Posted on 06/13/2004 6:46:05 PM PDT by WKB
Missippy Ping
Mississippi didn't become "one of the poorest and unhealthiest states" overnight, so the question begs: Why is Mississippi such an armpit? Who has been in charge of that state over the last few decades?
Am I supposed to get a 3rd job to pay for your pills? Maybe you could get a 2nd job.
The same stuff is going on in Illinois. The gov here wants to expand the medicaid program here as well even under a 2 billion dollar budget deficit. Some people who's income exceed the standard have a spend down or co-pay. That's the amount in excess of the standard compared to their income. They think they should have it all for free-even households who gross $4000 per month. They choose to drive $30,000 SUV's but when it comes to their healthcare they do not feel it is worth paying one cent for.
Who has been in charge of that state over the last few decades?
Other than the 8 years Kirk Fordice was Gov.
The dims have controled MS politics for over 100 years.
They think they should have it all for free-even households who gross $4000 per month. They choose to drive $30,000 SUV's but when it comes to their healthcare they do not feel it is worth paying one cent for.
The New American Way
Black people tend to make less money. Mississippi has the nations highest percentage of black people.
The new American way is pissing me off when I have to pay taxes to fund it.
The new American way is pissing me off when I have to pay taxes to fund it.
I agree 100%
What does that have to do with anything? DemocRATS want us to believe they have all the answers to overcoming poverty, lack of health care, etc.
As it has been pointed out, RATS have been in charge of Mississippi for 92 out of the last 100 years.
So race has nothing to do with anything. RATism is the problem, not race.
Democrats.
So? Vote Republican. In the 2nd District, get out and vote for Clinton LeSuere. (OMG! He's Black!! Vote twice!!!!)
What these idiots don't get - the system would have been running in the "RED" by now even if the economy hadn't slowed down. Such programs ALWAYS grow faster than the growth of revenue - it's the nature of government entitlements.
At the 100% of poverty level, there were a lot of folks who found ways to cheat - how many more people found ways to be eligible at 135% of Poverty?
I guess the idiots wanted the budgetary shortfall to come out of public schools? Oh wait - they can't do that - guess they have to raise taxes....yeah, that will fix this problem and the economy at the same time.....UGH!
When is the government going to learn to abide by the rule that we as individuals should live by - don't spend more than you've got????
I hate how the word "needy" is always
cavalierly tossed around, without bothering
to explain the ALL contributing circumstances.
What could you possibly need 13 prescriptions for? How many failing organs could one person have? I can see one for thyroid, another for diabetes, another for heart --- but 13??? She expects she shouldn't have to pay for any?
I hate how the word "needy" is always cavalierly tossed around, without bothering to explain the ALL contributing circumstances.
The line between needs and wants has been blurred slightly
in the last few hundred years or so.
The article is misleading. The only people being cut off are 65,000 aged and disabled. The welfare queens and "single mothers," their children, et al, will continue to be fully covered by Medicaid. The only people being cut off are the ones who actually worked and paid their taxes for years. The others will continue to be covered even if above poverty level.
Trial lawyers have run Miss for forty years--even more than most states.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.