Again, it doesn’t matter whether you find the argument about compelling.
If care cannot be provided profitably, it won’t be provided at all. That is reality. Somehow, the care must be paid for.
Those who need care are not better off if these facilities close.
The businesses are hardly profitable. For every dollar they get from housing a resident, they get just above half a penny of profit.
As I showed above, you can take the entire profit and put it into hiring more staff and it won’t actually make a difference. They either need to raise prices, cut costs elsewhere (maybe administration? I’m not familiar enough to know), or pay people less.
That’s what the numbers say.
We get it, you don’t like nursing homes.
You don’t seem to be engaging with the substance of the matter, so I’ll leave it here.
And that is a valid opinion. Unfortunately what do you do with all these people if the homes close because they can’t afford staff?
The intent of the bill is to prevent neglect in nursing homes - that is a worthy and important goal. The mandate doesn’t actually help make that happen.
It doesn’t provide funding the care providers to increase staff, it doesn’t add incentives for individuals to get certified and help address the personnel shortage, it doesn’t put a cap on administrative costs for care facilities, it doesn’t actually DO anything to help solve the problem.
Good mandates also provide an avenue to meet them.
That is an insanely small margin, and directly contradicts your claim that they can staff properly.
Let’s take the entire profit for the industry and hire nurses. Let’s say reach nurse costs $80K ( $60K salary, $20K for taxes/insurance/other benefits).
That pays for 9600 more nurses. Which, given the nursing requirements in the bill (3.48 hours per day per resident), only covers staffing for 22K residents… a rounding error to the more than 1.2 million nursing home residents in the country.
There are ~15K nursing homes in the US, each of them getting 0.6 more nurses doesn’t help anything.
The $94/hr isn’t a salary, it’s the cost to the business. Employees generally cost a business 1.3-1.5X their salary - since insurance, payroll taxes, PTO, etc. all also need to be paid for.
Again this is not considering any other cost for the facility: utilities, food, other staff, medical equipment, maintenance, insurance, rent…
3.5 hours of nurse care per resident per day (from the bill).
Resident pays $120K per year to stay at the facility.
There are 365*3.5 hours in a year they need nursing care = 1277 hours of nursing care per year per client.
$120K per year / 1277 hours per year = $94/ hr maximum cost for each nurse - assuming there are no other expenses for the facility.
Must have mistyped to get $95, but that is the math.
$120K per year per resident isn’t that much revenue to cover 24 hour availability of care, food, lease, etc.
I’m not saying it is unworkable, but with the requirement for 3.5 hours of nurse care or resident per day, that means the maximum total cost of a Nurse is $95 per hour, or about $190K.
That really isn’t much - typically employees cost a business twice their base salary. So the nurses can be paid $100K per year while leaving almost $0 for any other expenses…
One nitpick, Jesus was almost certainly a real figure. There are many records indicating someone with that name was in the area at the time, and that they were executed by crucifixion.
The religious stuff, obviously no way to prove. But as a person, the historical consensus is they existed.
The law doesn’t matter, it doesn’t enforce itself.
The judges wanted it lowered for reasons, and so they lowered it.
The entire system is a lot more about people than most want to admit. The magic words on a page somewhere only exist to serve those in power, never to force them to do something they don’t want to do.
Victoria 3 was just boring - I say this as a huge fan of Victoria 2.
I played a few weeks after launch, and - for every one of the 4 countries I tried (Russia, Japan, Denmark, Spain), simply building all the things everywhere and ignoring money made everything trivial.
The economic simulation was super barebones, the entire thing could be bootstrapped just by building. An entire population of illiterate farmers would become master architects overnight and send GDP to the double digit billions in a few decades.
Windshields have been laminated for decades. Side windows were tempered glass for decades, and since 2020 are mandated to be laminated glass.
Romney was wrong then and he is wrong now.
The greatest threat is and was China. Russia does not have the means to directly compete with the United States.
The border is already closed to illegal travel, that’s why such travel is illegal.
The border is not impenetrable - it is over a thousand miles of mostly difficult terrain - and enforcing entry requirements is difficult for those reasons.
The single most effective way to reduce illegal immigration is to punish businesses for employing illegal immigrants. As with everything else, as long as a market exists then there will be an economic incentive to break the law. This is true for drugs, prostitution, Russian oil, etc.
The federal government essentially enables the employment of migrants because many industries, particularly food harvesting and processing, could not operate without this labor. The consequence of the choice to not punish these companies is more migrants seeking the same economic opportunity.
Fix the problem at that end and illegal border crossings will drop dramatically.
That would give politicians another reason to raise the retirement age, in order to stay in power.