> Certainly, [free food] isn't for everyone, but for those in need. Why would we not extend similar policy to healthcare in a more efficient manner? But we do

> Certainly, [free food] isn't for everyone, but for those in need. Why would we not extend similar policy to healthcare in a more efficient manner? But we do have a similar system for healthcare! If you're poor enough you qualify for Medicaid [1], and if you don't qualify for Medicaid but your income is too low to afford the full price plans the ACA provides pro-rated subsidies. It's not that different from SNAP, and both are a mix of working well and poorly. [1] Unless you live in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin, Wyoming, which opted out of Medicaid expansion. Even though expansion had the federal government covering >90% of costs...