Seriously, GOP? Really?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I actually think Ryan is quite admirable in that he shows what it would take to balance the budget without raising taxes (which is what most Republicans say they want).

[kentonio]

How does he accomplish that? Are you referring to his "extreme" proposal to keep entitlements spending at its current level instead of letting it increase?

Have you been listening to a very different Paul Ryan than the one who wanted to abolish medicare and replace it with a crappy voucher system?

[kentonio]

How does he accomplish that? Are you referring to his "extreme" proposal to keep entitlements spending at its current level instead of letting it increase?

Have you been listening to a very different Paul Ryan than the one who wanted to abolish medicare and replace it with a crappy voucher system?

[Dinner]

Except he doesn't even come close to balancing the budget. When he sent his budget to the GAO he required them to assume some pretty ridiculous assumptions which will never actually happen in the real world. Maddow had a piece on this just last week.

Also his vouchers won't work because just one illness would blow the entire voucher amount. This is assuming old people could even find insurance because the whole reason we have medicare to begin with is that private insurance companies wouldn't cover most old people at any price. They're just bad bets because old people tend to get sick a lot.

[giblets]

Have you been listening to a very different Paul Ryan than the one who wanted to abolish medicare and replace it with a crappy voucher system?

• Health and retirement security: This budget's reforms will protect health and retirement security. This starts with saving Medicare. The open-ended, blank-check nature of the Medicare subsidy threatens the solvency of this critical program and creates inexcusable levels of waste. This budget takes action where others have ducked. But because government should not force people to reorganize their lives, its reforms will not affect those in or near retirement in any way.

Starting in 2022, new Medicare beneficiaries will be enrolled in the same kind of health-care program that members of Congress enjoy. Future Medicare recipients will be able to choose a plan that works best for them from a list of guaranteed coverage options. This is not a voucher program but rather a premium-support model. A Medicare premium-support payment would be paid, by Medicare, to the plan chosen by the beneficiary, subsidizing its cost.

In addition, Medicare will provide increased assistance for lower- income beneficiaries and those with greater health risks. Reform that empowers individuals—with more help for the poor and the sick—will guarantee that Medicare can fulfill the promise of health security for America's seniors.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703806304576242612172357504.html

[kentonio]

Jesus christ, so as long as the guy himself insists that his voucher scheme is not a voucher scheme, this means it isnt? Because it doesn't involve the literal handing over of a slip of paper with 'VOUCHER' written on it?

If you believe that crap, I've got a bridge in Alaska I want to sell you.

[giblets]

If he explicitly says he's not proposing a voucher program then the burden of proof is on you to prove he does in fact want a voucher scheme.

[Dinner]

His proposes giving them a set amount of money and then letting them see if they can buy insurance for that amount. It's the very definition of a voucher.

[Felch]

Nah, I kind of like it but the Eisenhower quote needs to be taken in context. He begins the paragraph (it's a letter to his brother who criticized his administration for being too much like Truman's) by worrying about the expanding role of the federal government but admitting the political realities that necessitate social programs since they are popular with the electorate. Eisenhower stresses moderation in his letter.

But yeah Ron Paul is too crazy extreme.

The Eisenhower quote is pretty clearly talking about the political reality rather than a moral ideal. What I object to is that Eisenhower is quoted and his presidential portrait is used, while Ron Paul has words shoved into his mouth and he's portrayed in a straitjacket.

[Felch]

What's wrong with a voucher system? If it's less cost-effective or something, that would be a reason to oppose it. If you just hate vouchers because you hate vouchers then that's different.

[kentonio]

If he explicitly says he's not proposing a voucher program then the burden of proof is on you to prove he does in fact want a voucher scheme.

How about the part where he describes a voucher system and then adds 'but its not a voucher system'?

What's wrong with a voucher system? If it's less cost-effective or something, that would be a reason to oppose it. If you just hate vouchers because you hate vouchers then that's different.

What happens when the persons medical needs exceed that set figure?

[Al B. Sure!]

The Eisenhower quote is pretty clearly talking about the political reality rather than a moral ideal.

Yes.

And Ron Paul doesn't care much about political reality (I mean, he thinks he can win a national election); he's an idealist.

His ideal is scary, though.

[giblets]

How about the part where he describes a voucher system and then adds 'but its not a voucher system'?



What happens when the persons medical needs exceed that set figure?

What part of "choose a plan from a list of guaranteed coverage options" and "the same kind of health-care program members of congress enjoy" makes it a voucher system?

[kentonio]

What part of "choose a plan from a list of guaranteed coverage options"

What happens when the cost of premiums go up and exceed the voucher amount?

"the same kind of health-care program members of congress enjoy"

If you believe that, I've still got that bridge in Alaska for sale.

[giblets]

What happens when the cost of premiums go up and exceed the voucher amount?



If you believe that, I've still got that bridge in Alaska for sale.

So it's a voucher system because the government won't make the subsidy as large as the recipient wants it to be?