US super-rich get five times more income than in 1995

By Andre Damon

20 February 2010

The incomes of the very rich in the US grew phenomenally between 1992 and 2007, while their tax rates plummeted, according to recently uncovered IRS statistics.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/feb2010/fams-f20.shtml

US states slash Medicaid

By Tom Eley, 20 February 2010

US states are imposing major cuts to Medicaid, the health insurance program for low income Americans, even as its rolls swell at a record pace.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/feb2010/medi-f20.shtml

SENIORS and others, get the facts as cjn says.....YOU MUST be signed up for BOTH Parts A and B and pay the $96.40/mo. Part B premium to Medicare to get either or both Parts C & D and pay the additional premiums (that are subsidized by the government.) It is that subsidy that BY BUDGET LAWS is being cut.

From the Medicare.gov website, Advantage section:

When you join a Medicare Advantage Plan, you use the health insurance card that you get from the plan for your health care. In most of these plans, generally there are extra benefits and lower copayments than in the Original Medicare Plan. However, you may have to see doctors that belong to the plan or go to certain hospitals to get services.

To join a Medicare Advantage Plan, you must have Medicare Part A and Part B. You will have to pay your monthly Medicare Part B premium to Medicare. In addition, you might have to pay a monthly premium to your Medicare Advantage Plan for the extra benefits that they offer.

If you join a Medicare Advantage Plan, your Medigap policy won’t work. This means it won’t pay any deductibles, copayments, or other cost-sharing under your Medicare Health Plan. Therefore, you may want to drop your Medigap policy if you join a Medicare Advantage Plan. However, you have a legal right to keep the Medigap policy.

Medicare Parts C & D were just another way that Congress figured out how to line the pockets of the insurance companies, NOT to help us seniors with our rising medical expenses.

Good thing AARP endorsed the Health Care plan since they are the one of the organizations that provide Advantage for seniors.

THE OBVIOUS PROBLEM WITH OUR MEDICAL SYSTEM IS COST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, taking this as the largest concern for everyone, what happened to the Health Care Redistributions claim of correcting the $500 BILLION DOLLARS of waste, fraud and abuse? It is nowhere to be found in the two bills proposed.

I'll tell you what happened. It got pushed aside because most of the problem lays in the government bureaucracy itself. Instead of addressing the problem, which was supposed to spear-head the savings to allow the needed expansion of coverage, the plan just CUTS $500 BILLION DOLLARS. And the waste, fraud and abuse will continue.

WHY?

Because the government is the cause of the waste, fraud and abuse. Just look at the most recent attempts by our government to solve problems. TARP is a black hole that no one knows how, when or why it's being used. The $TIMULU$ is a wet-dream gone very bad. No one can tell you how many people have actually been affected by it, how many jobs have been created and how much is being spent. And now we wonder why there is this massive amount of corruption in our health care system?

If the $500 BILLION is recovered along with allowing interstate commerce to promote competition, TORT reform, outlawing rescission and refusal of coverage due to pre-existing conditions and allowing importing medications from abroad the cost will drop immensely. Unfortunately only two of these are in current legislation, outlawing rescission and pre-existing conditions. The rest is made up of never tested options, cutting of benefits and more government intrusion.

Health Care Reform is obviously necessary. But we need to stress REFORM! Not abolishing it and replacing it with a massive government driven program that no one to this day can explain, let alone assure us it will ever help at a cost of over $1 TRILLION DOLLARS!!!!! Not to mention that we will be paying into this for 3-4 years BEFORE we see any benefits to ANYONE!!!!!

The process needs to be done in steps with at least some assurance that what is "reformed" will work better than what we have in place. This fix-it-all-in-one-2,500-page-legal-document-that-no-one-has-read is NOT what America wants.

85% of Americans are happy with their health care, but 80% agree that improvements are needed. The consensus is that 65% of Americans DON'T want THIS plan that's being developed behind closed doors pushed forward with fraud, bribery, cronyism, extortion and confusion.

This Health Care Smmit coming up this week will be another sham of posturing, strong arming and convolution of facts to fit agendas. I can guarantee you there will be as much if not more confusion AFTER this photo-op for both sides as there is today. Another 2,000+ page bill will be exposed with more bends and contortions than in a TWISTER game. Neither sides proposals will be evealuated by the CBO, no specifics will be given. Three days will be allowed for review that a room full of lawyers, acountants, doctors, administrators, economists and anyone else needed still won't be able to evaluate appropriately.

But hey, our government will have a lot of prime time exposure on TV to prance itself in front of the world. And don't be surprised if there isn't a lot of off-tracking to promote the upcoming elections in November.

Remember, everything done in our government is based on assuring re-election, NOT improving things for us.

I do not accept that government is the problem with runaway helath care costs.

Pharmaceutical costs are a huge part of the problem, and the excessive profits those companies pull in are frankly part of the problem.

Hospitals are another problem. Does every single hospital have to have a top of the line, brand new, MRI scanner? What ever happened to smaller hospitals referring patients to the larger ones for special services? Most city hospitals have agreed to have a single trauma center and a single burn unit. Why don't they do that with more services?

Because frankly, the more MRI scanners we have, the more MRIs will be prescribed, whether they are truly needed or not. Those scans are very expensive, sometimes as much as $3000, and they need scans to pay for the scanner.

It's a vicious cycle.

serious

Your concern is commendable but your logic is flawed. The reason the system has top of the line MRI's is because they give the doctors the best information for the problem occuring. Just imagine if you or your child falls and is unconcious, wouldn't you want the best technology available close by to evaluate if it's just a mild concussion or a subdural bleed (bleeding in the brain)?

The difference of minutes in diagnosis can make the difference of you or your child recovering or suffering crippling brain damage.

As far as Big Pharma is concerned all they have to do is make it possible for us to purchase drugs from offshore distributors, just like Canada does. This would force our domestic companies to be more competitive. But then Pelosi, Reid and even Coakley won't get their "charitable contributions" anymore.

As much as everyone wants the best health care for less, this is not going to happen. But we can all have affordable care. The problem is that our government doesn't know how to do it. If it did it would have already eliminated the $500 BILLION in waste, fraud and abuse in the system.

Government is never the solution, more often than not it is the problem.

This Health Care institution is really getting Out of Hand..Take the Insurance/ Business Realm OUT !!!..have People pay their part to; a NON- PROFIT MEDICAL Organization..Only then Health Care will be affordable for ALL..when there are; Too Many Hands Out for MONEY/ PROFIT..the Patient/ Consumer; CANNOT AFFORD That.. TOOO MANY MIDDLEMEN FOR PROFIT; is the Whole Problem...Pure & Simple,,,,,CUT THAT FAT OUT !!!.........

MRIs are the best scanning technique for SOME applications, but not for all. For example, they've found they are not better than standard mammorgraphy, and they cost several times more. But theywill be used for mammography, because those scanners have to pay for themselves.

Speaking of mammography, look into how the recent data that mammography isn't useful before age 50 is recieved by GE and other manufacturers of the scanners. There will be no end of lobbying to continue to encourage ever-younger women to get on that treadmill.

cjn fact is ,if you beleave this is not governments fault you are an idiot. the gov`t set these programs up and then reduced funding , did you not even read the article or are you only paid to comment on the titles?

serious...drivel...serious drivel

Get your facts straight.....it IS the government subsidy that is being cut and that is why the seniors are having to pay a higher premium....the taxpayers are NOT going to be covering a bigger share of the cost.

Anti-trust; right on point; the goal is to merge medicare with medicaid. Those that have paid into the system and still pay monthly benefits and also have a private plan, such as advantage; must now subsidise , those on medicaid; none of these proposals will cure the problem; hospitals must still provide free service to illegals, welfare,and make up the difference by charging outrageous amounts to those with health insurance. It broke the richest State , California, ; the real problems are not being addressed, drugs, temporary unemployed, and denial of claims or benefits by private carriers; this legislation is a band-aid on a mortal wound.

That is ridiculous!!! What exactly are the Democrats doing? Wasn't there a big health insurance company that did a fund raiser for Pelosi? The Democrats are just as guilty.

Tim, pay attention.

The Democrats, not the Republicans, were behind closed doors negotiating with the insurance companies for the past year. Harry Reid's number one campaign contributor is the insurance industry. The 2,000+ pages of drek they came forth with legislates the insurance companies 30 million new customers.

And you blame the Republicans?

The Republican plan wants to force the insurance companies to compete, like every other insurance company in other areas compete, on a national basis without immunity from anti-trust laws. THAT was the plan the insurance companies hated.

And you blame the Republicans?

The Democrats took that idea and bastardized it into the "exchange" which does offer national purchasing power, BUT not without a layer of government bureaucracy that adds costs and hassle for everyone.

And you blame the Republicans?

The Democrats are behind closed doors with Obama - AGAIN - trying to craft a final bill to pass on Reconciliation. The 2/25 health care summit is a farce, the bill is terrible, less than a third of the people in this country want that bill to pass even though about 80% want the health care system reformed.

And you blame the Republicans?

Until Scott Brown was elected, the Republicans could just as well have stayed home for the past year - and the Democrats STILL could not come up with a bill that they could all vote for without inter-party bribery.

And you blame the Republicans?

Wow, you are stubborn.

Or blinded by partisan hackery.

I'm going with B.

You've nailed some very good reasons not to vote for Republicans and you are right on.

$10 bucks a month is all you need to decide the Republicans are the devil?

Wow, the Democrats really got their money's worth on that bargain with you, didn't they.

If you're 66 and a 20 year navy vet, you should have TriCare.

So, how much actual health care have you consumed, for those premiums?

Why is it someone else's job to pay your bills for you?

You "get" $900 a month to live on? From whom? The taxpayer?

You're welcome.

From the SS benefits he/she paid into the 10 years of working. That is the part of the SS Trust Fund that Congress didn't think through clearly back in the 40's in terms of the cost vs. pay-in ratio potential for disability. But as others have noted, this is true with ANY form of catastrophic insurance (health, auto, shipping, homeowners, etc.) It is this same type of stock market insurance program that got AIG and others into trouble.

yes but i bet you failed to mention that you are in line for all the freebees. low cost housing, food stamps, weatherization programs, and what ever else the entitlements offer you. Get real. I don't even have a home, and I work and pay taxes.

Pragmatictoafault, Your comment is stunning. Most of the seniors on medicare are the ones that kept you safe in WW2, Korea, and Viet Nam. Your comment asking Kelly how much he/she medical care vs how much he/she paid into the program was intolerable. If you had your way, seniors would get no care, just let them die. Maybe you think that the $900 a month should be paid back?

You nailed it, Ken.

The teat sucking programs as they have devolved in this country PUNISH good behavior, and reward bad.

And the statists in Washington right now just want to do more of it.

Did it ever occour to you that you could become terminally ill or seriously injured? You never know and what would you think then if you could not work to afford health insurance or even get coverage in the first place? Do you think the insurance companies will care about that? Not on your life. Oh, and by the way you may be lucky enough to live to a ripe old age with all the conditions that usually come with old age. The grim reaper won't exempt you either.

I have MS, so I KNOW all too well serious illness and expensive health care.

I pay through the nose.

My employer pays through the nose.

My insurance company pays through the nose. (Yes they lose money on me.)

And believe me, there are days when I await the Grim Reaper.

And my question remains why do seniors think that it's OK for everyone else to pay more and more but their costs should be held constant? They think that somehow capitalism should be suspended just for them.

I am disabled as well and my disability stems from not having access to good healthcare when I needed it most because of my condition. I almost died and I had to go live with my folks in Canada so I could get medically stabilized. I can say I got better care there than I did in the States and I wasn't being jerked around by the money game. I am not retired yet but the cost of co-insurance with Medicare does concern me. Fixed incomes cannot sustain the outrageous cost of healthcare insurance.

Capitalism or not this healthcare mess makes no sense at all. I am at the point where I don't feel anyone should have to pay these outrageous premiums and continue playing the insurance game as it has been for decades.

It may sound like socialism but healthcare in America has become unaffordable for anyone senior or not and getting seriously ill or injured is not a matter of choice. There are better ways of addressing people's need for decent healthcare.

By the way, have you checked out the Working Disabled health insurance program through Medicaid ?

Sinclair, I've encountered too many people telling what smells to high heaven of bullcrap and when called on it, suddenly shut up.

You would like to say that when the vast majority of anecdotal evidence is to the contrary, that you went TO Canada to have your life saved?

I call BS. If you're not lying, then why didn't you stay if it's so wonderful? Could it be because you didn't want to pay 60% of your income in taxes?

Pragmatic, I know dozens of MS patients in Canada. They get the EXACT same care that I do, and I am a patient of the Melon Center of the Cleveland Clinic.

The Canadians get the same drugs, the same follow-up MRIs, the same IV-solumedrol, etc.. In fact they get more access to physical therapy.

They live just as long.

The idea that Canadian health care is subpar is a myth.

Sinclair went there to have his life saved, he would have us believe.

That's what I was talking about.

Biogen (a biotech, pharmaceutical company) listed net profit margin for Q4 '09 = 27.15 %, net profit margin for all of ''09 = 22.32 % http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:BIIB

A major product they produce is the MS drug Avonex.

Avonex costs between 24,000 and 30,000 dollars a year. (Check exact prices at DestinationRx.com). It is covered by most insurance plans.

Biogen Idec Inc. has essentially received a 13-year patent extension on its biggest moneymaker, the multiple sclerosis drug Avonex, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing Tuesday.

Read more: http://brassandivory.blogspot.com/2009/09/too-tired-to-blog-read-about-biogen-and.html#ixzz0g2gtJwz6

So, they charge between $24,000 and $30,000 a year while their profit margin is 22%. AND they get their patent extended by another 13 years - after all, we wouldn't want such an expensive drug to treat such a devistating illness to every go GENERIC!!!

Greedy pr!cks.

For the record, I do not take Avonex, but they are all the same. This was just an example I could find most easily.

Exactly right, Steve. Insurance developed to spread the cost of catastrophic risks. It was first seen in the shipping industry where sailing ship owners would insure their cargoes to prevent financial ruin in the case of their ships being lost at sea. It was a gamble, but the insurers developed actuarial methods which assured their ability to cover the bets being placed by the ship owners.

Health insurance for coverage of a catastrophic illness isn't a horrible idea. Like the ship owner's bet to cover the rare possibility of a ship sinking, it helps to prevent financial ruin in the event of a health catastrophe such as major surgery or cancer treatment. But no ship owner is going to pay to insure against wood worm or rust. Those are ordinary costs and are handled in ordinary fashion. The same goes for ordinary health care costs.

Today, however, people tend to treat insurance as a prepaid service plan for all of their health care needs. They seem to think insurance should just pay for every little thing. But then they scream when insurance companies raise the cost of their bets to cover all of those expenses.

Insurance isn't charity. They have to make enough money to cover the costs of the benefits paid, and to provide a reasonable profit for their investors. Typically, insurance companies are making around 4% ROI. That's very modest, until recently below the return on a bank deposit or money market account.

Insurance premiums are rising sharply simply because doctors, hospitals, and drug dealers are rapidly raising their prices. They are the real gougers. When I drive through my neighborhood, I see more drug stores being built than gas stations. These drug dealers must be making a killing to be able to build a drug store on every street corner. (Go in and try to get a prescription filled and you'll see that they are making a killing. I try to buy any medication I may need at the farm veterinary supply store, much cheaper, and made by the same companies on the same production lines.)

Doctor fees have tripled in the last three decades. Hospital charges have become more than just outrageous, they've become egregious. Billing $5 for a single Tylenol tablet when I know I can go to the local drug dealer and buy a bottle of 100 for $6.88 is the classic outrage. There is no excuse for this sort of gouging. The drug dealers are not exempt either. Charging $84 for a 14 day supply of antibiotic when I can get a 100 count bottle of the same pills at the veterinary supply for $12.

If people want to get a handle on medical costs, these are the areas we need to be investigating. Forget gambling with the insurance companies, we need to go directly to the source of the gouging and address doctor fees, hospital egregious billings, and drug dealer profiteering.

I had prostate surgery, last February. When I was recovering, I needed a final check up. The Dr. kept rescheduling my appointment, until two months went by. Feeling fine with no problems, my Dr. called assuring me I needed a final visit. I was not told in advance but was required to urinate into a toilet, connected to a computer, to record my "flow". The nurse stated, I hope there is enough, as I had gone before at home? I was billed over $400 and that didn't include the blood test. I wish I hadn't of gone, I could have used the money to pay my other bills.

You do realize the halcyon days of paying your doctor directly pretty much went by the wayside with the massive teat sucking program this article is about, right?

Someone mentioned that doctor's are loosing money. At my primary doctor visits we all have to pay before we see the doctor. By the way, he does not accept credit cards.

Nor do we know the costs until after the fact.

Have you ever seen a "menu style" listing of costs for medical procedures so you can make informed decisions or even just shop around?

Of course not.

Doctors and hospitals should be required by law to publicly post their prices. If Obama really wants health care cost reform, that's where he should start.

I've always said this, too! How come medical procedures are the one thing that you don't know how much you are paying for and then you sit there praying that your insurance company covers it.

Oh, and I have a good one that demonstrates the third party aspect. I switched doctors not long ago and a friend recommended her doctor. I had my own private insurance and my friend had no insurance. After my visit, I got the benefits statement from my insurance company and the doctor was charging $274 for a 30 minute visit. No tests, no urine samples, nothing. I couldn't believe it. I asked my friend what she paid and she told me she arranged a flat rate fee of $50 per visit. Wow, I wish my insurance company was as astute as my friend.

There is no shortage of students applying to medical schools.

If States would pay medical school tuition in exchange for the graduate signing a contract to practice primary care - not a specialty - and to practice in that State for 10 years, we'd have plenty of primary care physicians.

There's no shortage of students applying just so many seats to fill in medical schools. Plus the states are going broke without giving out free tuition.

The amount that States would pay in tuition for this program would be NOTHING relative to what they already give State University colleges of medicine.

The amount of money that Ohio gives to Ohio State, NEOUCOM and U Cincinnati is vastly more than what tuition would be for 100 students a year at those 3 medical schools.

I don't think you realize how much state support public universities get now.

By the way there are at least 4 new medical schools coming on line within the next 3 years.

So there will be more seats for med students, soon.

I strongly agree. The single payer option, you are the single payer, should be the centerpiece of any health care legislation.

So young people should pay your way, while they're trying to buy houses in a market the government destroyed, send their kids to schools the government destroyed, working for less wages because of your generation's greed for handouts, and paying higher prices for everything they need to raise the FUTURE of this country, but you who are the past should cost them more? Wow. Could you be more selfish yourself?

I have paid my taxes..probably more than you!!! I don not ask for a handout..you misunderstood...I receive a pension of 953/month...from the County where I worked for many years, and they take 556/mo from that for health insurance....I believe you need to learn to read!!! Oh, and reading comprehension would be a plan for you also!!!!

I don't give two craps about your county pension.

You know why? The taxpayers are footing that bill, too.

Did you save money to retire on? Did you do basic four function math that would have told you that your pension probably wasn't enough?

You're going to get no pity from me, and my reading comprehension is just fine.

We are on a fixed income, younger working people have a much larger income...it's all relative

Would you like to explain how that is to be interpreted? Because I'm interpreting it as "young people make more, they should pay more than me, because I make less."

Why?

Prag: Do you not think these same seniors did not pay the exact same thing that you are saying the young people are paying. They paid theirs and now it is their turn. And how did the government destroy our country>. The banks and corps are why we are where we are today. Ah and your reply about her county pension. You could very well be wrong about tax payers paying for it. I also receive a pension from a state retirement, through a city. But I paid every bit into it, all I am getting extra is what the interes thatt was paid on the money. No tax payer is paying for it.

That is something that needs to be broadcast far and wide.

The notion that tort is responsible for spiralling health care costs seems to have legs far in excess of reality.

Litigation is not driving the increase to any great extent.

Serious; According American Medical Journal in the Dr.'s offices, it increases medical cost by less than 1%.

scopata: They raise the cost of Medicare almost every year. Those people that think seniors are getting a free ride are out of their minds.

Apparantly he (or she) doesn't have the gonads to answer, or maybe passed out from whatever he or she was smoking....

Sorry to hear of those problems. I am an independant agent and I do sell Advantage plans too. In my county, Advantage plans have $0 premiums. They also have an out of pocket maximum. I have met with seniors who pay more for their supplement premiums than the out of pocket maximum of the Advantage plans. Don't forget that most Advantage plans include Part D for drugs. Medicare and Medicaid Services regulate Advantage plans. Advantage plans must include everything that Medicare includes.

I agree that if you have an expensive illness, you may want to keep a supplement policy. For those new seniors and most over 75, an Advantage plan may be preferable though.

It's not an easy decision to make. Medicare is complicated and that's not fair for seniors. I think that healthcare reform for seniors is as critical as for those on corporate plans. I would gladly accept a new way of healthcare that would put me out of business if it better served people at a lower cost. I am not that far from retirement. These issues also affect me as it does everyone in this country.

In Canada we have a government run health care sysyem. Out of 192 countries in the OECD only 3 countries do not have a form of government healthcare. Those 3 countries are Turkey , mexico , and the U.S. I can't understand why so many people are against it. In Canada 10% of our GDP goes to healthcare and everyone has it for a cost of $ 70.00 per month and free if you are in college or make under $ 20,000 per year. In the U.S. the latest statistics show that you pay 16% to 20% of your GDP for healthcare and you don't have any. Something wrong with this senerio. As long as your Medicare is run by Health Insurance Companies your taxes will have to increase to pay for it and rates will go up.