Medicaid pays for 40% of births

madengr

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
1,122
Damn!:eek: I didn't think it was this high. Since welfare is typically generational, it's only going to get worse. Of course it's moot once Obamacare kicks in.

Medicaid plays a key role in child and maternal health, financing 40% of all births in the United States. Medicaid coverage for pregnant women includes prenatal care through the pregnancy, labor, and delivery, and for 60 days postpartum as well as other pregnancy-related care.

http://medicaid.gov/Medicaid-CHIP-P...Population/Pregnant-Women/Pregnant-Women.html
 
Considering that having a baby at the hospital costs something like $10k for an uncomplicated vaginal birth (closer to $15k for a c-section), it's not that surprising. Had we not hired her student midwife, even a home birth with our CPM would have cost $3,600.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cap
I'd be interested to know how many out of that 40% will continue to collect some kind of entitlements throughout their life.
 
Damn!:eek: I didn't think it was this high. Since welfare is typically generational, it's only going to get worse. Of course it's moot once Obamacare kicks in.



http://medicaid.gov/Medicaid-CHIP-P...Population/Pregnant-Women/Pregnant-Women.html

This is very bad for our future and as a husband whose spouse is a nurse, I can affirm these numbers. Like you said, wealth is generational. Atlas (if he already hasn't) will shrug and go on to more prosperous/productive areas in the world.
 
It's not right. Especially annoying considering the plethora of birth control and the availability of abortion. There's simply no excuse in this day in age except you can't take care of your own children. It's sad and depressing. Choosing to have a child you can't afford is also a choice, and one that should be more frowned upon, imo.
 
It's not right. Especially annoying considering the plethora of birth control and the availability of abortion. There's simply no excuse in this day in age except you can't take care of your own children. It's sad and depressing. Choosing to have a child you can't afford is also a choice, and one that should be more frowned upon, imo.

Killing is not the answer. The answer is to step up, become a productive member of society (in spite of government initiatives to the contrary), and most importantly love and raise your child to be respectful and hardworking. Funny enough, none of these things involve killing or birthing based on affordability.
 
Killing is not the answer. The answer is to step up, become a productive member of society (in spite of government initiatives to the contrary), and most importantly love and raise your child to be respectful and hardworking. Funny enough, none of these things involve killing or birthing based on affordability.

Nonsense. The answer is to end medicaid and stop alienating people from the consequences of their behavior. Of course, the medical cartel won't allow that to happen.
 
Nonsense. The answer is to end medicaid and stop alienating people from the consequences of their behavior. Of course, the medical cartel won't allow that to happen.

Definitely agree, I just think that most of the responsibility for the "poor" people in the US is not having the right values in place and a strong family unit to instill it.
 
Killing is not the answer. The answer is to step up, become a productive member of society (in spite of government initiatives to the contrary), and most importantly love and raise your child to be respectful and hardworking. Funny enough, none of these things involve killing or birthing based on affordability.

An abortion is much more affordable for me, the taxpayer, than it is to pay for 18 years of government assistance. People should do what you're saying, but they won't. So you cut them off and teach them there are consequences to their actions.
 
Definitely agree, I just think that most of the responsibility for the "poor" people in the US is not having the right values in place and a strong family unit to instill it.

Not my job to judge my fellow man and his motivations, whether rich or poor. I simply don't think it's MY responsibility to "bail out" my fellow man, rich or poor. A Just Society does not alienate the individual from the consequences of his behavior. Understand that my tax dollar doesn't land in the pocket of the poor, it lands in the pocket of the service provider. Why should "I" protect the service provider from risk?
 
Considering that having a baby at the hospital costs something like $10k for an uncomplicated vaginal birth (closer to $15k for a c-section), it's not that surprising. Had we not hired her student midwife, even a home birth with our CPM would have cost $3,600.


The odds of the infant surviving are worth the extra money to some people. Go figure.
 
Yeah, those people in Croatia and New Caldonia don't know what they are missing, good old 'Murican health care.

God forbid anybody choose a different path.

34 is just above 35.

Huzzah government medical establishment!

USA 34th in infant mortality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate

America is the only country on Earth which includes all (all meaning all) deaths of premature infants in its infant mortality statistics, which is why socialists are constantly saying that the US is 34th in infant mortality and thus ought to have [more] socialized medicine.
 
Yeah, those people in Croatia and New Caldonia don't know what they are missing, good old 'Murican health care.

God forbid anybody choose a different path.

34 is just above 35.

Huzzah government medical establishment!

USA 34th in infant mortality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate

That's a red herring. The truth is that being born at home comes with a much higher infant mortality rate than being born in a hospital.

http://www.kjonline.com/news/study-home-births-more-dangerous_2010-07-04.html

...normal newborns are three times as likely to die after a planned home birth than after a planned hospital birth. When all babies were counted, including those with congenital problems, the risk is twice as high after planned home births, the paper said.

And as for the infant mortality rate...as always, liberal talking points are lies - there is no universal standard for reporting infant mortality. America considers any baby that draws a single breath to be born alive, even if it's only 18 weeks along. Some countries don't count live births unless the baby lives more than a day.,
Here is the how the lie is propagated.
In most European countries the size of the baby determines if the baby is born alive or stillborn.
Even in most “civilized” European nations such as Germany, Austria and France a live, kicking and screaming baby is reported as still borne, dead, if it weighs under 1.1025 pound ( 500 grams).
Other European countries , such as Switzerland, require that the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (12 inches) long to be declared “alive”
In France and Belgium additional RULES require that a baby be at least 26 weeks old to be declared alive.

In less “civilized” countries such as Russia and some of its former satellites the size requirement is 2.205 pounds ( 1000 grams) less that 28 weeks or less than 14 inches ( 35 cm) or failed to survive 7 days. If those conditions were not met the baby was declared still born.
In many countries the death of a 12 month old infant is just registered as a death of a 13 month old baby and thus no longer part of the IMR.
“Another seemingly paradoxical finding is that when countries with poor medical services introduce new medical centers and services, instead of declining the reported IMRs often increase for a time.”
Further more there is the deliberate inaccurate reporting of infant vs. stillborn deaths in most of the world. If we add to that the exceptionally high rate of abortions performed, even just late term abortions than the picture takes a ghastly turn towards some sort of Hieronymus Bosch living hell and the EU hospitals can be easily characterized as abattoirs.
Its virtually impossible to get real stillborn rates but its very significant to note that Sweden and Denmark which rank No.3 and N0. 14 respectively in the UN Infant Mortality Rate also has the highest stillbirth rate in Western Europe with over 7 per 100.( That’s 40% higher than even the worldwide rates!)
In Japan which ranks third int he UN IMR rankings there is a statistical anomaly regarding the incredibly high stillbirth rates ( especially the number of female infants reported dead in the first 24 hours ). In 2002 the Japanese still birth rate was an astonishing 31 per 1000 which rivals the 32 per 100o recorded in South-East Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa and is over SIX TIMES HIGHER than the worldwide average
The reported EU IMR rate is 5,72 per thousand and the US rate is 6.62 per thousand . Lets do some arithmetic here, sorry liberals I know I’ll lose you here, and see how that adds up. In the us there are a reported approximately 13% of babies born premature ( I have found no data on babies born at term but under EU measurements). If Japan ranked number three is reduced to a more realistic world wide average of 5 stillborn deaths per 1000 and we add the difference of 26 babies to the official UN IMR rate of 3.4 per 1000 then we get a total of 29.4 per 1000. Way higher than the 6.2 in the US and in the same neighborhood with Kazakhstan and Indonesia. If we apply the same method to Sweden and use average EU stillbirth rates then the IMR rate becomes 6.2 per thousand the same as the US.

As you can see I have just given very compelling evidence , with a simple investigation using publicly available information in less than an hour’s time, that the Infant Mortality Rates as currently published by the UN and WHO are bogus. Why isn’t the UN devoting more time to investigating this? Well we know that answer, the UN wastes no occasion to discredit and belittle the United States but why aren’t the libs doing more to find out the truth? Well, I could post the answer by I don’t like to repeat myself.

http://www.conunderground.com/two-obama-healthcare-myths/
 
Last edited:
America is the only country on Earth which includes all (all meaning all) deaths of premature infants in its infant mortality statistics, which is why socialists are constantly saying that the US is 34th in infant mortality and thus ought to have [more] socialized medicine.


Well, yeah. If you wanted to go with the short version. :)
 
America is the only country on Earth which includes all (all meaning all) deaths of premature infants in its infant mortality statistics, which is why socialists are constantly saying that the US is 34th in infant mortality and thus ought to have [more] socialized medicine.

I'm not inclined to believe that entirely.

The statistics for longevity and death by "medical misadventure" are equally grim.

Now, just because the socialists may want to point to that and argue for more of the same that caused it, does not negate the fact that, apart from trauma care, American allopathic medicine is a train wreck.
 
Back
Top