The people on Medicaid are overwhelmingly Democrat voters that can't find gainful employment or don't seek it. With the tariffs in place, illegals being deported, and jobs returning to the US, they should now be able to find jobs that pay more and offer benefits. People are overwhelmingly on Medicaid due to 1.) laziness and 2.) low wages due to the exact things Trump is fixing. That is the solution to this problem - not, just keep on subsidizing corporations refusing to pay living wages by giving taxpayer subsidies.

"#8 | Posted by Corky"

Do you believe that:

1.) tariffs
2.) deporting illegals

will result in higher wages for US workers? Yes or No.

"Louisiana (32.4), Kentucky (28.3), West Virginia (28.2) and Arkansas (27.4) were among seven states that had more than 25 percent of their population on the Medicaid program, according to the health policy research website KFF.
#9 | Posted by Corky"

"Possibly.
#11 | Posted by Alexandrite"

So, is that you saying yes but being too much of a ----- to actually say it?

"Read this as many time as you need, '-------'.
#14 | Posted by Alexandrite"

I want you to state it clearly - because 6 months from now when the impact of the tariffs and deportations start to show in the jobs and wage data, I want to be able to point and laugh at you.

"You should really learn how to read... or at least how to do the math.
#15 | Posted by Corky"

You -------- need to learn how to write clearly. Let's read this again:

"Done by a sane president?
Possibly.
Trump is not sane. He's a mentally ill wrecking ball with a cult following.
#11 | Posted by Alexandrite"

Based on his comment - it means that a sane president may be able to do this.

However, he then states Trump is not sane but does not define what happens in this condition. If they are not sane, does it become a definite yes or definite no? This is just logic 101. I want him to be clear because I will be here pointing and laughing when Trump accomplishes exactly this.

"#18 | Posted by Whatsleft"

Insurance is not the solution - we need to decrease the cost of the services.

This will only come through breaking the power of the AMA as well as reducing the hospital administrative overhead. Along with this, we need to cap malpractice payouts so that insurance costs for the doctors can also be reduced.

This is the same problem liberals have with the budget deficit - they only focus on how to spend more money side of the equation and never on reducing costs.

"No.
Higher prices, decreased supply and higher likelihood of product or service unavailability? Yes.
#27 | Posted by jpw"

Thank you for being man enough to at least state your position clearly. Now, we will see what the next 6 months bring. I think you will finally get that raise to $16/hr that you long dreamed about.