http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/E7-24867.htm is where you can read about the EEOC and its ruling that employers can reduce or eliminate health benefits for those 65 and older. Does this sound harsh? Not to me. If it sounds harsh to you, I've got to ask, where did you think the list of exemptions, empowerments, exclusions and tiered rates was heading? Old people have a much higher likelihood of making a claim for health insurance benefits than younger people--period. And if you ever supported any of the decades long arguments--why should I pay for someone else's weight, habits, or genetics then it's time to pay the piper, why should anyone else pay for your age?
The interesting aspect of the EEOC ruling is that it does not violate age discrimination rules. By describing the release of employer liability for offering plans to oldsters, the "protection" of insurance opportunities for others is emphasized and by describing the application of the ruling to those who are "medicare" eligible, age discrimination is avoided by using the old coordination of benefits idea, that you are covered by insurance (Medicare) and there is no obligation to provide you with more than one insurance coverage so that your out of pocket is less than the rest of the slobs. Don't fret old people, there will be a whole new range of products sold to you to get you through--at what price? Now there's the rub. You're old. Insurance companies only make money when they don't pay. I don't know what the price of covering your old butt will be, but understand, it's just business.
