Too poor to retire; too young to die

[Danmar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by athena53 "If the person can afford it" is the key here. People who own a few dozen Coach bags, buy diamond collars for their Chihuahuas and eat out every night are good for the economy. There's a segment of that group, though, whose long-term care insurance plan is "spend everything and Medicaid will pay for my nursing home" and who will be reliant before then on subsidized housing, Meals on Wheels, etc. when they could have saved. If you spent your whole life working minimum-wage jobs and raising 4 kids, well, you probably couldn't put much aside. If you bought a new SUV every 3 years and took Mediterranean cruises for your vacation and expect the taxpayers to subsidize your retirement, IMO that's just plain wrong.

Right, but this thread started out discussing a $21 meal. The examples you cite are obvious examples that we can all agree with. There are many of these we see in everyday life.

I was thinking more along the lines of personal tastes ie type of car we buy, clothing, type and frequency of travel, which would not necessarily be too expensive for a relatively well off person. Basically questions of taste within an affordability constraint. Also, in many cases affordability is a matter of opinion. For example is someone who uses and spends an SWR of 5% a spendthrift? Even if it is all on designer bags?

As far as subsidizing someone else's retirement. This is a bit of a hornets nest. Everyone who gets SS or Medicaid is being subsidized to some degree, no? Not being American I should probably pass on this part.

[karen1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by urn2bfree How about her completely unsubstantiated belief that "organic" is healthier? "Organic" means more expensive. I am shocked how many people have swallowed the notion that it means healthier. This seems to be nothing but marketing, plain and simple. For those who disagree, don't tell me about your "belief" or your anecdote about how "organic" cured your (eczema, arthritis, irritable bowel, energy level, etc.) or list some litany of the evils of non-organic food. Just show me some actual evidence. Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

While there are many "organic" foods which don't really add value.. many things can be made healthier by proper washing, dissolving the wax on foods where pesticides are sealed inside (especially apples).. there are a few foods like strawberries, I'd never eat without buying from a local farm where I knew what was on them...What’s On My Food :: Pesticides on Strawberries . We don't buy anything with colored dye in it...there are mixed studies about its impact on Hyperactivity for children with ADHD.. considering the ADD drug comes to about $7.50/day, paying a few dollars more for dye free food seems cost effective, it doesn't eliminate the need for the drug but it does seem to allow us to skip 1-2 days a week, evidence is difficult because there are so many factors at play but living with someone for years.. you know.

[timo2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by urn2bfree How about her completely unsubstantiated belief that "organic" is healthier? "Organic" means more expensive. I am shocked how many people have swallowed the notion that it means healthier. This seems to be nothing but marketing, plain and simple. For those who disagree, don't tell me about your "belief" or your anecdote about how "organic" cured your (eczema, arthritis, irritable bowel, energy level, etc.) or list some litany of the evils of non-organic food. Just show me some actual evidence. Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

I totally believe in the 'Placebo Effect', which has actual evidence. It is the basis of much of modern medicine, IMHO. If so called 'organics' make people feel better, that's great.

[marko]

Quote:

Originally Posted by timo2 If so called 'organics' make people feel better, that's great.

They feel better until that "organic" fertilizer (poop) gives them e-coli.
Then they feel worse.
Begging for those in-organic antibiotics.

[travelover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by karen1972 While there are many "organic" foods which don't really add value............

Amazing, but amusing thread drift. It is a little foolish to broad brush organic vs non-organic as it depends a lot on the type of vegetable or fruit considered and where it was grown. A few months back, Consumer Reports had a comprehensive chart showing which foods were problematic based on their propensity to retain pesticides and the type of pesticides used, by country of origin.

[kcowan]

Speaking of thread drift, we really enjoy buying food here in Mexico because it is mostly local and not subjected to hormones and pesticides (except for Costco/Sams) and is very cheap.

When we eat out, some of the restaurants try to adjust their prices to USD, but most do not. The USD restaurants cost about 1100 pesos per couple with a bottle of wine, whereas the others charge 600-700 pesos per couple.

[harley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marko They feel better until that "organic" fertilizer (poop) gives them e-coli. Then they feel worse. Begging for those in-organic antibiotics.

The poop giveth, and the poop taketh away.

'Poop pills' will put feces from healthy people into guts of patients with infections | Daily Mail Online

[dixonge]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcowan Speaking of thread drift, we really enjoy buying food here in Mexico because it is mostly local and not subjected to hormones and pesticides (except for Costco/Sams) and is very cheap. When we eat out, some of the restaurants try to adjust their prices to USD, but most do not. The USD restaurants cost about 1100 pesos per couple with a bottle of wine, whereas the others charge 600-700 pesos per couple.

Is it that much more expensive than Lake Chapala We're used to spending $200MX for a meal and wine, music and dancing incluye. We could spend more, but we're too damned cheap.

[kcowan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dixonge Is it that much more expensive than Lake Chapala We're used to spending $200MX for a meal and wine, music and dancing incluye. We could spend more, but we're too damned cheap.

Yes. PV is probably the most expensive tourist destination in Mexico. Sadly we like it!

We have visited Chapala and find the costs amazing. We were disappointed that we had to eat before 8PM. Reminded us of Florida. But the weather is great year round and 2 couples have recently sold here and moved there.

We had the benefit of a trail blazer who moved fulltime to Ajijic in 1997 and stayed there for 5 years before moving to the coast. They tried Manzanillo, PV and Mazatlan and chose Maz. We did not like the industrial nature of Maz and especially don't like the new bridge to Durango. But the coast of the Sea of Cortez is beautiful!

[dixonge]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcowan Yes. PV is probably the most expensive tourist destination in Mexico. Sadly we like it! We have visited Chapala and find the costs amazing. We were disappointed that we had to eat before 8PM. Reminded us of Florida. But the weather is great year round and 2 couples have recently sold here and moved there.

Yes, not a lot of nightlife around Ajijic. Unless you count cohetes. jaja

I saw two different couples we know posting photos from PV a couple of weeks ago. It's on our list to visit

[athena53]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danmar As far as subsidizing someone else's retirement. This is a bit of a hornets nest. Everyone who gets SS or Medicaid is being subsidized to some degree, no? Not being American I should probably pass on this part.

I agree that SS is a hornet's nest. I would restrict my definition of "subsidized" to programs that are provided to people who qualify based on low income and/or few assets. Medicaid is in that category. Medicare, which does not cover nursing homes except in very restricted circumstances such as "rehabilitation" does not. I once met a bank VP who goes on frequent scuba vacations to the Caribbean with her husband (we're in the Midwest) and they were methodically divesting themselves of assets by deeding their home to their adult kids and other means so that they'd qualify for Medicaid when they needed long-term care. I wanted to smack her.

[harley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcowan We have visited Chapala and find the costs amazing. We were disappointed that we had to eat before 8PM. Reminded us of Florida.

Hey! Let's not dis Florida. I went out to get some dinner last night at 9:30, and was able to choose between McDonald's OR Taco Bell. So there!

[Walt34]

Quote:

Originally Posted by athena53 I once met a bank VP who goes on frequent scuba vacations to the Caribbean with her husband (we're in the Midwest) and they were methodically divesting themselves of assets by deeding their home to their adult kids and other means so that they'd qualify for Medicaid when they needed long-term care. I wanted to smack her.

Karma may get them for that. Very few of the nicer nursing homes will take Medicaid only, most require the ability to private pay for at least a year, usually two or three years before they agree to not throw you you out when assets are depleted. In the ones that will take Medicaid only, you get the legally mandated level of care and nothing else, not what most people want.

Admittedly there may be exceptions to that but we didn't find any when looking around for FIL.

[Corporateburnout]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walt34 Very few of the nicer nursing homes will take Medicaid only, most require the ability to private pay for at least a year, usually two or three years before they agree to not throw you you out when assets are depleted. In the ones that will take Medicaid only, you get the legally mandated level of care and nothing else, not what most people want.

+1.

My brother's mother in law was in a private nursing home that would not accept medicaid only residents but after her assets were depleted in about two years they kept her in the same room with the same amenities and services as a private resident.

[marko]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walt34 Karma may get them for that. Very few of the nicer nursing homes will take Medicaid only, most require the ability to private pay for at least a year, usually two or three years before they agree to not throw you you out when assets are depleted. In the ones that will take Medicaid only, you get the legally mandated level of care and nothing else, not what most people want. Admittedly there may be exceptions to that but we didn't find any when looking around for FIL.

Its pretty much SOP 'round here with elder care lawyers advertising on radio and TV "don't let a nursing home take all your assets!!!".

I've often mentioned a relative who wanted to self-pay and the nursing home had no idea how to bill him.

All the billing was through Medicaid. They told me that in 20 years, they never had anyone self-pay and suggested that we/he was being 'very foolish' in not better planning his assets.

[Dog]

Wow...just read the article and comments.

Like others here I often think, "There but by the grace of God go I". DH and I have worked extremely hard, LBOM, saved diligently for ER, and followed our plan (with some unexpected sidetracks along the way).
I have friends and family that have chosen different routes and thus have learned that we all chose to live and spend differently.
At some point the 80YO woman's health will fail - then what? She will never pay off the $50k CC debt (and I doubt she has plans to).
For the others in the article (younger with a bit more income), I hope at some point they figure out that "hope is not a strategy".

Overall, they each made a lifestyle choice and I've learned that choices have consequences.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

[Andy2]

Sad story, but designed that way by the reporter I think. It seems to me that with just a little planning and common sense she could stretch her money a lot further - and it is likely she does, the reporter just ignored inconvenient truths.

And really, being caught speeding if she is as destitute as portrayed.....

[Miranda]

I admire the first woman in the article to a certain extent. She is a 79 y/o woman out on her own getting by as best she can, not a typical woman of her generation. She is not making the best financial choices (and so is making her life that much harder) and is under a lot of stress. However at her age i can imagine she might say to herself "oh what the heck, when am i going to have a chance to see a Frank Lloyd Wright building?" Or "what the heck, i deserve prime rib". And at her age, i dont know if i disagree with her. If not now, when? She's obviously not going to pay off her cc debt.

This is not the circumstance i want to be in should i be lucky enough to live that long. I think thats true of most posters on this board. I think most wont be able to relate to the financial decisions made by the folks in this article.

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miranda She's obviously not going to pay off her cc d

I agree with you, at this point trying to pay this off would be foolish, it would make her life much worse, and couldn't possibly help anything.

She is doing the only thing rational for her, live for the present.

Ha

[REWahoo]

Another similar article: https://www.theatlantic.com/business...fornia/553970/