Some GOP states want to abandon Medicaid expansion

[Jeffrey]

I wish california would do that... opt out of the medicad expansion... we cannot afford it... too many ppl scamming the system IMO.


http://www.sacbee.com/2012/06/29/459...o-abandon.html

[meltzerboy]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

I wish california would do that... opt out of the medicad expansion... we cannot afford it... too many ppl scamming the system IMO.


http://www.sacbee.com/2012/06/29/459...br /> on.html

Yes, the scammers make it bad for those who really need Medicaid. But why stop there? Let's get rid of all entitlements: Medicare, Social Security, student loans, SSI, Veterans benefits, regardless of who is deserving and who is not. The government should play no role in helping people, except in time of war. That's essentially the GOP position, to be sure under the guise of "fixing" these programs, isn't it? Why not privatize everything, with no government restrictions or regulations, since this is the party of free enterprise and free trade? Big business unfettered means prosperity for all. Capitalism at its best and a chicken in every pot!

BTW, Chief Justice Roberts voted in favor of Medicaid expansion, whereas Justices Breyer and Kagan were opposed. I find this odd.

[mary bobo]

Originally Posted by meltzerboy

Yes, the scammers make it bad for those who really need Medicaid. But why stop there? Let's get rid of all entitlements: Medicare, Social Security, student loans, SSI, Veterans benefits, regardless of who is deserving and who is not. The government should play no role in helping people, except in time of war. That's essentially the GOP position, to be sure under the guise of "fixing" these programs, isn't it? Why not privatize everything, with no government restrictions or regulations, since this is the party of free enterprise and free trade? Big business unfettered means prosperity for all. Capitalism at its best and a chicken in every pot!

BTW, Chief Justice Roberts voted in favor of Medicaid expansion, whereas Justices Breyer and Kagan were opposed. I find this odd.

Once again, a liberal misrepresenting the GOP position on entitlements. Given the financial situation the country finds itself in, what is your solution to the continuation of the welfare programs that are now in place? Obviously we cannot continue on the current path. Greece, anyone?

[mary bobo]

Originally Posted by ellipsis2

You were in the health care field, what do you suggest?

I am not wise enough to be able to craft an entire program, however if I were doing it, I would have a bipartisan panel with health care professionals on it to help solve the problem. The current plan was written by lawmakers, actually there surrogates, who have no training in the field of medicine. Firstly, I would have a program that would help those who truly cannot afford insurance for themselves. This is a small number as compared to the entire population of the country. Then I would put people in charge of their own health care by allowing buying insurance across state lines thus being able to bargain with the insurance companies. There could be county or city groups formed that could bargain for the group as a whole. This way people could get the kind of insurance that best suits his/her family. Tort reform needs to be addressed. Making the suer pay costs if it fails would be a start. The "jury" should have people on it that understand medicine and not sympathetic people who think deep pockets should pay for everything. We have a bad case of sueitis in this country and not every part of medicine assures a black and white outcome.

This is just a start. I am sure improvements could be made if our "esteemed" Congress wanted to do so. Right now there is no way this country can pay for what has been promised and in the long run, those who suffer most are the patients.

[meltzerboy]

Originally Posted by mary bobo

I am not wise enough to be able to craft an entire program, however if I were doing it, I would have a bipartisan panel with health care professionals on it to help solve the problem. The current plan was written by lawmakers, actually there surrogates, who have no training in the field of medicine. Firstly, I would have a program that would help those who truly cannot afford insurance for themselves. This is a small number as compared to the entire population of the country. Then I would put people in charge of their own health care by allowing buying insurance across state lines thus being able to bargain with the insurance companies. There could be county or city groups formed that could bargain for the group as a whole. This way people could get the kind of insurance that best suits his/her family. Tort reform needs to be addressed. Making the suer pay costs if it fails would be a start. The "jury" should have people on it that understand medicine and not sympathetic people who think deep pockets should pay for everything. We have a bad case of sueitis in this country and not every part of medicine assures a black and white outcome.

This is just a start. I am sure improvements could be made if our "esteemed" Congress wanted to do so. Right now there is no way this country can pay for what has been promised and in the long run, those who suffer most are the patients.

How about getting the for-profit insurance companies out of the health care business altogether since they are the ones who are mainly responsible for driving up the costs of health coverage, for example by means of providing the incentive for doctors to perform unnecessary tests? The single-payer system, so vilified by many conservatives, is the way to do this, perhaps the only way. This is what Hillary Clinton advocated during the 2008 primary. Obamacare does not address the basic problem of the insurance companies.

Mary, I'm not so sure that most people in the country can afford to buy their own insurance, contrary to what you state, although I don't have hard statistics on this. I would imagine most of the working poor, as well as a large percentage of the middle class, CANNOT afford the high insurance costs.

[Elizabeth502]

Mary, I just pasted your reply into the Fix Healthcare thread over in social justice, because I had inadvertently started a similar thread that is too duplicative. I'm now trying to get them merged.

meltzerboy, here's the problem with Medicaid in CA. It is so huge (and promises to be more huge now with federal subsidies coming into play) that CA is destined to be a medical crisis point in the near future, due to unavailable institutions and personnel to handle that. So either patient care will be compromised, or care will be rationed, meaning many not on medicaid will be affected as well. That doesn't sound like an enlightened solution to healthcare.

I'm on a different computer right now, which is not working well, but there's a headline about this if you go to kqed.org and find the News section.

[meltzerboy]

Originally Posted by mary bobo

Once again, a liberal misrepresenting the GOP position on entitlements. Given the financial situation the country finds itself in, what is your solution to the continuation of the welfare programs that are now in place? Obviously we cannot continue on the current path. Greece, anyone?

You're right: we cannot continue on the current path, which will eventually lead to financial ruin. I don't have the magic-bullet solution, but I know it is NOT abandoning the needs of the poor and middle class. I agree with Obama that growth with respect to infrastructure, education, energy, and technological and scientific research and development is a start, and that an austerity program which shrinks the economy is not the answer.

[meltzerboy]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth502

Mary, I just pasted your reply into the Fix Healthcare thread over in social justice, because I had inadvertently started a similar thread that is too duplicative. I'm now trying to get them merged.

meltzerboy, here's the problem with Medicaid in CA. It is so huge (and promises to be more huge now with federal subsidies coming into play) that CA is destined to be a medical crisis point in the near future, due to unavailable institutions and personnel to handle that. So either patient care will be compromised, or care will be rationed, meaning many not on medicaid will be affected as well. That doesn't sound like an enlightened solution to healthcare.

I'm on a different computer right now, which is not working well, but there's a headline about this if you go to kqed.org and find the News section.

Thank you for the link, Elizabeth. I agree that we have a medical crisis, but the solution is less clear.

[mary bobo]

Originally Posted by meltzerboy

You're right: we cannot continue on the current path, which will eventually lead to financial ruin. I don't have the magic-bullet solution, but I know it is NOT abandoning the needs of the poor and middle class. I agree with Obama that growth with respect to infrastructure, education, energy, and technological and scientific research and development is a start, and that an austerity program which shrinks the economy is not the answer.

I agree with Obama that all of those things need to grow but not with government money. The budget can't afford it. We have had a dose of how he wants the country to grow with the failed stimulus plan. Did not work. We need to make this country more friendly to business so that businesses will grow and hire more people. We cannot tax or spend our way out of our situation now. We need to grow out of it. And I don't think I have even hinted at abandoning the needs of the poor or middle class.

[Jeffrey]

No it didn't... not even close... it'd been better off if they gave every citizen $1million IMO.

Originally Posted by ellipsis2

Actually, the stimulus plan did work. Too bad they didn't go big, though.