Jackson Jambalaya

Bill Crawford - Grandma and Grandpa (of which I am one) were never meant to live to be 90. That's why 62 was picked sixty some odd years ago as the age of retirement.....people typically didn't live much longer after that age. Guess what? The government is well aware of the budgetary tsunami of retirees about to hit the budget, and because of which SS/Medicare will go bankrupt. So, guess what the plan is? To UP that age of 62 dramatically to say, 72 years old before you can start to receive benefits. It's the only way to keep social security/Medicare solvent.

we have a few choices. raise the retirement age, for social security disability- narrow the scope of covered disabilities (and ensure those persons disabilities are real before granting coverage), raise taxes or cut benefits. also, allowing medicare to negotiate with drug companies would cut prescription costs. the best approach would be a combination of all of the above.

I've got a better idea. Remove the tax-free status from churches. Did you know churches and religions orgs spent almost a BILLION dollars on lobby groups and lobbyist last year?

Churches fall into the category of ‘charitable’ entities. This is often a stretch. The researchers calculated the Methodist church, for example, spends roughly .7% of its annual income on charity. Their study of 271 congregations found an average of 71% of revenues going to ‘operating expenses,’ while help to the poor is somewhere within the remaining 29%. Compare this to the American Red Cross, which uses 92.1% of revenues for physical assistance and just 7.9% on operating expenses. The authors also note that

Wal-Mart, for instance, gives about $1.75 billion in food aid to charities each year, or twenty-eight times all of the money allotted for charity by the United Methodist Church and almost double what the LDS Church has given in the last twenty-five years.

Since the 1890’s, US churches have been tax exempt. They received an official federal income tax exemption in 1894 and they have been unofficially tax exempt since the country’s founding. Churches in all the 50 US states and also the District of Columbia have been exempt from paying property tax. Also donations to churches are tax deductible. Mega churches across the United States are becoming increasingly popular which is not only bringing thousands of worshippers together, but also billions of dollars in profit.

It's past time. We can no longer afford to allow the free ride! Taxing churches could inject between 75 and 100 BILLION dollars per year into social programs for the disabled, homeless, mentally-ill,veterans and the poor.

@2:32

I agree

religion in America (music minister, preacher, student minister, etc...) is now a career path. not a calling. it's about money and control. we need another Martin Luther.

Then the non-profit status should be pulled as well for all these college/university "foundations"....non-profit my ass.....you should see the salaries of some community college "presidents".....they're TWICE what the Governor pull down. Plus, they're building new buildings left and right from Federal dollars they capture in the billions of financial aid that's wrongfully pulled down.....enrollments and attendance records are pervasively being manipulated (which is fraud).

We could afford to take a little bit better care of our own people if we didn't spend so much taking care of the people in other countries.
Get serious about the illegals would save quite a bit.
No free ride for politicians and their friends would help quite a few old people.
If we would stop invading other countries the war toy money could be spent on the people.

There is so much waste in our spending habits. As long as the politicians know we can still borrow money they will not control spending. They do not plan on ever paying it back anyway.

Medical costs are ridiculous mainly because of the number of tests, the cost of drugs, and all the other measures taken to reduce the risk of being sued. If we would pass Federal Tort Reform we might get some rational charges for excellent care. Mississippi has experienced such a reduction in medically related court cases and if we replicated this nationally, then the cost of care would be reduced without sacrificing any of the benefits. This is the first place health care reform should start.

When the sale of alcoholic beverages was legalized in Mississippi, a portion of that tax was to go for treatment of problems caused by alcohol. It did not take the legislature long to stop that program and put this money into the general fund. This was OK with both parties; certainly not a GOP "death panel".

You pass Federal Tort Reform then medical malpractice and bad drugs will be unchecked like a biblical plague!

BTW.. July 29, 2017 at 3:27 PM, turn around. You're preaching to the choir! ( No pun intended)

Huh? So, we know the age at which people will die has been pushed out. So the answer is to push out the age of eligibility for benefits? Sort of put things out of reach? I thought the purpose was to provide for old people, not penalize them by pushing out the benefit eligibility age. Where did I go wrong?

Remove the damned cap on SS paid in for wealthy folks. Get drug costs under control by whatever means. Make it illegal for sitting senators and reps to accept money from the legal drug cartels.

Want to fix SS and Medicare? Put federal employees, including those vultures in Washington on those systems instead of their cushy retirement setup, and see how fast it gets fixed. And while we're at it,how about TERM LIMITS for said vulture!

If it were up to me, an Executive Order from the President would be issued pronto removing the exemption for employees of Congress from the ACA (Obamacare) and Congress would have to buy their own policies, non-reimbursable. And, Amen, to term limits. Would help keep the swamp from forming.

Tests are not so much performed/recommended/done on referral to avoid lawsuits as they are to fatten the pocket-books of the referring physicians. Look at who owns the businesses where tests are performed. The same physicians who make the referrals. The same places where surgeries are performed (not counting hospitals) are part-owned by the physicians making the referrals and performing the surgeries. Same with MRI machines. And after the tests and surgeries, guess who is part owner of the Physical Therapy business.

And take a wild-assed guess as to why my cardiologist always puts me on a new drug as soon as the patent expires on the old one.

This is the first time that every comment is non-partisan even though the article has a partisan element.
Everyone has made good points. Hope springs.
The reason is that we actually have first hand, relevant knowledge of how some of our systems are failing.
We have forgotten that neither churches nor hospitals were " for profit" in the 1800s.
We have forgotten there is a difference in paying those whose jobs are essential to society a fair compensation based on their performance and the manufacturing and selling widgets. We never think of making law enforcement or military defense " for profit", do we?
We've forgotten why , for centuries, we distinguished between professions, services and commerce.
Churches weren't taxed then because they were not profit centers. They didn't operate for profit businesses on the side. Their income was gifted through tithes or monies were raised by the free labor and generosity of church members.
And, while doctors were always in the upper social order, they, like ministers who healed the soul, had a calling to heal the sick body. Their patients, like the minister's congregants supported them based on their ability to contribute. Medicine was not for profit.
Blue Cross /Blue Shield was a non profit insurance company and other insurance companies made money by collecting and investing money to protect the insured against unlikely catastrophic events. The money collected over years and years from the many, invested wisely (rather than ending up in the pockets of the company in amounts that couldn't work) exceeded the disasters of the few.
Even business doesn't operate the same. Look at compensation comparisons for CEOs in the 50s and compare corporate profits and what was put back into research and development then to the equivalent percentages in today's dollar value. It's shocking. Then ask, how did this happen?
We aren't putting money back into our society in rational ways. In short, we haven't been investing in the future.
We need to first decide what we want a system, any system in a society to accomplish and then we can insist that those who represent us work towards those goals. Health care is a good place start to fixing what is broken.
Money should be seen a means , not an end to creating a functioning system and a prosperous society. Prosperity is not just about the money. It's also about the opportunity of citizens to be able to reasonably pursue life, liberty and happiness.
We used to agree these were our founding principles. It's the prominent section in our Declaration for good reason.

I think I heard that at one time in our history people did not enter politics to become wealthy either. (Columbo hand to the brow.) Anybody know the truth of that?

In the 50's, we had a true managed mixed economy. The country was also nationalist. Milton Friedman changed all of that. Starting with Reagan, the "pro-growth" policies began and his economic theories infiltrated every school of economics, and thus, every aspect of our lives.

Now, everything is about profit. So let's talk about seniors: Doctors will check a "magic box" and put an 80 year old in surgery that the patient doesn't need knowing his or her chances of dying are quite high. Life or death doesn't matter as long as they get their Medicare/Medicaid payout.
As far as the 1% goes, they use the nanny state as one of many barriers to entry. They preach free markets, but heaven forbid they actually compete with up and comers.

As far as term limits go, it won't work like you think it will because lobbyists will be waiting on fresh meat to manipulate. The people that have to leave their seat will go to work FOR the lobbyists.

If and only if, you make reforms to current lobbying practices will the idea of term limits work.

Taking away Medicare is only the beginning of the true agenda at hand. They want every govt program since the new deal to be obliterated (even the TVA), and turn the US back into a hyper-capitalist venture like it was before the crash of 29. Ideally this would be great if it weren't for barriers to entry that keep monopolies in power.

12:22....medicare doesn't pay shit toward the true cost of surgery. Turn your cap around.

6:14 don't split hairs with me. I included both for a reason.

I have a good friend in a neighboring state whose elderly dad had health issues that caused him to be hospitalized and subsequently sent to rehab to recover. However, in less than one week this reputable rehab facility told the family that dad would never come home. So 80 year old dad didn't spring back to life after surgery, loss of blood and 4 days in rehab. A family member was friends with the owner of the facility and he questioned why the diagnosis so soon. He was told "no problem, we can take care of this." When my friend went to the facility the next day the nurse manager pulled him aside and apologized and told him I didn't know your family was supposed to get the VIP treatment. What the . . . Every man or women in that place should get the VIP treatment. Medical facilities, surgery centers, hospitals, nursing homes, doctors, drug companies, health insurance companies, politicians, am I leaving someone out? They who operate solely on greed need to have a pit underneath hell. And no, if you are a nun or an administrator at catholic hospital or baptist hospital you do not get a pass.

'Split hairs'? You suggested doctors are operating on medicare patients for the money. That's pretty insane. The same surgeon would make that amount of money and more by seeing four patients instead of performing surgery at medicare rates.

7:09 am Justify the surgeon's rates on non- Medicare patients. Which is closer to your actual costs? I'm willing to account mathematically for your added costs of education. If you have to pay for use of equipment or bought it yourself, break down your costs per patient for me. Your equipment costs seems to never break even.
What I can't justify is the exorbitant costs I pay as a non-Medicare patient. Let's not pretend I'm not picking up the costs . I see my charges. I see the stuff I am " given" that could be sterilized and reused. I see the cost difference in what you charge for extremely inferior quality stockings that I threw away and they cost me less to buy myself. I'm from a textile family and know exactly how and where those stockings were developed and by whom. I know the patent names and what large corporation bought it out and when the patent expired and that the changes are not better and not innovative but of less quality.

I'd bet the majority of doctors' and nurses' direct deposits in this state can be directly traced to federal/state dollars from the programs. Yet here we are in this state complaining about moochers.

There have been some mentions lately of the number of middle class seniors who use Medicaid to pay for nursing homes. I think the CL and others should also look at how many middle class families rely on CHIP. There are plenty of blue collar hard working families where CHIP frees up enough income to pay the mortgage. I mean, let's get real people.

As all liberals do, Crawford argues that anyone who asks government to be frugal, not to waste money, and to be discriminating about who receives benefits are insensitive to the plight of the poor. They don't want to permit anyone to "lean on them." He absolutely is too lazy to take a look at the Department of Mental Health and see what programs and expenses they failed to cut in favor of cutting essential services. Instead of the good-hearted saints over at MDMH, it must be the cold, cruel hearted legislators and tax payers who cut the funds! Take a look at one of the families that was the subject of one of the Clarion Ledger's articles recently. Nobody will say anything, because they will get castigated for being critical. But, there was a family living in an upper middle class home, both parents working, and we have to pay for a several-hundred-dollar-a-day daycare for this family. No, one of them doesn't quit their job and keep the kid. And no, they aren't living in a two bedroom house in Jackson that costs $25,000. Basically, we are subsidizing their lifestyle -- and to Crawford, anyone who isn't willing to do that hates kids and wants them to die. What a total crock.