The point is... it doesn't matter what term we use. And the real point is, Trump says he will protect SS and Medicare.

Uh

How is cutting funding to those things protecting them?

Probably by aiming at austerity to make sure the programs are around for future generations?

It’s not all about today’s sick and old. Height of selfishness to think we deserve alle carte services without acknowledging that it’s at the expense of future generations.

That might make sense, if Republicans had put forward a real plan to actually reform these things in the last 10 years.

But they haven't.

The plan has always been to spend less.

We don't need Harvard & Yale think tanks to tell us something that's very obvious. When a program spends more than it brings in or is allotted from taxes, at some point the debt becomes too large to service. That's the case here. So cutting is in all sense of the word protecting these services.

It's like during war having a limited supply of food and knowing you won't have any more supply coming in for a very long time. Sure it would be nice to have 3 meals a day for everyone hunkered down but the wise thing to do is do half portions. Sure it may suck that we don't get our fill every day but that's better than running out of food in 2 months and starving to death because we didn't have the foresight to go to half portions.

Thats a real nice platitude but not an actual plan or effort from the Republicans.

If you want to make the systems solvent you shouldn't lower their income while not lowering the amount you spend. Theyve made plenty of attempts to reduce funding while not actually introducing serious bills that reform the programs to do what you are saying.

Just stick to English.

The spend is the income for those people. The programs need to be capped in what they cover and to what extent, that's the real issue here. Science moving at light speed and finding ways to keep people alive longer and longer is a double edge sword here. Yes it's a positive but simultaneously these services are extremely expensive, more so when it's not just one or two procedure but span months, years, decades.

For most of history a 80 year old getting an infection and dying was accepted for society. Today, we have the science and the resources to keep that person in the hospital for a month for them to recover and live for another year or two, at the cost of tens if not hundreds of thousands. Not saying don't treat these people but at some point we have to have the tough talk as a society and come to the understanding that the current model threatens the whole house of cards if something isn't done.

so then you R should tell everyone your plan is to remove the 3 meals a day and give them a slice of cold ham. and stop the bs lying about it.
Do you want to provide the service or not?

This post was edited by theCrossbones on Aug 29 2020 10:35am