Posted on 12/24/2013 4:27:25 PM PST by Libloather
The Affordable Care Act was designed to dramatically increase the number of Americans who qualify for Medicaid. In fact, the ACA will literally FORCE many low income seniors onto Medicaid rolls as subsidies for regular ObamaCare plans are NOT available to those over 55 years of age who earn less than 138% of the federal poverty level ($15,856 for individuals; $21,403 for married couples). And without such subsidies, ObamaCare plans are generally far too expensive for older, low-income individuals or couples.
Why should any of this matter to those getting “free” healthcare via Medicaid?
Because: “If you’re 55 or over, Medicaid can come back after you’re dead and bill your estate for ordinary health-care expenses.”
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
So: In effect the County stole their property.
I stand somewhat corrected. I was thinking more inner city population, not necessarily someone like myself who has a very small modest house and still can barely pay for the jacked-up taxes on it.
Younger people will pay for Medicaid by this direct claw back (reduced inheritance), or by higher taxes.
Does it matter which one?
We need to pay for our own things.
Too bad those with zero assets don’t have anything to forfeit - they get those pure subsidies (theft).
Assets are inflated, too. It is a wash.
__________________
no you are incorrect. Many people have assets that are worth about their 1994 values now. The hospital inflates their Cat scan costs 2000% well they might have to drop the price a bit, those type of costs put you underwater, you lose your house and become impoverished.
It makes perfect sense if the intent is to destroy private property rights. Most family farms now have to be sold when the patriarch dies, because of the Death Tax, especially if they did not get proper advise to incorporate the farm.
Medical costs bare absolutely no relationship to the consumers ability to pay. That is the ultimate problem that needs addressed. How many people stand between yo and your doctor, all collecting a salary? Needs to be thought about.
In this case we are talking about someone on medicaid(a version of welfare), and medicaid usually paying nursing homes costs, sticking the future taxpayers with the bill which is usually very costly.
Not collecting that $$$ on death is the same as transferring it from the future taxpayers to the dead patient’s heirs.
Its theft to not try to recover that $$$.
So in this case if the patent didn’t sign up for medicaid and he has assets then the hospital or nursing home can go after them. And that could be a problem if a spouse co-owns the house.
As opposed to medicaid (future taxpayers) paying for it and then on death the government goes to the dead patients estate to get the $$$ back.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.