Medicaid and Food Stamps may be abolished!!!

Lilac said:
These fraudsters were getting double money & thought they wouldn't get found out. They stole money from people who needed it & was quailified for it.
There is plenty of fraud going on whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
Click to expand...
There is a staggering amount of it going on with both food stamps and Medicaid. How "stop the fraud to save honest taxpayers money" turned into "oh gawd, they're stopping Medicaid for everyone and taking away the food stamp program" by "... as those who will not see" is mind boggling.
 

I asked Google and it said this: While SNAP (food stamp) fraud exists, it's important to distinguish between improper payments (which can include errors) and intentional fraud. Estimates of the amount of SNAP benefits lost to fraud vary, but one expert suggests around $25 billion annually, which is about 20% of the total SNAP budget,
Click to expand...
I agree with Kate, that 25 billion is a staggering amount of money, 20% of the total doesn't seem that bad to me.
In any case all "welfare" money put together is a surprisingly small percent of our taxes, only 8%.
 
I don't know how one tells who uses food stamps, I thought it was a credit card type of payment. Anyway, I hope the ones who need them, get them. Medicaid also helps people who need it, may they keep their health plan. Fraud is hurting everyone.
 

What is being cut is the fraud, not the programs. Repeating false narratives put out by those that politically oppose those working to cut the massive fraud and waste of tax payers money, only causes hate and division among good people. It serves no good purpose on a forum like this. No poor person is being cut off, not a single one, unless they are fake poor and getting tax payer money under false claim.
 
Last edited:
Who is "The American Hospital Association?"

The American Hospital Association (AHA) is a national organization that represents and serves hospitals, health care networks, and their patients and communities. It is a trade group for the health care industry. The AHA has nearly 5,000 member hospitals and health care systems. It focuses on advocating for its members' interests in public policy, providing educational resources, and serving as a central source of information on the healthcare sector.

From the AHA -June, 2025:

Medicaid is critical to rural hospitals:

16.1 million people living in rural communities are covered by Medicaid.

In nine states, over 50% of the Medicaid population lives in rural communities.

65% of nursing home residents in rural counties are covered by Medicaid.

[Prior to any proposed cuts] Medicaid already pays rural hospitals far less than the cost of care.

Medicaid only paid rural hospitals approximately 63 cents on the dollar for inpatient obstetrics care in 2024.
 
There isn't anyway the out-of-control spending can continue. The deficit is growing & is completely out of control. At sometime, we have to pay our bills.

If something isn't done by re-organizing, re-evaluating & cutting out what isn't necessary ... there isn't going to be any money going around to anyone.
 
MACKTEXAS said:
Who is "The American Hospital Association?"

The American Hospital Association (AHA) is a national organization that represents and serves hospitals, health care networks, and their patients and communities. It is a trade group for the health care industry. The AHA has nearly 5,000 member hospitals and health care systems. It focuses on advocating for its members' interests in public policy, providing educational resources, and serving as a central source of information on the healthcare sector.

From the AHA -June, 2025:

Medicaid is critical to rural hospitals:

16.1 million people living in rural communities are covered by Medicaid.

In nine states, over 50% of the Medicaid population lives in rural communities.

65% of nursing home residents in rural counties are covered by Medicaid.

[Prior to any proposed cuts] Medicaid already pays rural hospitals far less than the cost of care.

Medicaid only paid rural hospitals approximately 63 cents on the dollar for inpatient obstetrics care in 2024.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with Medicaid going to pay for rural hospitals which is a necessary item.

What needs to be cut out are the people who shouldn't ever have been on it in the first place that are taking money away from what is really needed.
 
The thread

Medicaid and Food Stamps may be abolished!!!

"May be" is not fact. OneEyedDiva is going to research what the facts are. And we still won't know until the legislation is on the presidents desk & either signed or vetoed. Rather than speculate I'm happy to wait until she posts her findings.
 
fuzzybuddy said:
I just don't see people, who use food stamps, drive off in Firaris. They look like people, who need food stamps, and medical care. I guess we could save a buck or two by cutting those programs, ahh what's a little starvation and early death- that'll toughen them up.
Click to expand...
You won't believe how people navigate the system and abuse social welfare. I personally know someone who owns a few rental properties under an LLC (hence has total rental income of >$20K per month) , but is still getting Medicaid. I don't know the details.
 
Last edited:
Lilac said:
I don't have a problem with Medicaid going to pay for rural hospitals which is a necessary item.

What needs to be cut out are the people who shouldn't ever have been on it in the first place that are taking money away from what is really needed.
Click to expand...
Lilac, I agree with what you just wrote, and many off your posts, but please understand that the no politics rule prohibits me from speaking to how the AHA details proposed cuts which far exceed elimination of fraud or ineligible recipients of Medicaid assistance.
 
Please keep in mind that anybody at a partisan think tank can come up with a number like "this will kill an estimated 100,000 people." Medicaid expanded dramatically during Covid and there is a movement to return it to pre-Covid levels. The program now costs almost a trillion dollars annually between state and Federal expenditures. It's simply not sustainable right now. And Medicaid for able bodied people means less money for the truly needy.

We need someone to create a new health care system, starting with a blank sheet of paper. We've hit debt levels that are starting to trouble the credit markets. Medicare/Medicaid and SS account for most spending and they can't be sacrosanct forever.
 
MACKTEXAS said:
Lilac, I agree with what you just wrote, and many off your posts, but please understand that the no politics rule prohibits me from speaking to how the AHA details proposed cuts which far exceed elimination of fraud or ineligible recipients of Medicaid assistance.
Click to expand...
Can you elaborate on the no politics rule? It seems to me this thread as it is titled and introduced, is politics. I don't understand the no politics rule here even after some have tried to explain it. What I see is those that promote one political side, posting topics that agree with their politics and those that oppose, don't respond in detail, because they honor the no politics rule or fear banishment.
 
Rae said:
I don't know how one tells who uses food stamps, I thought it was a credit card type of payment.
Click to expand...
If I'd have to guess (and it IS a pure guess) I'd say that a lot of the fraud is coming in with under claiming assets. Not sure if it's the same in all states, but in mine, there's a certain amount of assets (money in the bank, not real estate) that determines eligibility. If people with healthy bank accounts are getting benefits by saying they have no cash assets, it's fraud.
 
Deya said:
Can you elaborate on the no politics rule? It seems to me this thread as it is titled and introduced, is politics. I don't understand the no politics rule here even after some have tried to explain it.
Click to expand...
The no politics rule is as simple as staying away from partisan bickering, @Deya . We can talk about Medicaid, SNAP, immigration, abortion, gay rights, gun control, etc. etc. etc.... but as soon as someone (sadly it happens all too often) starts bashing a politician, an administration, a political party, and so on, it crosses the line. Some line crossers, I do believe, get a kick out of doing it. And some who used to do it are now banned. It's not about the topic per se, but about how it is handled by what are supposed to be mature adults.
 
CallMeKate said:
The no politics rule is as simple as staying away from partisan bickering, @Deya . We can talk about Medicaid, SNAP, immigration, abortion, gay rights, gun control, etc. etc. etc.... but as soon as someone (sadly it happens all too often) starts bashing a politician, an administration, a political party, and so on, it crosses the line. Some line crossers, I do believe, get a kick out of doing it. And some who used to do it are now banned. It's not about the topic per se, but about how it is handled by what are supposed to be mature adults.
Click to expand...
That is confusing because how does one respond to false narratives without mentioning the source of those false narratives?

I just edited one of my post to comply to this rule. Sadly, discussing lightly veiled politics under the disguise of a Hot Button Topic, leaves me a bit sad. I thought since the NO was in bold letters it meant no. Politics is the discussion of political topics so I hope you can understand my confusion. How do you discuss the plight (politics) of Medicaid without discussing who is behind the repeated narratives that have been proven false and these politicians have a long proven record of false narratives?
 
Last edited:
Deya said:
That is confusing because how does one respond to false narratives without mentioning the source of those false narratives?

I just edited one of my post to comply to this rule. Sadly, discussing lightly veiled politics under the disguise of a Hot Button Topic, leaves me a bit sad. I thought since the NO was in bold letters it meant no. Politics is the discussion of political topics so I hope you can understand my confusion. How do you discuss the plight (politics) of Medicaid without discussing who is behind the repeated narratives that have been proven false and these politicians have a long proven record of false narratives?
Click to expand...
I was offline when you raised certain questions, but I see Kate @CallMeKate responded to your original question and I can't add to what she wrote. The thread title and OP does not mention political parties, or key political figures by name.

The AHA, which I referenced, does not endorse presidential candidates, but some of their material I alluded to in earlier posts may contain political references regarding pending bills on Medicaid cuts, so I did not post those links. Anyone who cares to see the details is free to conduct their own search on Medicaid cuts and the AHA, as I had no trouble finding it myself.

I have not seen evidence that Medicaid is being abolished at this time.

Identifying and defining false narratives is often a matter of personal opinion.
 
Deya said:
Can you elaborate on the no politics rule? It seems to me this thread as it is titled and introduced, is politics. I don't understand the no politics rule here even after some have tried to explain it. What I see is those that promote one political side, posting topics that agree with their politics and those that oppose, don't respond in detail, because they honor the no politics rule or fear banishment.
Click to expand...
The "no politics" rule is pretty much no rule at all. If a thread gets really heated, it gets locked.
 
I know one ‘wealthy’ businessman who collected food stamps for years, and bragged about it to the people who worked under him.
He was so proud of beating the system.

Sure hope he is at the top of the fraud cases .. if he is still alive.
 
MACKTEXAS said:
Identifying and defining false narratives is often a matter of personal opinion.
Click to expand...
In some cases yes, but in many, such as this thread where it is said that Medicaid may be cut and 100k will die, isn't an opinion, just false narrative based on nonsense spouted by some news source that has a reputation of one false narrative after another. It is a speculation based on nothing. A dangerous one meant to incite hate against one political party and movement or politician. It goes along with the false Nazi narrative that was spouted until it meant nothing.

It isn't any mystery who the poster is blaming for this imaginary genocide. What political party is making changes to Medicaid? You see, it is just that easy to be political without mentioning or bashing any politicians. This is what I mean about lightly veiled politics. It is like putting a see thru top over a black bra. No one is confused about the bra color.
 
I believe the only good solution for all our problems with poor people and others in deep trouble like prison inmates is a Constitutional Amendment to be passed allowing all American citizens, who are over age 21, to have the right to Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) for any reason at all. In that way all folks in serious trouble could exit life when things go bad for them. Death is certain for everyone in the end anyway. Why not allow those in trouble to simply exit life when their problems get to be insoluble?

That would end government problems with the poor and criminally inclined. It would also end the problems of the very old who could fall into aging traps like dementia and paralysis.
 
Mitch86 said:
I believe the only good solution for all our problems with poor people and others in deep trouble like prison inmates is a Constitutional Amendment to be passed allowing all American citizens, who are over age 21, to have the right to Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) for any reason at all. In that way all folks in serious trouble could exit life when things go bad for them. Death is certain for everyone in the end anyway. Why not allow those in trouble to simply exit life when their problems get to be insoluble?

That would end government problems with the poor and criminally inclined. It would also end the problems of the very old who could fall into aging traps like dementia and paralysis.
Click to expand...
Sorry Mitch, but that’s a terrible idea. Encouraging people to commit suicide just because they are poor is horribly misguided. In fact, society has always tried to prevent suicide and help people that are struggling with their mental health.

Our country is selfish enough at the moment, and in fact, we need to help the less fortunate more and not less. A person‘s value to society should not be measured in dollars.

We need to help and encourage people to pursue paths that will lead to self-sufficiency. Free job training for occupations that our society actually needs would go a long way to achieve that goal.
 
Rossana said:
The question would be why is this administration mainly looking at cuts into social programs and not into corporate faud for example?
The local news advised us today that the State of Florida iis
Click to expand...
Because the wealthy people are their friends and own the corporations. They seek to make themselves and all of their friends and associates much richer. They are trying to make poor people scapegoats of the middle class. If the middle class hates poor people, then they can’t see that the rich and powerful are continuing to rob them.
 
Did you know there are currently eleven U.S. states that have enacted medical aid in dying or physician-assisted death for the terminally ill?

Here’s the list: Oregon, Washington, Montana, Vermont, California, Colorado, Washington, D.C., Hawaii, New Jersey, Maine, and New Mexico.

But what if you are not a resident of one of these states?

CBS News Health Watch stated that Vermont removed its residency requirement in May 2023, and Oregon did the same two months later. Aid in dying is effectively permitted in Montana due to a 2009 court decision, but residency rules are not specified in the ruling. New York and California both recently deliberated on legislation to permit nonresidents to access aid in dying, but neither proposal was approved.
 
Mitch, assisting terminally, ill people to die less painfully and slightly sooner is very different than assisting healthy people. I don’t think people should suffer if they’re already dying. I think eventually all the states will go this route.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top