5 ms·

> Perhaps, but that is more easily said than done. For both me (to move) or for the State (to pay for the expansion of Medicaid)- remember, the State can't just

by d23 13y ago

> Perhaps, but that is more easily said than done. For both me (to move) or for the State (to pay for the expansion of Medicaid)- remember, the State can't just print money like the Federal Government can! Just to let you know, this is not about the state not having the money. This is about them not accepting the money from the federal government solely out of political spite. And you and your family are on the receiving end of that.

ensignavenger 13y ago
Just so you know, the Federal Government never made any offer to pay for the cost- sure, they were going to float the bill a few years, but after that?.... Yeah, the State would have to pick up the tab. Perhaps it was political spite, but to say there were no real concerns for how the State was going to pay for it is itself, a partisan, politically motivated statement.
- d23 13y ago
  Just went on a fact-checking expedition: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3161 http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3161 > CBO estimates show that the federal government will bear nearly 93 percent of the costs of the Medicaid expansion over its first nine years. > The additional cost to the states represents a 2.8 percent increase in what states would have spent on Medicaid from 2014 to 2022 in the absence of health reform. > This 2.8 percent figure overstates the net impact on state budgets because it does not reflect the savings that state and local governments will realize in health-care costs for the uninsured. So no, I don't consider my statement to be partisan, given that the facts back it up. Your government just doesn't care all that much about you getting insured.
  - ensignavenger 13y ago
    Every state will have different numbers, though, and I don't know what Missouri's are. However, you have completely ignored what happens after the 'first nine years'. Sure, a lot of politicians don't care about the future, especially if they don't plan on being in office at that point (or being in a different office). But perhaps Missouri's legislature does?

by d23 13y ago

ensignavenger 13y ago

Just so you know, the Federal Government never made any offer to pay for the cost- sure, they were going to float the bill a few years, but after that?.... Yeah, the State would have to pick up the tab. Perhaps it was political spite, but to say there were no real concerns for how the State was going to pay for it is itself, a partisan, politically motivated statement.

d23 13y ago
Just went on a fact-checking expedition: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3161 http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3161 > CBO estimates show that the federal government will bear nearly 93 percent of the costs of the Medicaid expansion over its first nine years. > The additional cost to the states represents a 2.8 percent increase in what states would have spent on Medicaid from 2014 to 2022 in the absence of health reform. > This 2.8 percent figure overstates the net impact on state budgets because it does not reflect the savings that state and local governments will realize in health-care costs for the uninsured. So no, I don't consider my statement to be partisan, given that the facts back it up. Your government just doesn't care all that much about you getting insured.
- ensignavenger 13y ago
  Every state will have different numbers, though, and I don't know what Missouri's are. However, you have completely ignored what happens after the 'first nine years'. Sure, a lot of politicians don't care about the future, especially if they don't plan on being in office at that point (or being in a different office). But perhaps Missouri's legislature does?