Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (9657)	2/5/2017 7:08:34 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 356119

Let's put this in perspective. So, let's take Kate's Arkansas. From the Wikipedia. According to the 2010 United States Census, Arkansas had a population of 2,915,918. The racial composition of the population was: 77.0% White American 15.4% Black or African American 0.8% American Indian and Alaska Native 1.2% Asian American 0.2% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 3.4% from Some Other Race 2.0% from Two or More Races 6.4% of the population was Hispanic or Latino of any race. From your link, 62% of the population are nonelderly whites on Medicaid. 26% of the population are nonelderly blacks on Medicaid. 7% of the population are nonelderly Hispanics on Medicaid. So, whites are under-represented as Medicaid recipients, albeit still the vast majority. Blacks are over-represented although still a small minority. And Hispanics are roughly equal to their percentage of the population. Now, compared to, say Texas. The differences are stark. Hispanics are the majority of recipients and blacks are less over-represented. Probably because outside of pockets of East Texas, most blacks live in the major cities like the whites do and there is more economic opportunity. Whites have only about half of their population on Medicaid, compared to Arkansas which is closer to 80% of the white population is on Medicaid.