Medicaid was a system designed for the very poor and the disabled, both groups whom would be unable to attain any sort of healthcare at all. These people, who would have no way of paying their premiums or deductibles, were covered by this system as a way for the government to provide this help.
Obamacare, when it was introduced, expanded the demographic of Medicaid from the very poor and disabled to the very poor, poor, lower middle class, certain portions of the middle class, and the disabled. The effects of this were that those who found themselves with Obamacare were paying extremely high premiums and deductibles compared to what they were on Medicaid which placed strain on the very poor and disabled, who were supposed to be the ones benefiting from Medicaid originally. Couple this switch with those who found out that they could just stay on welfare and have healthcare as well and the prices rose further. For the past couple years all I heard about was how high the deductible was on everyone's plans.
Take into account the fact that many insurance companies sat out of Obamacare and could remove themselves whenever they wanted. One might say that it was due to profit, and they would be completely correct, but instead of looking at it through a lens of greed, consider it through and economic viewpoint:
>If all insurance companies joined Obamacare, there would be no need for all insurance companies but just one. This would create a monopoly.
>Insurance companies need competition to keep prices low for consumers and whether or not they make a large profit does not matter.
Now how does this relate to universal government run healthcare and why is the notion of healthcare being universal a bad thing?