The government has come up with a new way to count the numbers of poor people and seniors living in poverty. The formula they expect to use will effectively double the number of elderly people trying to make ends meet to be nearly one in five, which will produce a substantially higher head count.

So, doing some rough math here would give us figures that go from 13.2 percent to 15.8 percent. That’s a fairly significant jump, which means, in actual head counts, that the number of seniors living in poverty will go from roughly 39.8 million to about 47.4 million. Why are these numbers going up so drastically? They’re shooting up for pretty much one reason: the escalating costs of medical care. Yes, there are other factors, but the price tag on medical services is the largest.

Having more accurate results of the numbers in poverty won’t take over the “official” poverty rate. Instead, these new numbers will be published as a comparison of sorts for state officials and federal agencies. Well, that’s nice, but what precisely does that happen to accomplish?

The idea is to show the numbers of Americans living in poverty; to provide a more accurate picture of those over the age of 65 and facing a struggle to live. However, since the government is calling the new figures supplemental, they won’t make any difference in how federal dollars for the needy are handed out for things such as child care benefits, nutrition, housing and yes, health care. When you stop think that there are literally billions of bucks handed out based on the “official” poverty figures, imagine how much is “not” being handed out when the “new” numbers become a reality.

The biggest concern among the senior population of course is how this non-event will affect them financially and thus how it will affect their ability to afford decent health care. They definitely have a right to be concerned. If those numbers are ignored, and things go the way they usually do, the amount of money handed out will not address the “actual” need out there. Thus, rising Medicare costs mean more seniors living in poverty.

If the real new numbers were used, there would be more money handed out and, hopefully, more seniors able to afford Medicare – and therein lies the conundrum. If the new numbers are used, where does the extra money come from to hand out? The state of the union is in such an economic pickle right now, it’s a flight of fancy to think any more money will be tossed into the pot.

While it’s nice that the government wants to understand and get a grip on the real face of poverty, just knowing the numbers alone and not doing anything about it doesn’t do anyone much good. It certainly doesn’t help the 70-year-old retired postman who desperately needs home care, but can’t get it because his Medicare just doesn’t cover that, and he can’t afford a Medicare supplement.

And the other fly in the ointment? The traditional method of calculating those in poverty is based on a somewhat antiquated formula that uses what it cost in 1955 for an emergency food diet. Hello? 1955? Unfortunately, it also doesn’t take into consideration the skyrocketing cost of things like getting from point A to point B, differences in geographical living costs or – and here’s the biggie – out of control medical costs. There is no room in the formula to factor in government aid in the form of tax credits or food stamps.

Where is the government going with this? Good question. We can only wait and see and in the meantime, take care of our Medicare needs as best we can.

Article Directory : http://www.articlecube.com