<p>
</p>
<p>Senior-aged people have been and continue to be on on the government dole for medical care (Medicare), so it is everyone’s business (will the AARP members stop lobbying for their Medicare benefits and volunteer to go self-pay for all medical costs?). ACA or no ACA does not matter in this respect (although it is worth noting that the politicians who opposed ACA legislated an unfunded expansion of Medicare benefits less than a decade before).</p>
<p>I’m surprised that the Chiropractic Association isn’t ranked higher.
<a href=“https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/issuesum.php?id=HCR&year=2014”>https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/issuesum.php?id=HCR&year=2014</a>
I am always nonplussed at how our insurance will pay for multiple chiropractic visits, which has always seemed like a placebo to me,( at best, and at worst it is dangerous) but zero coverage on something that I know works, like massage therapy, and minimal coverage on mental health care when that should be taken more seriously.</p>
<p>My mother is hale and hearty and living on her own in her own house at 91. She is a vital part in the lives of her great-grand children. My father was diagnosed with prostate cancer at about age 65, and lived to be 85. Most of that time he was fine, and his health did not decline significantly until the last 6-8 weeks of his life. (He might well be alive now if he had received the superior care for prostate cancer that is standard now: he died of his cancer, his heart and other major organs were perfectly fine.) My father was hospitalized briefly before is death; we brought him home for hospice care. In retrospect, we would not have agreed to his being taken to the hospital at all, but other than that the amount of care he received seemed reasonable.</p>
<p>“I’m surprised that the Chiropractic Association isn’t ranked higher.”</p>
<p>I’m not. But, that’s because I’ve been to two chiropractic care providers recently. One oozed sleazy and proved with X-rays that I needed 2K dollars worth of treatments. Apparently they scheduled my first treatment because the office called me a week later to find out why I missed my appointment. That’s when I explained that I never agreed to come back and wouldn’t be returning. The other shined a red light on my painful foot for 6 weeks. It still hurts.</p>
<p>I meant, that they don’t have more lobbyists.</p>
<p>"I really doubt we are going to go around suffocating people in their beds, but we shouldn’t be spending so much money to extend someone’s life for three months.
Let’s spend it at the beginning, more prenatal care & well baby checkups. "</p>
<p>^^^I think it should be the individual’s call to make. I have been working all my adult life (and hopefully will continue to do so) and paying into the system. I am not interested in someone deciding that not so much money should be spent on me in the last 3 months.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As long as it is your own money, no one else will care (unless you have heirs squabbling over your estate that you are using up). But if you are on the government dole (i.e. Medicare), everyone else will care. And if your medical care is paid through private insurance, the insurance company will care.</p>
<p>Except that it’s funded through my taxes. I have been paying into the Medicare system all my life and will continue to do so, and I should have a say in what kind of a system I pay into.</p>
<p>Of course, I will do everything possible to make sure I am not at the mercy of what Medicare decides to do with my life (including insurance, long term care, or whatever else is necessary), but still, it’s not just free money being distributed - it’s a program that I pay into.</p>
<p>Well, you have a say with your vote but that does not mean you get your wish. At all.</p>
<p>No, your current taxes for Medicare pay for current recipients; it is not a true pension-like fund that has reserves to pay for future medical care for you and others in your age cohort.</p>
<p>True, which is why I don’t want to rely on it, but I still find it absurd that a person can pay into the system all their life without taking much or anything out and then be denied medical procedures that can keep them alive, just because someone decides that the money is better spent elsewhere. Life is not fair sure, but to me this is an absurd system.</p>
<p>“No, your current taxes for Medicare pay for current recipients; it is not a true pension-like fund that has reserves to pay for future medical care for you and others in your age cohort.”</p>
<p>I know and understand that, but the point is, I don’t want funding cut either now or in the future to people in the last stage of their life. I didn’t say I am paying for myself - I said I am paying into the program, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that program to be there for me (although, again, realistically, I doubt it will be).</p>
<p>I think most people would agree with the following sentence–although they would probably replace the variables with different numbers: “I don’t think it’s reasonable for Medicare (or private insurance) to pay $x for a life-prolonging treatment for a person who is y years old.”</p>
<p>I would not agree with that statement - I think it should be the individual’s call always. And personally, I am happy to pay a higher premium for insurance that wouldn’t cap me at any age. I am also happy to keep paying into the Medicare system to allow individuals that choice.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t use age as the only criterion; I wouldn’t deny a procedure to a person just because the person was old. I would consider how likely the procedure was to succeed, and what the quality of life of the person would be. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t want to spend $100,000 to keep an 80-year-old person alive and in great pain for another three months, but I wouldn’t want to do that someone of any age. I </p>
<p>To anyone who has a few extra years left and doesn’t want the extra years:</p>
<p>As a person who has had Many illnesses during my lifetime: I have lived through the worst and best of times. I know how wonderful life feels when one finally feels ok or fine. I’ll take your extra years. It may take me some work to get there, but I’ll take the extras. Really and thank you.</p>
<p>I have a co-worker who is going through aggressive treatment for cancer. He is suffering like a dog and it is agonizing to see, but he is in his 30s and has little kids. He is doing everything possible to try to hang on until his wife can graduate from college next semester so he can know that she will be self-supporting. This may not be anyone else’s choice, but I think it is a completely reasonable use of funds and fully support it. On the other side, my mother is not doing well and is also suffering terribly for different reasons, has lost most of her vision, much of her hearing and mobility and is in constant pain. I wouldn’t want to live like that, no matter what my age, if that was all there would ever be. </p>
<p>I will be thrilled to get to seventy five! That said, my medical expenses (OOP plus what insurance covers – not Medicare) run into significant figures each year. I often feel that I’m getting more than my share of benefits when that amount of $$ could do a lot of good for others. </p>
<p>Cardinal Fang, $100,000 in medical expenses is a drop in the bucket. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, this is a huge part of his economic argument to limit healthcare past age 75, i.e., how much one can further contribute to quantifiable goods and services. I guess we know who does not understand the family unit and its importance to civil society, which are qualitative aspects of living.</p>
<p>He sees little value in grandparents imparting advice and moral values to grandkids and others - and most important, in keeping families together. To Emmanuel, life experience has little value and teaching the next generations has little value as well. Rather strange dismissal given that such family activities limit crime and others ills of society. We have all seen a senior citizen say “No” or tell a story and everyone stops and listens and learns something valuable.</p>
<p>His concept of productive is too limited, as to be useful beyond determining what is a purchasable good produced by someone. One’s work / career is but one aspect of one’s life and its importance to people around you. There are deeper, more consequential purposes to one’s life that should be considered, as productive.</p>
<p>It is silly to put an artificial number on such things. One of my grandfathers was sharp and on the ball until he was 90 and choose to die gracefully because the only way to save his life would have been to have a leg amputated. One grandmother was sharp until the same time and then spent the last couple of years senile.</p>