It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New CMS Rule - Employment Should be Required for Receiving MEDICAID Benefits.

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:19 AM
link   
This just sounds like adding another level of bureaucracy to an already ridiculously antiquated government.

Just by enforcing jobs and checking and the enforcing of jobs and all the government employees required to take care of the fraud and complaints to support this medicaid jobs requirement would probably out finance any savings or positivity from the whole idea.

So much for more government oversight.

That's the real problem. The nanny government is already taking away personal responsibility and the medical/pharma/insurance companies are reaping the profits and scalping the American people; and I mean the AMERICAN people because who's paying for "The Dreamers?" Americans who pay for the government and big Pharma and the insurance companies.

This is a bigger problem than making medicaid recipients work for their care. Nice idea but needs more than adding additional government jobs to oversee and punish the non-compliers.

This whole medical mafia needs to be turned on it's head and every human deserves honest medical care without the dirty hands of big business, government and greedy medical companies controlling the show.


edit on 15-1-2018 by Justso because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Justso

The STATED goals for the Medicaid work/volunteer requirement is to get people feeling productive, interacting with other productive people, feeling good about helping society, etc..

But I'm sure that there are also underlying (more cynical) reasons for this policy change, as well.

Remember, it's up to each state. California may not want to implement any requirements for Californians to receive Medicaid. If they want to keep everything just like it is now in CA, it's their right to do so.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:50 AM
link   
I started coming down with schizophrenia when I was 17. By the time I was 19 I was so far gone I couldn't tie my own shoes. Legally I was an adult and had no insurance. My mom didn't know what to do to get me help. She was able to get me medicaid and get me hospitalized. Technically I hadn't been ruled disabled. So what happens to people that fall in between with these new rules?

I worked for 10 years. I developed a life threatening illness and had to go off my schizophrenia medication. I got sick again and I couldn't work. I had to go on medicaid. I applied for disability. I wasn't ruled disabled yet by any courts. I got medicaid until I won my case.

What happens to people that are sick and can't meet the medicaid work requirement but technically they haven't been ruled disabled by any court? This is a very slippery slope and I have no doubt that some people that need insurance aren't going to get it.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 03:19 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Yeah, take it away from the ones who need it most!

After all, those fabulously wealthy health admins and big Pharma might loose a little profitability,and we can't have that.

What if their thrones got wobbly and began to topple from off the pile of corpses?

I mean, only countries other than the US can afford to treat healthcare like it is a human right to a quality of life for all.



edit on 15/1/2018 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 05:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: carewemust

Yeah, take it away from the ones who need it most!

After all, those fabulously wealthy health admins and big Pharma might loose a little profitability,and we can't have that.

What if their thrones got wobbly and began to topple from off the pile of corpses?

I mean, only countries other than the US can afford to treat healthcare like it is a human right to a quality of life for all.


You're right. They call them entitlements but what some people don't realize is they may need these programs some day. My aunt worked her entire life and she got liver cancer at age 50. She got medicaid and food stamps. She ended up needing and getting a liver transplant.

At anytime a persons life can be ripped apart by some unforeseen illness or accident. People need some form of a safety net to fall back on in case something happens. These programs allow people to meet their basic humanitarian needs. You could get an illness or be injured in a car accident and have your world turned upside down.

Some politicians and people always make it out to seem as though everyone is abusing the system. As someone that rely's on these programs I can tell you the majority of people using them aren't.
edit on 15-1-2018 by wantsome because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 06:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: toysforadults
well that's pretty smart, let's add millions of people to the labor pool


Then they can pay taxes, like everyone else.


I thought low paid/part time/volunteer workers won't pay taxes. They claim top-up benefits and housing assistance.

You Americans, your taxes are already fully funding a 'single payer' health system that everyone who doesn't/can't contribute to, can benefit from, except you. Which means you have to find additional funds for your own medical needs, or rely on the generosity of your employer.

I know the majority of Americans will have a near-death-experience at the very idea of a National Health Service that all citizens can benefit from that is free at the first point of contact/use. But you already have one and you're paying for it, it's a fully funded system and it works perfectly. The problem is that you whose blood sweat and tears are paying for it, can't use it.

Change the way you think, Americans. Instead of complaining that you're having to pay for a system that only others can use, why don't you insist that since you're paying for it that you too have the right to use it if you choose? Why should you be forced to buy additional separate insurance for your own needs? Why can't you have the choice of using the taxpayer-funded system OR a private provider like we can in the UK? We're free to use either.

Everyone benefits from the American health system except the taxpayer who funds it, and none more than the insurance companies. Oh and the unscrupulous private medical providers that see you as a walking sack of money and 'recommend' you have this test and that test and offer you a velvet bed to lay on and a personal nursemaid etc, each unnecessary test and 'add-on' is $$$$$thousands in their pockets and is a waste of time and money, usually yours.

An NHS system is a wonderful concept, it places life and health above profit. It's a pity you taxpaying Americans can't use yours.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 06:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults

originally posted by: bluechevytree
are you saying that able bodied healthy americans can no longer be parasites on society by getting free medical care? That's outrageous, that`s criminal, that`s..that`s... never mind that`s just a common parasite wanting a free ride off of other`s hard work. about time that the government starting picking the parasites off the backs of the hard working people.


I'm pretty sure you have to be in poverty to qualify to Medicare FYI

that's cool throw 10 million people in the labor pool see how much that devalues your current job when more people have to develop higher skill sets they normally wouldn't have and add supply to whatever it is you do


Assuming these 10 milkion folks are healthy enough to work, think what 20 hours a week x 10 million cleaning up trash around neighborhoods or doing yard work on cities properties (especially as volunteers) would benefit everyone’s quality of life...not to mention providing a sense of purpose to those becoming productive. This direction would devalue no ones job, though I’m pretty sure those we’re aiming these thoughts at aren’t much of a threat to highly technical or education required type jobs.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: doobydoll

You make a good point I had not previously considered in that light. Thank you.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 07:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: carewemust

I thought medicaid was already for the working poor and disabled.


it is......but trump voters don't believe it



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

So Trump is cutting off his own nose to spit the face. Just wait till those folks that are receiving the help start calling for his blood. It's flyover country that benefits from this government program.

I know someone that works in a State Department that process government aid and it's not drug dealers or what you think the stereotype is.
edit on 15-1-2018 by cenpuppie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 07:54 AM
link   
As usual everyone overlooks the elephant in the room.
Insurance is not and has never been the problem.

The real problem is the cost of healthcare in america. The country needs to change the way it pays for everything in the medical industry.

A crown costs $2k
Braces cost $8 -$10k
MRI cost $3-5k

My friend that died recently had a heart bypass and ran up a $190k hospital bill.

That is the problem.
Could be fun to stop the gravy train.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22


Well said.


Obamacare was a result of a way to pay for the high costs.

No one thinks to lower the costs.



I think that eliminating the government mandate to force hospitals to charge a specific amount in order to receive Medicaid reimbursements should become a priority.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

You do know, most people who are on Medicaid are elderly people in nursing homes who need 24/7 care.


Most people who enter nursing homes begin by paying for their care out-of-pocket. As you use your resources (like bank accounts and stocks) over a period of time, you may eventually become eligible for Medicaid.


I'm so tired of the idea that American citizens who work hard their entire life just to own a home and invest their money so they can leave it to their children in hopes they may have a better life, are stripped of their home and whatever money they saved and invested by our overbearing government. The American people pay taxes on their income, sales and property. We pay into social security for our own life-line when we retire. We pay into medicare to help us out on medical expenses. All because of greedy over priced health care costs, greedy pharmaceutical companies, and for profit healthcare insurance.

People take risks and use their own taxed income hoping to someday win the lottery or hit it big at a casino. When they do, who is standing in the wings expecting a 25% cut of their winnings, Uncle Sam.

A house is built from the ground up. It's taxed on the full value, yet the government continues to tax the value every time this house is re-sold. The same thing goes for automobiles, land etc....

I don't know if everyone is aware of this, but our wonderful representatives in government have created a law that lets the government take ownership of your home once you have completely depleted your savings and investments due to nursing care expenses. To make sure citizens don't try to get around this law, they incorporated a 5-year stipulation in which you can not transfer your money or your home to your children between that time and the time of your death. They are now trying to make it even harder to protect your assets by extending that time from 5 years to 7 or 10 years! So unless you have a crystal ball and know exactly the date of your death and transfer your assets before those time periods, you and your children are screwed!!!

Where is the OUTRAGE in that??? Americans are their own worst enemy We complain about taxes going to programs that help those in need, programs that offset outrageous healthcare costs and a program that gives us a paltry monthly income when we retire. Yet we justify giving billions of dollars to a U.S. military that outpaces all other nations in military expenditures. We justify billions of dollars for foreign aid and billions of expenditures for conflicts the U.S. created overseas! This doesn't even account for close to 59 billion dollars set aside for black military budget projects.

This is highway robbery, and we continue to attack programs that help every American because people think they're the only people bearing the brunt of taxes for these programs. Instead we should be demanding term limits, a reduction in the outrageous high salaries from our representatives which should only be a temporary position and the elimination of government waste.

Our government is supposed to work for it's citizens. Protecting us also includes not denying it's citizens life saving healthcare, education that directly affects our economy, innovation and livable wages. The U.S. always prided itself as being a leader of the free world, yet we're at the bottom when it comes to providing it citizens with basic human needs.

I leave you with this statement from a Norway official which I feel rings true and would hope the U.S. follows Norway's lead on providing basic needs for it's citizens.


Today, Norway is one of the richest countries in the world, and we will not give up on our cradle-to-grave welfare. Our parental leave is a generous year, kindergarten is cheap, and our higher education is free. Health care is also free for every Norwegian citizen. Our society strives to be tolerant. Every political party promotes liberal values, gender-equality and human rights. The plumber´s son goes to school with the CEO´s daughter, and social mobility is high. Hence, our leaders have diverse backgrounds and anyone could meet the NATO secretary general skiing in the woods or our Prime Minister at the supermarket doing her own grocery shopping.

Norwegians aren't likely to move to the US, even if they're welcome. So instead of trying to import our whiteness, the US President should try letting some of our ideals in.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 08:30 AM
link   
So what would be the rules for new mothers?

"Get your lazy ass out of bed and leave your newborn at home with a babysitter you can't afford, so you can go work part time for nothing (all pay going to child care)?"

Seems a little stupid when you lay it out like that, but hopefully there would be some sort of leeway with people in this circumstance... Affording new mothers a "maternity leave" so-to-speak for work requirements?

Just a thought. Everything else, I whole heartedly agree with.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
Considering most Americans receive their health insurance as a work benefit I don’t think it is unreasonable that the people receiving government funded health insurance be held to the same standard.


But wouldn't that just be providing health insurance rather than using the market to make the employer provide it?

Besides, most who get it are elderly or disabled, they're not in proper condition to work.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt
You have something against people getting work and pulling themselves out of poverty? You think that is going to make you less valuable as a labor asset? Fear not, there are lots of jobs for people who are only working 20 hours a week. Or they can get job training and qualify. That scare you too? They can even go down to their local food bank and volunteer. That's a pretty scary thought too isn't it? People taking jobs from other people....geezee..

I don't know where you are but in our town there are "Hiring" signs everywhere!


The problem with this thinking, and many others in this thread are making it too. They're just talking about having a job. Not a career, not something that provides upward mobility. Just mindless labor. Mindless labor doesn't benefit society, skilled work that requires extensive education does. Everything else is treading water.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
A crown costs $2k


I can verify this. Fortunately, I had the money in savings as I don't have dental insurance. I needed a root canal recently. The root canal procedure was $1500. The crown was another $1300. That's $2800 for a simple dental procedure.

How are most people ever supposed to pay that when the average person doesn't even have $200 in savings? Even in my case where I'm making 5x the median income of the area, that did a number on my savings and it cost 2 weeks of wages. Should something so simple cost half a months wages even when you're lucky? What if you're not lucky?

I come from poverty, I learned to measure expenses in terms of how many meals it would cause me to skip. From where I was just a year ago, $2800 is more than an annual food budget. Fixing a single tooth would mean going without food for a year.

That's unacceptable.
edit on 15-1-2018 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Even with dental insurance it costs to much.
$500 deductible
Then they only pay half.
You're out another $1200.

Couple that with the dental insurance premiums and you might as well just pay cash.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Aazadan

Even with dental insurance it costs to much.
$500 deductible
Then they only pay half.
You're out another $1200.

Couple that with the dental insurance premiums and you might as well just pay cash.


That's why I don't have dental insurance. Work offers it, which I'll get starting in May when I go to a permanent position but it's still not worth it. It's going to run you about $350/year. Then a $500 deductible, then as you said they only pay half. So I'm out $850+$1400 in that case or $2250. Granted, $2250 is less than $2800 but that's also a year in which I need the insurance. In most years you're not supposed to need it. Not to mention, that most people still can't pay a $2250 dental bill in an emergency.

As near as I can tell, the whole thing comes out to about a wash with or without it, and dental insurance is one of the easier and cheaper types to get.

In my opinion, insurance just isn't a sustainable model for access to health care. Insurance relies on the idea that catastrophic costing events are rare, but the truth is, with prices being what they are catastrophic costs are guaranteed over each persons life span. That's a common event from a provider point of view... we're all going to rack up several hundred thousand in bills, and premiums can't cover that.

We have to address it on the cost side of things, and leave insurance as a supplemental plan.
edit on 15-1-2018 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Disability and Medicare enrollment went up big time after the crash of 08 they just about let anyone who applied in and so the mess we have now. talking to a guy yesterday that needs new glasses because he broke his $600 for the third time in 2 years. Hell my insurance wouldn't cover it but Medicaid no problem.




new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join