General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn a healthcare supply store today I saw an elderly man deprived of a needed oxygen tank.
This is a large healthcare supply store that ships nationwide. The owner is a wealthy man who will suffer no consequences from his actions today.
I overheard him tell an obviously unwell elderly man that they were refusing to accept his insurance. I gathered he has a Medicare Advantage plan, though I did not catch which one.
He slowly got his question out to the owner...why are you refusing to accept my insurance? The owner said it was because of Obamacare, that he could not afford to take the cuts in payments for supplies. He told the man that his insurance would change from paying 50 dollars for the item to only 19 dollars in January 2014.
The man said what can I do? The owner said he just didn't know.
The man then left and said whatever. When I checked out I said where others could hear that he had turned this from a health care center to a political arena, and that it was a shame.
Since hubby and I were both hospitalized with a bad strain of pneumonia the last of March I have seen so many changes from when he was sick before. Reduced staff and delays in responding to patients are the most obvious.
Top Five Ways the President's Budget Would Change Medicare
The changes appear to be just beginning.
In 2017, 2019 and 2021, new Medicare beneficiaries would have to pay an additional $25 for their Part B deductible, for a three-year total of $75 to be added on to the cost of the Part B premium, which in 2013 is $147.
The administration says the change would "strengthen program financing and encourage beneficiaries to seek high-value health care services." Seniors advocates say it's an additional cost to people already struggling on fixed incomes. In 2012, nearly half of Medicare beneficiaries had annual incomes of below $22,500.
Also starting in 2017, Obama's plan would require new Medicare beneficiaries to pay $100 for five or more home health care visits that are not preceded by a stay in the hospital or another medical facility, such as a nursing home or a rehabilitation hospital. Home health care is one of the few areas in Medicare that does not have cost sharing, and its rapid growth in recent years has led panels like the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) to recommend beneficiary cost sharing.
Beginning in 2017, new beneficiaries who purchase supplemental insurance, known as Medigap, with particularly low cost-sharing requirements -- such as "first-dollar" coverage -- will face a surcharge equivalent to approximately 15 percent of the average Medigap premium. The thought is that more generous Medigap plans encourage overuse of services, but seniors rely on these generous plans to shield them from unanticipated costs.
There is already a great inconsistency in Medicare Advantage plans. For example Blue Medicare requires a co-pay of $150 for each day in the hospital up to day 7. Aetna Medicare requires no co-pay at all for those first 7 days.
I think the health care supply owner will go tonight to his fancy home thinking nothing at all about that man he turned away. I hope that discouraged man will find another supply place that will accept his insurance. I wondered how many more will be in the same situation as the cuts begin.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)Not so sure there isn't more to this. There is a savings to seniors by getting rid of the donut whole.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)I don't care who is president or who is to blame, it is a reality that is going to cause much pain.
It will be needless pain while billionaires suffer not at all.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)whole story here. I'll wait and see for myself. I turned 67 today so I should learn first hand.
I think you have an axe to grind. Just my gut feeling.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Care to explain?
grilled onions
(1,957 posts)I hate to think how many against Obama,Obamacare, or detesting the idea that everyone should be insured will play hardball with human lives to get their point across. They care nothing about the humans,mostly elderly,sickly who are little more then pawns in this sick game of political tennis. Each side lobs for their side,their ideas and,we the political ball, get lied to,neglected,refused coverage. The most heartbreaking part is the total refusal to so many who think they have insurance coverage but discover it's coverage in name only and they get turned away from doctor's services, medical supply services and yet will still get more bills at a larger cost then they ever have had before.
Where I live I cannot get any doctor in an entire three story medical building that takes Medicare. What good is having so called insurance when no one will take it?
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)And so many just can not fight back.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)which is NOT equivalent to Medicare. It's a private program that the government had been subsidizing, but since it turned out to be more expensive, the government is phasing out the subsidy.
Most people on Medicare Advantage would be better off if they switched to regular Medicare.
The insurance companies got into the Medicare Advantage business because it was profitable for them to do so. The government subsidised them to manage the patient's healthcare, and as long as the patient stayed relatively healthy, they made a profit and the patient paid slightly less for deductibles and doctor visits etc.
The ACA has done away with the subsidy - that's the 700 billion dollars a year that Paul Ryan was bleating on about when he used to try and scare seniors about the 'cuts in Medicare'.
So that elderly gentleman would be best off by going to a secondary insurance to top up what Medicare doesn't cover completely.
Turbineguy
(37,213 posts)The only way the GOP would pass Obamacare is if it murdered enough people.
TheFutureWillCome
(36 posts)only passed it to murder some people. How could that be accepted and signed by the President?
Turbineguy
(37,213 posts)let's say "insure its failure". Still, it's a step in the right direction, but the key is to get democratic control of Congress in order to remove the trojan horses.
former9thward
(31,807 posts)No Republicans in Congress voted for Obamacare.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)vs those who have been on it for awhile.
dunno if courts will honor a suit, but it sure is discrimination.
as it stand right now, I pay 147.00 a month for Plan B, I see my doc once a year for follow up and new scripts,
which costs me...107.00.
Used to cost me 65.00, but apparently doc got one of those new "obamacare" computer programs they are required to use, and the new legit patient billing allowed them to double the office visit.
So I never meet the deductible, have to pay the office visit out of pocket, and the scripts are not covered under B.
Fortunately, those only cost 10.00 every 90 days.
Worse yet, I am one of those who get a very very low SS check, so with higher and higher Medicare B deducts,
I am worse off than I was before I went on Medicare.
Now they want to charge "new" recipients more money than I pay.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)I was taking care of my mother then. She had a medigap policy from AARP, and when her medical bills came there was never any co-pay. If this keeps up they will hurt many seniors.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)My mom just got her card recently and will be joining the ranks in a few weeks. I left the country and unless I decide to go back won't get medicare (Korea has a national health insurance plan). I do worry about how much it will cost her especially once she retires. For now she's got insurance under her employer for a couple of more years. Thankfully she is in good health, but she is borderline diabetic which could cause problems in a few years.
My wife's parents are indigent and get their healthcare for free. My FIL had a bout with cancer (throat and intestinal) about a year after we got married. I think the entire month in the hospital cost (including surgeries) was about $5,000 which was covered by family members. On the other hand I was in the hospital when I visited the US the year before last with a nasty case of pneumonia and it was well over $3,000 for wait for it....5 days.
joeunderdog
(2,563 posts)Total administrative expenses: 3%. After they privatized it by adding 47 middleman companies, about half the money gets spent on things other than medical care even tho there's some medication coverage. Nice reform. Now it's "too expensive." Go figure.
Why is this never mentioned?
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)How are you?
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Long year, but it's nearly done. Good to see you!
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)To me this is alarming.
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)several elderly folks on different occasions. They were crying and walking away without their meds, and I could do nothing to help them.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)And that the government has been subsidizing?
So people should get out of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Advantage
Medicare Advantage (MA) is a health insurance program that provides an eligible person with the United States' Medicare benefits. Medicare Advantage differs from the original Medicare model, which offered a standard plan provided directly by the state. In contrast, Medicare Advantage is offered by a private provider.
SNIP
Effects of the Health Reform
There is considerable confusion about what the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (or ACA) of 2010 did with respect to Medicare Advantage. As part of a broad set of reforms aimed to control the cost of Medicare, the ACA eliminated subsidies which the federal government first used to establish the Medicare Advantage program. The Obama administration launched an $8.35 billion demonstration project to postpone the majority of Medicare Advantage program cuts. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) this demonstration project will cost more than the combined previous 85 demonstration projects beginning in 1995. As of 2008, the federal government spent 12 percent more on Medicare Advantage than it did for comparable care under traditional Medicare.[7] These subsidies (which added an additional $14 billion to the Medicare program last year alone) will gradually be reduced until payments to Medicare Advantage are in line with the cost of traditional Medicare.[8]
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Group insurance that covers retirees often choose it. Saying no to it would be harmful to the retiree. Our county subsidizes the payments and carries guarantees with it.
It is usually better insurance than some of the other plans.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)than regular Medicare?
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)But our teachers' retirees and county retirees benefit from staying with the ones they choose. It's better coverage.
I would prefer traditional Medicare, but not willing to give up the group plans.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)He was blaming not selling oxygen to the customer now on changes taking place in 2014.
The problem is that up till recently, oxygen supplies cost Medicare much MORE than the suppliers were charging to other customers. A few years ago, the government put a stop to that and since then the suppliers have been trying to get their elderly customers to lobby for them.
http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2007/11/30/medicare_is_a_boon_to_oxygen_tank_firms/
Millions of Americans with respiratory diseases have relied on oxygen equipment, delivered to their homes, to help them breathe. A basic setup, deliveries of small oxygen tanks for three years, can be bought from pharmacies and other retailers for as little as $3,500, or about $100 a month.
Unless, that is, the buyer is Medicare, the government healthcare program for older Americans.
Despite enormous buying power, Medicare pays far more. Rather than buy oxygen equipment outright, Medicare rents it for 36 months before patients take ownership, and pays for services that critics say are often unnecessary.
The total cost to taxpayers and patients is up to $8,280, or more than double what somebody might spend at a drugstore.
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)questioning it.
People wonder why many health care charges are so high.....because there are a lot of cases where Medicare will pay the full amount they bill for many services.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)about the politics when they can't get needed services?
Isn't this an amazing thread?
snooper2
(30,151 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Because nobody else seems to care anymore.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)And I am told I have an axe to grind?
Now that it is a bipartisan effort to cut services to the old and or needy, it is being accepted as okay.
riqster
(13,986 posts)So this incident would not be the fault of the ACA, yes?
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)It is the unethical oxygen supplier who wants to continue to charge Medicare patients much more than he charges private patients for the same product. And who wants to blame changes in 2014 for prices he wants to set now.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)I do not believe they are as widespread as they are made out to be. There are definitely some incidences of fraud, but this is being treated as across the board everyone does it stuff.
I do not believe that there is an upside to cutting the safety nets. In fact I think there will be a huge downside showing up next year.
But then that's just me. I have been told I have an "agenda", I have been told "nice story"....when I post here now I am treated as barely intelligent.
I DO think the Medicare cuts will harm many people. I also think that combined with the devastating side effects of the Sequester many people will be left out in the cold.
The responses here are truly heartbreaking. And what IS a fair price for his oxygen tank? Can they be bought for 19 dollars? I don't know.
Will it make America a stronger nation because a man has to beg for oxygen now, going from supplier to supplier?
I don't think so.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)to Medicare patients than to private customers?
What is wrong with cutting the payments to the same amount everyone else pays? Or even to the same amount wholesalers would pay? Why should Medicare have to pay a special premium?
http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2007/11/30/medicare_is_a_boon_to_oxygen_tank_firms/
Millions of Americans with respiratory diseases have relied on oxygen equipment, delivered to their homes, to help them breathe. A basic setup, deliveries of small oxygen tanks for three years, can be bought from pharmacies and other retailers for as little as $3,500, or about $100 a month.
Unless, that is, the buyer is Medicare, the government healthcare program for older Americans.
Despite enormous buying power, Medicare pays far more. Rather than buy oxygen equipment outright, Medicare rents it for 36 months before patients take ownership, and pays for services that critics say are often unnecessary.
The total cost to taxpayers and patients is up to $8,280, or more than double what somebody might spend at a drugstore.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)That would not be very bright to think that. In fact I do not think I said anything at all like that in my OP. I think you are assuming a lot about my post.
This paragraph concerns me because it just assumes that people have this much money. Not everyone does.
A basic setup, deliveries of small oxygen tanks for three years, can be bought from pharmacies and other retailers for as little as $3,500, or about $100 a month.
As Octafish said in another post in this thread....this OP is not just about the cost of a tank of oxygen. That means he gets what I am saying, and that you do not.
The man was turned away without his medical needs, and not a single person except me spoke up.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)I'm saying that oxygen suppliers and other medical products companies have been overcharging Medicare -- charging more for the same products -- and Medicare should be cutting those excess charges.
And I'm not excusing the store owner who turned the man away. I think he's part of the problem. He's trying to get elderly patients to become lobbyists for him. He obviously doesn't need to turn them away in May because of cuts that will occur next January.
nolabear
(41,915 posts)I hear about many people saying they won't accept Medicare, and in truth I know many (me included) who don't now because it's outstandingly bureaucratic and difficult to deal with for little money (the unpaid hours of paperwork reduces the pay to an absurd level) but I would imagine that if a medical device business cut off all Medicare payment they'd lose a huge percentage of their business.
But that's next year. Why now?
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)group of children.
I highly recommend this website--- www.knowyourmeme.com
Tell it Again!
unapatriciated
(5,390 posts)Our company just sent out letters stating that our retirement benifits paid by them are being reduced from 10% to 5% of annual income. They have also reduced the amount for raises we "might" be eligible for. They openly state their reason is the unknown cost of Obamacare (they acutualy used that term) for the decrease in their contrubution to our retirement plan and the reduction in possible raises. It takes affect next month not next year.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)What kind of company is it? Will it respond to social media?
Is there a plan to reinstate benefits if money is saved?
It sounds like you work at a horrible company. Should Obamacare not have been passed because of that?
unapatriciated
(5,390 posts)even without personal identifying information. Sorry you disbelieve it, but I do not post lies.
1. The company I work for is considered one of the best in the industry regarding pay and compensation. We have higher pay and benefits than most in the industry, I will be ok. But if my company is using this excuse I wonder what other corporations are doing who do not pay as well.
2. No
3. see #1 plus where did I say it shouldn't have passed. Just pointing out that the corporate world has already started using the ACA as a reason to cut benefits and future pay raises.
When you used the term "cool story bro" it was to say you thought she made it up. It was a slam and you know it. Just as you insinuated I lied by asking for a copy the actual letter I received, knowing full well that it might jeopardize my employment.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)posting the nonsense they are trying to push. Social media can do that.
But I understand if you do not wish to take the risk, and I don't blame you for that.
As for madfloridian, well, I find lots of banbury tales on the Internets....
unapatriciated
(5,390 posts)When it comes to the ACA there are many loopholes in which to abuse those in need of medical care. I have been involved with healthcare reform since 1991 and have read the ACA in full. It was not the best we could have done. We were in a position to do more with the majority wanting single payor only to have it taken off the table. We missed a big window of opputunity that I fear we will not see again in my lifetime. Many will suffer at the hands of our for profit medical care industry. Many have already suffered including my own son because we embrace the insurance cartell to be our middle man in regards to health care. They add nothing to actual health care except to rake in unspeakable profits.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Thanks for that post.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)You really don't have to make that point in every thread I post.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Last edited Tue May 14, 2013, 10:19 PM - Edit history (2)
During this time, during these years leading up to 2017 when the Obama administration's proposed $100 copay for each home health care visit will kick in....many will be like this man yesterday. Just not receiving services.
From the article....they did not include those who were refused service or could not afford the copay.
http://hamptonroads.com/2013/05/medicare-costs-way-down-companies-worry
Federal health officials say it saved more than $200 million in its first year. They reported high levels of satisfaction from beneficiaries and no increases in hospitalizations, emergency room visits or other undesirable outcomes in the areas served by the program, according to a report last year from the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
The number of people receiving some types of equipment declined. Medicare leaders said that could be because the new system routed out potential fraud or because the new system affected claims-processing timelines.
The Government Accountability Office called the results incomplete, though, noting that the measures didnt show whether patients received needed equipment on time or whether their health suffered if they didnt.
More about the home health care copay....many will not be able to afford it.
http://homehealthcarenews.com/2013/05/home-care-advocates-ready-to-fight-co-pays-again/
The Obama Administrations FY 2014 budget proposes a co-payment of $100 per home health episode for new Medicare beneficiaries, applying to episodes with five or more visits not preceded by a hospital or other inpatient post-acute stay.
While the proposal would not kick in for new Medicare enrollees until 2017 if implemented, home health professionals are already wary the law would drive patients to costlier care settings.
For seniors living on limited or fixed incomes, co-pays for home health services could cause them to forego care, says Kyle Simon, government affairs director of the Home Care Association of Florida.
In extreme cases, beneficiaries with chronic conditions could opt to move into more expensive institutions like nursing homes, further stressing state Medicaid budgets, says Simon.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)and that implies that it will cost us money. Home health visits after hospitalizations are crucial for many seniors.
If they degenerate, they wind back up in the hospital. Being a little "off" for younger people means that you are dragging your ass. Being a little "off" for older people can mean that they forget to eat and take their medication start staggering and take a header down the stairs. Also medication side affects have to be monitored for this group, and it is not infrequent for them to be prescribed new medications after hospitalizations.
I have stepped in and taken care of several older people who were alone, so I know whereof I speak.
When the GAO calls the results incomplete, we should all listen. They are the legal primary government auditors, after all.
gvstn
(2,805 posts)But it sounds like post-hospital home care visits would not have a copay.
So medicare patients would probably still get home visitations for a period time after a hospital stay for followup care. Like you said they should since this keeps them healthier and out of the hospital.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)to the hospital if they could not afford the 100 copay. That would cost Medicare so much more in the long run.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Tanuki
(14,894 posts)If I were you, I would drop a dime with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. You could pretty much just paste what you have already written, but include the names and any other relevant info, and send it by e-mail or print it out and post it.
http://www.medicare.gov/claims-and-appeals/file-a-complaint/complaints.html
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)This is the heart of right wing Florida, tea party is strong here.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)If they want the best health care in the world, they're gonna have to pay for it.
Where's the problem?
The responses on this thread are most, em, illuminating.
For those who need a clue: It's not just about the cost of an oxygen refill.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)For those who need a clue: It's not just about the cost of an oxygen refill.
Indeed it is not.
haele
(12,582 posts)Who are using the fact that the ACA will cut into their "mark-up" profits and claiming that they'll be out of business when they'll still be making a significant profit - just not personally taking home as much - and these are from people who are pretty well off.
The ACA is not going to hurt their bottom line, nor would it hurt the amount of money they're going to have left over to make payroll or pay taxes, it just means that they might see up to a 2% drop in what they bring home after paying all the costs of their businesses.
Just like the medium-sized businesses that are complaining that they now have to provide for medical insurance coverage for their employees when before they were perfectly willing to let those same employees struggle to handle sometimes severe medical issues on their own and ultimately force the taxpayers, the local medical infrastructure, and other people that had insurance plans pay for their unwillingness to pay their fair share of medical costs everyone else in the community has to pay.
ACA certainly wasn't the best cure for the situation of out of control medical costs, service provision and the rampant corruption inherent when the profiteers self-regulate, but it's far better than what we had before, and will slowly get better as the bullshit gets worked out of it. People forget the double-digit rises in medical insurance and overall medical costs that were occurring between 2002 and 2007.
As it is, that poor old man in the story would still have "thrived" only as long as the various medical businesses could feast on the taxpayer subsidies to keep him alive. Now that government is attempting to control the vast sucking from the corporate ticks, it's only going to be more obvious what his worth was to those "caring" medical companies who had positioned themselves into the gatekeepers to medical care for immense profits and are pushing back to try and keep all that beautiful "free" taxpayer money they had been getting for over a decade.
And all those "bootstrap" type entrepreneurs whining about costs might want to rethink their business models if they are unable to maintain a fairly-compensated employee base to support their businesses. Either that or they should get off the socialist-boogieman bandwagon and push for single payer, taking health care out of the employee/employer relationship all together.
Paying an extra 2 - 4% in taxes to cover single payer is far less than what most people looking for health insurance pay just in the premiums and is easily cheaper than what premiums and deductible costs would be to pretty much all but the upper 2% of citizens. Health care is not something most people can choose not to participate in. Everyone is born, everyone grows up and gets older, and everyone dies.
While younger, healthy individuals might whine about the cost of Medicare/single payer while they're healthy, they will be happy as they start getting less "prime", have kids, or find themselves in a medical emergency that will eventually cost them hundreds of thousands more over their lifetime with the system pre-ACA
It's far cheaper paying the government to be the middleman and negotiate for fair health-care provision and prices through the tax system than paying for-profit businesses to play the middleman and refuse critical care because "it's too expensive" or there's not enough "return" to invest into, say, providing oxygen to a poor old man with COPD who is probably only going to get worse and more expensive. Easier to kill the old man off quickly by making it too expensive for him to continue to survive, if you're not going to be able to soak as much money from the government to make up for the costs of keeping him alive.
The government is not supposed to make a profit; at most, it's supposed to break even. Businesses are required by their shareholder contracts to make decisions that will result in the most profit they can amass.
And it's disgusting that those who are profiting off medical problems of people on fixed income are trying to shift the outrage over the costs of their own lazy greed, sycophantic advertising budgets, lobbyists and profit margins, and claim it's "because of the liberal agenda or the black man in the white house" that they are withholding the critical care they are getting all sorts of taxpayer subsidies and dollars to provide. They can still make profits, just not the monstrously huge double digit profits they are counting on to attract private investors.
Haele
gvstn
(2,805 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)They caught up in having to "file forms over the Internet" having Doctors who don't really understand why they don't know how to get better care and that they can't fill out forms and it's going to get worse.
Relative of mine noted that Social Security Offices have cut back hours and so it's hard to get there to have a "Person" sign you up if you are eligible. You sit in a waiting room and a Flat Screen tells you to "GO ONLINE ...WE MAKE IT EASY FOR YOU" and shows cheeful Seniors going online and getting screen shots to walk them through. In fact...it didn't work for my relative...and so they had to go to the SS Office Three Times..(parking lot was Filled) and finally they found a spot and waited an Hour...before they were called. The SS Rep asked "Why didn't you file online" and they said...we tried and had help from our Son but our submission didn't go through. SS Rep said...well let me try to walk you through this...
They filled out more forms and left hoping they were OKay...but the have to wait to see "if it all goes through."
They've cut back the hours for SS since last November...so this isn't Bush...it's Obama and BEFORE THE "Sequester!" How can this be that they cut back hours that SS offices are open and push people ONLINE who may not even have ACCESS to a COMPUTER?
It's truly Disgusting how those who paid in all their lives to SS..(all of Us) are being treated. And, to think of who those who HAVE NOTHING are being treated in other agencies are beyond what I would want to think about. They have to take time off jobs that they could be fired from if the Aid Office has cut back Hours and they have to find someone to drive them and then can't find a parking spot...so they lose time out of work...and get trashed because of NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN.
Anyway...I can't go on because it's all so incredibly Depressing to think we HAVE A TWO TERM DEMOCRAT ELECTED...and people are considered "less" in our Society than Wall Street Bankers and the Entitled Politically!
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)They closed a lot of offices in our area also. Shorter hours.
Longer waits for doctors, and only a very brief time with them after the long wait. My last office visit had a wait of almost an hour, then less than 5 minutes with the doctor.
I have heard a lot of people say things like you just said lately. It is getting obvious now that Medicare and Social Security are no longer respected as the safety nets for seniors.. They now consider them political.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)but WHO is fighting for those going on SS even earlier and earlier because of the Layoffs for those who wanted to work longer.
I started getting stuff from them in my late 30's and never signed up. I'm way older than that now...but, they don't target me for mailings anymore.
Why isn't AARP Fighting Harder against all this...Do you have friends who belong to them...and are they sharing anything?
unapatriciated
(5,390 posts)The person in the op is not the only one doing this. See post 55
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)There's an Ayn Rand atmosphere permeating our country now.