Home | About | Donate

Mr. Trump, If You Love Medicare, Improve It and Expand It to All


Mr. Trump, If You Love Medicare, Improve It and Expand It to All

Dr. Carol Paris
Well, now I’ve heard everything: Donald Trump wants to keep “the government” away from Medicare and protect seniors from attempts to improve it.


Two very corrupt systems MIC and the medical industrial complex is about making huge profits. Insurance companies are like big banks and are in the back pockets of all the politicians. There is also holistic health care w food , vitamins etc that should be part of the system and not a drug w many side effects.


Brilliant response from Dr. Paris!


Trump “read the bill” implies there has been some cerebral action in the White House since 1/20/17.

Trump has never read any bill and never will.

Trump pontificates issues like they are just another episode of The Apprentice, and he rubber stamps whatever the GOP controlled Congress sends him.

Cerebral action in DC is limited to K Street where our destiny is being shaped by those who have an unlimited budget to own politicians, judges and other corporate toadies. The three branches of gubmit are puppet shows in three different buildings in the DC swamp.


Speak to the congress about this matter. The president has not promised any such bill and I have not seen any large cry for such a program.

I am not a fan of the president and in my opinion his attack on the established medical programs are wrong. I believe he is wrongly allowing his Secretaries to reduce payments which are due. He does not pass bills; however, he interfere with the programs that have been passed.

When he want a bill passed the only thing he can do is ask congress to pass the bill.

Our split congress can not get much done. Now with a conservative Supreme Court there is a chance that some bills will be found unconstitutional.


“Now with a conservative SCOTUS there is a chance that some bills will be found unconstitutional.”

There is not just a chance. The forty plus year plan to stack all levels of federal courts with young, right wing judges provides the opportunity for any 1%er or corporation having the means to initiate a court challenge of legislation they don’t like to be assured that those courts’ decisions will find in favor of their challenges.


Maybe you could get Democrats to agree to a health insurance voucher system for the currently employed for as long as they still have their jobs? What Congress must consider: Anything resembling universal health care would make no sense in a country that’s a quarter-century into its war on the poor. Lack of adequate food and shelter take a heavy toll on human health. In fact, the overall life expectancy of the US poor already fell below that of every developed nation.


Beginning a comment with idiotic bigotry is a sure way to keep anyone from considering what you want to say.


I read Dr. Carol Paris’ article. I find sentences such as



Lead me to think she has written advocacy propaganda, with red-flag adjectives.

The doctor doesn’t get around or talk to enough seniors. Plenty of seniors sign up for Medicare Advantage. Rather more than the number of people who signed up for HMO (Health Maintenance Organizations) 30 years ago. Some ideas draw customers and some ideas are duds.

As for ‘obscene’ profits, that is in the eyes of the beholder. There are many people on this forum who think that any amount of profit is ‘obscene’. The people who sign up for Medicare advantage know how much they are paying and how much they are getting, and have decided that the amount of profit the insurer is getting is reasonable.

As for overhead, the numbers are not directly comparable. Insurers count as overhead the amount they have to spend to prevent a doctor or hospital or policyholder from defrauding them. Medicare spends very little on combating waste, fraud and abuse. They suffer quite a bit of waste, fraud and abuse, which shows up on a different line of their yearly financial statement. (presuming that this government agency actually produces a yearly financial statement that would survive auditing.)

This, perhaps, is the biggest argument against Medicare for All. You are going to task a government that spends $1000 on a military toilet seat to buy epi-pens and pacemakers and whatever health else the public needs, and not waste money? (Waste cuts private insurers profits, so they have an incentive to fight waste. Not true in government.)

Dr. Paris also takes a pie in the sky approach to the subject, telling us about all the good, seniors and everyone being able to get whatever healthcare they need, and afford groceries too. She says nothing about the tradeoffs and costs that will inevitably happen.

This has been the subject of many articles, including a study by the Mercatus Center that has been written about on this forum. If the cost is only $32 trillion, then America comes out ahead by saving the private insurance premiums. But the Mercatus study shows that it would take very few things going worse for Medicare for All costs to explode higher, and become a worse bargain for America.