Why should her assets not be used to pay for her expenses IF and WHEN she passes away? So the people of your state can absorb the expenses?
See an Estate Atty.
I will tell you why. I am assuming you are referring to the Medicaid expense reimbursement program. If not, that is fine, but if you are here is my reply. My mother has no health insurance. What little money she does have has gone to pay what she can for medical expenses. So let's get this straight. The government taxes people twice, the estate and gift tax, and then inheritance tax. If the state used that money more efficiently that they get from the taxes they levy the could not worry about the expense and just focus on those that commit fraud. They could also just use that money to pay for Medicaid. That is if they can quit using it as PORC. My mother has worked hard, and paid her taxes and social security just like every other law-abiding citizen. You cannot change the rules in the middle of a game. It has come out that 250,000 disabled and elderly people have lost their insurance. My mother worked low paying jobs to buy a nice house for her, now she will spend all of her money to pay the bills and qualify. So the government should help people in need, but only help them if they can pay after their dead? By that reasoning, people during the great depression would have never survived. I do not hear anyone saying that we should make the big businesses give back their take credits once they make a profit. You do not hear that about small businesses. Rarely do you see a teacher have to give back her assets because her students did not pass and all that money was paid. If you are going to take out taxes out of your check this is what you are paying for. If we elect them, and give them billions in tax dollars, you would think that there would be a responsibility to spend the money on the essential programs, not just more money for they government to go and blow. That is atrocious. The government has a responsibility to help people, and especially when you pay the taxes to fund the program. You cannot tell people to spend down their assets to qualify for Medicaid to make them poor, take their tax money for years and years, and then tell them that you are going to take what little assets they have when they are dead anyway. That is burning both sides of the candle. Frankly, I am sure that my mother's tax money has paid for elderly, homeless, and illegal alien health care, so why should she be the one that is not receiving the benefit of her money for health care. Government is not the stock market; there is not a risk for the investment that you put in. Beyond the policy analysis, my mother worked for the house, paid her taxes for the house, and if she wants to leave it to my brother who is homeless and needs a place to live she should be able to. The government should not take it so they can go and misappropriate the asset for more PORC. The next thing that will happen is we are going take social security off the assets when you are dead. Should the people that we elect get to burn the candle at both ends, poorly spend our tax dollars, and then tell us that it is not enough and because they cannot manage money tax those people's assets. I THINK NOT!!!!!
By the way…thanks for the advice.
