Medicare weighs premium cut

[rustyp]

Medicare weighs premium cut after limiting Alzheimer's drug.

Medicare weighs premium cut after limiting Alzheimer's drug (https://news.yahoo.com/medicare-weighs-premium-cut-limiting-221417203.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

[retiredguy123]

What does the Medicare premium have to do with an Alzheimer's drug? Medicare premiums are already way too low to cover the cost for the benefits being paid out, whether the drug is covered or not. Why not balance the total Medicare cost and benefits, so the program is paid for?

[rustyp]

What does the Medicare premium have to do with an Alzheimer's drug? Medicare premiums are already way too low to cover the cost for the benefits being paid out, whether the drug is covered or not. Why not balance the total Medicare cost and benefits, so the program is paid for?

Read the article !

"The projected cost of Aduhelm was a major driver behind a $22 increase in Medicare’s Part B premium this year, boosting it to $170.10 a month."

[retiredguy123]

Read the article !

"The projected cost of Aduhelm was a major driver behind a $22 increase in Medicare’s Part B premium this year, boosting it to $170.10 a month."
I did read the article. But, I think the major driver should be to charge enough in taxes and premiums to collect the money needed to cover the cost of all benefits that are paid out.

[Stu from NYC]

Medicare is well on its way to running out of money. Than what?

[rustyp]

I did read the article. But, I think the major driver should be to charge enough in taxes and premiums to collect the money needed to cover the cost of all benefits that are paid out.

Let's take your thought to the extreme. So without punishing those contributing under 65 and not using the benefit today would you support leaving the tax rate as is but raising the premium on those of us using Medicare to the point the system breaks even ?

[retiredguy123]

Let's take your thought to the extreme. So as not to punish those contributing under 65 and not reaping the benefit today would you support leaving the tax rate as is but raising the premium on those of us using Medicare to the point the system breaks even ?
Another option is to reduce the benefits. But, I think that a major problem with Medicare is that you can pay the premium and buy a supplement plan that will cover 100 percent of all medical costs, with no copays. So, the patient has no incentive to shop around for lower costs or to avoid unnecessary treatments. I think that the patient should be required to pay a percentage of the cost for every treatment so that the patient has some skin in the game. That would significantly reduce the overall cost of the Medicare program.

[Nucky]

The argument over a specific drug raising our cost is a diversion. The threat of Social Security running out of money is just whacked out. Why should anyone have to sweat that the money they paid in won't be there when it's due? It's simple. Pay up! People work their entire life and look forward to retirement and somewhat count on SS. Cut the garbage out and talk about how you're going to save SS.

The government has the money for everyone else and every project known to man. This is the one I'm, interested in. Pay up!

[retiredguy123]

The argument over a specific drug raising our cost is a diversion. The threat of Social Security running out of money is just whacked out. Why should anyone have to sweat that the money they paid in won't be there when it's due? It's simple. Pay up! People work their entire life and look forward to retirement and somewhat count on SS. Cut the garbage out and talk about how you're going to save SS.

The government has the money for everyone else and every project known to man. This is the one I'm, interested in. Pay up!
I agree. It's a diversion.

[nn0wheremann]

Medicare is well on its way to running out of money. Than what?
Part B is funded by premium income and general revenue. It is not funded by the Medicare trust fund. That funds Part A, Hospital Insurance. That is why it is called the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund. And yes, it is underfunded.

[Luggage]

The one drug has a high cost and is projected to be a large useage . The taxes we paid over 45? Years were projected to pay for our Medicare based on old costs .

[retiredguy123]

Part B is funded by premium income and general revenue. It is not funded by the Medicare trust fund. That funds Part A, Hospital Insurance. That is why it is called the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund. And yes, it is underfunded.
Note that the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund is not an actual fund, but rather an accounting mechanism. Currently, it is projected to be depleted in 2026. I assume, at that point, it will start adding to the National debt unless the SS payroll taxes are increased. Medicare does not charge a monthly premium for Part A like they do for Part B.

[Luggage]

In other word because the gov creates a huge demand and CAN pay for new drugs and medical procedures, new medicines are created, kadix eye surgery, heart transplants as an example too

[Luggage]

"Lasix"

[biker1]

Lasik

"Lasix"

[MandoMan]

Medicare weighs premium cut after limiting Alzheimer's drug.

Medicare weighs premium cut after limiting Alzheimer's drug (https://news.yahoo.com/medicare-weighs-premium-cut-limiting-221417203.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

Read articles about this Alzheimer’s drug. Alzheimer’s is a heartbreaking disease, but this expensive drug seems to be only slightly effective, possibly for a limited period, on only a small percentage of sufferers early in the disease’s progress. Many doctors don’t think the FDA should have approved it. I wouldn’t use it.

I remember back around twelve years ago the FDA approved an expensive drug to increase women’s sexual desire. (It’s a serious problem.) I was at the yearly conference of AASECT (the American Society of Sexuality Educators, Counselors, and Teachers), where I was presenting a paper. There was a session for the entire group (a couple thousand people) to debate use of this drug, and we recommended against it, as testing showed that like the Alzheimer’s drug, it worked maybe a little for a few people and was very expensive. We would have strongly supported a drug that worked well.

We all want a cure for Alzheimer’s, but let’s not let our anguish over the disease lead us to insist on a medication that doesn’t work while leaving taxpayers with the exorbitant cost. Even if we only pay a small part of the cost, We the People are all paying. Let’s hold out for a treatment that works.

[retiredguy123]

In January, the company that makes Aduhelm reduced the cost from $56,000 per year to $28,000 per year. That's Iike a BOGO sale. What a deal!

[Bay Kid]

They cut Dad's SS this year. Said it was the rise of the rise in cost for medicare and secondary insurance.

[craigrmorrison]

Not sure if I’m a fan of reducing premiums across the IRMMA spectrum to offset the out of pocket costs for a medication used by the minority.

At an annual drug cost of $28,000, even reducing the lowest monthly MediCare Part B/D premium of $170.10 to $0 would still make the medication unaffordable for most in need.

[craigrmorrison]

I’m a fan of reducing MediCare Part B&D premiums because everyone who has ever earned a paycheck paid a portion into funding MediCare. Whether it was an actuarial flaw or inappropriate transfers/disbursements the truth should be revealed.

[Hape2Bhr]

Read articles about this Alzheimer’s drug. Alzheimer’s is a heartbreaking disease, but this expensive drug seems to be only slightly effective, possibly for a limited period, on only a small percentage of sufferers early in the disease’s progress. Many doctors don’t think the FDA should have approved it. I wouldn’t use it.

I remember back around twelve years ago the FDA approved an expensive drug to increase women’s sexual desire. (It’s a serious problem.) I was at the yearly conference of AASECT (the American Society of Sexuality Educators, Counselors, and Teachers), where I was presenting a paper. There was a session for the entire group (a couple thousand people) to debate use of this drug, and we recommended against it, as testing showed that like the Alzheimer’s drug, it worked maybe a little for a few people and was very expensive. We would have strongly supported a drug that worked well.

We all want a cure for Alzheimer’s, but let’s not let our anguish over the disease lead us to insist on a medication that doesn’t work while leaving taxpayers with the exorbitant cost. Even if we only pay a small part of the cost, We the People are all paying. Let’s hold out for a treatment that works.

This is correct. Aduhelm is for a small subset of those with Alzheimer's, and those who take it need to be wary of brain bleeds. Not anything I would take. :ohdear:

[Boomer]

They cut Dad's SS this year. Said it was the rise of the rise in cost for medicare and secondary insurance.


IRMAA comes back to bite you two years after the income threshold for the higher premiums is crossed.

If you don’t know about it, it can be a nasty surprise.

If income is rising because the RMD is rising, a QCD can help if the math works and the taxpayer would rather give part of the RMD to charity. For those who usually give to charity anyway, it can make sense to use the QCD, making sure to follow the instructions exactly.

Someone in this thread or the other one about SS has linked the IRMAA info from the SS site.

Boomer