Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 20:52:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2017 18:25:44 GMT -5
If the kids want family homes and inheritances, then why can't they step up and take care of their aging parents? There have got to be other options worth considering when funds are available other then strategically hiding assets so the state has to take care of everyone. Some happy medium between elderly dying in the street and Medicaid nursing homes for all. I agree. DS has told me he and DDIL would take me in. It would depend on so much. If their kids are out of the house and there's room for me, if I'm not incontinent or prone to wandering at night or liable to forget I have something cooking on the stove... The thing is I want it to be their choice, not something they're forced to do because I didn't provide for myself. I do want to help with their kids' educations but only to the extent that it doesn't burden them or the taxpayers with my long-term care expenses. Heart2heart's post on "planning" appeared to advocate stashing money in 529s, gifting it to family, etc. as forms of divesting yourself of assets so you qualify for Medicaid way down the road. I'm not gonna go there.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 20:52:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2017 6:05:01 GMT -5
No. There is nothing wrong, illegal, unethical, or morally corrupt with taxpayer's who compartmentalize their financial assets while they are working, on behalf of their current and future status. If someone wants to leave property or anything for that matter, to their loved ones they've worked hard for and paid for - They have a right to do so if they've planned accordingly. I am going to leave my children an inheritance of some type, so help me God. Nobody in any of these posts is a "horrible" person. But I don't think that Medicaid set up the five-year "look back" period as a way to protect your assets. It is just being used that way. In fact, I think it used to be three years, and there is nothing to say that it can't be ten or more years in the future. If they increase it someday, I doubt that they are going to grandfather people in. Some states have set up a way to protect your assets. If you purchase LTC insurance, the payout on that can protect an identical amount of assets. In other words, these states are acknowledging that you are taking steps to provide for yourself. This discussion may all be moot, anyway. There is nothing that says that Medicaid $$$ has to be spent on the old. If the federal money is turned over to the states in block grants, choices may be made not to fund nursing homes. What will happen? No one knows, but it could get ugly just as mental health care got ugly for many after they closed the state mental hospitals. The mentally ill were put back into the community, and many have become part of the homeless. So make sure your kids know the part they are supposed to play in this. I remember Looney's mother's boyfriend did some "estate planning" with his daughter, who eventually kicked him out of his own house. She was a lawyer. I often wondered how that story turned out. Does anyone know? Medicaid's standard is to look back five years to help determine the applicant's current active financial status, and not whether or not applicants left others assets (properly) outside of the five year look back. My gosh, Susana, if there were no boundaries in place by the powers that be, there would be no need for its subordinates, us, to invest. I don't know about you, but I want to leave something behind after I am gone for those of my choosing, and give to others, and causes while I live, and will continue doing so. What parent/person doesn't want to? And I don't consider anyone doing so, hiding from their responsibilities. I have good, private health insurance, so I am not trying to shirk the taxpayer.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 20:52:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2017 6:29:57 GMT -5
If the kids want family homes and inheritances, then why can't they step up and take care of their aging parents? There have got to be other options worth considering when funds are available other then strategically hiding assets so the state has to take care of everyone. some happy median between elderly dying in the street and Medicaid nursing homes for all. You say, if the kids want family homes and inheritances.. I say, many parents desire, is to want to leave their children an inheritance. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Many children do help take care of their aging parents. There is a family who lives directly behind me who does just that. The home was built many years ago, and have been left to one of the grandsons'. He lives in his own home with his family. The home serves as a landmark for the family, where life began for them. The home will be in circuit to the family as long as the family lives I am told. The home was built and paid for by two hardworking grandparents whose desire was to leave their home as an inheritance to their family for years to come. Nothing wrong or unethical about it. They've planned wisely, that's all. Know one of the main reasons why many children don't step in, gooddecisions, and help take care of their parents'? (And this is to lay no guilt on no one) - Because most children of the elderly are unavailable, and are busy building their own lives. You see distributing assets to loved ones as strategically hiding.. I see distributing any asset as helping others while I live, and even helping beyond my living years.
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,005
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Jul 13, 2017 7:48:43 GMT -5
To me it seems no different than the people on Food Stamps that limit their hours at work or are careful to spend any extra money that they have every month so they don't go over the income/asset limits and get kicked off the program.
If your parents are ok with people controlling their work hours and savings to stay on Food Stamps, they should be ok with moving assets around to make sure that Medicaid covers their expenses. If they are not ok with people doing things to stay on Food Stamps, they should not be ok manipulating their assets.
To me it seems much worse than the food stamp people, because 1. food stamp people are generally in pretty dire straights and sometimes desperate people do desperate things, and 2. many of the people hiding assets from medicaid have no problem railing against and trying to cut off the food stamp people.
|
|
countrygirl2
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 7, 2016 15:45:05 GMT -5
Posts: 17,016
|
Post by countrygirl2 on Jul 13, 2017 8:22:30 GMT -5
We are about to use up the money MIL had saved within about 6 more months. There is some money that was left to son and is legally his, was in his name many years ago. We never used it. We are going to have to start dipping into that money soon.
MIL gets SS and VA and it almost covers her bill but there is not enough money left to pay $880 a quarter for her supplemental insurance for much longer. She has been waiting since 2015 for back pay from VA, its around $10k which would pay for 3 more years of insurance. They tell us there are over 640 vets in Indiana waiting to get back pay and I don't remember how many case workers but not many who are reviewing it. They told us may be another year or more before they get to it.
I don't know what people would do with someone like her. She couldn't be left on her own, might wonder off. Doesn't remember stuff sometimes forgets where she lives in the building. Wants to go out walking all the time but they try to have staff with her. She is 90 and only has memory issues may live to 100, would not surprise me, takes no meds.
I know a lot of wealthy farmers here set things up so they never pay for their parents as do many other wealthy. Yet if some poorer person tries to pass on a few assets they are chastised. We spent all of moms on her except 25 acres she gave me. At that time wasn't worth much, many years later was worth a lot of money, never foresaw that so I did get something.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jul 13, 2017 8:29:05 GMT -5
To me it seems no different than the people on Food Stamps that limit their hours at work or are careful to spend any extra money that they have every month so they don't go over the income/asset limits and get kicked off the program. If your parents are ok with people controlling their work hours and savings to stay on Food Stamps, they should be ok with moving assets around to make sure that Medicaid covers their expenses. If they are not ok with people doing things to stay on Food Stamps, they should not be ok manipulating their assets. To me it seems much worse than the food stamp people, because 1. food stamp people are generally in pretty dire straights and sometimes desperate people do desperate things, and 2. many of the people hiding assets from medicaid have no problem railing against and trying to cut off the food stamp people. The only distinction I would draw here is that there is a difference between railing against the PEOPLE who are making logical decisions for their family, and railing against the rules/setup/system which is set up to force people into an undesirable decision (undesirable from the position of what we want the government to encourage via their rules).
I can simultaneously say that I think the rules of any program are terrible, and still use the rules of any program to my advantage while they exist.
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,005
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Jul 13, 2017 8:54:27 GMT -5
To me it seems no different than the people on Food Stamps that limit their hours at work or are careful to spend any extra money that they have every month so they don't go over the income/asset limits and get kicked off the program. If your parents are ok with people controlling their work hours and savings to stay on Food Stamps, they should be ok with moving assets around to make sure that Medicaid covers their expenses. If they are not ok with people doing things to stay on Food Stamps, they should not be ok manipulating their assets. To me it seems much worse than the food stamp people, because 1. food stamp people are generally in pretty dire straights and sometimes desperate people do desperate things, and 2. many of the people hiding assets from medicaid have no problem railing against and trying to cut off the food stamp people. The only distinction I would draw here is that there is a difference between railing against the PEOPLE who are making logical decisions for their family, and railing against the rules/setup/system which is set up to force people into an undesirable decision (undesirable from the position of what we want the government to encourage via their rules).
I can simultaneously say that I think the rules of any program are terrible, and still use the rules of any program to my advantage while they exist.
I agree completely with that. We really should be working toward reform of both programs, but doing so without demonizing the people using them.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jul 25, 2017 11:29:31 GMT -5
|
|