Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting question. What specifically is wrong with the individual States determining how best to serve their populace, based on prioritizing health issues?
Where in a particular state like #$%^@!, health problem (a) might be addressed because it is more of a problem, but health problem (b) is not prioritized because it is less an issue. A different set of priorities could be set in %)+&^!@. And so on and so forth.
We see lots of threads and posts on the C-D forums about different regions being fatter, slimmer, healthier, sicker, so why not let those regions - states - deal with their issues in the way they see best.
Interesting question. What specifically is wrong with the individual States determining how best to serve their populace, based on prioritizing health issues?
Where in a particular state like #$%^@!, health problem (a) might be addressed because it is more of a problem, but health problem (b) is not prioritized because it is less an issue. A different set of priorities could be set in %)+&^!@. And so on and so forth.
We see lots of threads and posts on the C-D forums about different regions being fatter, slimmer, healthier, sicker, so why not let those regions - states - deal with their issues in the way they see best.
Indeed. Quiet as a church mouse. Awaiting guidance on how to demagogue. Does make it hard to do the 'anti-states rights dance' when so many blue states love them some states and cities rights when it comes to stop illegal immigration, immigration control and immigration system reform.
When you say "state medicaids" are you referring to Medicaid coverage in individual states?
If so, that's an easy answer. Because many states--all of them red, I might add--have refused to expand Medicaid coverage to cover their large populations of uninsured people, and they have done so for purely ideological reasons.
"Nationally, more than two and a half million poor uninsured adults fall into the “coverage gap” that results from state decisions not to expand Medicaid, meaning their income is above current Medicaid eligibility but below the lower limit for Marketplace premium tax credits. These individuals would have been newly-eligible for Medicaid had their state chosen to expand coverage."
When you say "state medicaids" are you referring to Medicaid coverage in individual states?
If so, that's an easy answer. Because many states--all of them red, I might add--have refused to expand Medicaid coverage to cover their large populations of uninsured people, and they have done so for purely ideological reasons.
"Nationally, more than two and a half million poor uninsured adults fall into the “coverage gap” that results from state decisions not to expand Medicaid, meaning their income is above current Medicaid eligibility but below the lower limit for Marketplace premium tax credits. These individuals would have been newly-eligible for Medicaid had their state chosen to expand coverage."
That AND they are taking like how many millions out of Medicaid? The states can't make that up. It doesn't impact me at this time because I have employer insurance. Those laid off coal miners though . . . .
When you say "state medicaids" are you referring to Medicaid coverage in individual states?
If so, that's an easy answer. Because many states--all of them red, I might add--have refused to expand Medicaid coverage to cover their large populations of uninsured people, and they have done so for purely ideological reasons.
"Nationally, more than two and a half million poor uninsured adults fall into the “coverage gap” that results from state decisions not to expand Medicaid, meaning their income is above current Medicaid eligibility but below the lower limit for Marketplace premium tax credits. These individuals would have been newly-eligible for Medicaid had their state chosen to expand coverage."
so.....everything you said, what makes you think that a federal government solution would be better????
ACA is way to expensive as it is as far as premiums?
And
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14
When you say "state medicaids" are you referring to Medicaid coverage in individual states?
If so, that's an easy answer. Because many states--all of them red, I might add--have refused to expand Medicaid coverage to cover their large populations of uninsured people, and they have done so for purely ideological reasons.
such as?
Quote:
"Nationally, more than two and a half million poor uninsured adults fall into the “coverage gap” that results from state decisions not to expand Medicaid, meaning their income is above current Medicaid eligibility but below the lower limit for Marketplace premium tax credits. These individuals would have been newly-eligible for Medicaid had their state chosen to expand coverage."
In Alabama, you get no Medicaid if you dont have a child. And even with children, if you earn more than $2000 a year, you dont get Medicaid.
States can simply chase sick and poor people out of their state if we leave it up to the states. As long as there is no ban on red state refugees with expensive medical conditions flooding blue states, it cant work.
The states are not as powerful as you think they are. They dont have the power that a federal government has to enact tariffs, immigration rules and other measures that can make this work.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
