If the U.S. government is forced to do anything to solve the challenge described, it will not provide us with “long-term quality care.” The plutocrats who own and run our government will never allow such a thing. See Caitlyn Johnstone’s most recent essay on CN for reasons. If they give us any solutions, it will be massive euthanasia, because that’s what they have best. We’ve all noticed the movies. “Soylent Green” will probably be the archetype of our long-term challenge of aged care, just as Orwell’s “1984” was for 21st century governance in our transformed Western “democracy.”
It’s clear that other people are older and don’t admit or admit it. I think age discrimination is no more unusual than racism and many other isms. Decide for yourself.
Congratulations to Ms. Ortiz on an article on the grave ills and injustices inflicted on one of our most vulnerable populations.
In addition to the examples cited through Ms. Ortiz, the governors of the U.S. states, adding that New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and California, have demanded that nursing homes settle for coronavirus patients, even though it was already transparent that other elderly people with comorities were most at risk of dying from the virus. Apparently, the same was also done with Boris Johnson in the UK, and as discussed through some other commentator, the leaders of Belgium and Sweden. These ‘leaders’, who have been guilty of what can only be described as mass murder, will be held fully accountable, not just subject to occasional minor criticism.
This challenge stems from the existing economic system, which exploits or rejects vulnerable populations – the elderly and the sick, on the one hand, and other unprotected young people, on the other – as the scandals of Epstein and other paedophiles show. Being old in America is wonderful if you’re rich or tough (in fact, our two presidential candidates are septuagenarian), but if you’re old and poor, or old and sick, the scenario can be cruel. As Ms. Ortiz says, long-term care is necessarily a payer, and the cost of long-term care in the United States is excessively expensive and can be ruinous for anyone with a net worth of less than 8 figures. It is statistically much more likely that other older people will become disabled and require long-term care, for example, due to a stroke, than death. And, given the exorbitant charge of long-term care (usually in the order of $150,000 per year), the victim will pay until it runs out, at which point Medicaid can interfere and cover basic insurance expenses. And the maximum amenities are pitiful or punitive.
Other commentators have provided intelligent research into the challenge, and michael888 interestingly points out that it would possibly be similar to the lack of respect and appreciation of other older people in the West, especially in the United States, unlike Eastern cultures. like China Array Japan, Vietnam, etc., which honor its elders. This is also reflected in other areas, such as the compulsory retirement age.
If I qualify as an old man at 62, I hope what I say resonates a little. The approach used by fitness service providers to classify those with fitness service providers is neither discriminatory nor racist. Rather, it is a conviction of the U.S. (non-profit) scam system. People deserve to be outraged that America’s “system. It’s not fitness care, but about putting big profits in the wallet of ceos of fitness management organizations (HMO).
Only the United States and the United Kingdom had to stay in the face of ignorance of the elderly than the younger ones, since neither country had the frontline capacity to deal with the pandemic. In the case of the United Kingdom, its socialized health care formula is hugely underfunded, while in the United States there are huge dollars still diverting to the wallets of HMO CEOs, lobbyists and bought politicians.
In any fitness emergency, where the formula is overwhelming, triage, a protocol in which patients fall into 3 categories, those who sort, those who can and can’t, are priorities for limited medical care as well, is the only way to provide medical care rationally. There are only a limited number of hospital beds, a limited number of doctors and nurses, and a limited number of medicines to determine where those resources are used for maximum effect.
No, it’s not discriminatory. It’s not racist. However, it’s greed. Greed that stimulates public spending at war and is toys of a quality fitness system.
That’s why you deserve to be outraged.
Added to my Liverpool Care Pathway thread.
For decades, it has been a challenge to hit elderly patients in end-of-life care programs/paths.
This program includes:
He was there in the 1990s with dr. Jane Barton and serial killer Howard Shipman.
However, it became a protocol in the 2000s, when a report by the Evercare Palliative Care and Palliative Care Unit in Minnetonka, MN, became the basis of Liverpool Care Pathway.
Evercare belonged to Ovations (CEO: Simon Stevens). The ovations belonged to Dollar Bill McGuire’s United Health Group, where Simon Stevens was executive vice president. Simon Stevens is not executive director of the National Health Service or the UK NHS. For Royal Protection, Simon Stevens is also director of the King’s Fund, founded through Queen Elizabeth II and whose sponsor is Prince Charles.
In the 2010s, this program was exported to many countries around the world, adding the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and more.
hXXps: //twitter.com/MrK00001/status/1289206496199356416
I believe that general public spending on seniors, where they are not small businesses, once giant corporations dominate care, becomes a care industry with consequences for commercial livestock. Competitiveness requires shortcuts.
For example, it might make sense for an establishment serving older people to make arrangements for those who are inflamed. While pandemics are rare, groups of fatal pneumonia are not, etc. These provisions would rise to cost, even if the power of the company requires that it be avoided. Staff reimbursement is minimized, which is likely to minimize their ratings. It is difficult to improvise the care of other inflamed people if there is no protective device in place and there is no prior education on how to do it (I wouldn’t know, but doing anything with a protective device is complicated and frustrating). Isolation can then be psychologically harmful, follow-up is complicated but necessary, etc. Low wages also force them to have multiple jobs. An example of New York, alternating shifts as a taxi/Uber driving force and in an establishment that cares about the elderly, conveying “effectively” to inflamed travelers themselves and everyone at the facility.
Of course, if they are kept to a minimum (even if they are underpaid, this adds to the back line), it is difficult to deal with staff who are inflamed or quarantined due to a family infection.
I spoke of breeding because I was very inspired by an article about the effect of cage length on the potency of poultry production. Smaller cages allowed in the United States lead to a smaller amount of food consistent with a pound of meat, preferably the bird deserves not to move at all, but otherwise the smaller, harder but also the cheapest cage. The differences are not big, however, a company will not make a decision to “why have trouble saving a penny according to the pound” or a dollar according to the user in care.
Donate here PayPal:
Keep the consortium in Robert Parry’s culture.
Become a member of the News Consortium!
Make your tax-deductible donation by clicking here.
2017 MARTHA GELLHORN JOURNALISM AWARD WINNER