I think my posts misdirected the discussion.
I was hoping to build on the idea of a live-in companion, where companion services would be rendered, but as a trade off of care, for the security of a good home, and the ability to live a life that would otherwise be pressured by the need to work just to exist. Think the tired older lady who is standing at the cash register at Walmart for eight hours a day.
So here's how it worked for my neighbor.
The home owner who needed care, connected with a younger widow who had lived on subsistence in a bad part of Chicago. While I don't know what kind of payment was involved, I know it was not anywhere near the $22/hr for local caregivers. Maybe more like a one or two hundred dollars a week, which she could bank, as all of her other expenses were covered by the home owner at a a small incremental cost, mostly for food.
It was a symbiotic relationship, which worked perfectly, and allowed the owners family to live uninterrupted lives, without the constant worry of emergencies.
I wouldn't pretend to propose a method for developing a means of expanding this idea, as obviously it would require some basic rules and background research, but there is some precedent for matching up compatible individuals, as in online dating sites, such as Christian Mingle.
An aside... When the homeowner passed away, the lady who was the caregiver, was able to choose between five different new homes, and is still comfortably settled and happy.
Why should we move some of these services away from the business sector? Because it will be a financial impossibility to accommodate the rising aging population.The per capita cost for unfunded liabilities is already more than $800,OOO, and that's just for a child being born today.