The
Conclusion:
There are many solutions to the
problems of Social Security and its partners Medicare, Medicaid and its ilk. It
is however, up to the American people to seize upon one of them and say “I want
that one.” The politicians will not do anything until they are forced to for
they fear to act under the threat that they may be unelected. It is time we
choose America
Means test everything: Those who
are receiving lots of money should not get any benefits while those with little
money should get more. Social Security was designed during the Great Depression
to help the elderly retire, open up jobs for the young who would replace these
seniors in the work force, and help avoid ageism as seniors were being forced
out of jobs due to age discrimination. Now we have millionaires who want to
collect for some strange reason and they should be blocked from doing so.
Eliminate the Contribution cap:
The amount of taxes paid per year toward Social Security and Medicare is
capped. So the really rich finish paying within the first pay check of the New
Year and then they are done. At the same time, lower middle class and the poor
continue to pay large sums of money often times never reaching the cap. The result
is less money at retirement. Thus, I say reduce the tax levels on everyone and
make it so that everyone contributes for life (except double taxation). This
will allow Social Security to have the funds it needs thanks to the richer
portions of society. At the same time those reduced levels mean fewer
contributions by the lower middle class or the poor. This is where supplemental
forms of Social Security and Medicare kick in to give them a little extra
boost. Also, the system still acts as a safety net for if the rich somehow fall
below the poverty line, then they will get the money they put in the first
place.
Make it accurate: Currently Social
Security and Medicare are adjusted through the cost of living adjustment
(COLA). By making this adjustment for inflation more accurate we can ensure
that people get only the money they need to continue buying bread, milk, etc.
Combined with means testing means more accurate adjustments of benefits so that
those who are impoverished in a high expense area get more, while those in an
affordable area get less. Basically, together these would insure custom
benefits for each individual.
Make it Personal: Both Congressman
Paul Ryan and Governor Mike Huckabee have the right idea. Make it so that
individuals that hold off retirement longer can expect a greater rate of return
and make it so that the money can be passed on to their children and
grandchildren. Ryan does this by eliminating the age requirement for Social
Security by being able to collect when a certain amount of money has
accumulated and has the option for an investment type version of Social
Security. Governor Huckabee would use the lock box type of plan by having the
money become an actual account, like a banks. I would combine both ideas.
Ryan's idea of eliminating the age requirement would end the debate on age
entirely with his plan stipulating you must be able to receive money equivalent
to 120% of the poverty level in the traditional system to retire. From there I
would use the Governor's ideas of incentives to keep the money in by allowing
for interest to be gained for keeping it in longer, while taking Paul Ryan's
idea of investments and investing small sums of peoples retirement money into
safe funds in the market and in savings bonds (people would have a say in what
forms of investments). This would provide a greater pay out at the end as
similar programs have worked in Galveston
Texas
Vouchers: Health Care for both
Medicare and Medicaid need this version of the system. All a voucher does is
give money to a health provider you yourself designate who will then provide
your health care. It works the same why as Medicare part D without the
excessive amounts of money and paperwork. It already works in school systems,
and in the current form of Medicare part D to provide cheap medication to those
who otherwise can't afford it. So this option is essential.
Decrease
health care costs: I have always found it stupid to put more people on
some form of health insurance rather than look at the system and fix it to make
it cheap. Part of the reason is patent law with drug patents not expiring for
20 years and Congress possibly being lobbied to increase how long that patent
lasts. Let’s face it; corruption is part of the issue. Also, Drug companies
have to get approval from the FDA before they can increase or decrease
production of a medication. Originally this was meant to prevent price gauging,
but has backfired making cheap medications more expensive. Also, allow generic
drugs to remain on the market longer, as if that drug still works let it be up
to the doctor and patient to decide if that medication is still right for them.
As to health insurance, let people buy across State lines. States limit
coverage per State for each insurance registered in their area. As such you may
be paying for more health care than you need, or possibly even less than you
need. By removing the States from this equation, and letting people buy from
anywhere and everywhere even insurance in other countries (I find no problem
when it comes to free trade with respect to health insurance) this will reduce
overall costs. Also, don't tax hospitals, Doctors offices, health care premiums
and the like. That only adds to the total cost of health care. All this
combined will aid in reducing health care costs to more manageable levels. From
there the non-health care related issues increase costs, like patent law,
taxation on business on the Federal, State and local levels. So by allowing
free trade in health insurance, insurance companies can more to the cheapest
State to operate in and thus allow them to reduce costs to consumers even
further.
Costs at doctor’s offices can be reduced further by
eliminating waste paper work from government institutions. Doctors have
multiple forms they have to fill out to get reimbursed from the government for
Medicare and Medicaid. By switching to a voucher system here, it reduces the
paper work as the insurance enforces the rules rather than the government. Thus
money is saved at all levels, not to mention time and effort. Also, malpractice
lawsuits are a major issue as well. By implementing loser pays lawsuits (where
the loser pays the costs of the winner) it will decrease the overall costs of
fictitious lawsuits as most will not occur or they will just lose in court and
the doctor loses no money if they were in the right in the first place. For the
rare chance that the person in the right will loose, there is a new industry of
looser pays insurance providers ready and waiting to start work. I am not
saying the costs will be completely reduced to the point that we may not need
health insurance, but at least costs will be more manageable no matter ones
age.
Conclusion: We can change the
system. It will be hard, and people will push back out of fear of change
despite the fact that change is inevitable. I do not believe that Social
Security or any form of welfare or safety net will be there for me let alone
for my parents when I retire. Change must happen and I believe the
aforementioned ideas are the best changes to start off with short of tearing up
the whole system and stating over. Let's make the change that we need to happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment