- Joined
- Jul 4, 2011
- Messages
- 33,023
- Reaction score
- 14,666
- Location
- Near Seattle
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Obamacare cut medicare by $800 billion
And improved it in the process.
https://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-medicare/
Health Care Reform and Medicare Myths vs. Facts - AARP
800 Billion is a start , Trump needs to gut the money pit !!!! :roll:
As someone who works daily with poor seniors and poor disabled people, (including veterans in remote area who depend on Medicare and/or Medicaid) , I certainly hope not.
The Medicaid system has its warts,. But most right wing nuts don't realize that it can protect your assets when your spouse gets sick.
The single biggest threat to your estate, is the cost of Long Term Care.
Yep, it kicks in right after the couple spends down to half of their assets. In the case of my parents that was three weeks (20 days) before my mother died. Assets lost $125K and Medicaid benefits gained $3K - a great deal indeed.
Did you consult an elder attorney?
The Medicaid laws are now designed to protect the well spouse. There are several legal ways to transfer and protect wealth. WELL WORTH THE ADVICE.
The well spouse was entitled to 50% of the shared assets - that half was "protected". The sick spouse was said to own 50% of the shared assets thus was said to be "too rich" to get Medicaid. And yes, lawyers were involved.
Unfortunately planning ahead relieves many of the look back provisions. There are legal ways to protect wealth. Hindsight is 20/20 of course. Your Mother's need for care was relatively short-lived it appears. (Sorry for your loss btw)
Had her stay been average (2 and a 1/2 years), Medicaid would have really helped your Father.
She had LTC insurance? That's pretty rare these days.
Probably not if she had to spend down. Medicaid makes you spend down your assets. They're brutal to, they leave the house and a car for the spouse and take just about everything else. Til the spouse dies, then they get the house and car.
LTC gives you a pool of money based on a daily cost. A nursing home in one town may charge 70 a day for care. While a different towns nursing home costs 90. They take the cost per day and ask you how many years you want to prepare for and that's your pool. And for an extra 10 bucks a month they tack on inflation protection. Which increases your pool with inflation.
I prefer HHC (Home Healthcare Plans), they're cheaper on the premium and they keep you in your house.
Food for thought, would you rather spend 1400 a year on a LTC plan, or have medicaid spend down everything you worked for in your life.
Probably not if she had to spend down. Medicaid makes you spend down your assets. They're brutal to, they leave the house and a car for the spouse and take just about everything else. Til the spouse dies, then they get the house and car.
Yep, it kicks in right after the couple spends down to half of their assets. In the case of my parents that was three weeks (20 days) before my mother died. Assets lost $125K and Medicaid benefits gained $3K - a great deal indeed.
yea don't forget once it is done they can come looking for their money back from the estate.
Expanded Medicaid’s fine print holds surprise: ‘payback’ from estate after death | The Seattle Times
As someone who works daily with poor seniors and poor disabled people, (including veterans in remote area who depend on Medicare and/or Medicaid) , I certainly hope not.
The Medicaid system has its warts,. But most right wing nuts don't realize that it can protect your assets when your spouse gets sick.
The single biggest threat to your estate, is the cost of Long Term Care.
If you truly work with the poor, seniors and veterans then you know that the states have programs for all these people and that federal funding isn't required to handle the needs of the people. Could it be that lower federal taxes would results in fewer dollars leaving the states thus giving the state economy more money to solve their own social problems? It does seem that spending in the name of compassion appeals to the hearts of the left but does nothing to truly help those in need other than helping the bureaucrats that run the programs
It really is sad how easily minds of some people are manipulated into believing that a federal one size fits all program in 50 independent states with different costs of living works when the results show the opposite
Top Cat;1067237034]Trump wants to cut federal funding for states by 800 billion. To suggest that the states just Make That Up" is naive at best.
The money isn't there. And who gets hurt? Those with the least.
There is abuse of the system that can be addressed to produce cuts. That is a reasonable and noble cause. That is what the previous administration did