Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Working until they dropped dead kept the old people from becoming moochers and parasites, dontchakno [View all]
The elderly poor had it so good back in the dayPaul Rosenberg has a very interesting interview on Salon with Nancy Altman and Eric Kingson, authors of
"Social Security Works!"
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/31/tea_partyers_union_members_democrats_republicans_all_love_social_security_so_lets_expand_it/
...............
Rosenberg: You point out that before Social Security came into being, old age and poverty were synonymous, and old age was commonly looked at with dread. Few people alive today have any memory of that, but could you talk about that reality, what it was like, and what kind of difference Social Security made?
Altman: When Social Security was enacted, every state except New Mexico had poorhouses. I know that sounds like Dickens, but this is just 80 years ago. The residentsthey were called inmateswere not working-age people, or children; they tended to be people who have been independent all their lives, but dependent on wages. When they were no longer able to work, if they didnt have children who could take them in, they literally went to the poorhouse. It was often common at that time that if the worker died, the family would split apart. Orphanages were full of children who still had a parent living who couldnt support those children. Often youd see people begging on the streets; there were lots of stories about that.
Yes, these poorhouses existed all the way up until the 1930s.
Here's what the population looked like:


The second one is a poorhouse broom factory. Working until they dropped dead kept the old people from becoming moochers and parasites, dontchaknow.
Conservatives won't admit that this is the system we will inevitably adopt if they have their way. It's where their philosophy leads. Sure, some people will have children who will be forced to take them in at the expense of their own kids. And some people will make enough money in their lifetime to be able to support themselves in old age (assuming they don't have to spend every penny on medical care, which is probable.) But in the conservative/libertarian system this will be the inevitable end for a whole lot of people.
By the way, they are also trying to destroy disability insurance and are questioning whether mental illness really exists, so there are going to be a lot of folks in the poorhouse. They seem to be willing to spend whatever it takes to keep massive numbers of people in prison however, so I'd imagine that most of the sick, old and mentally ill poor could wind up there, so that's good. They'll have a roof over their heads at least.
More, plus links:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-elderly-poor-had-it-so-good-back-in.html
41 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Working until they dropped dead kept the old people from becoming moochers and parasites, dontchakno [View all]
kpete
Jan 2015
OP
Have you checked the Medicaid in your state? If her earnings is low there is some assistance
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#6
did you even read the post? the woman has nearly enough to pay for a place in assisted living.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#7
HEY, did you read the post? here you go again, when someone needs the help you come up with this, I
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#8
yeah, it would really help that family if one of the people in it with income went on the state and
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#9
And where have you helped, if the family has not gone to check on Medicaid in their state and
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#10
yeah, you were a big help you're always helping by running down the ssdi program and advocating
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#12
Give your proof the links I furnished you in the past are phantom cheaters.
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#14
the extra resources needed to track down less than 1% of the caseload = more than the gain.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#15
Proof, sent me the links where those I provided to you are phantom cheaters.
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#16
i don't have to prove anythng to you. everyone's seen you running around talking up SSDI 'fraud'
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#17
Oh, phantom proof, yes, I do not see proof, so your accusations are phantom proof.
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#19
What everyone does not see is your proof of phantom cheaters is not true, what are you pushing.
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#22
There just may be some programs to help in assisting with her care such as some home health
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#13
what don't you get about MEDICAID TAKES EVERYTHING. You're not on Medicaid, and putting
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#20
Get over yourself, where is your proof where medicaid takes everything, when you get
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#23
I think what happens is medicaid pays x dollars and the nursing home charges 4X for care.
LiberalArkie
Jan 2015
#26
At one time this was true, it has changed, the non institutionalized spouse gets to remain in the
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#31
What Medicare are you talking about, dont get yourself confused. Just for
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#32
As far as the mental illness part goes, that only applies when rednecks shoot innocent people with
world wide wally
Jan 2015
#25
There's always the trust fund. Mitt or maybe it was W who had to dig into his.
rickford66
Jan 2015
#34