Is Medicaid basically going away if BBB is approved by Senate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About half the people on medicare and medicaid are MAGA. Leopards eating faces and all.

Perfect. Maybe they will vote differently in the future.

No they won’t. Look at West Virginia. There will never be a Touch Stove moment.

Okay, well so it is then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably. It’s hard to imagine that they will cut services for children— who really can’t go to work to prove their value, at least as things stand now; implement work requirements for most adults; yet maintain nursing home payments for seniors as part of Medicaid. I assume these people, um, have a plan for that, since many seniors not in nursing homes are being cared for by family members — who have to leave their jobs and their employer provided health plans, to go on Medicaid in order to provide eldercare. All of this is so the wealthy can have tax breaks — financed by cutting health care for kids, the elderly,and those who care for them.

So many adults who are on Medicaid are either providing childcare, eldercare, or both, or have lower paying jobs where their limited pay and often limited hours qualify them for Medicaid, SNAP, and other benefits, while the companies like Walmart that employ them get tax breaks funded by working people.

Elder care is a paid job, even if provided by a family member for eligible seniors. I would think this should count for job hours minimum qualification. Childcare? It’s confusing, because technically single moms would have to work unless they are supported by ex-husband or parents , and SAHMs would be assumed to get healthcare through their husbands. I think we likely don’t know what it takes to qualify for Medicaid now and it’s difficult to imagine what happens later

Wrong, caring for family members doesn’t count as work. There are currently rare instances in some states where family members can apply to be carers to a very low income parent -but it’s a Medicaid funded program and will disappear.
What we have, it works. Taking it away will not work. This isn’t the answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They want Medicaid returned to its original intent: low-income elderly, catastrophically ill adults, disabled adults, chronically ill & disabled children, and the children of low-income adults.

Medicaid should not be for my neighbor with anxiety. How is there no WFH job that she can do? BFFR.

If you are able-bodied, you should be required to work to get Medicaid. End of story.

Your neighbor is the except...report her if you feel that strongly about it.

DP here. We all know stories like this. I also want parents of disabled children under 26 to be income-tested. I know several wealthy families with disabled minor children on Medicaid. It should be need-based. We make way less than many of these - why am I subsidizing them?

For this one you'd need to tackle private insurance. I have a relative with a medically fragile child who must have 24-hour supervision because he has a trach-vent. Their private insurance won't cover that, so he has medicaid, which does cover the 24-hour nursing. They are relatively well off financially because his dad is in big law, but even with their money, just one of his short hospital stays can total up to a half million.

Here's a mom on TikTok who also has a medically fragile kid on a trach-vent who explains why medicaid for the kids of wealthy parents is necessary.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjb1SLSS/

It’s “necessary” because our country as represented by politicians decided that every life has value, and that we as a country would support that. Is that really where we are now though? DOGE, Miller, RFK Jr, and Trump are spending OUR tax dollars on what THEY value. I’m really worried about what will happen to the medically fragile of all ages once the Medicaid-dependent hospitals start to close, especially in rural areas.

I’m not sure what your point is about tackling private insurance. Are you imagining that profit-focused corporations will somehow decide to add new, expensively and chronically I’ll patients to their coverage lists?

The PP (or you, if it's you) said that they wanted medicaid for children to be income-tested meaning that disabled kids of wealthy parents shouldn't qualify for medicaid. I meant that that scenario will only work if we tackle private insurance reform so that insurances are required to cover more. My relatives are well-off, but if they had to cover the remaining balance of one hospital stay that their private insurance didn't cover, they'd quickly be wiped out. And then what would happen? The entire family could theoretically qualify for medicaid.

Their kid's last hospital stay was 23 days and totaled $1.8mil. Their private insurance covered most, but there was still a 6-figure amount leftover that medicaid then covered so that the amount they needed to pay out of pocket was not even a few thousand.

The key to most things re: healthcare is insurance reform, IMO.

Does not make sense given OOP maximums.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably. It’s hard to imagine that they will cut services for children— who really can’t go to work to prove their value, at least as things stand now; implement work requirements for most adults; yet maintain nursing home payments for seniors as part of Medicaid. I assume these people, um, have a plan for that, since many seniors not in nursing homes are being cared for by family members — who have to leave their jobs and their employer provided health plans, to go on Medicaid in order to provide eldercare. All of this is so the wealthy can have tax breaks — financed by cutting health care for kids, the elderly,and those who care for them.

So many adults who are on Medicaid are either providing childcare, eldercare, or both, or have lower paying jobs where their limited pay and often limited hours qualify them for Medicaid, SNAP, and other benefits, while the companies like Walmart that employ them get tax breaks funded by working people.

Elder care is a paid job, even if provided by a family member for eligible seniors. I would think this should count for job hours minimum qualification. Childcare? It’s confusing, because technically single moms would have to work unless they are supported by ex-husband or parents , and SAHMs would be assumed to get healthcare through their husbands. I think we likely don’t know what it takes to qualify for Medicaid now and it’s difficult to imagine what happens later

Wrong, caring for family members doesn’t count as work. There are currently rare instances in some states where family members can apply to be carers to a very low income parent -but it’s a Medicaid funded program and will disappear.
What we have, it works. Taking it away will not work. This isn’t the answer.

I have a relative who is paid to care for her mother and gets health insurance too. She had to quit her job, she is unmarried and was a college educated professional. Her mother would have to go to a nursing home or die at home without this service. I bet it’s cheaper for a taxpayer to pay a low wage/healthcare to her daughter instead of having to pay through the nose for the healthcare facilities. I don’t see how it’s going away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't something like 60% of elderly in nursing homes covered by medicaid? Will the nursing homes put everyone on the street? Or will everything else be cut but the nursing homes remain stable.

What do you think happens if elderly without funds get kicked out of nursing homes? Where did you get this stupid idea?

Also, the reform is specifically focusing on able bodied people which automatically exempts elderly and those in nursing homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About half the people on medicare and medicaid are MAGA. Leopards eating faces and all.

Perfect. Maybe they will vote differently in the future.

No they won’t. Look at West Virginia. There will never be a Touch Stove moment.

This is looking increasingly accurate. It is becoming clear that MAGA is impervious to reality. MAGA doesn’t care if it suffers just as long as everyone, most especially the libs, are suffering.

Not sure what the way forward is, but Trump has stoked the hatred and divisiveness to such a degree that it will probably take something dramatic for anything to change. It’s a waste and stupid. But here we are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't something like 60% of elderly in nursing homes covered by medicaid? Will the nursing homes put everyone on the street? Or will everything else be cut but the nursing homes remain stable.

This will get rolled out over time. Nursing home will close and women will be forced to take care of the elderly. Just the way MAGA wants.

I say, Democrats should insist the cuts happen immediately. No waiting till after the mid-terms.

This is not happening unless you think MAGA wants to tank our birth rates even further and close to zero. Nobody will be having kids if they know they have to be caretakers for their elderly family (because they likely only have 1 other sibling if that, and probability of this is very high). Elderly caretaking by the family only works in high birth rate societies where family size allows for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably. It’s hard to imagine that they will cut services for children— who really can’t go to work to prove their value, at least as things stand now; implement work requirements for most adults; yet maintain nursing home payments for seniors as part of Medicaid. I assume these people, um, have a plan for that, since many seniors not in nursing homes are being cared for by family members — who have to leave their jobs and their employer provided health plans, to go on Medicaid in order to provide eldercare. All of this is so the wealthy can have tax breaks — financed by cutting health care for kids, the elderly,and those who care for them.

So many adults who are on Medicaid are either providing childcare, eldercare, or both, or have lower paying jobs where their limited pay and often limited hours qualify them for Medicaid, SNAP, and other benefits, while the companies like Walmart that employ them get tax breaks funded by working people.

I don’t know why that would be hard to imagine, they’ve been speed running killing children via Doge since day one. That’s a feature and not a bug to the people running things.

That’s my point, perhaps clumsily stated. They cut resources for children, so, of course they will be cutting resources for older adults.
I’m sure there are young, rich, DOGE guys noting how many vaccines for children could be paid for with the savings from each day of nursing home care for an elderly person— then cutting both sets of services since RFK Jr and Dr Oz said to.

Hmmmm. Let's see now.

70+ percent of the federal budget is entitlements (mandatory spending).

We're borrowing or creating out of thin air 50 cents of every dollar the U.S. government spends.

We have low/high inflation, depending who you talk to, because we're diluting the dollar's worth by doing that, since it's value is based on scarcity, as every currency is.

We're spending $17 Billion a day to keep the fed.gov party going and inflation on the national debt is now more than defense spending.



Should we go to a model where everyone pays half their income to the health care industry and the government does nothing other than pay for health care?

70% is not on entitlements.

MAGAs cannot make the argument that budget cutting of $800m on Medicaid is necessary at the same time they are spending $5 trillion on tax cut for rich people.

I guess you aren't a numbers person.

It costs $17 BILLION PER DAY to run the federal government. That's $17 BILLION, 365 days per year.

You're whining about $800 MILLION in cuts?

because those 800 million in cuts are material to the people receiving those cuts, to the point that they may not be able to survive any longer

The point is you are like Pavlov's dog: ANY CUTS to anything are too much. Better wake up.

If this whole damn thing collapses, no one will have anything. Then talk to me about survival.

Young people are already moving overseas when they see what's coming. They don't want to be stuck for life footing a ponzi scheme. Honestly, why bother working anymore when half the country skates?

Young people are moving overseas to get away from the dictatorship that the US is quickly becoming.
The US could have continued as the world’s leader. Instead, it’s becoming a dictatorship thanks to Right Wing Evangelicals who want a “Handmaids Tale, Project 2025” US version of North Korea. Billions spent on a military parade for Trump’s Birthday?
WTF?
The brain drain has already started.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't something like 60% of elderly in nursing homes covered by medicaid? Will the nursing homes put everyone on the street? Or will everything else be cut but the nursing homes remain stable.

What do you think happens if elderly without funds get kicked out of nursing homes? Where did you get this stupid idea?

Also, the reform is specifically focusing on able bodied people which automatically exempts elderly and those in nursing homes.

Half of US states have a law on the books from many years ago that requires adult children to financially take care of their parents. Nursing homes will go after their adult children when Medicare runs out.

Its horrible. As a child, you can’t control your parents choices interns of money, career, savings, ect. You grow up and as an adult, you gave NO control over how your adult parents spend and save money for the next 20-40 years.
But then an adult child should be suddenly responsible for their selfish Boomer parents choices at the end of their life?

[Anonymous]

Rick Scott stole $300 million in Medicare funds he’s taking it away from people who need it republicans suck

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rick Scott stole $300 million in Medicare funds he’s taking it away from people who need it republicans suck

Rick Scott and his ilk are literally the fraud in the system, not the individual patients etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About half the people on medicare and medicaid are MAGA. Leopards eating faces and all.

Perfect. Maybe they will vote differently in the future.

No they won’t. Look at West Virginia. There will never be a Touch Stove moment.

This is looking increasingly accurate. It is becoming clear that MAGA is impervious to reality. MAGA doesn’t care if it suffers just as long as everyone, most especially the libs, are suffering.

Not sure what the way forward is, but Trump has stoked the hatred and divisiveness to such a degree that it will probably take something dramatic for anything to change. It’s a waste and stupid. But here we are.

The way forward is simple. Trump keels over from a stroke and the cult of personality dies. Trumps rural voters can’t be bothered to go to the polls for anyone else. That’s why MAGS midterm performance is so crappy when Trump isn’t on the ballot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't something like 60% of elderly in nursing homes covered by medicaid? Will the nursing homes put everyone on the street? Or will everything else be cut but the nursing homes remain stable.

What do you think happens if elderly without funds get kicked out of nursing homes? Where did you get this stupid idea?

Also, the reform is specifically focusing on able bodied people which automatically exempts elderly and those in nursing homes.

Wrong. My mother had to qualify every year for her Medicaid nursing home. She had to prove she couldn’t work and she didn’t have a secret trust fund. A medicaid rep visited her each year. My mom could not feed herself or talk and had seizures all the time. It was absurd!