Tuesday, January 30, 2018
My co-blogger buddy, Professor Pearson, recently posted about the costs of long term care insurance policies. A new article in Bloomberg View examined the implications of the losses posted by a division within GE for long term care insurance policies, What’s Bad for GE Will Be Worse for America. The article notes the implications of the division's losses beyond the company: "it’s also a harbinger of a much greater challenge for society at large: paying to care for the growing number of Americans who can’t look after themselves." The article notes that increased life expectancies contributed to the problems but it's important to look beyond why a particular company has issues. Instead the article offer that paying for long term care is not a problem to be solved just by the insurance companies.
"By 2050, the U.S. will have almost 90 million people aged 65 and over, and more than half will need long-term care at some point. Yet only a sliver of that group can afford the premiums insurers require. As of 2015, private insurance covered less than 10 percent of U.S. spending on long-term care -- and the private market has been shrinking."
We all know there is no easy answer on what we should do in the US regarding long term care. I thought this paragraph very compelling
The challenge is to design a safety net that will deliver long-term care when it’s needed -- without making people destitute first, yet without burdening taxpayers unduly. This isn’t only a matter of compassion: There’s a strong economic argument as well. The cost of long-term care weighs heavily on the economy, as family members step in to do what the health-care system does not. The lifetime cost to caregivers in forgone wages and other losses has been put at $3 trillion.