Why do people insist that they can't save anything?

[veronak]

There's another side that no one has addressed:

It's better not to have savings.

I saved and had to pay full cost for summer camps for my two kids.

I saved all my life and then had to pay full tuition for both my kids.

I saved and now face the possibility of having to use my savings for medical care.

Others who earned as much as I did, but didn't save, got financial help for all these expenses.
---End Quote---
Was the only criteria for summer camp assistance how much you had in savings? Or did they also look at how much you earned?

I have a problem with people who depend on the system, it is designed to help those in need not those who abuse it. I think it's great that you were able to save and send your kids to school others should do the same. There was a time when public assistance was considered shameful now it's the norm

[maat55]

I have a problem with people who depend on the system, it is designed to help those in need not those who abuse it. I think it's great that you were able to save and send your kids to school others should do the same. There was a time when public assistance was considered shameful now it's the norm

I agree, it's getting to be to much the norm. And those who point this out are critized for it.

[disneysteve]

I agree, it's getting to be to much the norm. And those who point this out are critized for it.

I agree, too, but certainly a system such as what vole described is flawed. Basing aid on income minus expenses doesn't really identify folks who need assistance. Instead, it gives money to folks who can't handle the money they already have. That just invites abuse.

[SacredFaerie]

The system Vole described is drastically flawed. Drastically. There's nothing wrong with assistance given two points: You actually truly need it and you have a plan to get off of it.

The issue is that many people can't commit to either.

[maat55]

I agree, too, but certainly a system such as what vole described is flawed. Basing aid on income minus expenses doesn't really identify folks who need assistance. Instead, it gives money to folks who can't handle the money they already have. That just invites abuse.

Every system has its loopholes and those who are weak will find them and exploit them. Those who would shame the use, don't look. I have no contempt for those who do so as a last resort. (last resort has a broad measure depending on strength of a persons will) It's hard for any system to work perfectly.

[poundwise]

I've yet to meet the person who cannot save, only many who do not. Nor have I met many who do not have any money, only many who do not have any money left.

[prosper]

I agree with an earlier poster that used the phrase "will power." I suspect that most people in this forum are savers and it would be hard to understand the mentality of a non-saver. I have always equated it to a person that does not work out or eat healthy. Both are vital and can be detrimental if not done on a consistent basis.

[vole]

That's certainly a flawed system that rewards the irresponsible. Drive a BMW, get assistance. Drive a Chevy, get nothing. I'd be writing a nasty letter to the folks that administer the assistance if I were in that situation.

I did make several appeals, and even after losing close to 1/2 my savings as the stock market dropped, I got no financial aid.

Most of the elite private colleges talk a good game but it's more like a con game.

Just because you are sitting in the same waiting room and seeing the same doctor as the Medicaid patients does not mean that you are getting the same level of care. Why? Your private insurance has a better drug formulary than the Medicaid plan so your doctor has more options when choosing what to prescribe for you.

Like Neurontin? I would disagree. Many studies have shown that the "new" and "better" drugs that cost significantly more money than the old standby drugs are not better. Just more expensive and make more profits for the drug company.

Marketed to doctors for atrial fibrillation, Betapace is the same as sotalol at 1/10 the price. Recent studies have shown expensive anti-hypertensive medications don't do much better than older cheaper therapies at preventing complications of hypertension.

And most infections don't need the newest and best antibiotics. As you know, the abuse of the newest antibiotics is causing increased resistance.

Your private insurance is accepted by more specialists and facilities so your doctor has more options when choosing where to refer you for additional treatment or testing.

As for seeing the specialist, the patients with the best insurance, HMO, or Medicaid are sitting in the same specialty offices that are located in the hospital. There used to be "clinics" in the hospital that have now become hospital based practices. We all sit together and see the same doctors.

You probably have a vehicle and the means to get around to doctor appointments, medical tests, pharmacies to pick up your prescriptions, etc. The Medicaid patient next to you may have no means with which to do what the doctor orders. If he has no car, he may not be able to get to the specialist or go for the x-ray.

In a large city, no one uses a car. It's just too hard. We're all using the same public transportation to get to the doctor.

The abuses of the drug companies are common everyday news.

As for access to the doctor, that is a very common and very valid complaint. My advice is if you don't feel you have adequate access to your doctor, get yourself a new doctor.

Easier said than done.

In addition to a broken financial system, a broken banking system, a broken educational system, we have a broken health care system.

But this is an economic forum.


-Dave

[disneysteve]

Many studies have shown that the "new" and "better" drugs that cost significantly more money than the old standby drugs are not better.

I agree. In fact, most doctors agree. In 2006, over 60% of prescriptions were filled for generic drugs.

Betapace is the same as sotalol at 1/10 the price.

True. Betapace is the brand name, sotalol is the generic name, so yes, I would recommend using the generic, as do most doctors.

the patients with the best insurance, HMO, or Medicaid are sitting in the same specialty offices that are located in the hospital. We all sit together and see the same doctors.

This is absolutely not true in my area. I have many Medicaid patients in my practice and finding specialists who accept the insurance is very difficult and sometimes impossible. One company, for example, does not have a participating dermatologist within 60 miles of here. There is only one local orthopedist who accepts one of the Medicaid plans and getting an appointment there is nearly impossible. The only Medicaid physical therapy sites are the 2 local hospitals and they are perpetually booked so getting a new patient in can take weeks or months. If you have an HMO or private insurance, I can make one phone call and have you in with most specialists within 24 hours.

In a large city, no one uses a car. It's just too hard. We're all using the same public transportation to get to the doctor.

Also not true in our area. Where I live, the only people using public transit are the poor. Everyone else drives.

[SacredFaerie]

The client I recently worked with is stuck with no physical therapy because he can't do traditional therapy and no local aqua therapy providers take Medicaid.

[Well Spent]

There's another side that no one has addressed:

It's better not to have savings.

I saved and had to pay full cost for summer camps for my two kids.

I saved all my life and then had to pay full tuition for both my kids.

I saved and now face the possibility of having to use my savings for medical care.

Others who earned as much as I did, but didn't save, got financial help for all these expenses.

How about all those people who bought houses they couldn't afford and made profits as real estate values went up.

And now that the party is over, there are efforts to refinance for those who can't pay their mortgage. Reward those who didn't save and overspent.

And what happened to my savings? Almost 1/2 wiped out as a result of fraud, abuses, and criminal activity of banks, corporations, insurance companies, and investment houses.

Our society rewards those who don't save and penalizes those who do adn who try to live within their means.

Color me bitter.

You have the wrong attitude. Cultivate a better attitude by being proud of your financial accomplishments and being grateful that no misfortune derailed your financial planning.

[skylovessea]

You have the wrong attitude. Cultivate a better attitude by being proud of your financial accomplishments and being grateful that no misfortune derailed your financial planning.

I don't believe the wrong attitude is present here. One shouldn't have to dig into their savings for things like this. What is the point of saving money if it is just going to end up spent?

Maybe I'm looking that this the wrong way, but that's the way I see it.

[cptacek]

One shouldn't have to dig into their savings for things like this.

What? One shouldn't have to dig into their savings for summer camp? Or tuition? Isn't that what savings are for?

[vole]

You have the wrong attitude. Cultivate a better attitude by being proud of your financial accomplishments and being grateful that no misfortune derailed your financial planning.

I see many of my co-workers, and even relatives, who receive financial aid and breaks not because of misfortune, but because they spent their money and didn't save.

In fact, college advisers suggest buying a new car and having major home renovations done before children apply to colleges.

And isn't it true that those who borrow money and have credit card debt actually have better credit ratings than those who live within their means?

-Dave

[SacredFaerie]

Wow vole you really are bitter.

*shrug* It happens.