Should the US expand Medicaid to 400% of the Federal Poverty Level

  • Thread starter Thread starter RCIAGraduate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Augustinian said:
Maybe. The tax cuts that were passed are really growing the economy and increasing the base which can be taxed. If someone’s income rises, they pay more taxes, and if they are suddenly working, they may no longer be in need of food stamps or EBT cards, cutting government expenses. Under President Trump, the number of food stamp recipients has plummeted.
Click to expand...
Except that we know from experience that big tax cuts are never paid for by growth in the economy. According to the Congressional Budget Office, after the recent tax cuts, deficits (including interest) are going to run about $1.9 trillion per year by 2020.
 
Last edited:
Thorolfr said:
As far as I know, Medicaid is a government run health care program that is paid for by both the Federal Government and the states. But gazelam said that he was against government involvement in health care.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, although that’s not my position. I am against massive expansion to people making 6 figures like the OP suggested. And I wanted to point out there isn’t much need for massive new programs, maybe a little tweaking at best- but that’s not what’s being called for by Sanders and Cortez
 
Also, there are some states that have not expanded under the ACA which don’t allow adults who aren’t disabled to use Medicaid. But there are a lot of chronic medical conditions that would still be much too expensive for someone to pay for themselves and they might not have a job which includes good medical insurance or perhaps they are self employed.
 
But we still have millions who go without coverage (and this doesn’t include those on catastrophic plans who cannot afford out-of-pocket expenses). Do some people refuse to buy qualify insurance even though they are well within their means of affording it? Possibly. But what about the possibility about those with limited discretionary income, those who might have to choose insurance for rent, or insurance for groceries?

That said, perhaps a targeted plan could work better, for me it just seems like people fall through the gaps in the current systems like a moderate-income person who struggles to make rent but can’t qualify for Medicaid. Countries with universal or single-payer systems seem to remove anxiety and worry for their peoples. Theoretically, if they can do it, why can’t the US follow suit?
 
Last edited:
$5000/mth isn’t necessarily that large of a number, depending what number of people we’re talking about splitting the expense among. There are also things like go-fund-me, which can be an extension of the benevolent friends/family. You also cant look at medical expenses as they are and assume that they would be the same if everything else changed. One of the reasons medical prices are so high ia the very fact that they are covered through 3rd party agencies(which is necessary because they’re so high - ad infinitum). Remove the rug under this system, and it’s not unlikely, over time, that said $5000 bill would be slashed to $2000 or $3000 or less through simple market forces.
 
Key word being “seem to”. There’s still a lot of anxiety associated with excessive waits in Canada resulting from socialist-induced shortages.
 
‘The problem with Socialism is eventually you run out of other people’s money.’
 
No. The federal government cannot currently cover its existing commitments to Meciaid or Medicare. Attempting to expand it in such a manner would constitute gross negligence.
 
Last edited:
Bingo!! And where do they end up when they get tired of waiting? The Cleveland Clinic!
 
boldlygo said:
Bingo!! And where do they end up when they get tired of waiting? The Cleveland Clinic!
Click to expand...
That relates another problem with socialized medicine schemes.

If we institute the program, what patients get to see the quality physicians at the Cleveland Clinic or other top institution? And who gets shuttled off to the mediocre hospitals?

If I am in need of a competent physician, will I even be allowed to contract with Johns Hopkins or Cleveland Clinic as a self-pay under a socialized medicine scheme?
 
Well, if you don’t like paying Federal income tax, you can always move to Puerto Rico. Just sayin’
 
IMO they would have a better chance if they wouldn’t keep raiding these funds so they could build more nuclear arsenals.
 
boldlygo said:
We have the finest healthcare in the world here. Why else would healthcare professionals from around the world come here to practice? Why would you want to destroy this by putting the incompetent federal government in charge??!!
Click to expand...
The role of the government isn’t to decide who should have a surgery nor the performance of the surgery itself, unfortunately we have insurance companies and bean counters coming between doctor and patients deciding that for us. Government has had to become involved in many cases so persons cannot be denied based on pre-existing conditions, or in the cases where catastrophic care and life saving measures would have been deemed too costly by middle men.
Health care is wonderful, but useless policies being sold to unassuming recipients and the greed of middle men making it inaccessible is an entirely different animal. It requires regulation, or ought to in many cases. No one with health care should have to set up a go-fund-me page for health care costs in the case of a young mother of 3 with newly diagnosed breast cancer. (true story)
Government has a role in health care not proactively, but reactively. Reaction to injustice.
 
Last edited:
Do you know how much 400% of the poverty level is? It’s over $100,000 for a family of four.
 
Socrates92 said:
$5000/mth isn’t necessarily that large of a number, depending what number of people we’re talking about splitting the expense among. There are also things like go-fund-me, which can be an extension of the benevolent friends/family.
Click to expand...
The fact is, almost no one likes to part with a lot of their money, even for family and friends. Maybe Catholics are a lot different from everyone else, but even in most churches I’ve been in, I don’t think that most people would volunteer to pay a significant amount of their monthly income to help someone in the church who needs to pay expensive medical bills, especially not an open-ended commitment for a chronic medical condition.

And for someone to rely on charity for their medical care, especially for an expensive and chronic medical condition, would be extremely stressful.

And I can just see someone needing an operation right away and having to wait for go-fund-me to get the money they need. And what hospital is going to do some expensive surgery on the promise that they’ll get their money after all the contributions to go-fund-me come in?

And if there were quite a few people who needed help from their family and neighbors, there would soon be a case of donor fatigue.
 
Last edited:
Which of comparable systems service 400 million people? The VA is a model people seek to emulate, and it is terrible. As a veteran, I know. I avoid it like the plague.
 
RCIAGraduate said:
But we still have millions who go without coverage
Click to expand...
When I was a young man, I had no coverage at all. Didn’t need it, I saw a doctor maybe twice between 20 and 35, except for employment physicals.

If someone doesn’t actually need coverage, it isn’t a problem if they don’t have it.
 
I’m waiting for abortion and euthanasia to be off the table before I consider using taxes in this way.
If you reworded the proposal to address basic preventative care: prenatal vitamins, or basic (and non-fetal tissue involved ) immunizations I might vote differently on a provision by provision basis.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top