As frequent readers of this blog knows I have little or no use for the two party system. In my opinion the American political system is broken and the roots of that brokenness have everything to do with the trap of a two party system.
Democrats = Republicans and vice versa. You can make all the arguments you want about the differences, but in the end the one thing they have in common is they live and survive for their own self interest. The public and doing the right thing for the Country is lower on the priority lists of the two parties than doing what is politically expedient. Period.
I know this is not a great revelation. It is simply obvious. Neither will do anything to support the other, even if it is the right thing for the country.
My contempt for the politics of the 1970s, 80s, 90s and through today has little bounds.
With the death of my father-in-law and the placement of my mother-in-law in a nursing home that contempt has only magnified the anger and frustration with what I feel is a government out-of-control.
My father-in-law saved carefully all his life. He invested wisely and was prudent. Now, after paying his taxes for his entire life the government has created a situation where they and the nursing home will confiscate most of his wealth in just a very short time.
Medicare rules and nursing home requirements are currently draining about $10,000 a month from my in-laws carefully constructed nest egg to care for her in a 10 X 20 room. For $10,000 a month you could reserve a room on a cruise liner and live there in luxury, but laws written by Republicans and Democrats are seeing to it that what was so carefully collected over 50 years will be gone in less than two years.
Trust me, the government will not get my nest egg, because I'll make sure it is gone before I am, or I'll hide it where they'll never find it.
If you haven't been through this event - the placement of an elderly parent in a nursing home - you will not have an appreciation for the labyrinth of rules and regulations drawn up by legislators to make sure they squeeze every dollar from every citizen before they die. This from citizens who have been lifelong taxpayers.
The rich - and the legislators - would never have to face this because they would have been able to afford the lawyers and crooks that would have sheltered the money.
To navigate these laws and regulations you are forced to hire an elder care attorney - not a cheap option - and spend even more money to salvage something, anything, for my surviving mother-in-law. Just spending two months watching this has me longing for a new 1776 revolutionary spirit. Of course the money you spend on lawyers is exempt from all the other regulations. Republican and Democrat lawyer-legislators made sure of that.
People ask me why I don't support the public health care option. It's easy, because I don't trust the government and I hold them in utter contempt. I don't need any more reason than that.
Living through this government induced horror for my mother-in-law and her savings has more than convinced me that it is time to throw ALL the bums out, President Obama included.
And don't offer me any Republican or Democrat as a substitute either.
Consider just a few recent examples:
A Democrat who helps write tax laws, doesn't pay his own taxes.
Another Democrat congressman scoffs at the idea he should ACTUALLY read the health care bill.
A Republican governor preaches family values and then flies to Argentina for a weekend with his mistress.
President Bush convinced Congress to act quickly to pour billions into a broken financial system to save the corrupt bankers and insurance companies who created the crisis. Did things get better? No, they got worse.
President Obama enters office and immediately repeats the mistake, promising that by doing so unemployment will stay under 8 percent. Wrong again! Unemployment is approaching 10 percent with little indication it will drop any time soon.
For you young people who support these policies just remember that the trillions in new debt being rung up by the past and current administration - aka Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum - will be on your backs to pay in a few years.
While some think all this money being handed out is "Obama money," it is really "your money" and you will be responsible for paying it back, with big interest. Remember that someday when you are trying to smile and say "Yes, we can."
We have a sleeping media. We have media on the right that attacks everything and a media on the left that acts as a cheerleader. For an old newsman it is beyond frustrating to watch.
It's past time for serious questioning and investigation and frankly, it may be too late.
If someone will boil the tar, I'll be happy to bring the feathers. I actually wrote this last Sunday and slept on it for two days and actually toned down some of what I previously wrote, but I don't want anyone to try and tell me that the government is the answer for anything except providing a great military defense and law enforcement.
If you're a Republican or Democrat politician and you're reading this, well, you probably owe everyone an apology.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Glad you're back Jim. And in traditional great style!
It might be worth your time -- and money--to hook up with a geriatric care manager who can give you some advice about the financial end of things. As well as the care end.
We have hired what is supposed to be the best elder care attorney in Western New York. As I mentioned, the law allows you to pretty much spend whatever you want on attorneys, but I do appreciate the advice.
Trust me, we are doing everything legal in our power to keep as much money as we can for mom in the event that someday she might recover to the point that she could live in her own home or with one of us.
Just a little example: Three years ago the folks gave us their 8-year-old Crown Victoria when they purchased a new car.
Now the government wants us to sell that car and give them the money because they believe it was an attempt by the folks to "hide" their money.
That is frickin' ridiculous. The car's blue book value three years ago was $4,500 and they simply didn't need two cars for one driver.
But we must remember that we are dealing with bureaucrats, many of whom have never worked a real job or had real responsibilities, so common sense does not mean much to them.
This posting reminds me of why I classify myself as a Reagan Conservative or Independent Conservative. The GOP years ago lots its way. When they get back to basics, maybe I'll consider joining them. At this stage, if a Conservative Party ever emerged, I'd rather join that.
It is my hope that you understand the nursing home cost is so high not because of government, but because the owners of nursing homes choose to charge this much and people pay it. The average cost of nursing home care is nearly $5,000 per month in this country, and hospitals are snapping up property and nursing homes left and right to cash in because they know the next 30 years are so are going to be extremely lucrative on the nursing home front with the Baby Boomers aging.
And that is what is wrong with Medicare. It merely buys health insurance in our current, overpriced system. In my opinion, it is not Medicare's fault for its financial woes - it is the current setup of our health system, which allows for these exhorbitant prices.
Which brings up the debate of government/our society's moral obligation of affordable healthcare for all vs. no gov't peddling, please, and let us have our free market.
I suppose in a perfect world we'd all die quickly and leave our nest eggs to our children largely intact. Unfortunately, sometimes death is long, messy and expensive. That is why we have nest eggs.
While I'm sure your mother-in-law is a very lovely person, why should my tax dollars pay for her nursing home care so that her nest egg is undisturbed? Taxes don't begin to cover the cost of long-term care.
I apply the same argument to so-called "libertarians" who want to repeal motorcycle helmet laws in Michigan. I don't want my taxes to pay for a cyclist's long-term care in an institution because he sustained a closed-head injury while proving how "independent" he was.
Rather than hate the system for making seniors spend down their assets before receiving government-funded nursing home care, you should be proud of the fact that your inlaws were responsible adults who saved enough money so that they could "pay their way." Another option would have been purchasing long-term care insurance.
With all due respect, Jim, I think your anger is very misdirected. Where is your contempt for the nursing home companies that charge desperate families exhorbitant rates while paying their careworkers minimum wage? Would you want to change an adult's diapers or swab their bedsores for $8 an hour? To me, your arguments demonstrate why we need a single-payer system in this country. Either that, or people will have to care for their aging loved ones at home, like they did in the old days.
Dear Brown:
We are not in disagreement. I believe my mother-in-law and her estate should pay her way.
But what has been created is a situation where government requirements for Medicare (a system they did pay into after all) and the nursing home have symbiotically created a situation where there is no reality in the cost of care.
The idea that the cost of her care is $10,000 a month is ludicrous. We could easily pay $3,000 to $4,000 a month in perpetuity for her treatment. That would largely be covered by the pension she receives from Red's continuing retirement and interest from her nest egg.
The idea that her care, remember she is living in a double room that is about 15 X 40 feet, costs $10,000 to $12,000 a month is a function of the nursing home and the governmment conspiring to make sure that they get all the money up front.
The fact that the laws and rules are written to allow us to spend pretty much all we want on lawyers is evidence of the corruptness of this law.
We have no issue with paying her way. We just believe it should make sense.
We don't need her nest egg, but say in a year, she recovers to the point that she could live on her own, she will not have any means to do so, because the government and nursing home have required the divestment of all her money on their gamble that she may not die soon enough.
It is the rationed care that we already live with and that will get worse when the government takes over all medical care.
So, yes we are more than willing to pay for her care, but not willing to pay at the ridiculous rate of $10,000 to $12,000 a month for care that is worth $2,000 to $4,000 a month.
We are exploring options of hiring two or three people to keep her at home, but frankly the home is not set up for a person in a wheelchair.
Our other desire would be to move her in with us, but her desire is to remain in the only hometown she has ever known.
So, I don't disagree that you and others shouldn't be required to pay for her care, but letting the government and nursing homes conspire to drain all her money in a short time in the hope that she will die penniless as the money runs out is not an option that I agree with.
So until I see some reasonable reform on the cost of care, nursing and otherwise, I will never see my way to approve of government paid health care.
You can't divorce the connection between the nursing homes and the Medicare system from dual responsibility for this situation.
If you are going to make people pay into Medicare and then offer them nursing home care under that it will have to be at a rate that covers the cost of that care.
That's my opinion anyway.
The government-run VA healthcare system is efficient and rated very highly by those who use it. There must be a way to adapt that model for private long-term care facilities. Right now, most nursing homes deliver shoddy care at Four Seasons prices, while paying the direct caregivers squat. These companies are getting rich on the backs of our seniors.
Dear Brown:
Having lost my brother - a Vietnam veteran - early this year, you will have a hard time convincing me of the effectiveness of the VA system.
My brother struggled for years with problems that we believe were associated with her service in Vietnam.
After several appointments and tests, my brother had one more hurdle to jump before he was to get help and some benefits from the government.
Unfortunately, he died. Therefore, the VA system said they could not prove he was actually sick of a service related problem so neither he nor his surviving spouse gets any benefits.
We are NOT impressed by the VA system. I will admit to hearing of individual cases where people have gotten good service from the VA, but have heard just as many bad ones.
We are not unhappy with the care that our mother is currently getting.
But the idea that because she and her husband saved well that now she has to be parted with her nest egg to pay for all those who didn't, isn't sitting very well.
The process, as you probably know, is a matter of taking from those with means, to pay for the Medicare patients who have no independent means.
We all know that her care does not cost $10,000 to $12,000 a month, but others in the nursiving home are suriving there on Medicare, which does not cover the bills, so those who have "extra" must pay for those who don't.
It's Marxism at its purest form. Redistribution of wealth.
Of course that should be "his" service, not "her" service. Typing too fast.
Post a Comment