Age of enrollment into Medicare should directly correlate with ones wealth (historic income?) instead of what a senior might actually need, that is what Ezekiel J. Emanuel proposes. Although, he feels that the wealthy should have to option to buy into Medicare at age 65 and pay a flat rate (what would that be?) until they turn 70.
People in the bottom half of the lifetime earnings distribution would become eligible for normal retirement benefits at age 65 for Medicare and 66 for Social Security, just as they are today. But people in the next quarter of the lifetime earnings distribution would become eligible for the respective programs at 67 and 68, and those in the top quarter would become eligible at 70 and 71. All eligibility ages would increase over time, as they are scheduled to now.
In all income brackets, those choosing to retire later than the standard age would still receive higher Social Security benefits, called delayed-retirement credits. For those choosing to retire earlier and accept reduced benefits, on the other hand, nothing would change in the lower bracket, while the minimum age would increase in the two higher income brackets. And wealthier older people would have the choice of buying into Medicare at age 65, though they would have to pay for it before the age of 70. Original here
According to Ezekiel this should be done since on average a wealthy person will live longer (by about 5 years) and that isn’t going to change any time soon. This sort of reform would just turn SS and Medicare into welfare (or is that what they are supposed to be?), would you support this? Plus it won’t save Medicare much since the wealthy are such a tiny minority and are mostly healthy.