Replies

The point was, why did FL, AZ and OH buckle to Obamacare when, as Perry said, down that road leads to bankruptcy

This raises a question: if Medicare expansion grows a "broken" system that takes us down the road to bankruptcy, what was Medicare doing before?

Rick Perry has had over a decade as Governor of Texas; at any time, he could have completely opted out of Medicare. If he's right about it, why hasn't he gotten out completely?

And since you “know it all”, do please further enlighten us on the advantages of caving to that part of the Obamacare mandate (ruled unconstitutional) for the states to greatly expand Medicaid to put millions of uninsured into Medicaid under Obamacare.

Sure.

Let's say you're the Governor of Florida, and you notice that your state spends $2.8 billion a year covering care for uninsured people. You also know that you can cut that by 25%-50% by taking a federal grant. If you really hate the idea of taking federal money you could consider other options. (And let's be clear, we're talking about taking more federal money, on top of the billions that they've been happily taking for years.)

You could sit back and do nothing. The Feds will come in and set you up an "insurance exchange" (after all, why would you want to run your own state when you can delegate to the Feds?). The idea of the exchanges is to use market forces to lower the cost of insurance. Of course, if you punt the Medicaid expansion, all of those people will get subsidized policies from your state exchange. This huge base of artificial demand will stifle competition and cause insurance rates in your state to be higher than normal.

So, the bottom line of rejecting the Medicaid expansion is that the people who were buying insurance before are now paying more.

I think Rick Scott understands all of this from his years of business experience. I'm not so sure about career politician Rick "I can't remember the third thing" Perry.

Well-reasoned argument..except for "...this raises a question: if Medicare expansion grows a "broken" system that takes us down the road to bankruptcy, what was Medicare doing before? Rick Perry has had over a decade as Governor of Texas; at any time, he could have completely opted out of Medicare. If he's right about it, why hasn't he gotten out completely?"

Careful about getting Medicare and Medicaid confused.

But at least you're a voice of reason. The expansion is a potential time bomb, and states that take part are setting their citizens up for heartache.

I'm dreading 2014.

Because you have done “A” before does not mean that doing “A” under different circumstances going forward is the thing to do.

The circumstances regarding the Medicaid program of today are different from what they were through the years. It was always a disaster in the making as the years passed. It could not help but lead to a bad result, or brokenness, as Perry says.

It has nowhere to go but down.

Now you have on top of that a placement of the stupid, already broken as it is written, Obamacare on top of Medicaid.

Anyone who brings up Perry’s debate problem (he did better as the debates went on, but what the hay do YOU care, right?...as he got past his back surgery and pain meds difficulties) is de facto admitting you don’t really care about reasoning and common sense on the issue under discussion.

Again, tell us more and more and more how you love caving to Obamacare. You can deny it forever, but you can’t be believed. It isn’t good to set up a state exchange under Obamacare. It isn’t good to expand Medicaid so Obamacare can sit on top of it to collapse it more than it already is. To argue those points is to be totally FOR caving to Obamacare and it does not matter what you call it.

You need to start an honest thread of your own. A vanity. Call it Mr. Know It All’s apologia for caving to Obamacare. Make your hero Rick Scott. He knows so much about healthcare. He knows caving to Obamacare is just the thing for Americans and Floridians and even Texans to do.

Glad I live in Texas.

As I understand the exchanges (or market places as they have been quaintly renamed)...the Feds will subsidize Medicaid in the states for 3 years, then drop to 90 per cent and then receive no federal funding. At the same time, the Feds will determine Medicaid qualification.

IMHO, that accomplishes two goals. The Feds will govern who qualifies for Medicaid and can expand those requirements to insure people that might not qualify otherwise (get the monkey off of their back). Secondly, when the Fed funding period expires, the states will be left holding the bag with the Feds basically in charge.

It's actually a pretty cleaver strategy on the Feds part. Short term the states will be grateful for the influx of funding...long term will be a disaster.

Portion of the purpose statement by Jim Robinson

“As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.

We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.

Our God-given liberty and freedoms are not negotiable.”

Note: FR is pro-limited government, pro-low taxes, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-Constitution, pro-Capitalism, and pro-freedom.

“OUR GOD-GIVEN LIBERTY AND FREEDOMS ARE NOT NEGOTIABLE.” (Rick Scott negotiated using our liberty and freedoms as bargaining chips, in return for borrowed money from the bankrupt and corrupt Feds, for a short time.)

Obamacare is the antithesis of what Jim Robinson and this site stand for. It is anti-limited government, anti-low taxes, anti-Bill of Rights, anti-Constitution, anti-Capitialism and anti-freedom.

I have nothing more to debate you about. I’m done with that. Debate Jim Robinson, or if he so chooses that you can continue flapping your yap here about Rick Scott, good, Rick Perry, bad, because your boy caved to Obamacare and you’re glad he did and think he’s real smart, but Perry didn’t and you think that’s too bad, and stupid, well, that’s up to Jim.