U.S. Budget - OBBB | Medicare Part D premiums set to rise

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 47K
  • Politics 
ZenMode said:
My understanding of the Medicaid changes is that you have to a) be working and b) if able, be actively trying to find work.

If true, what is the issue with that?
Click to expand...
Work requirements are an extreme paperwork burden -- one that has the effect and purpose of kicking millions off coverage. Republicans talk about cutting red tape for businesses, while simultaneously regulating the poor into oblivion with miles of red tape.

John Oliver explains the problem very well in this week's show:

 
Calheel said:
Work requirements are an extreme paperwork burden -- one that has the effect and purpose of kicking millions off coverage. Republicans talk about cutting red tape for businesses, while simultaneously regulating the poor into oblivion with miles of red tape.

John Oliver explains the problem very well in this week's show:
Click to expand...
If you are young, physically able and on the dole, yes, you need to be either working or actively looking for work and completing all necessary paperwork to stay on the dole. Tax payers aren't a non-profit charity.
 
ZenMode said:
If you are young, physically able and on the dole, yes, you need to be either working or actively looking for work and completing all necessary paperwork to stay on the dole. Tax payers aren't a non-profit charity.
Click to expand...
Please watch the John Oliver video. I started it at the relevant point. It is only about six minutes.

After you watch it, come back and report your thoughts and we can have a further discussion.
 
Calheel said:
Please watch the John Oliver video. I started it at the relevant point. It is only about six minutes.

After you watch it, come back and report your thoughts and we can have a further discussion.
Click to expand...
I watched it. The solution for old, non-tech savy people is not to remove ongoing requirements of eligibility.

The solution to too frequent verification requirements (and, yes, monthly might be too much for older people) is not to get rid of all requirements.

We can disagree on how much is the right amount, but surely you're aren't just saying "Once you're on, you're on for life", right?
 
Paine said:
You’re talking about Medicaid, right? Just so we’re clear, you think seeing a doctor when you’re broke is “the dole”?
Click to expand...
Basically, by definition, yes:

Meaning of on the dole in English
If you are on the dole, you are receiving money from the government because you are unemployed: Half of the town's residents were on the dole.

 


Massive claims he has enough votes to block passage but … we’ll see.
 
ZenMode said:
I watched it. The solution for old, non-tech savy people is not to remove ongoing requirements of eligibility.

The solution to too frequent verification requirements (and, yes, monthly might be too much for older people) is not to get rid of all requirements.

We can disagree on how much is the right amount, but surely you're aren't just saying "Once you're on, you're on for life", right?
Click to expand...
Do you agree that we should cut regulations for businesses to reduce the paperwork burden?
 
Paine said:
Cool, thanks for confirming.

Medicaid isn’t unemployment insurance. It’s health coverage. You don’t get a check, you get a doctor’s appointment. So unless you think a cancer screening is a form of income, calling it “the dole” is just lazy moralizing dressed up as fiscal concern.
Click to expand...


Paine said:
If you’re going to complain about taxpayer money, let’s talk about corporate tax breaks, not insulin for broke people.
Click to expand...
There are a lot of areas that government spending can be cut and revenue can be increased.

i'm not advocating get rid of all Medicaid or all corporate tax cuts or all subsidies. I'm saying we have to have some kind of ongoing eligibility requirements to stay on the dole receive taxpayer money. It can't just be "you're in the door, so you stay in for as long as you want". Yes, I think it should require some level of effort to continue to receive services/money at at taxpayer expense. It cannot be "you're in now, so you're in for life". Are there exceptions? Sure, but those people shouldn't be on Medicaid. They should be on some type of permanent disability.
 
Calheel said:
Do you agree that we should cut regulations for businesses to reduce the paperwork burden?
Click to expand...
I'm not a small business owner, and I didn't see any specifics in the video about how much paperwork was required, to give an opinion. In general, all processes should be constantly reviewed and revisited to improve efficiency while still ensuring that the system and tax payers aren't being taken advantage of by individuals or businesses. There should be ongoing eligibility checks. When appropriate, there should be employment or employment seeking requirements.

It shouldn't...can't.... be easy.
 
Medicaid, Medicare, ACA and a Public Health Option could be consolidated to one Premium Health Entity. With multiple tiers of coverage and a minimal HC coverage, a bit like auto insurance.coverage. Medicaid, Medicare, ACA would save by eliminating redundant administration costs and confusing coverage.

But that would require *thinking,* planning, and work. No chance Congress is up to it, especially the GPT cohort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top