Cuts To Medicaid - What Happens to Recipients?
Unfortunately Congress has passed a budget with harmful cuts to Medicaid. This vote moves the proposal forward, but the fight is not over. As the budget reconciliation process moves forward, specific House committees will have the opportunity to weigh in and protect millions of Americans who rely on Medicaid.
More than half of all Americans have a family member with Alzheimer’s. Cuts to Medicaid threaten their care. Cuts to Medicaid threaten not only the health and wellbeing of those suffering with Alzheimer’s but the health and wellbeing of their caregivers which, more often than not, are their family members.
Congress needs to not defund Medicaid. It’s not a matter of the market catching up. Medicaid was formed to fill in the gap caused by a failure of the market to deal with individuals stricken with Alzheimer’s.
For example, just because a worker in one of the last remaining textile manufacturing plants in the United States finds out their parent has Alzheimer’s – do they get a raise automatically because of it?
No.
Does the person so stricken get a little more in their retirement check or social security payment just because they now have Alzheimer’s?
No.
So, Medicaid fills the gap. It can do so because the United States operates on a surplus not a swiftly shrinking source of funds and productivity.
By cutting these funds the Congress of the United States of America is fiddling with the economy of the United States of America in a basic manner.
People depend on these payments in order to support their loved ones and thereby, with a feeling of contentment and secure in the knowledge that they are doing the best they can for their family they then do the best they can for their nation and their jobs.
By removing these payments the Congress is casting a shadow of doubt and a shroud of uncertainty over the future of the lives of the majority of Americans – because, even as more than half of Americans have a family member with Alzheimer’s, the other half know those people.
The shock to small town economies as well as to large cities was felt long before the cuts occurred as talk of them spread. One would almost think that Americans have a soft spot for their elderly relatives. In fact, they do. They would rather deal with the problems of an adult family member with a failing memory and other issues than to pack them off to an industrial deathcenter that facilitates end-of-life rather than provides health care.
The mistaken ideal that profit to the maximum regardless of impact on human health and life for those suffering from Alzheimer’s and other ailments, is the same twisted logic that encourages, rather than offers, abortions. In fact, abortion has become so entwined with marketing language that an abortion clinic offers abortion ‘services’.
What ‘services’ are available for the elderly? Especially to those who, after working a full and healthy life, then become, through natural circumstances of human flesh, as do us all, fall back upon dependency to their families?
What ‘services’ are being cut off when Medicaid payments are cut or eliminated, scratched off, erased and no longer made?
Well, food for the family becomes more dear. Medical care for the rest of the family grows dear. A great many Americans are not even able to afford their own home in their own country so, rent grows dear for those effected.
In my own case – we had three elderly relatives live in my home until they passed away. My mother-in-law, my aunt, my mother – all three of them depended on Medicaid, Social Security and a pittance in the case of my mother and mother-in-law, from retirement benefits.
Even with that combination the money ended up getting pooled and went to pay for everything and left a deficit.
Which I had to make up.
I have a wife and two children.
I gained my house by using money accrued in a stock account I managed for myself at my work – when I retired after 20 years I paid the house off.
Now, let’s imagine one of my coworkers – or all of them because I was the only one managing my own retirement fund, the rest took ‘Plans’.
More than 2000 other Americans – lost nearly 50% of their retirement investments because of that scheme. …and it is a scheme – to convince workers that a third party company investing in stocks is a good way to set aside money for retirement.
Not only that – but among them, they had seniors in their homes or close by that they were helping to support already EVEN THOUGH MANY WERE ALSO RECEIVING MEDICAID.
Medicaid is not a cure – it is a bandaid – and by eliminating these payments you have ripped the bandaid off and taken the heart and soul of American families along with it.
The expected cuts to Medicaid are particularly troubling as individuals living with dementia are more than twice as likely to be eligible for Medicaid than those who do not have the disease. Without access to Medicaid, patients lose critical access to services such as memory care facilities and in-home care. Cutting Medicaid today will only delay a crisis on the horizon, ultimately resulting in higher costs if we don’t have a system in place to manage and support these patients. It goes without saying that without proper care the crisis on the horizon may be premature death.
These cuts will not only harm patients today but will also create future financial burdens and draw funding out of the system. This burden lies not just with individuals, but also with their families. Much of the cost of caring for patients falls on unpaid caregivers, with these costs topping $599 billion in 2024.
Please keep in mind that the costs mentioned are being extracted from the economy overall. It is clear that in some strange way there is an intention to decrease the money supply by stopping these payments, but, that cannot be thought of realistically, because the same entity, the Congress, that is interfering with Medicaid payments, is the same one generating trillions of dollars to uphold what seems to be defunct banks, indebted manufacturers and a lopsided international trade intended to extract cash from the United States rather than bring it in.
In other words – it looks like elderly people are being sacrificed to finance a backward process. It will not work.
If these cuts to Medicaid are enacted, millions of family members will bear an even greater financial burden caring for their loved ones. It will lead to privation. That is, privation, not privatization.
"Privation" refers to a state of lacking basic necessities or comforts. Here's a breakdown of its meaning and some related concepts:
Core Meaning:
Lack of Essentials: Privation signifies the absence of things essential for well-being, such as food, water, shelter, and other necessities. It implies a severe deficiency that can lead to hardship and suffering.
State of Deprivation: It describes the condition of being deprived, particularly of those things crucial for existence.
Key Aspects:
Distinction from Deprivation: While often used interchangeably, there's a subtle distinction between "privation" and "deprivation." "Deprivation" can imply the removal of something that was previously present, while "privation" often emphasizes the absence of something that was needed from the outset.
Impact: Privation can have significant physical and psychological effects. It can lead to health problems, emotional distress, and social difficulties.
Context: The term is often used in discussions of poverty, famine, and other situations of extreme hardship. It can also be used in a more general sense to describe the lack of any desired or needed thing.
In essence:
Privation describes a severe state of want, where basic needs are not met. It's a condition that can have profound consequences for individuals and communities.
Now, let’s take a look at what could happen to a middleclass family of four who takes in a senior stricken with Alzheimer’s – just from a general financial viewpoint. We will say that the family of four earns $85,000 and the average annual fee to care for an Alzheimer’s patient is $95,000 a year.
Not starting out in the surplus here – are we?
Let’s take a look at the numbers :
With the average cost of caring for an elderly relative at $95,000 a year, what could happen to a family of four that owns their own home and brings in $85,000 a year in salary with no savings in the bank and no Medicaid relief available?
Immediate and Drastic Measures:
Financial Collapse: The $10,000 annual deficit is just the beginning. The accumulated debt from the first month will snowball quickly. Without savings, they'll rely on high-interest credit cards, leading to a debt spiral. Defaulting on bills becomes inevitable.
Home as Last Asset: The home will be the only substantial asset. A reverse mortgage or a home equity line of credit (HELOC) might be considered, but these come with risks. Ultimately, selling the home is highly probable.
Lifestyle and Basic Needs:
Diet: The diet will shift to the absolute cheapest options: Relying on bulk dry goods (rice, beans, pasta). Eliminating meat almost entirely. Forgoing fresh produce for the cheapest, most basic options. Food banks will become a necessity. Meal skipping could become common.
Clothing: New clothing purchases will cease. They will rely on thrift stores, hand-me-downs, and mending existing clothes. Clothing will become purely functional, not fashionable.
Lifestyle: All entertainment and leisure activities will be eliminated. Social outings will be non-existent. Vacations are out of the question. Every spare moment will be dedicated to either caregiving or generating income. Utilities will be cut to the bare minimum.
Transportation: If they have multiple vehicles, they will sell all but the most fuel-efficient one. Public transportation or carpooling will be used whenever possible. Maintenance on the remaining vehicle will be deferred, leading to potential breakdowns.
Financial Strategies (Desperate Measures):
Investments: Any existing investments, no matter how small, will be liquidated immediately. There will be no opportunity for future investments.
Business Ventures: The family might attempt to start small, home-based businesses: Selling crafts or baked goods. Offering freelance services (writing, editing, virtual assistance). However, these ventures require time and resources, which are scarce. One or more family members may attempt to work multiple jobs.
Family Involvement: All family members that are of working age will be required to work. Children that are old enough may be required to get jobs. The family may move in with other family members if possible.
Emotional and Psychological Impact:
The stress will be immense, leading to: Anxiety and depression. Relationship strain. Potential health problems. Burnout from caregiving and financial pressure.
Long-Term Consequences:
This situation can lead to long-term poverty.
The children's education and future opportunities will be severely compromised.
The family's health will deteriorate.
In essence, this scenario forces a radical transformation into a survival mode, where every aspect of life is sacrificed to meet the overwhelming financial burden.
Community health centers and emergency departments will also face increased patient loads so the medical and emergency services systems and infrastructure will face increased pressure, and, of course, will refuse to fail, so services will be cut back drastically.
The removal of Medicaid funding would have catastrophic consequences for emergency and general medical services, particularly for vulnerable populations. Here's a breakdown of the potential impacts:
Impact on Different Socioeconomic Groups:
Lower-Class Families, the Poor, and Indigent: These groups rely heavily on Medicaid for basic healthcare needs. Without it, they would face severe barriers to accessing care. Emergency room visits would likely increase as individuals delay seeking preventive care, leading to more severe and costly health problems. Access to essential medications and treatments for chronic conditions would be drastically reduced. Mortality rates would likely rise due to untreated illnesses and lack of access to timely medical intervention.
Middle-Class Families: While less reliant on Medicaid, middle-class families would still feel the strain. Increased uncompensated care costs would likely lead to higher healthcare premiums and out-of-pocket expenses. Those with pre-existing conditions or facing unexpected medical emergencies could quickly find themselves in financial distress.
General Impacts: Hospitals and clinics would face significant financial strain due to increased uncompensated care. This could lead to closures of healthcare facilities, particularly in rural and underserved areas. Emergency rooms would become overwhelmed, leading to longer wait times and reduced quality of care.
Impact on Small Communities Like the City of Wayne:
Exacerbated Financial Strain: Cities like Wayne, already burdened by debt, would be unable to absorb the increased costs of providing healthcare. Local hospitals and clinics would struggle to remain open, further limiting access to care. The city's existing financial problems would be compounded by the increased need for social services.
Increased Mortality Rates: With a large population of elderly, disabled, and low-income residents, the City of Wayne would likely see a significant increase in mortality rates. Lack of access to preventive care and treatment for chronic conditions would lead to worsening health outcomes. The strain on emergency services would further contribute to increased mortality.
Community Health Decline: The overall health of the community would decline. Increased rates of untreated illness, and the spread of contagious diseases would occur.
Key Factors:
Uncompensated Care: Hospitals would be forced to absorb the costs of treating uninsured patients, leading to significant financial losses.
Emergency Room Overload: Without access to primary care, individuals would rely on emergency rooms for all medical needs, overwhelming the system.
Public Health Crisis: The decline in access to preventive care would lead to a public health crisis, with increased rates of infectious diseases and chronic illnesses.
In conclusion, the elimination of Medicaid without a suitable replacement would have devastating consequences for individuals and communities, particularly those already facing financial hardship. Small communities like the City of Wayne would be especially vulnerable, and the overall health of the population would suffer.
Caregivers and individuals will have fewer options and may have to seek urgent care for issues that could have been managed or prevented with access to memory care services, in-home assistance, and medication management.
Caregivers, indeed, as well as individuals, would be faced with increased incidence of stress related illness – and who would question that – except, perhaps someone who is wealthy enough or ignorant enough not to comprehend the real work scenarios that are occurring?
When you remove the safety net of Medicaid, the already immense burdens of Alzheimer's caregiving become exponentially heavier, particularly for middle and lower-class families. Here's a deeper look at the unique stresses and financial obstacles they face:
Heightened Stressors:
Unrelenting Financial Anxiety: Without Medicaid, the fear of complete financial ruin becomes a constant, gnawing presence. Every medical expense, every need for supplies, amplifies this anxiety. The pressure to stretch limited resources leads to agonizing decisions about which necessities to prioritize.
Isolation and Lack of Respite: Respite care, which provides temporary relief for caregivers, becomes prohibitively expensive. This leads to profound social isolation and burnout. Caregivers are trapped in a cycle of constant care, with little to no opportunity for rest or self-care.
Increased Physical and Emotional Strain: Without professional help, caregivers must handle all aspects of care, including physically demanding tasks like lifting and bathing. The emotional toll of witnessing a loved one's decline, coupled with the constant stress, leads to increased rates of depression, anxiety, and physical health problems.
Navigating a Complex System Alone: Finding resources and support becomes incredibly difficult without the guidance of Medicaid case managers. Families must navigate a maze of healthcare providers, social services, and legal requirements, often with limited knowledge and resources.
Financial Obstacles:
Middle-Class Families: They face the rapid erosion of their life savings and assets. The need to sell homes, liquidate retirement accounts, and forgo children's education becomes a stark reality. They may be forced to choose between providing adequate care and maintaining their own financial stability.
Lower-Class Families: They are pushed to the brink of destitution. Basic needs like food, clothing, and shelter become secondary to the overwhelming cost of care. They may be forced to rely on already strained community resources like food banks and homeless shelters. The chance of becoming homeless greatly increases.
Universal Financial Hardships: In-Home Care Costs: Even part-time in-home care is extremely expensive, and without Medicaid, it's often unattainable. Nursing Home Costs: Nursing home care for Alzheimer's patients is exceptionally high, and without assistance, it's a financial impossibility for most families. Medication and Supplies: The costs of medications, medical supplies, and specialized equipment add to the overwhelming financial burden. Lost Income: Many caregivers must reduce their work hours or quit their jobs, leading to a significant loss of income.
In essence, the absence of Medicaid transforms Alzheimer's caregiving into a relentless struggle for survival, where families are forced to make impossible choices with devastating consequences.
The devastating consequences mentioned include early death – which, in this case, with the taking back of and refusing of aid translates into a rather brutal, though profitable for some, form of national euthanasia.
Spending $10 billion on an aircraft carrier and spending the same amount on Medicaid represent vastly different priorities and have distinct societal impacts:
Aircraft Carrier: Focus: National defense, military projection, and strategic power. Impact: Primarily benefits the military-industrial complex, with potential long-term benefits in national security. Economic Impact: Large, concentrated spending on a single, complex project, creating jobs in specific sectors. Societal Impact: Indirect, through perceived security and international influence.
Medicaid: Focus: Healthcare access for low-income individuals and families, including children, the elderly, and people with disabilities. Impact: Direct benefits to millions of vulnerable people, improving health outcomes, reducing poverty, and enhancing quality of life. Economic impact: Diffused spending across the healthcare sector, supporting hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, and related industries. Societal impact: Direct improvements to public health, reduced healthcare disparities, and increased social well-being.
In essence, an aircraft carrier represents a concentrated investment in military hardware, while Medicaid represents a dispersed investment in human health and social welfare.
Now the question becomes – what sort of country would spend $10 Billion (USD) on an aircraft carrier to defend its most citizens from attack if they were just killing them by neglect anyway?
A country that prioritizes spending $10 billion on an aircraft carrier while simultaneously neglecting its citizens' healthcare would exhibit several key characteristics:
Emphasis on Military Might: It would prioritize projecting military power and maintaining a strong defense posture, even at the expense of social welfare. A strong nationalistic or militaristic ideology would likely be prevalent.
Disparities in Resource Allocation: There would be a significant imbalance in how resources are allocated, with a disproportionate focus on military spending compared to social programs. This could reflect political priorities that favor certain sectors or interests over others.
Weak Social Safety Net: The country would likely have a weak or underdeveloped social safety net, with limited access to affordable healthcare, housing, and other essential services. This could be due to ideological opposition to government intervention in social welfare or a lack of political will to address social needs.
Prioritization of External Threats over Internal Needs: The government would prioritize addressing perceived external threats, even if it means neglecting the internal needs of its citizens. This could reflect a belief that national security is paramount, even at the expense of individual well-being.
Potential for Social Inequality: The country would likely experience high levels of social inequality, with significant disparities in access to healthcare and other essential services. This could lead to social unrest and instability.
Potential for political corruption: Large military spending can be tied to political corruption, and money flowing to large corporations that provide those military needs