Low Cost Healthcare And Retirement



R

Rajah Homaba

Guest
What if we send all unproductive retirees to 3rd world countries where caregiver salaries are
cheaper and climates are more favorable to rheumatism? Rich countries will then save money from
pension and healthcare costs. Unproductive retirees will be sent to central africa, central america,
and south east asia, (near the equator/tropics ideal climates for rheumatism). And those countries
will benefit too by earning income. Healthcare costs will skyrocket soon because retiring baby
boomers are too many compared to available healthcare workers. But with this approach healthcare
costs will be cheaper.

Some japanese retirees are voluntarily doing this for years now. They have senior centers and
tropical resort retirement villages built in south east asia exclusively for japanese retirees. With
the low birthrate and long life expectancy in japan and money saving costs in countries near the
equator, soon more japanese senior facilities will sprout in the tropics.

[email protected] (DavesVideo) wrote in message news:<20040217082012.21920.00002075@mb-
m14.aol.com>...
> The Rajah said:
>
> >>This post is a topic jump to this forum.>>
>
> Ok, I give up. What are you talking about? Dave http://members.tripod.com/~VideoDave
 
On 17 Feb 2004 13:06:56 -0800, [email protected] (Rajah Homaba)
wrote:

>What if we send all unproductive retirees to 3rd world countries where caregiver salaries are
>cheaper and climates are more favorable to rheumatism? Rich countries will then save money from
>pension and healthcare costs. Unproductive retirees will be sent to central africa, central
>america, and south east asia, (near the equator/tropics ideal climates for rheumatism). And those
>countries will benefit too by earning income. Healthcare costs will skyrocket soon because retiring
>baby boomers are too many compared to available healthcare workers. But with this approach
>healthcare costs will be cheaper.

I think your idea is certainly better than bringing the third worlders here to look after our
seniors. Your way the outward US emigration causes a raising of the IQ and cultural levels in both
areas. Who could argue against that ?
 
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 18:06:20 -0500, Gary James <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On 17 Feb 2004 13:06:56 -0800, [email protected] (Rajah Homaba) wrote:
>
>>What if we send all unproductive retirees to 3rd world countries where caregiver salaries are
>>cheaper and climates are more favorable to rheumatism? Rich countries will then save money from
>>pension and healthcare costs. Unproductive retirees will be sent to central africa, central
>>america, and south east asia, (near the equator/tropics ideal climates for rheumatism). And those
>>countries will benefit too by earning income. Healthcare costs will skyrocket soon because
>>retiring baby boomers are too many compared to available healthcare workers. But with this
>>approach healthcare costs will be cheaper.
>
>I think your idea is certainly better than bringing the third worlders here to look after our
>seniors. Your way the outward US emigration causes a raising of the IQ and cultural levels in both
>areas. Who could argue against that ?

I realise this was meant to be a joke. At least, I hope so. But the underlying belief is
fascinating.

Arrogance must be environmental.

Or is it taught in schools over there?

At least some of your seniors would discover that there is another Georgia that is a country, not a
state. And that Australia is next to Indonesia, not Hungary (I got so many compliments on my English
on my trip, on the presumption that my native language was German).

Or that good healthcare doesn't have to bankrupt you.

They may even discover that India and China had cultures pre-dating western "civilisation" by a few
millennia.

'nuff said.

Alan, Australia
 
>>What if we send all unproductive retirees to 3rd world countries where caregiver salaries are
>>cheaper and climates are more favorable to rheumatism?

My mother-in-law's in a nursing home that costs $4500 a month. They have a skeleton crew 95% of the
time. They only have like 4 orderlies for 60 people and 1 or 2 nurses. The orderlies make about
$7/hour, hardly expensive salaries! Do the math. The place is owned by a corporation that owns all
the nursing homes around here and makes big money off them. My point is: if the profit motive were
taken away, it'd cost a lot less to house these old folks, the workers who work there would get more
salary, there'd be more workers thus benefiting the economy, and the care would be better due to
increased staffing.

Plus another unnecessary thing that adds to healthcare cost is the fact that the AMA and medical
schools have a stranglehold on the number of physicians that are being trained. Fewer doctors keep
their salaries real high and care real poor. You're lucky if your doctor spends 3 minutes with you.
There are so few slots open in medical schools that there are 1,000's who could handle the rigors of
medical school but can't get into medical school. The AMA and medical schools argue that "it allows
only the best students to get into medical school" but the competition is so stiff, the difference
is negligible between those who get in and those who don't.

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1
Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
 
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:52:43 +1100, Alan <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 18:06:20 -0500, Gary James <[email protected]> wrote:

>>
>>I think your idea is certainly better than bringing the third worlders here to look after our
>>seniors. Your way the outward US emigration causes a raising of the IQ and cultural levels in both
>>areas. Who could argue against that ?
>
>
>I realise this was meant to be a joke. At least, I hope so. But the underlying belief is
>fascinating.
>
>Arrogance must be environmental.
>
>Or is it taught in schools over there?

Over there ? You're the one "over there". I'm over here.

>At least some of your seniors would discover that there is another Georgia that is a country, not a
>state. And that Australia is next to Indonesia, not Hungary (I got so many compliments on my
>English on my trip, on the presumption that my native language was German).

An Australian who speaks English ? Will wonders never cease ?

>Or that good healthcare doesn't have to bankrupt you.
>
>They may even discover that India and China had cultures pre-dating western "civilisation" by a few
>millennia.

I recently read that academic studies show that nothing of significance has ever been produced in
that vast wasteland extending south of the Tropic of Cancer and north of the Tropic on Capricorn. A
quick perusal of my globe indicates these studies to be extremely accurate.

>'nuff said.

Why worry with coddling these Seniors, anyway ? If we give them three hot meals a day they'll next
be demanding a loose pair of shoes and a warm place to sleep.
 
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:39:59 -0500, Gary James <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Why worry with coddling these Seniors, anyway ? If we give them three hot meals a day they'll next
>be demanding a loose pair of shoes and a warm place to sleep.

I thought about responding to the rest of your response and decided to let it die; lurkers might
start to take us both seriously.

On seniors, see if you can get a couple of ancient movies out of your local video shop:

"Wild in the Streets", and "Soylent Green".

Gives you a choice of concentration camp or concentrated food. Of course, the first one defines
"seniors" as anyone over thirty. As in geography, it all depends on your point of reference.

Alan, Australia
 
It is too bad that seniors can not be taken care of by their children. It is too bad that it is not
even considered as a possibility. There are cultures where this is done and part of life and death.
I live in the USA and believe me,,,, I have done all I can do to take care of my old age and my
wifes old age myself. I do not want to be a burden to anyone and I have four children that have done
very well in the taking care of themselves department. If you think governments should do the job,
check to see if that is done anywhere in the world really well.

Harv
 
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:34:36 +1100, Alan <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:39:59 -0500, Gary James <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Why worry with coddling these Seniors, anyway ? If we give them three hot meals a day they'll next
>>be demanding a loose pair of shoes and a warm place to sleep.
>
>I thought about responding to the rest of your response and decided to let it die; lurkers might
>start to take us both seriously.

OK. let's drop it.

>On seniors, see if you can get a couple of ancient movies out of your local video shop:
>
>"Wild in the Streets", and "Soylent Green".
>
>Gives you a choice of concentration camp or concentrated food. Of course, the first one defines
>"seniors" as anyone over thirty. As in geography, it all depends on your point of reference.

I remember "Soylent Green" but am not sure about the other one. Have a nice week, Alan.
 
>>If you think governments should do the job, check to see if that is done anywhere in the world
>>really well.
>
> Harv

The way the system works now is Medicaid/Medicare pays for a lot of people's care in nursing homes,
so the gov't is involved. What I am suggesting is that if the profit motive were taken away and
these places reverted to non-profit, you'd still have private adminsitrators (not bureaucrats), but
the huge benefit would be that it'd be a lot cheaper to take care of these old folks. As it is now,
these nursing homes charge about $4500 a month to the gov't for each patient and about 30% of that
is profit to the corporation that owns the nursing home. So we the taxpayers could be saving 30% of
a huge medicare/medicaid budget for nursing home patients.

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1
Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
 
On 18 Feb 2004 20:59:46 -0600, Justin <nog> wrote:

>>>If you think governments should do the job, check to see if that is done anywhere in the world
>>>really well.
>>
>> Harv
>
>
>The way the system works now is Medicaid/Medicare pays for a lot of people's care in nursing homes,
>so the gov't is involved. What I am suggesting is that if the profit motive were taken away and
>these places reverted to non-profit, you'd still have private adminsitrators (not bureaucrats), but
>the huge benefit would be that it'd be a lot cheaper to take care of these old folks. As it is now,
>these nursing homes charge about $4500 a month to the gov't for each patient and about 30% of that
>is profit to the corporation that owns the nursing home. So we the taxpayers could be saving 30% of
>a huge medicare/medicaid budget for nursing home patients.

I certainly think you are on the right track. We should do two things.

(1) localize the nursing homes so it will be owned and operated, as you say, by a non profit entity.
But within the county. Hospitals use to operate that way.

(2) Malpractice awards must be capped so trial lawyers won't be encouraged to promote frivolous
suits in hopes of hitting this lottery.

Right now there is a bill in the GA legislature to do just this. I don't have much hope for it
passing because every lawyer and corporate criminal is working against it.

With a county maintained nursing home we could depend on local employees to care for the patients
instead of a bunch of illegal aliens. I figure after malpractice caps, a locally operated facility
could run well for about $1,500 a month per patient.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back