Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Pooky

State can seize your assets to pay for care after you're forced into Medicaid by Obamacare

7 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/12/16/fine-print-state-can-seize-your-assets-to-pay-for-care-after-youre-forced-into-medicaid-by-obamacare/

So, if you're over the age of 55, Medicaid might just be a loan and you or your estate may end up owing it all?

How is that in any way "affordable"? :huh:


Don't interrupt me when I'm talking to myself

2011-11-15.garfield.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Embrace the suck..... Income inequality is the game plan going FOWARD now. ......Bring everyone down to the lowest rung.


If more citizens were armed, criminals would think twice about attacking them, Detroit Police Chief James Craig

Florida currently has more concealed-carry permit holders than any other state, with 1,269,021 issued as of May 14, 2014

The liberal elite ... know that the people simply cannot be trusted; that they are incapable of just and fair self-government; that left to their own devices, their society will be racist, sexist, homophobic, and inequitable -- and the liberal elite know how to fix things. They are going to help us live the good and just life, even if they have to lie to us and force us to do it. And they detest those who stand in their way."
- A Nation Of Cowards, by Jeffrey R. Snyder

Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama

white-privilege.jpg?resize=318%2C318

Democrats>Socialists>Communists - Same goals, different speeds.

#DeplorableLivesMatter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well sh|t - there's a balancing factor, if'n ever I've heard of a balancing factor.


Sometimes my language usage seems confusing - please feel free to 'read it twice', just in case !
Ya know, you can find the answer to your question with the advanced search tool, when using a PC? Ditch the handphone, come back later on a PC, and try again.

-=-=-=-=-=R E A D ! ! !=-=-=-=-=-

Whoa Nelly ! Want NVC Info? see http://www.visajourney.com/wiki/index.php/NVC_Process

Congratulations on your approval ! We All Applaud your accomplishment with Most Wonderful Kissies !

2mzcunl.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a state issue not an ACA issue. And Washington State is working on fixing the rules to ensure that the intent of the ACA - expansion of coverage - is carried out. Every state can do it.

Below is from the very article that Hotair quotes. Of course, they forgot to talk about that part on hotair. Wonder why. No, I actually don't. They don't call that site hotair for no reason.

Over the past month, as lawmakers began hearing from worried and angry constituents, state officials began exploring what it would take to fix this collision of state rules with the ACA.

Late Friday, Gov. Jay Inslee’s office and the state Medicaid office said they plan to draft an emergency rule to limit estate recovery to long-term care and related medical expenses.

They hope to be able to change the rules before coverage begins Jan. 1.

Fixing the problem will cost the state about $3 million a year, said Dr. Bob Crittenden, Inslee’s senior health-policy adviser, but it’s the right thing to do.

“There was no intent on the part of the ACA to do estate recovery on people going into Medicaid (for health insurance),” Crittenden said. “The idea was to expand coverage.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Medicaid Reimbursement Act existed well before Obamacare. (It's not Obama's idea or fault.)

Medicaid is WELFARE. It is given to the poor who have less than $2000 of countable assets.

What is not counted is a home.

For example:

Joe and Mary live in California and have a $500,000 home and little in other assets and less than $2000 in cash.

Joe racks up $300,000 in medical bills that is paid for by the Medicaid.

Medicaid pays the $300,000. $300,000 from US taxpayers.

Joe dies.

Mary lives alone in the home for another 10 years before she dies.

Mary leave a home worth $500,000.

The Medicaid Recovery Act requires that US taxpayers be reimbursed the $300,000 in welfare that Joe took before the remainder is distributed to Joe and Mary's heirs.

-----

What is fair?

Joe and Mary's heirs getting $500,000 and US taxpayers get shafted for $300,000; or

US taxpayers getting reimbursed $300,000 first and the remainder goes to Joe and Mary's heirs?

Edited by aaron2020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my example, Joe and Mary makes out pretty good under Medicaid recovery.

They essentially get a loan with zero interest.

Mary gets to live in her home until her death.

The house can appreciate after Joe receives Medicaid and the appreciation goes to the family.

Pretty darn good deal to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Medicaid Reimbursement Act existed well before Obamacare. (It's not Obama's idea or fault.)

Medicaid is WELFARE. It is given to the poor who have less than $2000 of countable assets.

What is not counted is a home.

For example:

Joe and Mary live in California and have a $500,000 home and little in other assets and less than $2000 in cash.

Joe racks up $300,000 in medical bills that is paid for by the Medicaid.

Medicaid pays the $300,000. $300,000 from US taxpayers.

Joe dies.

Mary lives alone in the home for another 10 years before she dies.

Mary leave a home worth $500,000.

The Medicaid Recovery Act requires that US taxpayers be reimbursed the $300,000 in welfare that Joe took before the remainder is distributed to Joe and Mary's heirs.

-----

What is fair?

Joe and Mary's heirs getting $500,000 and US taxpayers get shafted for $300,000; or

US taxpayers getting reimbursed $300,000 first and the remainder goes to Joe and Mary's heirs?

True enough - and certainly fair enough - as far as the Medicaid Reimbursement Act goes. However, the intent of the Medicaid expansion was to expand health insurance coverage to people. That coverage for those eligible, rather than subsidizing at 100% a private insurance plan, was to be delivered via Medicaid. It's cheaper than to subsidize private health insurance. That coverage should not fall under the Medicaid Reimbursement Act rules. Why? Well, because the private insurance subsidies that are paid to people making above the threshold for Medicaid eligibility are not subject to recovery either even if they exceed the cost of Medicaid coverage. Everyone that has an employer sponsored plan receives subsidies - however indirect that may be. If nothing else, your income tax burden is reduced. Nobody comes after your estate for those subsidies either once you kick the bucket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×