Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread

@mqt

Who are the people not currently supported by the existing food and healthcare programs that you think require our tax dollars to support?
Sorry, real life called before I could answer.

I would generally draw the line on healthcare at universal. I understand the cost, I understand the tax implications and possible changes to my access to care, but I think the positives outweigh the negatives.

I don’t know that I can put a hard number on food assistance, and as I’ve stated before, I’d support a massive reduction in both the scope and convenience of the program. But as constructed, my only real gripe is at the margins for low-earning individuals. Under the current system, I think one oversight is in the frequency of the redetermination process, which encourages people to attempt to fluctuate their earnings to game the system. While this is more of a societal problem than a government one, I think more consistency in low wage earners’ access to food assistance would allow for those in frequent need of help to climb up toward more employment opportunities without such immediate changes to their benefits. But I fundamentally disagree with the way we do food assistance and think the program should be reduced to essentials rather than blocks of cash freely spent on any applicable food.
 

Went to Disney in August and I agree with this.

Just gross to see all adults dressed up like children.

Maga keeps self reporting.
 
Is it news to you that government employees enrich themselves corruptly?

Do you see what these people in congress are worth?

And yet you fight every attemtp to the reduce the system enabling it
 
I would generally draw the line on healthcare at universal. I understand the cost, I understand the tax implications and possible changes to my access to care, but I think the positives outweigh the negatives.
I admire that you are willing to spend more for worse care (and more so appreciate that you recognize this will happen), but for whom? This didn’t quite answer the question of who falls out in the current system
 
Last edited:
I admire that you are willing to spend more for worse care (and more so appreciate that you recognize this will happen), but for whom? This didn’t quite answer the question of who falls out in the current system
I mean, you can sort of just loop in anybody who isn’t on Medicaid currently based on my proposed answer to healthcare. I understand that healthcare is heavily funded and nobody is presently not receiving life-saving, immediate care, but even with insurance a hospital bill is financially ruining for most households and medication expenses are high enough to lead anybody who doesn’t have either the means to afford it or assistance to forego a lot of medication. While a Medicare for All style plan wouldn’t necessarily eliminate all of those problems, it would help a lot of middle class families be able to spend their money on something other than not dying.

I also think a lot of the fraud/ills of the system are at least contributed to by the means testing. Autism costs are on the rise in part because of programs designed to allow Medicaid for such folks. And while that’s great that we care for them, it also leads to false diagnoses and services.
 


former-first-gentleman-south-dakota-124778343.jpg
 
Back
Top