>> The War on Poverty is an expensive failure which has made people comfortable and dependent in poverty rather than assist them out. A solid dependent class with their hands permanently out is required to keep the professional political class and the bureaucracy in power. More food stamps, more "free" healthcare, more cradle-to-grave nannying keeps the soft voting for the power hungry. The rights, freedoms and property of the independent citizenry get squeezed out in the process.

These sound bites willfully ignore the fact that there aren't enough jobs for everybody. US employment is slightly better than expected this quarter, but only keeping up with population growth. "Let them eat cake" has never been a useful response when the un/underemployed ask for assistance. In this case, low-pay workers are the main losers from the decision to outsource most manufacturing to increase profits until the Chinese achieve control industry by industry. Perhaps it'll be cooler to complain once the implications strike you as well, as will surely occur.

>>Suggesting that "healthcare is different" is a losing argument etc etc

Who said that? You said that Medicaid needed to be dismantled for failing to reduce poverty. As I noted, poor health does entrench poverty but healthcare is intended to relieve the symptoms of poverty, not solve it. I also observed that poverty conditions are wonderful breeding grounds for epidemics that don't check employment status once they get established. The losing argument is the claim that healthcare was ever expected to reduce poverty.

>>With that said, I'm gonna pull the eject lever.

Fair enough.