You may be misinterpreting your article. In this article, the same author calls for increasing taxes on the rich. http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/25/news/economy/tax_increase/index.htm?iid=EAL
I'm not a legimate source, but AARP put out a commercial blitz stating that they were opposed to any cuts to medicare service whatsoever. The same medicare service that is overrun by an amount annually that can pay for the entire DoD, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the DHS. You don't think that if we doubled the size of the military and started fighting two more wars, that someone "legitimate" would state that it's not economically feasible?
To cut Medicare by 20%, you can either have everyone die at 70 instead of 75, or you can cut doctors by 20% in their pay and in their spending on overpaid assistants and equipment that is a cash cow for manufacturers. I'll choose the way all the countries with successful health care programs do it. There should be less profit in the medical industry.
And I know it's semantic, but we're not talking about "the greatest generation" here. We're talking about (no offense to anyone here) baby boomers. The Greatest Generation is defined by Brokaw (who coined the term) as "the generation who grew up in the United States during the deprivation of the Great Depression, and then went on to fight in World War II, as well as those whose productivity within the war's home front made a decisive material contribution to the war effort." The Baby Boomers are those born between 1943 and 1961. Drugs, Sex, Woodstock, Vietnam, civil rights, etc. One thing I agree with the President about is this:
Cutting Medicare by 20% leaves another ~$500B that they're overrunning. As I stated in an earlier thread, if you want to cut Medicare 20% and then raise payroll taxes to support the difference, you're talking about going from 2% tax to ~11% on every single worker in America.
Why shouldn't AARP lobby the government on behalf of its members? It's a constitutional right to both form voluntary associations and to lobby government. When all is said and done, govt. gets its pound of flesh and it's up to all of us to lobby it to see the spending priorities are proper.
Dude. The chart is just to show how FUCKING INSANE the numbers are. There is no way it ever gets to those 2040 numbers. It would all implode (rather badly) way, way before that point.
So, he calls for tax increases? One of MANY steps needed to "save" the entitlement programs. How or what am I misinterpreting?
Yes, the Baby Boomers are the demographic time-bomb that will destroy the inter-generational transfer system, just due to sheer numbers. However, you are wrong. The "Greatest" Generation are EXACTLY the folks who created, fed and teflon coated the monster. As well, that generation got what any economist would tell you is a fantastic deal for the explicit taxes paid in. SSI and Medicare taxes started out quite low. The payouts were relatively generous to those retirees that lived long enough. How was that paid for? By the Baby Boomers who saw a significant increase in SSI and Medicare taxes. So, it is now wonder that SSI and Medicare became WILDLY popular among the "greatest" generation, so much so that they developed a bizzare mental blind spot that allowed them to think they "earned" it or had paid plenty of taxes to justify their "benefits". Study the history of prior attempts to reform SSI and Medicare so that they were more sustainable. Who created the Third-Rail in American politics?
Read the article. Author points out AARP is also running a BIG business, which is a conflict of interest. Additonally, AARP has systematically LIED over and over and over again in order to push their policies. Additionally, AARP has pushed policies in Washington that a majority of their member do not agree with. And fine, they can push their agenda. And I (and some others) are free to point out that they are fucking scum of the earth for the incredible damage they have caused this county.
You are free to point out whatever you like. Big businesses have political interests, and they're voluntary associations.
Do those businesses have a dual personality? We know they are profit seeking organizations. We know their primary legal responsibility and main motivators. It is not the same thing. AARP has credibility on the issues because they are perceived to be NOT motivated by profit or revenue considerations.
It looks to me like AARP partners with insurance companies and isn't an insurance company itself. Health insurance through Aetna Life insurance through New York Life Auto Insurance through The Hartford Homeowners insurance through The Hartford Long term care insurance through Genworth Financial Motorcycle insurance through Foremost / Farmers Insurance Group Annuities through New York Life Property & Casualty from Real Legacy Assurance Company It looks like they lobby the insurance companies for better rates for their members, too.
Those enrollee numbers would be cut to less than half if illegal immigration was successfully eliminated. Cost per enrollee skyrockets simply because we don't have socialized healthcare like every modern, developed country in the world. WE are now the third world.
Medicare keeps people alive. DOD and DHS kill people. Apples and (Agent) Oranges. We did that 10 years ago and nobody "legitimate" raised an eyebrow.
