Exactly. There are situations where people are caught between a rock and a hard place. Those who can get a better paying job but can't risk losing medicaid fall into that category. It costs the taxpayers too much to keep them in that pidgeonhole. It would make more sense to allow them to keep medicaid as long as they are productive workers (hence paying more into the general tax fund themselves and contributing). The cap on medicaid is far, far too low. Some folks stay below the poverty line or right at it because there is a point just above it where they risk everything and they are not earning enough yet to afford medical insurance.

See! Even though I am a fiscal conservative, I am not totally heartless <g>. I also have some sympathy for the retirees of the auto unions. They worked at an auto plant for 30 years or more and part of the motivation was the benefits package they would receive upon retiring. It would be unfair to say to a retiree now "Too bad. Your pension is killing the company."

Having said that, these entitlement programs must be phased out - gradually so no one who acted in good faith is hurt. I think that starting a cuttoff at, say, 45 years of age, and giving anyone between 45 and 50, 25% of what their pension would have been and use a sliding scale up to the retirement age. That way, people would have enough advanced notice to know that they have to start saving for their own retirement.