[/caption]Carol Forsloff - Mark and David are thinking of moving to Costa Rica. As two members of the progressive side of the political spectrum they have given up the hard fight, as Mark has aged and health problems circle both men, knowing the future will be bleak as programs are emasculated in the US for seniors and recent news talks about redefining poverty.
An article in a California publication called Vantage speaks of how worried seniors are about their future, especially those seniors who are becoming impoverished through cost of living problems and health care issues. “America is a nice place for the young, but for the old, it is no good,” some claim. It is this concern that drives both Mark and David as they worry about a future where politicians talk about total reduction or destruction of programs designed to help seniors get through advancing years.
Already seniors are poised for trouble. Most face a future of using all their assets for long-term care. Much of that long-term care is for Alzheimer’s, but the costs are considerable as people have trouble saving and paying for premiums as their income declines or if they are out of work in a crippling recession like the present one. By the age of 85 one in three seniors, according to statistics, will have dementia and be unable to make cogent decisions about what type of plan to buy, so those recommendations for private pay presumes seniors able to make good decisions and to have the money for policies that are often very expensive.
While Mark and David make their plans, seniors all over the United States are making theirs as well. They first decide where to live along with putting together a budget they believe might serve their needs. The problem is, however, that the budget often changes as the medical costs rise, as property taxes differ, and as new political gains are made or lost that changes what the future just might be.
A future with Ron Paul or Ron Perry at the helm as President of the United States might make most seniors worry, especially if they rely on social programs. If they examined well the views of each, those seniors might soon follow Mark and David out the door.
Ron Paul believes in an individualism defined as each person responsible for making the right choices, even if those choices go up against health consequences that can change. Or the problem that brings personal catastrophe just might be the weather, as disasters impact everywhere these days. But for Ron Paul, disaster support is non essential, believing those who fall victim do because they didn’t have the good sense to live somewhere safe. Paul announced his candidacy for President of the United States, declaring he would get rid of FEMA if he is elected. He said, “Well if you want to live in a free society, if you want to pay attention to the constitution, why not? I think it’s bad economics. I think it’s bad morality. And it’s bad constitutional law.” In explaining his position on helping others he says, “Why should some body from the central part of the United States rebuild my house. Why shouldn’t I have to buy my own insurance and protect about the potential dangers.” This type of argument might likely be used for that senior needing special care. So why should anyone else take care of the individual without the funds to pay? The argument counters a compassionate culture.
Like natural disasters, however, the unexpected comes, like Hurricane Irene did recently. The East Coast seldom sees hurricanes that devastate whole regions, including into the interior of the country. The Midwest and the South huddle in relentless heat after both regions experienced major floods, tornado damage and a host of weather emergencies in 2011. Environmental groups declare, “Paul’s suggestions Americans are “dumb”for being victims of natural disasters is not only heartless, it seriously calls into question his credibility to preside over the country’s welfare.”
Health emergencies come like natural disasters, at times and to people who took care of themselves, saved their money, bought insurance and then found the clause in the insurance restricts needed funds, or the funds are used for some cancer treatment that goes on and on, that eats up savings and with it hope as well.
Rick Perry presides over the State of Texas as its Governor, a state with one of the highest numbers of people uninsured. Medicaid funds have been severely cut, and it is Medicaid that is used by those seniors when their private funds are gone. Families who barely make ends meet either take care of Mom or Dad or one or both of them goes on the street to join the homeless crowd that is growing leaps and bounds. For among that ever-growing group are elderly as well. The 45,000 homeless seniors living on the streets are said to likely double by the year 2050. That statistic also doesn’t show the uncounted persons who live in desperation, in desperate circumstances, nearly on the streets. Many of these are persons with dementia.
A look at Perry’s Fed Up book gives clues for seniors about the path that he would take if he becomes President. Perry has made strong statements against Social Security, the New Deal and other government programs, which give the hope for intervention when the worst happens to the unwitting, but innocent elder who loses all to illness.
Mark and David are making their plans, but these depend on an economy where they can sell their home and the capital they need to plant their feet where they intend to grow and live much better if the worse case comes and safety nets are reduced to nothing, then are gone in a future where the strong succeed and the weak are dragged behind. It isn’t fear that drives the fellows forward, but the loss of hope instead.
