Downer thread.

[lewdog]

Originally Posted by Easy 6

Very sorry to hear it Smed, prayers for you and your Pops

And yes nursing homes are an absolute racket, expensive AF even for substandard care... they'll gobble up every dime available and then some

Many nursing homes run on 2-3% profit margins. 24/7 licensed staff care is expensive, not to mention the supplies and overhead provided by the business.

In home care is usually 2-3x the cost and the most expensive option.

Many nursing home residents are on Medicaid because they cannot afford the care themselves. Medicaid currently pays facilities 15-30% UNDER the cost to actually care for the patient. If you actually cared about facilities being able to provide better care, you would vote so that the government stops cutting Medicaid funding for care.

[stumppy]

Originally Posted by lewdog

Many nursing homes run on 2-3% profit margins. 24/7 licensed staff care is expensive, not to mention the supplies and overhead provided by the business.

In home care is usually 2-3x the cost and the most expensive option.

Many nursing home residents are on Medicaid because they cannot afford the care themselves. Medicaid currently pays facilities 15-30% UNDER the cost to actually care for the patient. If you actually cared about facilities being able to provide better care, you would vote so that the government stops cutting Medicaid funding for care.

This!

[IowaHawkeyeChief]

Originally Posted by lewdog

Many nursing homes run on 2-3% profit margins. 24/7 licensed staff care is expensive, not to mention the supplies and overhead provided by the business.

In home care is usually 2-3x the cost and the most expensive option.

Many nursing home residents are on Medicaid because they cannot afford the care themselves. Medicaid currently pays facilities 15-30% UNDER the cost to actually care for the patient. If you actually cared about facilities being able to provide better care, you would vote so that the government stops cutting Medicaid funding for care.

We're $37 trillion in debt to mostly to entitlements. I'm fine with having more spending on nursing home care, but then we need to push back the retirement age for Social Security further for younger folks, or other adjustments without politicians screaming they are taking something away. We can't just spend more, it's already unsustainable as it is now.

Sorry to hear SMED. My Mom and Dad are 85 and 86 and I will be dealing with similar issues soon.

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief

We're $37 trillion in debt to mostly to entitlements. I'm fine with having more spending on nursing home care, but then we need to push back the retirement age for Social Security further for younger folks, or other adjustments without politicians screaming they are taking something away. We can't just spend more, it's already unsustainable as it is now.

Sorry to hear SMED. My Mom and Dad are 85 and 86 and I will be dealing with similar issues soon.

How old are you?
There definitely needs to be changes, but Medicaid is a state-level program that, yes, is subsidized by the federal government, but that expense cannot be just traded away with raising the age at which people can draw SS.

How many people do you know who are in their late 60s that can still work an average job? It is not many. The physical requirements and attendance make it very hard for people of that age to remain a viable part of the workforce.
How many employers want to employ that same demographic? Not many, and if they do it is at such a low rate of pay that it is not worth it either.

I tried not to get political. If I did, much apologies to everyone, including the mods.

[loochy]

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

How old are you?
There definitely needs to be changes, but Medicaid is a state-level program that, yes, is subsidized by the federal government, but that expense cannot be just traded away with raising the age at which people can draw SS.

How many people do you know who are in their late 60s that can still work an average job? It is not many. The physical requirements and attendance make it very hard for people of that age to remain a viable part of the workforce.
How many employers want to employ that same demographic? Not many, and if they do it is at such a low rate of pay that it is not worth it either.

I tried not to get political. If I did, much apologies to everyone, including the mods.

Nah, I'd say that you're fine.