You need to get this long before you need it, but also ensure it is good plan that will take care of you. The person in the article is lucky to have kids doing that, if you don't have kids who care who will care for you.
Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
11–20 of 210 posts
Re: Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
#12Healthcare in the US is broken and they won’t let you fix it because the money is too good. Think about the fact that PBMs, which is there to save and manage on pharma is incentivized to promote drug price inflation. That’s just one “small” piece of this clusterf*k. It’s layers and layers of these convoluted system of incentives.
As to OP, the simplest solution is to move out of the US early enough or become “poor” enough and be in a wealthy blue state by the time you get to this predicament.
Re: Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
#13Healthcare in the US is broken and they won’t let you fix it because the money is too good. Think about the fact that PBMs, which is there to save and manage on pharma is incentivized to promote drug price inflation. That’s just one “small” piece of this clusterf*k. It’s layers and layers of these convoluted system of incentives. As to OP, the simplest solution is to move out of the US early enough or become “poor” e…
I think the broader extrapolation is that the social contract has emerged around giving private enterprise wide latitude to promote the public welfare. However that does mean that the quality of said welfare entirely revolves how profitable you are to said enterprise. While great for airline tickets, its a tragedy for healthcare.
Re: Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
#14There are three things a nation needs to accept about universal health care: (1) It’s expensive (2) Everybody has to pay (3) The government’s gotta run it
>The government’s gotta run it But there are plenty of countries with functioning healthcare systems that are private? The Swiss, for instance. Moreover depending on what counts as "government’s gotta run it" (paying for it? administering it? actually providing care?) you can argue that the German or even Canadian systems aren't government run, at least to some degree.
So why don't we see Republican Americans advocating to adopt the Swiss system which provides universal coverage at a lower per capita cost?
Re: Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
#15[deleted]
Re: Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
#16There are three things a nation needs to accept about universal health care: (1) It’s expensive (2) Everybody has to pay (3) The government’s gotta run it
>The government’s gotta run it But there are plenty of countries with functioning healthcare systems that are private? The Swiss, for instance. Moreover depending on what counts as "government’s gotta run it" (paying for it? administering it? actually providing care?) you can argue that the German or even Canadian systems aren't government run, at least to some degree.
In the Swiss system the private insurance companies are required to be non-profits. The government sets the standard for care and coverage and all the companies can do is compete on price.
Basically what Obamacare was originally intended to be before they had to compromise to get it passed.
Re: Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
#17I wonder if moving his father to an assisted living facility at some point will be a better option. I have little experience with this topic so I am genuinely curious.
Re: Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
#18Delay, deny, defend --- this is the insurance industry's modus operandi. Insurance is the only industry where customers are the enemy.
I wrote a longer response but deleted it as it was just a personal anecdote. Suffice it to say I'll never buy LTC insurance or participate in any elder care such as "assisted living" or "nursing care." It's all (IMO) engineered to drain old people of their assets before they die. Providing care is nowhere on the list of motivations of anyone involved.
Re: Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The government’s gotta run it But there are plenty of countries with functioning healthcare systems that are private? The Swiss, for instance. Moreover depending on what counts as "government’s gotta run it" (paying for it? administering it? actually providing care?) you can argue that the German or even Canadian systems aren't government run, at least to some degree.
So why don't we see Republican Americans advocating to adopt the Swiss system which provides universal coverage at a lower per capita cost?
Because it's any amount of government spending for one. And for two (this one is more of my opinion than the last one) the US has a problem where we, as a culture, view poor people as somehow morally or ethically broken, which is what causes them to be poor. Therefore, we shouldn't spend money that could positively impact them, regardless of its overall benefit. I got mine, so anyone can, but as the cultural zeitgeist.
Re: Financial lessons from my family's experience with long-term care insurance
#20Delay, deny, defend --- this is the insurance industry's modus operandi. Insurance is the only industry where customers are the enemy.
There seems to be no will to replace this dysfunctional arrangement with a social safety net unfortunately.
Because injustice is corruption.
So every area of our lives that feels like it doesn't work like it used to - cost of living, healthcare, education, antitrust enforcement, journalism, accountability at the highest levels - represents a segment of the economy which has been corrupted.
Through this lens, socioeconomic policies start to make sense. For example, if your goal is to skim a fraction of the income from everyone in an economy and redirect those funds to specific goals/organizations/individuals, you could put tariffs on common goods and pass the funds collected on to companies granted large government contracts. Then the largest companies like GM and Ford see their profits reduced or even show a loss, while Grok and Palantir have all the money they need for mass surveillance.
Explanations for regulatory capture aren't normally this reductive, but wealth inequality has reached such monumental proportions that the simplest answer tends to be the right one when the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.