Thanks to Obamacare we may Suffer the Pleasures of an IRS Audit when Caring for our Aging Loved Ones

Posted by PITHOCRATES - May 18th, 2013

Week in Review

Thanks to birth control and abortion people stopped having as many babies in the Sixties and Seventies.  While their parents did their job to keep the population growing their selfish baby boomer children did not.  Which has caused populations everywhere to age.  Where fewer and fewer young people are supporting more and more elderly baby boomers in retirement.  Putting a huge burden on our hospitals.  And our nursing homes.  Where it is not uncommon for an elderly patient to suffer a near life-ending malady.  And is rushed to the hospital.  The hospital uses the latest in life-saving drugs and treatment.  Stabilizes the patient.  Who, unable to live on their own anymore, are transferred to a nursing home.  Where drugs keep them alive.  Until they suffer another near life-ending malady.  And the nursing home sends them back to the hospital.  Where doctors stabilize the patient.  And sends them back to the nursing home.  And so on until the patient dies.

This is one of the most heart-wrenching things to have to go through with a loved one.  To see a loved one passed back and forth between the hospital and nursing home.  While the quality of their life diminishes.  And making everything worse are the costs.  Insurance pays for some of it.  When that runs out the government will pay for some.  But if a patient needs custodial care (to help them bathe, dress, eat, etc.) the family will have to begin liquidating their assets.  Unless they have no assets.  If not then the government steps in once again.  After verifying that they have no more assets to take.  But at this stage you’re getting the bare necessities to keep your loved one alive.  Where costs are more times than not driving the decision-making process.  Not the patient’s quality of life.  Even when the government provides free health care for its people little changes in this heart-wrenching process (see Pledge to close health and care gap by Nick Triggle posted 5/13/2013 on BBC News Health).

Ministers are promising an end to the era of vulnerable people being passed around the health and care systems.

The pledge forms part of a shared commitment being set out by NHS and local government leaders to close the gap between the two systems by 2018…

It comes as figures show elderly hospital patients are facing increasing delays for social care help.

The analysis of government figures by Age UK showed that hospital patients were waiting for more than 30 days on average for a care home place – 13% longer than three years ago.

Those needing social care packages at home are waiting 27 days on average – again 13% longer.

As well as being inconvenient for patients, the delays are costly for the NHS.

For example, a hospital bed costs £250 [$379.25] a day compared with just over £500 [$758.50] a week for a care home place.

Age UK released the figures to illustrate the growing disconnect between the health and social care systems…

Michelle Mitchell, of Age UK, said: “Waiting in hospital needlessly not only wastes NHS resources but it can also undermine an older person’s recovery and be profoundly upsetting for them and their families as a result.”

Now imagine inserting the IRS into this process.  Who the government will no doubt use to determine how much a patient’s family can contribute to this process.  The same IRS that fills a person with fear and dread whenever they get a notice from the IRS in the mail.  The government agency that can destroy your life like no other can.  That IRS.  Imagine the care of your loved one dependent on an IRS auditor’s opinion of how much you can afford to pay.  Which may happen.  For Obamacare gives the IRS that power.

Or worse.  Imagine the IRS determining the cost of care for your loved one based on your politics.  Like the IRS has been doing when granting tax-exempt status for certain groups.  Where people who support liberal causes go to the front of the line.  While conservatives go to the back of the line.  Especially if you’re a Tea Party conservative.  Imagine going through the equivalent of a costly IRS audit at the time your loved one is being shuttled between the health and social care systems.  As a conservative.  Where the IRS will seize all of your assets to pay for your loved one’s health care costs.  While liberals won’t go through the same costly IRS audit.  Or give up their assets.

It isn’t fair.  But little in Obamacare will be fair.  Not when liberals in government will use the IRS to attack political opponents.  Which they have admitted to doing.  We used to joke that we’d rather have a colonoscopy than go through the ordeal of an IRS audit.  Now we may have to have an IRS audit first before we can enjoy the pleasure of a colonoscopy.  Thanks to Obamacare the IRS will make a dreadful procedure even more horrible.  But on the brighter side if you want birth control or abortion they will be free on demand.  Including the morning-after pill.  Even if you’re a 15-year-old girl.  Funny, really.  As these things caused the very thing that got us into this mess in the first place.  An aging population.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tobacco, Smoking, Cigarettes, Sin Taxes, Obesity, Health Care Costs, Lost Tax Revenue, Abortion, Deficit and Debt

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 5th, 2012

History 101

The Government saves Money in the Long Run when People Smoke because they Die Earlier than Nonsmokers 

A lot of people like to smoke.  Before we knew any of the adverse health effects of smoking it was as wholesome as apple pie in America.  American tobacco was one of the first cash crops of the United States.  Because it was in such high demand throughout the world.  During the American Civil War many officers chain-smoked cigars.  We put cigarettes in our soldiers’ C-rations in World War II.  Some of the most iconic photographs of battle-weary soldiers, seamen and airmen have a cigarette dangling from their mouths.  Our favorite parents from the Fifties’ sitcoms smoked cigarettes in their homes with their children playing on the floor at their feet.  If you watch AMC’s Mad Men everyone smoked cigarettes.  All of the time.  At work and at home.  In restaurants and in hospitals.  Even while pregnant.  Then the attacks against Big Tobacco began.

First they started with the sin taxes.  Greatly increasing the cost of cigarettes.  Which increased their opportunity costs.  People had to give up other things to continue to enjoy their cigarettes.  Especially the poor.  The rich still could enjoy their cigarettes without making sacrifices in their life.  And kept on smoking.  Movie stars and rock stars always have a cigarette hanging out of their mouths.  To look cool.  Which is why teenagers started to smoke.  Not because of Joe Camel.  But to look cool like their favorite movie stars and rock stars.  So people kept smoking their cigarettes.  While the government bureaucrats started tallying the health care cost of smokers.  To recover the health care cost of smoking government bureaucrats sued Big Tobacco.

According to ‘health care experts’ in the government smoking costs the health care industry some $100 billion annually.  Which is why they’re constantly raising taxes on cigarettes.  Why they sued Big Tobacco.  And why they’re ostracizing smokers everywhere by making almost every area a nonsmoking area.  But they still haven’t made smoking illegal.  Why?  High sin taxes and lawsuits.  Smoking is a cash cow for government.  And the dirty little secret about smoking is that the government saves money in the long run when people smoke.  Because of those sin taxes.  And because smokers die earlier than nonsmokers.  Up to a decade or more.  And it is in that last decade of life that seniors cost government the most.  Another decade of Social Security benefits.  And Medicare and Medicaid benefits.  Those benefits smokers paid into all of their lives.  Who forfeit them when they die early (and they don’t get passed on to their heirs).  Unlike the nonsmokers who don’t have the decency to die before collecting all of their Social Security and Medicare benefits.  Adding another decade or so for a whole sort of health ailments to inflict their fragile bodies.  Requiring more hospitalization.  Medication.  And nursing home care.  Expenses smokers help cut short by dying earlier.  Such as from an early heart attack before they even get a chance to have a lengthy and expensive hospital stay.

The Loss Tax Revenue from Abortions in the Eighties over Three Decades is Approximately $4.98 Trillion 

So government is increasing the opportunity costs of something people enjoy.  Smoking.  When in the long run smokers’ early deaths save the government money.   Not to mention those sin taxes fattening the tax pot when they’re alive.  So it’s a specious argument that the government is spending more on them in health care costs than nonsmokers who live another 10-20 years.  So why do they do it?  To boost tax revenues.  And smokers are just a convenient scapegoat.  Like the obese.  Where those on the Left make the same arguments.  Where according to ‘health care experts’ in the government obesity costs the health care industry some $150 billion annually.  Even though these people like smokers live shorter lives.  So while they’re consuming that $150 million the government is keeping about 10-20 years of their contributions to Social Security and Medicare.  So it is again a specious argument that the government is spending more on obese people than thinner, healthier people who live 10-20 years longer.  Who could, say, fall and break their pelvis requiring an extensive and expensive hospital stay.  As well as rehabilitation and possibly nursing home care.  And yet those on the left have campaigned to remove toys from Happy Meals.  And made it illegal in New York to buy a big cup of soda pop.  Why?  Again, to boost tax revenue.

All right, let’s go to the source of that tax revenue problem.  Let’s look at a decade of lost tax revenue.  From 1980 to 1983 there were about 1,300,000 abortions each year.  In 1984 there were 1,333,521 abortions.  In 1985 there were 1,328,570 abortions.  In 1986 there were 1,328,112 abortions.  In 1987 there were 1,353,671 abortions.  In 1988 there were 1,371,285 abortions.  In 1989 there were 1,396,658 abortions.  In 1990 there were 1,429,577 abortions. 

Had these abortions not happen in 2006 there would have been an additional 1,300,000 taxpayers aged 26.  In 2007 there would have been an additional 1,300,000 taxpayers aged 27 and an additional 1,300,000 taxpayers aged 26.  And so on.  If you crunch the numbers over a 30-year period by decades you get an additional 72,006,665 people paying taxes at all levels of government in the first decade (2006-2015).  An additional 146,913, 940 tax-paying people in the second decade (2016-2025).  And an additional 88,169,092 tax-paying people in the third decade (2026-2035).  The average age in the first decade is 29.  It’s 32 in the second decade.  And 42 in the third decade.  Assuming those age 29 earn on average $30,000 annually, those age 32 earn on average $40,000 annually and those age 42 earn on average $50,000 we get the following incomes per decade: $2.16 trillion, $5.88 trillion and $4.41 trillion, respectively.  Assuming that we pay approximately 40% of all our earnings in taxes at the city, state and federal level the lost tax revenue (at all levels of government) for those same decades equals $864.1 billion, $2.35 trillion and $1.76 trillion, respectively.  For a grand total of loss tax revenue for those three decades of approximately $4.98 trillion.  Or on average $165.9 billion per year.  These numbers are conservative.  Yes, some of these people may not survive to become taxpayers.  But some of these could become millionaires and billionaires, paying more in taxes.  There could have been another Lady Gaga, Madonna, Oprah Winfrey, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Barbara Streisand, George Clooney, Steve Jobs, etc.  A few of these added to the calculations would make the lost tax revenue numbers larger.

From the Government’s Perspective Abortion has a Far Greater Opportunity Cost than Smoking and Obesity 

This is the opportunity cost of the abortions in the Eighties.  So much loss tax revenue that the government has attacked smokers and the obese.  Whose health care costs are not adding much if anything to the federal budget.  Thanks to their early deaths compared to nonsmokers and thin people.  (If the government starts refunding remaining Social Security and Medicare benefits to the surviving family that may change.)  Yes they are costing the health care system.  But their costs are just brought up earlier in their lives as opposed to someone living 10-20 years longer making the nursing home to hospital to nursing home roundtrip a few times in the last 10 years or so of their life.  Because they have lived so long.  And had a chance to suffer every disease and trauma those smokers and obese can’t due to their early deaths.

It is interesting to note that the federal deficit in 2006 was $282.14 billion.  The lost tax revenue from the Eighties’ abortions was on average $165.9 billion per year in those three decades.  Granted not all of that money would have been federal taxes.  But with the conservative estimate of that loss tax revenue it is safe to say it would have come close to balancing the federal budget.  And if you factor in the abortions of the Seventies (there were fewer than in the Eighties but they would have been higher earners in the 2000s) the federal deficit may have become a surplus.  At least holding the federal debt to the $9.34 trillion it was in 2006.  Perhaps even reducing it.

Smoking and eating an unhealthy diet may be bad for you.  But it probably doesn’t cost the government anymore in tax dollars.  But they increase the opportunity costs of these things we enjoy to dissuade us from enjoying them.  So those who enjoy smoking and eating and drinking ‘bad’ things enjoy life less.  By not choosing what they want to choose.  Why? To pay for the lost revenue from another choice that government doesn’t try to dissuade people from.  Abortion.  Which from the government’s perspective has a far greater opportunity cost than smoking and obesity.  And yet government paints a bulls-eye on the back of smokers and the obese.  Why?  Because they’ve so demonized and oppressed them they can.  While the abortion issue too much of a sacred cow to those on the Left.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,