If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Making $5,000 per year makes you ineligible for Medicaid in some states. Turns out that safety net is about as robust as a Kleenex   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 108
    More: Sad, Poverty in the United States, Kleenex, program designer, U.S. News, Medicaid  
•       •       •

1724 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Aug 2012 at 10:01 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



108 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-17 05:06:51 PM
Well, let's see...

Defraud the federal government b lying on your tax forms, take a vow of poverty, ask your boss for a $60,000 raise, or die. Which is it to be?
 
2012-08-17 05:06:54 PM
thepoliticalzealot.com
 
2012-08-17 05:08:27 PM

cretinbob: [thepoliticalzealot.com image 460x259]


Tax evasion it is, then!
 
2012-08-17 05:15:59 PM

cretinbob: [thepoliticalzealot.com image 460x259]


Gee, I wonder which political philosophy is behind said predicament?
 
2012-08-17 05:16:51 PM

gameshowhost: cretinbob: [thepoliticalzealot.com image 460x259]

Gee, I wonder which political philosophy is behind said predicament?


LOL I QUOTE YOU, SENSLESSLY

/just ignore that part of the comment. thx, everyone!
 
2012-08-17 05:20:51 PM
Better no one receive benefits than to give them to a single person who might not be as deserving
 
2012-08-17 05:59:08 PM

gameshowhost: gameshowhost: cretinbob: [thepoliticalzealot.com image 460x259]

Gee, I wonder which political philosophy is behind said predicament?

LOL I QUOTE YOU, SENSLESSLY

/just ignore that part of the comment. thx, everyone!


3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-17 06:01:18 PM
Republicans: forever proving government programs don't work by intentionally destroying them, then claiming government programs don't work.
 
2012-08-17 06:26:13 PM
This is so much of the underlying problem when it comes to kicking the federal monies habit for people. Someone with two kids currently on federal aide while looking for a job must find a job that provides insurance immediately and also pays enough to put food on the table. Getting a job at McDonalds which is usually the bootstrappy comment most GOPers give isn't practical knowing that you get neither insurance nor enough money to pay for living expenses. What you do get is kicked off healthcare. So even if a poor person wanted to bootstrap into McDonalds management there is still a huge gap in healthcare coverage for their children. The only practical option is to remain unemployed or lie on tax returns and I'm sure neither is attractive for most. The GOP is doing absolutely nothing to bolster the poor in the country or to help them climb the ladder to a different class. It's exactly why after three decades of trickle-down economics we have the 2nd highest level of poverty in the industrialized world at almost 25%.
 
2012-08-17 06:29:48 PM

xynix: This is so much of the underlying problem when it comes to kicking the federal monies habit for people. Someone with two kids currently on federal aide while looking for a job must find a job that provides insurance immediately and also pays enough to put food on the table. Getting a job at McDonalds which is usually the bootstrappy comment most GOPers give isn't practical knowing that you get neither insurance nor enough money to pay for living expenses. What you do get is kicked off healthcare. So even if a poor person wanted to bootstrap into McDonalds management there is still a huge gap in healthcare coverage for their children. The only practical option is to remain unemployed or lie on tax returns and I'm sure neither is attractive for most. The GOP is doing absolutely nothing to bolster the poor in the country or to help them climb the ladder to a different class. It's exactly why after three decades of trickle-down economics we have the 2nd highest level of poverty in the industrialized world at almost 25%.


At this point, that trickle would have to turn into a deluge to do any good
 
2012-08-17 07:21:07 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: gameshowhost: gameshowhost: cretinbob: [thepoliticalzealot.com image 460x259]

Gee, I wonder which political philosophy is behind said predicament?

LOL I QUOTE YOU, SENSLESSLY

/just ignore that part of the comment. thx, everyone!

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 600x528]


*kind of making a sadface*
 
2012-08-17 09:04:21 PM
"I'm not concerned about the very poor."

www.fishink.us
 
2012-08-17 09:24:45 PM
As bad as Congress is, I have more faith in the federal government than I have in the governments of the States. It seems that the smaller the governmental unit is, the easier it is for the petty, corrupt, and mean-spirited to overtake it. I'm glad to see power shift towards the feds and away from the States.

Why do we need States, anyway?
 
2012-08-17 09:44:25 PM
Thanks Perry.

Asshole.
 
2012-08-17 09:47:17 PM
I would like to point out that this also includes the disabled. If someone is seriously disabled they can receive Social Security Disability - which is only about $900 a month, sometimes more if the person has worked longer. Once approved for SSD - which can take years, they become eligible for Medicare part A at no cost. This covers hospital costs - some of them. They also become eligible for Medicare part B - which has a monthly co-pay of over a hundred dollars. Then they have to pay more for prescription coverage... not to mention co-pays. If they are lucky they will be able to find a doctor who takes Medicare. There are many costs not covered by Medicare that the disabled person has to pay out of pocket. The people are DISABLED, so chances are they will need more medical care and more prescriptions than the average person.

In some states they can receive help from the government to pay for all or part of the Medicare Part B co-pay and sometimes help with prescriptions. But things have changed as the economic downturn has cut off many benefits at the state level for the disabled. They are left with little to no options for care as pharmacies and doctors refuse to take their insurance because the amount they get reimbursed from the government is too low. Their health suffers and their disabilities become worse.

Social Security has a very stringent acceptance program for those who wish to apply. The "reward" of being accepted is a monthly stipend that places them in the lowest level of poverty and nearly non-existent healthcare. The federal government then expects the states to pick up the rest... like housing, transportation, food, etc. Section 8 housing is so overrun (with people that I won't talk about) that there is currently a three year waiting list in some areas. Transportation is often limited to regular buses - which is fine if the disabled person can get themselves to the bus stop. Food stamps are tricky with people receiving SSD as they can be disqualified because the disabled person does receive a little bit of money from the government. The threshold for the amount of food stamps varies from place to place. But even after the disabled person pays for their Medicare part B deduction, pharmacy plan deduction, co-pays for medications, payments for non-covered or OTC medications, payments for what the insurance doesn't cover... then there's utilities and the co-pay for the housing - if they are lucky enough to get it... Then everything from cleaning products and personal hygiene care... The food stamps are still often denied because of ass-backwards formulas that are based on the gross amount of income and not the income that is left over after required expenses.

The truly disabled in this country are treated horribly. We are supposed to take care of those in society who, by no fault of their own, are disabled. The system in place now is barely better than the executions the Nazi's used to do to eliminate the sick from society. In this country we barely give them anything, torturing them, and leaving them to often times die of neglect. This country has a moral imperative to clean up its act and care for those who really need it.
 
2012-08-17 10:04:48 PM
Christian nation, my ass.
 
2012-08-17 10:10:43 PM
Jesus Christ, GGracie...
 
2012-08-17 10:12:46 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: Christian nation, my ass.


America is only a "Christian nation" when it comes to subjugating women, gay people and non-Christians.
 
2012-08-17 10:15:16 PM
www.airfarceone.net
 
2012-08-17 10:19:05 PM

GAT_00: Republicans: forever proving government programs don't work by intentionally destroying them, then claiming government programs don't work.


*SMASH*

*SMASH SMASH SMASH SMASH SMASH*

See, I told you watches were useless!

/It's great that they hold major positions of power
 
2012-08-17 10:23:41 PM

GGracie: The people are DISABLED, so chances are they will need more medical care and more prescriptions than the average person.


But do they contribute to the GDP? If not, why do they deserve health care? Why do my taxes (which are THEFT) have to be used to pay for someone else's health care?
 
2012-08-17 10:24:07 PM

BarkingUnicorn: As bad as Congress is, I have more faith in the federal government than I have in the governments of the States. It seems that the smaller the governmental unit is, the easier it is for the petty, corrupt, and mean-spirited to overtake it. I'm glad to see power shift towards the feds and away from the States.

Why do we need States, anyway?


I would assert that the state level is the worst level to concentrate political power. The political system in the US is set up to allow states to "compete" with each other in the exploitative capitalist sense but not to enact any kind of significant defenses (tariffs, denial of reciprocity, etc) against said "competition". The state level of government is, in turn, far enough removed from the local level that there is no inherent sense of social responsibility from the vaunted "representatives" to the people of their state.
 
2012-08-17 10:28:18 PM
Convenient they left out the other conditions, monetary income isn't the only condition. Often times Medicaid is slanted to children and women over men. I know in Arizona being a single childless male essentially means no Medicaid, the same is probably similar in the other states mentioned. Blame it on the state policy of preferential treatment to certain segments of the population.
 
2012-08-17 10:28:44 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Better no one receive benefits than to give them to a single person who might not be as deserving


Better that tens of thousands of children should suffer (and maybe die) - unless the child isn't born yet. Because - sanctity of life and all. Of course, poor pregnant women also don't have medical coverage, and that can cause miscarriages. Of course, the Christian thing to do here is to charge those poor women with negligence if they miscarry.
 
2012-08-17 10:28:53 PM

born_yesterday: *SMASH* *SMASH SMASH SMASH SMASH SMASH* See, I told you watches were useless!


i45.tinypic.com
 
2012-08-17 10:33:34 PM
I can't help but notice damn near every one of those cited states are pinchpenny, bootstrappy red states deep on the federal dole themselves.
 
2012-08-17 10:38:30 PM

BarkingUnicorn: As bad as Congress is, I have more faith in the federal government than I have in the governments of the States. It seems that the smaller the governmental unit is, the easier it is for the petty, corrupt, and mean-spirited to overtake it. I'm glad to see power shift towards the feds and away from the States.


Very much this!

Might explain why the rightards want "states rights" so bad. Remember what it was like when some certain states declared themselves exempt from the Federal government?

blogs.e-rockford.com

/Oh, you know very damn well how much the republicans want to bring back slavery.
 
2012-08-17 10:38:39 PM
Shocking lack of information, browsing the requirements for Texas as an example:

Pregnant women and newborns with an income of up to 185 percent of the poverty line are eligible for full Medicaid coverage. Children aged 1 to 5 are eligible in families making up to 133 percent of the poverty line. Coverage for children aged 6 to 18 is limited to those at or below the poverty line. The groups together account for about two-thirds of Texas' full Medicaid beneficiaries, according to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.

Read more: Texas Medicaid Eligibility Requirements | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/info_7754576_texas-medicaid-eligibility-requiremen ts.html#ixzz23rTVzgFh


So yes, if you make very little and are a single childless male, you may not get Medicaid. I'm sure liberals will soon be calling for equal protection though, correct?
 
2012-08-17 10:39:03 PM

MyRandomName: Convenient they left out the other conditions, monetary income isn't the only condition. Often times Medicaid is slanted to children and women over men. I know in Arizona being a single childless male essentially means no Medicaid, the same is probably similar in the other states mentioned. Blame it on the state policy of preferential treatment to certain segments of the population.


Until last year's cutbacks, Arizona was one of only five States that covered childless adults with Medicaid.
 
2012-08-17 10:40:51 PM
How the hell is Pennsylvania on this list? Oh wait...our State Senate is a bunch of jerkoffs from the "T-Section," where we still have a huge KKK presence.
 
2012-08-17 10:42:34 PM

xynix: This is so much of the underlying problem when it comes to kicking the federal monies habit for people.


This bears repeating. Over, and over, and over, and over again.
 
2012-08-17 10:43:55 PM

MyRandomName: Shocking lack of information, browsing the requirements for Texas as an example:

Pregnant women and newborns with an income of up to 185 percent of the poverty line are eligible for full Medicaid coverage. Children aged 1 to 5 are eligible in families making up to 133 percent of the poverty line. Coverage for children aged 6 to 18 is limited to those at or below the poverty line. The groups together account for about two-thirds of Texas' full Medicaid beneficiaries, according to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.

Read more: Texas Medicaid Eligibility Requirements | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/info_7754576_texas-medicaid-eligibility-requiremen ts.html#ixzz23rTVzgFh


So yes, if you make very little and are a single childless male, you may not get Medicaid. I'm sure liberals will soon be calling for equal protection though, correct?


So, you're saying we should increase Medicaid spending so childless males can get help too? You're gonna get kicked out of the conservative clubhouse.
 
2012-08-17 10:44:27 PM

that bosnian sniper: I can't help but notice damn near every one of those cited states are pinchpenny, bootstrappy red states deep on the federal dole themselves.


And they'll move the goalpost as far as they need to in order to get the image they're looking for.

So if it means killing off a few thousand because they can't afford medical help then so be it. It's how America should work, according to them.
 
2012-08-17 10:44:44 PM

GGracie: The truly disabled in this country are treated horribly. We are supposed to take care of those in society who, by no fault of their own, are disabled.


The only downside to your comment is that it can not be inscribed upon a brass plaque to be hung in the office of every elected official.
 
2012-08-17 10:44:52 PM
Due to SCHIP and non-SCHIP programs on the state level, children are thankfully covered by much less onerous restrictions than are adults.

The adults in a 3 member family? If they are employed, they cannot make more than $6,8xx annually in my state, or they are ineligible for Medicaid. What do they do then? They seek out basic healthcare at free clinics or the ER. The ER bills are then passed on to the rest of us, but not before the medical debt destroys the remaining credit the parents have. Just another way the poor are screwed and kept poor.

Wonderful system we have here.

/subby
 
2012-08-17 10:46:21 PM

MyRandomName: . I'm sure liberals will soon be calling for equal protection though, correct?


If liberals had their way Medicaid would be far more comprehensive and far easier to get.
 
2012-08-17 10:46:37 PM

MyRandomName: So yes, if you make very little and are a single childless male, you may not get Medicaid. I'm sure liberals will soon be calling for equal protection though, correct?


If you look at the Kaiser foundation's actual data, the numbers quoted in the article are for families of three with one wage-earner.
 
2012-08-17 10:47:45 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: BarkingUnicorn: As bad as Congress is, I have more faith in the federal government than I have in the governments of the States. It seems that the smaller the governmental unit is, the easier it is for the petty, corrupt, and mean-spirited to overtake it. I'm glad to see power shift towards the feds and away from the States.

Why do we need States, anyway?

I would assert that the state level is the worst level to concentrate political power. The political system in the US is set up to allow states to "compete" with each other in the exploitative capitalist sense but not to enact any kind of significant defenses (tariffs, denial of reciprocity, etc) against said "competition". The state level of government is, in turn, far enough removed from the local level that there is no inherent sense of social responsibility from the vaunted "representatives" to the people of their state.


Well said.
 
2012-08-17 10:48:47 PM
CSS:

I have a client. 22 year old woman with severe disabilities recently diagnosed with a brain tumor. Due to a quirk of medicaid/medicare/social security/DAC laws, she isn't eligible to get any kind of public health care for 2 years. She'll be dead by then. The only hospital that can help her won't take charity care. Luckily I JUST managed to wrangle her into her mom's private health care plan so she can get the radiation she needs... but had it been LITERALLY 4 days later, she would not have been eligible for this coverage. Nothing. So she'll get treatment, and her mom will probably pay over $8,000+ in co-pays this year alone.

And Romney thinks the poor are taken care of?

F*ck you, Romney. F*ck you, and everyone who would have let this girl die.
 
2012-08-17 10:49:00 PM

BarkingUnicorn: As bad as Congress is, I have more faith in the federal government than I have in the governments of the States. It seems that the smaller the governmental unit is, the easier it is for the petty, corrupt, and mean-spirited to overtake it. I'm glad to see power shift towards the feds and away from the States.

Why do we need States, anyway?


We don't. Not since the Civil War or earlier. Frankly, I think the US needs a new Constitution... but that's just me...
 
2012-08-17 10:52:20 PM

AliceBToklasLives: GGracie: The people are DISABLED, so chances are they will need more medical care and more prescriptions than the average person.

But do they contribute to the GDP? If not, why do they deserve health care? Why do my taxes (which are THEFT) have to be used to pay for someone else's health care?


Just in case you're not trolling, I'll give you your answer.

BECAUSE ON DAY YOU TOO WILL BE VULNERABLE, AND ON THAT DAY, I AM DEAD CERTAIN YOU WILL PRAY THAT SOMEONE OUT THERE IS PAYING TAXES TO SAVE YOUR SELFISH ASS FROM THE DUMPSTER!
 
2012-08-17 10:58:30 PM

fsbilly: We don't. Not since the Civil War or earlier. Frankly, I think the US needs a new Constitution... but that's just me...


States work as a decent safeguard against the insurrection of the masses towards the federal government. When riots break out, it's local people damaging local institutions, being put down by local officials. Any bad blood and resentment that results from said riot will be directed locally. The federal government is either a non-party or comes in to save the day. By contrast, when some students decide to protest for higher wages in China, they are put down by the national party. This ends up uniting all protest against the national state itself, which as history has shown, will eventually end up with the downfall of said federal government.
 
2012-08-17 10:58:32 PM

fsbilly: We don't. Not since the Civil War or earlier. Frankly, I think the US needs a new Constitution... but that's just me...


As long as we're stuck with Jesus freaks and the Greed is Good capitalists, any system of government we have is going to get ruined by them.
I do think that the Congress, Senate, and even the Supreme Court should have a much larger amount of members to properly represent our population, but the two afforementioned groups are going to fark it up for Jesus and profit.
 
2012-08-17 11:00:03 PM

fsbilly: BarkingUnicorn: As bad as Congress is, I have more faith in the federal government than I have in the governments of the States. It seems that the smaller the governmental unit is, the easier it is for the petty, corrupt, and mean-spirited to overtake it. I'm glad to see power shift towards the feds and away from the States.

Why do we need States, anyway?

We don't. Not since the Civil War or earlier. Frankly, I think the US needs a new Constitution... but that's just me...


Well, we'd need a new name for this country if we eliminated the States.
 
2012-08-17 11:04:11 PM

I live in Georgia.

In Georgia, many people have an annual income of $0 and are still INELIGIBLE for Medicaid.

Seriously.

In Georgia, not only must your income be severely limited, you must ALSO satisfy an additional requirement, such as...

* You're pregnant

* You're a child

* You're 65+

* You're legally blind

* You're legally disabled

* You require a nursing home
If you're unemployed, have no savings, no income, no prospects, yet you're not old, blind, a pregnant woman or a child YOU ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICAID IN GEORGIA.

If you think being poor automatically qualifies you for Medicaid, you're wrong...and, probably an idiot.
 
2012-08-17 11:06:48 PM

BarkingUnicorn: Well, we'd need a new name for this country if we eliminated the States.


Why?

The name of the country is a proper title...it's not an adjectival description.
 
2012-08-17 11:10:23 PM

eraser8: Why?

The name of the country is a proper title...it's not an adjectival description.


M'urrrrka just sounds better.
 
2012-08-17 11:12:42 PM

AliceBToklasLives: GGracie: The people are DISABLED, so chances are they will need more medical care and more prescriptions than the average person.

But do they contribute to the GDP? If not, why do they deserve health care? Why do my taxes (which are THEFT) have to be used to pay for someone else's health care?


I know you are either a troll or a goddamn ignorant teatard but nonetheless, why do you hate civilized society?

why do you hate America? Are you not willing to pay for this great nation? I suppose then, you are a parasite and a leech, wanting everyone else to pay while you reap the rewards.

Also aren't we the United States of America? not the Some of us United so we can fark over the least among us States of america
 
2012-08-17 11:14:35 PM

eraser8: I live in Georgia.

In Georgia, many people have an annual income of $0 and are still INELIGIBLE for Medicaid.

Seriously.

In Georgia, not only must your income be severely limited, you must ALSO satisfy an additional requirement, such as...* You're pregnant

* You're a child

* You're 65+

* You're legally blind

* You're legally disabled

* You require a nursing homeIf you're unemployed, have no savings, no income, no prospects, yet you're not old, blind, a pregnant woman or a child YOU ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICAID IN GEORGIA.

If you think being poor automatically qualifies you for Medicaid, you're wrong...and, probably an idiot.


Or not a Georgian.
 
2012-08-17 11:16:17 PM

there their theyre: AliceBToklasLives: GGracie: The people are DISABLED, so chances are they will need more medical care and more prescriptions than the average person.

But do they contribute to the GDP? If not, why do they deserve health care? Why do my taxes (which are THEFT) have to be used to pay for someone else's health care?

I know you are either a troll or a goddamn ignorant teatard but nonetheless, why do you hate civilized society?

why do you hate America? Are you not willing to pay for this great nation? I suppose then, you are a parasite and a leech, wanting everyone else to pay while you reap the rewards.

Also aren't we the United States of America? not the Some of us United so we can fark over the least among us States of america


Get some pliers and take that out of your lip. :-)
 
Displayed 50 of 108 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report