The law was written by the people who use it to exploit the elderly. This is just another case of endemic US corruption that sits behind a polite facade.

> This is just another case of endemic US corruption that sits behind a polite facade.

Everything that happened in that case was a function of state, not federal, law.

US government is in no way limited to the federal government. State and local governments tend to be more corrupt not less.

Gerrymandering + loss of local news coverage = incredible levels of corruption get baked into the system.

> State and local governments tend to be more corrupt not less.

That's true, but the point is that a retiree can choose where they retire to within the United States. Informing oneself about the legal risks associated with guardianship abuse in a given jurisdiction seems every bit as worthwhile as a state's tax laws or weather, topics which retirees certainly tend to take an interest in.

> Gerrymandering + loss of local news coverage = incredible levels of corruption get baked into the system.

Dammit, we've only got an inch of topsoil left!

I really don't understand what you're saying - legalised theft is OK because people can choose to retire in a different state?

I cannot imagine how you got that out of my comment. I think people ought to educate themselves about the laws and customs of their state and avoid the places where this stuff takes place like the plague. Or, failing that, get a really good lawyer.

The federal government tends to be corrupt in ways less "shallow" and outrageous, but on a much more enormous breadth and scale.