The million dollar elderly voter question for 2012 is which Medicare plan is best for them: the Paul Ryan Medicare plan or Obama's Medicare plan?
The Associated Press reported that those voters in favor of President Obama's Medicare plan can expect seniors' dependent upon Medicare in 2030 to cost taxpayers 75 percent more money than they do right now.
How many young and middle-aged workers does Obama really think will want to pay double in social security taxes than what they are paying right now?
None, of course, especially if they've heard the scuttlebutt that they may not even get to benefit from Medicare when they get old--even though they paid into it for years. That's because it is in danger of going bankrupt unless funds or added to it (by taxing workers more) or excessive costs are cut.
With the U.S. economy still struggling, asking its limited workers to pay twice what they do now just to expand government benefits is ridiculous, of course. And there has to be a better plan.
The Associated Press reported that Paul Ryan's Medicare plan is much less costly than Obamas, and that it would only inch Medicare expenses up to 35 percent by 2030.
That's a lot more reasonable and much better for taxpayers who already pay a considerable amount of social security insurance each pay period. Ryan's plan, therefore, might be a better sell to the elderly and the general public, who will have to pay for it.
At least with the Paul Ryan Medicare plan the elderly keep getting the care they expect now (no more, no less)--and the employed, what few there are now, will not have their pay checks cut even more drastically due to Medicare costs.