Advocacy / Advocating for You / Healthcare / Medicare / Social Security

Biden Administration Seems Reluctant to Deal with the Potential Social Security and Medicare Problems

Social Security

WASHINGTON, DC, July 28 — There is a consensus that Social Security and Medicare are in desperate need of a fix. Yet, the new Biden administration seems oblivious to that fact and what it means for America’s growing population of senior citizens.

Perhaps President Biden has forgotten, too, that as the oldest Chief Executive this country has ever had, he might show a little more compassion for his elderly constituents, too many of whom rely on Social Security and Medicare for survival.

The administration is seeking outlandish amounts of money for a variety of pet projects dear to the hearts of the progressive socialist elements in the nation’s capital. To paraphrase the late Senator Everett Dirksen, a trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon, you’re talking real money. But there are barely enough dollars for the lifelines that too many older Americans rely upon.

According to the Social Security Administration:

  • Among elderly Social Security beneficiaries, 50% of married couples and 70% of unmarried persons receive 50% or more of their income from Social Security.
  • Among elderly Social Security beneficiaries, 21% of married couples and about 45% of unmarried persons rely on Social Security for 90% or more of their income.

Chris Jacobs is a health policy analyst for the Senate Republican Policy Committee. In a recent Opinion article published by the Daily Caller, he pointed out that, “By ignoring the crisis facing our current entitlements [Social Security and Medicare] while proposing new financial commitments, Biden will create problems for multiple generations. Thanks to inaction by this administration and congressional Democrats, today’s seniors will face an uncertain retirement.”

Some might say, “who cares!” and others might say, “so what?”

But the fact is we should all care, and we should all be concerned about “what happens.” Growing old is something each and every one of us can look forward to, some with anticipation and some with regret. However, the coronavirus pandemic has shown that Ageism may have gripped the nation, and more and more of our fellow citizens could care less.

One recent piece of research goes so far as to point out that:

“During the pandemic, public discourse that suggests older generations should sacrifice their lives in order to reduce the economic cost of COVID-19 for future generations has emerged. In this case, the ageist expression is that older lives are expendable, which is set against the benefit of reduced economic burden on younger generations. This is a stark and clear expression of age bias against older adults, and a damaging characterization of how a society feels about its older generations.”

Governor Gavin Newsom [D-CA], who is facing a recall election this fall, was taken to task when the pandemic was spreading at full steam last spring. He was “roundly criticized,” according to the Los Angeles Times, “after his administration advised hospitals to prioritize younger people with greater life expectancy for care during the coronavirus outbreak. Those guidelines were swiftly retracted.”

So, can the lack of response from the Democratic regime in Washington to the critical attention that is needed to deal with the Social Security/Medicare crisis be an extension of the increasingly hostile attitudes emerging generally as regards the elderly?

Not long ago, the Website NursingAnswers.net published a description of what Ageism is all about: “Ageism generates unnecessary fear, waste, illness, and misery; hence it has an impact on both society and culture, even though most individuals are not aware of it. Ageism and ageist attitudes are one of the factors that can contribute to elder abuse by creating a fertile environment in which the abuse can develop, leading to age discrimination, and devaluing and disempowering older people.”

It appears that disdain for the elderly motivates a growing part of the population, and it is reflected by those in power, those such as Governor Newsom and the socialist lackeys who are disrupting Congress. It’s no wonder, then, that the desperate financial needs of Social Security and Medicare are being ignored.

The promise to guarantee Social Security for all Americans must be kept, says the Association of Mature American Citizens (AMAC), the largest conservative alternative to the AARP. AMAC has developed and recommended to many in Congress a solution that avoids the “political third rail” those in Congress fear. In this connection, AMAC has examined the many proposed solutions presented in the recent Social Security Trustees Reports and selected the alternatives best suited to save Social Security’s retirement trust fund. These have been combined with several other recommendations in the Social Security Guarantee-Social Security Plus proposal to achieve what is the best path to long-term trust fund solvency without raising taxes.

AMAC’s proposal has three primary objectives:

1. Guarantee an increase in benefits for those with lower earnings;

2. Guarantee achieving solvency and ensure benefits continue; and

3. Provide a means for all earners to have more income available at retirement through a complementary or supplemental Social Security Plus account.

In sum, AMAC’s proposal provides solutions for Congress as it will hopefully engage prudently in addressing the guarantee of Social Security’s retirement fund without penalizing individuals, businesses, and jobs by seizing on payroll tax increases as being necessary in the absence of first evaluating the results of needed changes in the Social Security law.

We hope you've enjoyed this article. While you're here, we have a small favor to ask...

As we prepare for what promises to be a pivotal year for America, we're asking you to consider a gift to help fund our journalism and advocacy.

The need for fact-based reporting that offers real solutions and stops the spread of misinformation has never been greater. Now more than ever, journalism and our first amendment rights are under fire. That's why AMAC is passionately working to increase the number of real news articles we deliver WEEKLY, while continuing to strengthen our presence on Capitol Hill.

AMAC Action, a 501 (C)(4), advocates to protect American values, free speech, the exercise of religion, equality of opportunity, sanctity of life, the rule of law, and love of family.

Thank you for putting your faith in AMAC!

Donate Now

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Read more articles by AMAC, John Grimaldi
Subscribe
Notify of
7 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gil
1 day ago

Social Security for those that worked (and are still working at 71, like my husband) should be there for him when he retires ….if he gets to retire. We only have that and our savings which is not enough to survive on decently. So, we keep working. Why is there always enough money for everyone who comes here illegally and not those that abide by the rules and pay their taxes and are LEGAL??

VenaZ
2 days ago

Taxes raised? Shouldn’t we also as seniors have a raise too? We shouldn’t have to pay medical. As our Heavenly Father says in His words Honor thy Father n Mother the only Commandment w a PROMISE. Majority of us have worked 40-50 years contributed into to system diligently, faithfully. When we were young I didn’t want to (contribute)than got some sense knocked into my head. Lol. Now that I’m here a senior collecting ss, w todays inflation, n unable to qualify for assistance, jus barely making it month to month, can’t save nothing. It’s terrifying. God keeps me grounded Hallelujah! My faith in God will give you life too.

Charles Nolan
2 days ago

Seniors tend to be more conservative and vote Republican. The more that die of COVID in rest homes or depression and homelessness the less votes for their enemy, the Republicans. From father to son, since they lost the Civil War, the Democrats have hated the Republicans.
Free education for students at the new indoctrination camps, while homelessness and depression for seniors.

PaulE
3 days ago

Bernie Sanders and AOC have already laid out the plan for what they want Biden to do regarding both SS and Medicare. To boil it down to its base form, both SS and Medicare as they exist today would be done away with. All remaining monies in both programs would be shifted to the new UBI and so-called Medicare for All (which is really single payer government run health care) programs that would take their place. A series of new, across the board taxes would also be enacted to help pay for these programs, so your income actually ends up going down, as these new social welfare programs consume more and more of our overall economy. The Democrats have NO interest in salvaging either SS or Medicare as it exist now.

Under UBI, what any current retiree receives from SS would of course be meaningless. UBI would provide either $1,000.00 or $2,000.00 a month to every American, regardless of age, depending upon what the final legislation reads. One size fits all as it has to be “equitable”.

Single Payer would work like the system in the UK or Canada and the government would ration medical care according to your remaining economic value to society. The older you get, the less chance the government will approve an expensive treatment or drug. The government does compensate for this (sarcasm here) by allowing the government doctors to prescribe lots of cheap pain killers. There are literally hundreds of articles on-line that accurately describe the system. I also have several friends and relatives that have personally experienced the so-called quality of care delivered by single payer in several European countries. I seriously doubt most seniors would appreciate the change.

Kim
2 days ago
Reply to  PaulE

Several months ago, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine (“joints”, to us old people) injected something called SynViscOne into my knee. A week later, I had a severe reaction to the injection, and could barely drive to get back to the doctor’s office.

After he admitted that successive injections (this was my third) markedly raise the probability of a bad reaction (possible surgery, sepsis, and death) I was surprised by his reaction, essentially, “Why are you coming to me with this? You should go see Dr. D.” And I’m not even a crabby patient! If I had known about the odds (12%) of a bad reaction, I would not have gotten the shot. He gave me the paperwork describing side effects after the second visit…

So, yes, I do think Medicare patients are not getting the quality of care as those not on Medicare. We’ll end up on gurnies lining the hallways, like they do in the countries you referred to.

VenaZ
2 days ago
Reply to  Kim

I know of persons who have both Medicare n medicaid they pay nothing n are prescribed top of the line meds. These are people on disability. Plus $200 foodstamps. Never worked so they never contributed into the system. A little “J” you know I am. Unfair practice.

Unless they’re born disabled, ok I got no gripe about them. It’s the liars, cheaters, fakers…

PaulE
2 days ago
Reply to  Kim

Once we adopt Single Payer here, if the Democrats ever get their way, and ALL doctors are forced to be controlled and regulated by the federal government, in order to be allowed to practice in this country, people in this country will look back at this time as paradise compared to the quality of care they will be receiving. Access to care specialists or any expensive medication, will require prior approval from the government and for most seniors, that means you’ll be turned down.

In most countries with Single Payer, if you have a serious illness or disease that is highly expensive to treat, they send you home with an automatic, refillable prescription for cheap pain pills until you pass away. They don’t want you to take up limited hospital bed space or gurnies. If you die in a hospital, that reflects poorly on the government stats. If you die at home, it doesn’t make the stats for Single Payer look worse, because you’re not actively being treated within the medical system. That is how one doctor in Europe explained the rationale to me a few years ago. It’s all about making the government numbers look good.

7
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x