough calls and telling people they can't have everything, they'll just get voted out.

The issue is that neither the State nor the Federal government have any money, so cuts need to be made everywhere. Every agency is lobbying so that their funds do not get cut. They are all good causes, but when there is no money, everyone has to make some sacrifice. Each agency then has to step up their fund raising efforts and donors who are able need to contribute more.

It is not the responsiblity of the government to take care of me. That is my responsibility.

Self sufficiency should be the goal of everyone. Insurance should be a priority for everyone. But when dire circumstances arise, then we should care for each other. Those who are able should contribute all that they can to causes that are important to them. My point is that it is not the responsibility of the government to take care of me. My parents were in a nursing home and they paid every penny of that bill because they had scrimped and saved all of their lives to be able to take care of themselves.

D64 - your emotional approach to the situation is one of the reasons this country can't have a reasonable conversation about healthcare. this country has too many political third rails that prevent anyone from dealing with any of our problems.

Janet - most of us understand your point: the standard should be self reliance and self sufficiency with a safety net for the few very unfortunate situations. However, this country is quickly becoming far too reliant on government handouts for far too much of life.

We're nearly 4 years into a sluggish economy and unfortunately we have leadership in this country who have chosen to set a tone of telling people that the solution to their woes is to blame others and then take from others. What we need is someone to get in front of the nation like Reagan did after Carter and tell every man woman and child that they are the solution and that each of us getting up every day and working hard (even if that means looking for a job) is the solution.

D64 - anyone one of us could describe a more desperate situation than the next. Many of us have those stories as personal experience rather than theory. The point is that there is already a significant portion of our country's resources directed towards healthcare - more than any other nation on the planet. The solution is not to throw more money at the situation but to use it more wisely.

Frankly I have no idea what your point is.
My point has been that people who are concerned that not enough money is being spent on whatever program or benefit they are emotionally attached to, have to find somewhere else within the existing healthcare budget to take from. Raising taxes or spending less on wars is not a solution to any healthcare woes because those two steps (and others) will be solutions to the debt crisis.

I think we all need to focus on why suddenly everything seems to require cuts. Have we done anything lately to make it all so hard to support? Well, there were 2 needless wars, we cut taxes for the wealthiest people and corporations, we deregulated derivatives causing a huge financial crisis.... Just saying....

There's nothing emotional about seeing the need to protect Medicaid. No one without upward of $60K per year to spend will be able to afford a nursing home or other type of supportive living. A lot of kids won't go to college because mom and dad have to concentrate on saving for their old age or supporting grandma and grandpa. Seniors will live in dangerous and unhealthy situations, not to mention the lack of dignity. Children will be caring for their grandparents while their parents work. Some people think they're immune from this issues, but even if you're not planning on getting old or suffering an illness like Alzheimer's, you never know when you'll get into an auto or other type of accident, have a stroke etc. Your private health coverage will end when you lose your job and there you have it, you'll need Medicaid just like anyone else.

Millions of kids go to college without mom and dad paying for it. They can go to community college. They can have jobs. My daughter had a roommate in college who worked full time while going to school full time. Good financial advisors will advise to save for retirement rather than for college because there are many more options for children to afford college. If you work until 65, which is perfectly reasonable, your health coverage will be Medicare and have nothing to do with your job. I am 70 years old and working two jobs to make sure that I can take care of myself. Seniors get Social Security to supplement their own savings, not to be their sole source of income. As stated before, Medicaid should be a safety net for those truly in need, not for seniors who have transferred all of their assets to their children so the government can support them.

You make all these emotional statements -- yes that is life - we all have parents and kids and college and things we'd love to spend money on. And life is hard.

But you ignore the fact that the money needs to come from somewhere to pay for all these things.

You ask why everything seems to require cuts -- have you seen the debt/deficit lately? Have you seen any news coverage of Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, or Ireland?

You seem to want to tax more and cut certain things and then turn around and spend more on things YOU prefer. When is everyone going to realize We All have our own pet projects. But we all have to stop this craziness.

Which is why i spent a bit of time laying out ratios in my previous posts that can be a starting point for budgets -- all of which counters your points that there has been cuts in federal healthcare spending in this country (there haven't been) or federal spending in Illinois (there hasn't been).

But it feels like cuts because too many people have gotten stuck on the tit of goverment and just want more. We have a choice: make responsible decisions today or the marketplace will eventually knock on America's door the way the sheriff does when a bank forecloses on a house.

When are you going to say something factual? You say "we cut taxes for the wealthiest people".

Here are the "effective individual income tax rates" as reported by the govt from two very different eras. As you will see - EVERYONE is paying a lower rate. You are against overseas wars, but not internal class warfare apparently.

(and yes, the lower 40% are now getting paid to file a tax return!)

JUST SAYING........

Quintile ________ 2007 ________1980

Top ________ 14.3 ________ 16.1
2nd ________ 6.1 ________ 10.4
Middle ________ 3.2 ________ 7.8
4th ________ -0.6 ________ 4.3
Bottom ________ -6.7 ________ 0.1

Medicade - I'm not touching that.....you can't argue changing that in any form or you'll look bad. This article is a setup...of course you'll want help if you or your mother needs it and can't afford it! But the key word there is NEED....people like "just sayin" and their type NEED other people's money for their liberal agenda. Even if you pay 50% taxes your're the devil for not paying more.....complain about an expenditure and you're selfish.....question why certain things need funding and you're greedy.....ask people to at least try to get a job and you're infringing on their human rights......wonder why everyone shouldn't need to be required to provide proof of who they are and you're discriminating......aspire to be successful and you're not conforming. Liberals or socialists want big gov't to be able to control everything because if they are in control and promise to take care of everyone's needs - they know they'll always get the vote. It's tough to be a republican these days because you want to work and work hard but you see more of your taxes going to one thing or another and you wonder maybe you should join the hands out club or those that benefit from keeping them down.

Sorry watching basketball and forgot its a proper noun....."Hands Out Club"

Just sayin.....it's desperation because more and more people are like you and either leaching off society or supporting those who do......it's ingrained in you to be a leach and to be mad at those who are successful because you're just jealous and want your share. (without working for it)....I bet if I was able to see a picture of you or your family or your existence....pictures would speak a thousand words and this conversation would be over. Make your own way and get your hands out of my pockets - loser.

DF...I work in the film industry and have done so for the last 30 years. I would venture to guess that my lifetime income, to date, is double what you have ever made. Your pathetic imagination is running away with you! Go away...you bore me....

"so you're sayin you're a loser". Please tell me more about your lifestyle it's like a reality show...from our last battle you stated that you prefer someone with the same plumbing now I find out that your a fluffer in the film industry .....BTW (so you can understand) ...I have project managers that make more money than you...and we give them pre employment tests so we don't get any of your type.

Dullfield Resident...Your project managers net more than 600.00 a day ??? WOW...me impressed...snicker...snicker...snicker. Say...go piss in someone else's yard dufus...I am not interested.

Since you are so loaded why don't you go hand it out to the needy?