BB&T tried to talk my 90 year old Mom into a bridge loan to get into an upscale nursing home. The DA financial adviser dropped a $100K of liquid net worth AND it was in a CD at BB&T. She can go without selling her house if she wants. She has the paperwork which made me laugh. She should throw a class action suit. Sure there like her.
AND for those calculated correctly, wait til those old folk homes don't sell and the cash runs out. Talk about bad loans.
That is not ethical. Makes me laugh banks ask seniors about large cash withdrawals. Who besides their families ask seniors how their financial insitution is doing them in????
Mom is loaded with cash. She is in wonderful shape for her age. She doesn't have to sell her house to go into a home. My parents did what her three children are doing, saving so their kids don't have to support them. Not one of my Mom's 3 children want or need her money. We want her to spend it on herself not us.
Sorry I started this. Our family is fortunate. The real issue was she did not need to sell her house or get a bridge loan to move into the fancy nursing home.
You feel the same as I do, to have saved enough so the retirement years are pleasant and you are not a burden to anyone and you raised your children to be self sufficient.
The problem with LTC insurance is most plans are not written for an 'indefinite long term'. Most plans in the fine print will list the length of long term care, usually no more than 3 years. As I've said many times, our big prayer is: To live long and die fast.
I think everyone may have a different perspective on this. My wife and I have saved so that we could stop working at some point and enjoy our life together before we got to the point where we would need some form of care. We purchased LTC insurance to avoid being a burden on our children when that time came and to avoid running through what money may be left then. I do abhor the thought of paying $6,000 a month for someone to feed and care for me. If that happens I'm hoping I won't feel so bad if the insurance is paying most of the bill.
The reality is 22% of all medical expenses annually are consumed by people in the last year of their life. The last few years carry a significantly disproportionate share of all medical expense a person will have in their lifetime. Most people will not save enough to cover this expense and will go through all their savings before a government program kicks in.
We have provided an education for our children and we are generous with them now so that they have the best chance to get ahead. Their ultimate success, however, has to come from what they do and is not dependent on my wife and I dying and leaving them an inheritance.
Maybe our investments will be adequate and we will be lucky and benefit from good health and never need the LTC and we will leave our children a little something...that would be great. That however, is not the basis for how we are planning the rest of years, nor did I look to my parents for a nice inheritance to finance our lifestyle.
Greed works both ways, greedy kids and greedy parents. Think about it.
Most of what you say is correct, insurance is paid to beneficiaries unless it has a cash value, your saving etc is for your old age care.
You are correct, medicaid kicks in when you have no assets. As long as you have assets, you pay for your nursing care with your asset and LTC until it is all gone. You better read your LTC contract, usually they are for a specified period only, not necessarily until you die. My prayer is, "Lord let me live long and die fast".
If you wish for your kids "a leg up", you better make arrangements for them to have it before it is needed for your long term care. There is a clause in the law that assets must be transferred to heirs 5 years before medicaid time.
Getting old is tuff.
Medicaid only kicks in if you have no assets. So you have to spend it all down first. So why bother to save in the first place? See how twisted the logic is. And no, kids arent being greedy. I have kids: I save, I invest, I have insurance both life and LTC. My savings are not for my impending elderly years, but for my children. That's my duty, to make sure they have a leg up. That's what parents are supposed to do. Its not about greed. I have a friend who has no savings and no insurance. His logic is that his kids can fend for themselves and the govt will take care of him when he is old. So go and get that boat now. He is the one who is greedy, not his kids.
Here's where many of us get bent out of shape. Mom or Dad or both have saved money forever for their old age. They have a home and a healthy savings account. All of a sudden they can no longer take care of themselves and have to go to a nursing home for care at a cost of about $5,500/month or $65,000/year. It doesn't take long for all on their wealth to be gone.
The big problem is with the children that believe this money is theirs and are expecting to inherit a lot from the parents when they die. Keep in mind, the parents wealth is for their support in their old age not a gift to the children. If parents want their children to have their wealth, they should make arrangements to give it to them 5 years before they get 'OLD'.
When parents get 'old' and need to be admitted into long term health care, and have no assets, medicaid will take care of them.
All you greedy kids out there should check into this.