Americans Have Burned Through Their Savings

[somarco]

A new poll for Newsweek showed that more than a fifth of Americans are without any savings, with another fifth saying that they have less than $1,000 in their bank accounts, a signal of how precarious some voters feel about their financial situation even as the U.S. economy has withstood the shocks of a high interest rate environment.

Asked "how much money do you personally hold in personal savings accounts," 22 percent answered "I don't have any savings" while another 20 percent said they had less than $1,000. Other answers revealed that 15 percent had between $1,000 to $5,000, 10 percent with savings of $5,000 to $10,000, 13 percent boasted $10,000 to $20,000 of cash in their bank accounts while 20 percent had more than $20,000.

In a sign of how precarious the economic situation was for some Americans, 23 percent of those surveyed said they only had a "few days" of savings left to finance their basic costs of living, the poll showed. The survey by Redfield & Wilton Strategies for Newsweek was carried out on January 18 with a sample size of 1,500 eligible voters in the U.S.

Americans have burned through their savings

A fifth of Americans say they are without any savings, according to a poll by Redfield & Wilton Strategies for Newsweek.

www.newsweek.com

 

[annon123]

A new poll for Newsweek showed that more than a fifth of Americans are without any savings, with another fifth saying that they have less than $1,000 in their bank accounts, a signal of how precarious some voters feel about their financial situation even as the U.S. economy has withstood the shocks of a high interest rate environment.

Asked "how much money do you personally hold in personal savings accounts," 22 percent answered "I don't have any savings" while another 20 percent said they had less than $1,000. Other answers revealed that 15 percent had between $1,000 to $5,000, 10 percent with savings of $5,000 to $10,000, 13 percent boasted $10,000 to $20,000 of cash in their bank accounts while 20 percent had more than $20,000.

In a sign of how precarious the economic situation was for some Americans, 23 percent of those surveyed said they only had a "few days" of savings left to finance their basic costs of living, the poll showed. The survey by Redfield & Wilton Strategies for Newsweek was carried out on January 18 with a sample size of 1,500 eligible voters in the U.S.

Americans have burned through their savings

A fifth of Americans say they are without any savings, according to a poll by Redfield & Wilton Strategies for Newsweek.

www.newsweek.com

And if they live in states that didn't expand medicaid, are under 65 and would otherwise qualify atheir lives are even more precarious. Or can't afford ACA premiums. Actually I'd include in that group the people who have medicare, enough medical conditions that MA is too expensive due to MOOP, yet make too much to qualify for medicaid. Several studies I have read documented that people who miss being dual eligible through 200%-400% of the poverty line (depending on the study and what they included in the study) have the most trouble paying for medical expenses and other living expenses if they have much in the way of medical issues.

 

[somarco]

Medicaid is a good deal for patients . . . IF they can find access to care.

But it is a losing proposition on the provider side.

When Practicing Medicine is a Losing Proposition

wsma.org

 

[annon123]

Medicaid is a good deal for patients . . . IF they can find access to care.

But it is a losing proposition on the provider side.

When Practicing Medicine is a Losing Proposition

wsma.org

Yes that is very true - low reimbursement rates; on the other hand medicare isn't doing all that well on that front either. I am sure these issues are behind so much of the upcoding that goes on. Locally they list a chronic condition or two in the "plan and assessment" part of the visit notes and the visit gets coded for that too even if the patient wasn't seen for that on that particular visit - and I am not talking about just MA or medicaid, I am talking about with all patients with all kinds of insurances including private, ACA and OM.

I think the medicaid acceptance is a bigger issue in rural areas or in smaller towns although in more populous areas some people may need to travel future to get care if some systems/doctors don't accept it. Around here every major medical system accepts medicaid (and we are unique in that all 4 systems employ, between them, most of the physicians in this metro area) and they own a ton of practices/have a ton of clinics across 4 counties. Of course this doesn't help the folks who don't live in those though, several rural counties in this state have no medical care at all in those counties.

Living in another state in a smaller town we had one small medical system, a hospital that was 34 bed (and only with a physician on call - and that includes for their ER), and a 2 hour and 45 min drive to see specialists although a few would come to town one day a week to see patients in specialities that tend to have a lot of patients. There was one NP practice that was part of the system in the city with the specialists that accepted medicaid (the other practice did not) and that was it. Less than ideal. Stuff like this makes a good case for universal health care.