Reader comments
U.S. favors health-care prevention, poll finds
36 comments | Read story
Anonymous | 4:08 p.m. June 8, 2009
The reason there is more money in health care's treatments than there is in
it's prevention is because the health care industry exists, for the most
part, to treat ill people. Whoever said it was responsible to make sure people
live healthily? Prevention responsibilities belong to individuals themselves.
rp | 4:11 p.m. June 8, 2009
How do you get people to just walk 30 minutes a day and eat 5 servings of fruit
and vegetables a day? That will add about 14 years to your life. A fish or two
a week and red meat maximum once a week. This is the prevention that works.
Comments continue below
I doubt it | 4:19 p.m. June 8, 2009
Most Americans favor prevention only for OTHER people.
But when it comes to their own health care, they want the best their money can buy.
But when it comes to their own health care, they want the best their money can buy.
Belgie | 4:29 p.m. June 8, 2009
As with so many things, the core problem is entitlement, laziness, and greed.
Americans feel entitled to health care, are too greedy to pay for it themselves
(but manage a host of other "necessities" like cell-phones, cable TV,
Nintendo DS, etc.), and too lazy to maintain their good health.
ANY government program will only exacerbate the situation.
But, we all seem too stupid to realize this, so, let's let China continue to pay for our gluttony and we'll just saddle our children and grandchildren with the responsibility of paying the piper.
ANY government program will only exacerbate the situation.
But, we all seem too stupid to realize this, so, let's let China continue to pay for our gluttony and we'll just saddle our children and grandchildren with the responsibility of paying the piper.
Woody | 5:20 p.m. June 8, 2009
I think most of you miss the point. I actually work in the health care industry,
and the biggest problem is the Government. Costs could be reduced a great deal
if physicians didn't have to use defensive medicine to protect themselves
from lawsuits. Belgie is correct, people buy motorhomes, cell phones,
ATV's, expensive cars and homes, but won't pay for health care. The
government can't even run the post office, or GM, and you expect better
health care with a government run program. GET REAL!!!!!
criticize constructively | 5:49 p.m. June 8, 2009
RE: Belgie and RP,
Have either of you had a weight problem? If not, you're ignorant, your criticisms aren't constructive and criticism without construction is judmental, and harmful! The recommendation of 2,000 calories a day is wrong. There needs to be a list of calorie intake per height, age, weight, active, and inactive. I've lost 80 pounds (postdate) by eating 1200 calories for my 5'4" height. In order to stay a decent weight, I'll have to count calories the rest of my life. Weight Watchers works-they count calories by a point system. When I was single and extremely active, able to have a support system of guys, roommates, etc. I exercised daily. I got married, my support gone and I ended up living in an area where I was frightened to go out by myself. Husband worked all the time, responsibilities in the home and elsewhere doubled. I wasn't caring for myself anymore, and now I had an overwhelming learning curve. We couldn't afford the expensive exercise equipment. My diet didn't change, exercise did. To my surprise, I fattened! Constructive critics buy equipment, become exercise buddies, and don't criticize.
Have either of you had a weight problem? If not, you're ignorant, your criticisms aren't constructive and criticism without construction is judmental, and harmful! The recommendation of 2,000 calories a day is wrong. There needs to be a list of calorie intake per height, age, weight, active, and inactive. I've lost 80 pounds (postdate) by eating 1200 calories for my 5'4" height. In order to stay a decent weight, I'll have to count calories the rest of my life. Weight Watchers works-they count calories by a point system. When I was single and extremely active, able to have a support system of guys, roommates, etc. I exercised daily. I got married, my support gone and I ended up living in an area where I was frightened to go out by myself. Husband worked all the time, responsibilities in the home and elsewhere doubled. I wasn't caring for myself anymore, and now I had an overwhelming learning curve. We couldn't afford the expensive exercise equipment. My diet didn't change, exercise did. To my surprise, I fattened! Constructive critics buy equipment, become exercise buddies, and don't criticize.
to Belgie | 4:29 | 5:52 p.m. June 8, 2009
"...the core problem is entitlement, laziness, and greed..."
Actually, the core problem is with people like you, who have no ability to see the larger picture, and use only your personal experiences in dictating what you think is correct.
Here's the reality check. 60% of bankruptcies are due to medical bills, and 75% of those bankruptcies had medical insurance but were still overwhelmed by the costs (American Journal of Medicine). These aren't entitled, lazy or greedy people! They are hard working, tax paying Americans who were financially destroyed due to a medical condition in the family. Yet you would label them as leeches on the system. The irony is that unless you are infinitely wealthy, or already covered by some government program, you also are only a medical emergency away from a similar fate and label.
There are many countries who do health care more effectively and less expensively, while covering ALL their citizens. Failure to examine and adopt a better, cheaper system puts the US at an economic disadvantage, and amounts to nothing more than nationalistic hubris.
Actually, the core problem is with people like you, who have no ability to see the larger picture, and use only your personal experiences in dictating what you think is correct.
Here's the reality check. 60% of bankruptcies are due to medical bills, and 75% of those bankruptcies had medical insurance but were still overwhelmed by the costs (American Journal of Medicine). These aren't entitled, lazy or greedy people! They are hard working, tax paying Americans who were financially destroyed due to a medical condition in the family. Yet you would label them as leeches on the system. The irony is that unless you are infinitely wealthy, or already covered by some government program, you also are only a medical emergency away from a similar fate and label.
There are many countries who do health care more effectively and less expensively, while covering ALL their citizens. Failure to examine and adopt a better, cheaper system puts the US at an economic disadvantage, and amounts to nothing more than nationalistic hubris.
Insurance Man | 5:52 p.m. June 8, 2009
Well, Woody and Belgie have it right. The people who cry the loudest for
preventative care being taught or forced on every one, cannot work unless there
is incentive. If you want preventative (By the way AGREE preventative does cost
a lot in some cases more that insurance.) then define those things that can be
prevented and let the insurance companies exclude treatment for those
conditions, if you aren't doing your preventative, then you don't get
coverage for it. If the people using the health care system don't have
"skin in the game" then they don't and won't take care of
preventative issues. Most of you don't take your cars in for full
diagnostics and tests when it is running fine, and most of you don't go to
the doctor, unless there is a problem, that is unless someone else is paying for
your checkups. In all the health reform in Utah and US every one is bellying up
to the trough to get their share of the freebies. None are saying Hey I am
willing to pay for that, let the other guy pay it.
Anonymous | 5:55 p.m. June 8, 2009
Wow where did that come from Criticize?
Belgie | 6:08 p.m. June 8, 2009
Re: criticize constructively - You're right. I've never had a weight
problem. But, I still drag myself out to run 3-4 times a week to maintain my
fitness (no coaches, buddies, or expensive exercise equipment required). I also
try to make good decisions about what I eat.
Everybody has problems. Some are just more visible than others. I don't see why a predisposition to obesity is any more of a societal problem than low IQ or just plain laziness.
I'm fine with programs to educate people. In fact, I'm all for them. I also enjoy helping my neighbors and providing support when they need it. If you happen to live in the Portland area, I'd love to go for a run with you.
But, I'm adamantly opposed to a nanny-state, where all the hard decisions are made for us.
Everybody has problems. Some are just more visible than others. I don't see why a predisposition to obesity is any more of a societal problem than low IQ or just plain laziness.
I'm fine with programs to educate people. In fact, I'm all for them. I also enjoy helping my neighbors and providing support when they need it. If you happen to live in the Portland area, I'd love to go for a run with you.
But, I'm adamantly opposed to a nanny-state, where all the hard decisions are made for us.
Constructive Criticism cont' | 6:14 p.m. June 8, 2009
Have you ever tried to count calories? It's hell and it's not
sustainable. So, I'm currently trying to change my list of recipes and try
that. People aren't always willing to share their healthy recipes either.
So, unless you're willing to share your recipes, keep your ignorance to
yourself. Also, getting out for 30 min. a day isn't easy either when
you're already running faster than you have strength. I think weight is a
problem too when you're too responsible and won't let things go. It
needs to be a priority to prevent weight additions, but then people need to
never visit, never be critical of ones home without being willing to help clean
it, weed it, or otherwise fork out money to help maintain it. Watch children so
they can exercise! Never sign up to bring desserts unless it's fruit,
never bring sweets to peoples homes with weight problems, never keep it out so
that a person with a weight problem doesn't have to suffer trying to not
eat it. Any weakness/problem has been given to strengthen them. Don't
give up, find a way!
Anonymous | 6:24 p.m. June 8, 2009
"But, I'm adamantly opposed to a nanny-state, where all the hard
decisions are made for us."
Do you beling to a religion that is essentially a "nanny church" where all the hard decisions are made for you?
Just wondering...
Do you beling to a religion that is essentially a "nanny church" where all the hard decisions are made for you?
Just wondering...
Belgie | 6:25 p.m. June 8, 2009
Re: to Belgie | 4:29
Well, you're close, but as usual, the statistics are deceiving. I think you're referring to the Harvard study, which said 50% of bankruptcies were caused by "illness and medical bills".
Of those 50%, 75% of the people did have insurance, but 38% lost their coverage because they could pay for it. Besides the medical bills, I'm sure than general irresponsibility had a lot do to with it. People should plan for at least one disastrous event in their lives.
Reports like the one you cite serve themselves if they can make alarming and sensationalize claims. I read last month that 20% of Utah children are hungry, which is crap, unless you count teenagers because they're always hungry.
Look around you. How many people have 3 months salary in the bank? How many people have disability insurance? How many people have a boat, RV, iPhone, Sony PS3, 3000 sqft home, new cars, etc. It's incredible to see where our priorities are.
And, I do have a right to get mad and criticize. I'm paying for your medical bills.
Well, you're close, but as usual, the statistics are deceiving. I think you're referring to the Harvard study, which said 50% of bankruptcies were caused by "illness and medical bills".
Of those 50%, 75% of the people did have insurance, but 38% lost their coverage because they could pay for it. Besides the medical bills, I'm sure than general irresponsibility had a lot do to with it. People should plan for at least one disastrous event in their lives.
Reports like the one you cite serve themselves if they can make alarming and sensationalize claims. I read last month that 20% of Utah children are hungry, which is crap, unless you count teenagers because they're always hungry.
Look around you. How many people have 3 months salary in the bank? How many people have disability insurance? How many people have a boat, RV, iPhone, Sony PS3, 3000 sqft home, new cars, etc. It's incredible to see where our priorities are.
And, I do have a right to get mad and criticize. I'm paying for your medical bills.
Jess | 7:29 p.m. June 8, 2009
Before I retired I regularly worked out during my lunch hour during which time I
walked past the snack bar where fat people ate their calorie rich lunches and
complained about how they couldn't loose weight and blamed their problem on
"heredity." Since retiring, if I stop exercising regulary and am not
careful with my diet, I gain weight. Then I have to loose it by exercising and
watching my diet. It's as simple as that.
I would be interested in a government assisted health insurance program in which the individual or family would be responsible for a reasonable deductable amount and insurance or government would pay for catastrophic costs only (deductable based on the person or family's income). But I would have a problem if the catastrophic costs paid for by the government were because of the recipient's drug or tobacco or alcohol abuse. Or because of gluttony or sexual promiscuity or other health issues in which the person placed themselves at risk.
I also would like to see tax sheltered health savings accounts. But liberals hate that idea.
I would be interested in a government assisted health insurance program in which the individual or family would be responsible for a reasonable deductable amount and insurance or government would pay for catastrophic costs only (deductable based on the person or family's income). But I would have a problem if the catastrophic costs paid for by the government were because of the recipient's drug or tobacco or alcohol abuse. Or because of gluttony or sexual promiscuity or other health issues in which the person placed themselves at risk.
I also would like to see tax sheltered health savings accounts. But liberals hate that idea.
Conundrum | 8:27 p.m. June 8, 2009
We have usually paid more in premiums than we have used, being generally healthy
people. One family member is overweight and has a pacemaker. Everyone else does
routine preventive checks, etc. Counting the premium our employers have paid on
our behalf, insurance companies have made plenty on our family, since our out of
pocket would typically be far less than the full premiums charged by insurance
companies.
I'd love to have some of that coverage pay more (instead of offer minimal contracted discounts) for health education, customized diet and lifestyle education (everyone knows about the food pyramid and 30 minutes 3x a week general guidelines), and mental wellness education. Maybe it would help motivate our struggling, overwhelmed family member to think less and do more.
We're not pros, but we do the best we can.
I'd love to have some of that coverage pay more (instead of offer minimal contracted discounts) for health education, customized diet and lifestyle education (everyone knows about the food pyramid and 30 minutes 3x a week general guidelines), and mental wellness education. Maybe it would help motivate our struggling, overwhelmed family member to think less and do more.
We're not pros, but we do the best we can.
xscribe | 9:43 p.m. June 8, 2009
Hey, Belgie, guess what? Lost 10 pounds in Norway in 5 months, and didn't
need to drag myself out to do it. Why? No need for a car, so a person walks
constantly. How and why? First, awesome public transportation, run by the
government. No sprawl -like America, especially the west - so everything you
need is, guess what, within walking distance. Again, no sprawl, so hiking
mountains was, guess what, within walking distance, and you didn't have to
worry about being in someone's backyard. And the attitude of the people
there was to be in nature, not to "drag" themselves out for a run.
And I mean all the people there, the old and young. Aside from a mere handful
of people, the only ones that were overweight were, guess what, Americans, and
the occasional tourist. Guess what? Norway has a government-run - ah,
"nanny-state" healthcare system, and it works beautifully and cheaply.
Americans are too hung up on drill here, drill now, can't walk a block to
the grocery store to ever prevent most illnesses caused from being overweight.
Can't imagine what the next generation will be like.
@Belgie | 10:10 p.m. June 8, 2009
What a smug individual.
You place yourself on a pedestal as if you alone support the uninsured, when in all likelyhood, you don't even pay your medical bills. Heaven help you if you actually have a catastrophic medical issue in your family. No amount of insurance or savings will help you if you hit your policy's maximum coverage. And no provider would touch you after that. 3 months savings equates to one night in intensive care.
Spend a day at Primary Children hospital. It might give you some perspective.
You place yourself on a pedestal as if you alone support the uninsured, when in all likelyhood, you don't even pay your medical bills. Heaven help you if you actually have a catastrophic medical issue in your family. No amount of insurance or savings will help you if you hit your policy's maximum coverage. And no provider would touch you after that. 3 months savings equates to one night in intensive care.
Spend a day at Primary Children hospital. It might give you some perspective.
worried | 11:04 p.m. June 8, 2009
re: xscribe: I think you hit the nail on the head, perhaps without recognizing
it. It isn't likely the gov't run "nanny-state" healthcare
has much to do with those outcomes: diet and exercise is clearly the reason.
Any system where people eat/exercise to keep themselves healthy is going to cost
less than one, like we have, that is focused on trying to fix people after they
become sick, even though a significant portion of that disease burden is
preventable. But having a gov't run health care system will not fix that
problem, or even affect it. Switching to a gov't program will just change
our current problems to different ones, not solve them. Personally, I think we
will dislike the new problems worse than the ones we currently have.
To worried | 11:31 p.m. June 8, 2009
You say we will dislike the new problems with a gov't run health care
system worse than the problems we currently have. What is worse than having no
health care or insurance at all?
Dan | 11:33 p.m. June 8, 2009
Does anyone else wonder why health care cost so much? I believe it is because
50% is subsidized through medicare and medicare. If I wasn't an engineer
but rather a doctor, I would charge however much people are willing to pay. In
our current situation they can charge anything they want because 50%!!! will be
payed from deep government pockets. (In other words our childrens and
grandchildrens future incomes)
If there was no subsidized health care then doctors would have to compete for what others are willing and able to pay just like any other market.
Its simple folks. Its time we elected government representatives who can actually balance a budget, perform the math that would help them understand decisions and elect those who understand who they are working for!!
If there was no subsidized health care then doctors would have to compete for what others are willing and able to pay just like any other market.
Its simple folks. Its time we elected government representatives who can actually balance a budget, perform the math that would help them understand decisions and elect those who understand who they are working for!!
nowchange | 12:06 a.m. June 9, 2009
We all have a right to life. Not just the rich americans. It is time we have
insurance for all, whether or not they have a job... How many us have jobs
anyway in this economy?
The majority of Americans are without insurance and its time the government cared about our healthcare instead of the auto industry.
Time for results is now. Stop the greed. Focus on Love.
The majority of Americans are without insurance and its time the government cared about our healthcare instead of the auto industry.
Time for results is now. Stop the greed. Focus on Love.
FixItNow | 12:55 a.m. June 9, 2009
Balancing a budget would be nice. One of the many ways would be to have a
healthy nation.
Unfortunately the healthcare industry is corrupt with ethic problems. The government has turned a blind eye because of the payouts to our senators and representatives to look the other way.
Time to fix it is now! Take over it and clean it up.
Unfortunately the healthcare industry is corrupt with ethic problems. The government has turned a blind eye because of the payouts to our senators and representatives to look the other way.
Time to fix it is now! Take over it and clean it up.
chris | 6:22 a.m. June 9, 2009
Medicare is the one of the worst payers in medicine. They set the fee schedules
and pay what they want. Many physician groups opt out of Medicare because a
practice full of medicare patients barley pays the overhead. The quality of
your health care will just as likely decrease in a Government run system.
Martie | 7:32 a.m. June 9, 2009
To all of you who want a government-run system...the government now has 36
trillion dollars (yes, trillion with a "T") in future unfunded
liabilities. And you want to tell me Medicare is a great system? Obamacare will
add several trillions over the next 10 years. I only have one child and one
grandchild and am not excited at their future life prospects.
You don't think there will be rationing of care? How will the same number of docs take care of an additional 47 million patients, who, because health care will now be cheap (govt subsidized) will run to the doc every time they have a runny nose? The only way will be to ration the care. And then you'll have a situation like my fist cousin in a western European socialized medicine country who wasn't sent for an MRI for 18 mos because the governor of the area decreed that one MRI facility for a population of 400,000 was all they can afford. She died of lung cancer. She had experienced excruciating pains in her arm and back for nearly 2 years before the MRI. Physical Therapy was obviously not working.
You don't think there will be rationing of care? How will the same number of docs take care of an additional 47 million patients, who, because health care will now be cheap (govt subsidized) will run to the doc every time they have a runny nose? The only way will be to ration the care. And then you'll have a situation like my fist cousin in a western European socialized medicine country who wasn't sent for an MRI for 18 mos because the governor of the area decreed that one MRI facility for a population of 400,000 was all they can afford. She died of lung cancer. She had experienced excruciating pains in her arm and back for nearly 2 years before the MRI. Physical Therapy was obviously not working.
Cb | 7:42 a.m. June 9, 2009
People would be more interested in prevention if they paid their own cost for
healthcare. As long as insurance has low deductibles and copays people will not
take responsibility for their health. Insurance does not mean healthcare. If you
pay your own costs you take better care of yourself.
Brian | 7:53 a.m. June 9, 2009
The free enterprise system could have gone a long way towards solving the
problem we now face. We have a shortage of doctors in this country and an
excess of lawyers. Lawyers are low cost up front in terms of tax dollars spent
on their education but very expensive to maintain with costs of $700,000 per
year for their support system of courts etc. Doctors are expensive up front in
terms of their education but with more doctors there would be actual competition
and some of the rapidly increasing fees would start to come down in time.
Fewer law schools and more medical schools could lead eventually to a situation where you had a shortage of lawyers and an excess number of physicians!
Fewer law schools and more medical schools could lead eventually to a situation where you had a shortage of lawyers and an excess number of physicians!
to Martie et al. | 8:54 a.m. June 9, 2009
All you people who claim that some relative couldn't get care in (insert
your favorite country here) because that government had a State run health care
crack me up. If there is such a backlog for MRI's why hasn't some
enterprising person bought a machine and started scanning people for cash? You
can have a government health care system, and private health care both exist at
the same time. I live in Japan and that is exactly what we have here. With the
government health care (for which I do pay a premium, although not near the
premiums that I was paying in Utah), I can go to the local hospital and get
treated. I don't need to worry about being bankrupt if I get cancer, etc.
I am also free to purchase additional insurance coverage if I so desire from any
number of private insurance companies. I will always have the ability to pay
that premium and receive coverage. The government insurance will not drop me if
I make a claim that ends up costing them.
to Martie et al. cont | 8:55 a.m. June 9, 2009
To all of you that want private (market run insurance) I hope one day you have
some real medical catastrophe so that you get the personal experience of dealing
with the US insurance companies when you make a claim that costs more than a
regular doctor visit. When the company finds some reason to drop you, and no
one else will pick you up because you are "high risk" I imagine you
will start to sing a different tune.
The reason the US system is so screwed up has been described by other posters. Americans feel entitled to everything. They sue everyone for any stupid thing. The juries award crazy settlements causing the need for outrageous liability insurance costs to the health care providers. That cost then gets passed on to the insurance companies who pass it back to the taxpayer/worker/company, etc. It's a vicious cycle that will only stop when Americans stop being so greedy and self centered and start worrying about someone other than themselves.
The reason the US system is so screwed up has been described by other posters. Americans feel entitled to everything. They sue everyone for any stupid thing. The juries award crazy settlements causing the need for outrageous liability insurance costs to the health care providers. That cost then gets passed on to the insurance companies who pass it back to the taxpayer/worker/company, etc. It's a vicious cycle that will only stop when Americans stop being so greedy and self centered and start worrying about someone other than themselves.
Wassup | 11:21 a.m. June 9, 2009
To make preventive care a success, you have to change the behavior of those who
have put themselves at risk for health problems. Good luck. If they had any
sense of control, they would be involved in preventive care now.
Show me a study where behavior has changed as a result and then I'll believe this nonsense.
Show me a study where behavior has changed as a result and then I'll believe this nonsense.
national | 11:41 a.m. June 9, 2009
why not national insurance run through private companies like blue cross and
some of the other good companies, in compation for contracts
Facts | 11:41 a.m. June 9, 2009
Lawsuits account for less than 1% of total health care costs. (And
McDonald's did not pay Stella all the money you read about in those chain
letters.)
President Obama is in the forefront of finding ways to REWARD preventive actions.
The very people who can least afford health insurance (the poor), are also the people who complain if cigarette taxes go up.
Over 80% of total lifetime medical costs occur in the last two years of one's life. Once someone is deemed terminal, why do we give them other healthcare (ie, lasik surgery, etc)? Yes, that happens.
We "save" ultra-premature babies by spending millions on them, then have to care for them for the rest of their lives, because they have severe medical issues. Why? If God creates life, and God had the baby emerge early, why don't we let God's will prevail?
We make NO sense...but we want it all.
President Obama is in the forefront of finding ways to REWARD preventive actions.
The very people who can least afford health insurance (the poor), are also the people who complain if cigarette taxes go up.
Over 80% of total lifetime medical costs occur in the last two years of one's life. Once someone is deemed terminal, why do we give them other healthcare (ie, lasik surgery, etc)? Yes, that happens.
We "save" ultra-premature babies by spending millions on them, then have to care for them for the rest of their lives, because they have severe medical issues. Why? If God creates life, and God had the baby emerge early, why don't we let God's will prevail?
We make NO sense...but we want it all.
Tax deductions | 11:55 a.m. June 9, 2009
Give a tax deduction for health club dues (after verifiable improvement), and
for annual physicals, bicycle events, 10k runs etc. You have to incent people
if you want positive outcomes.
But wait, this won't work because then the people who have self-caused health problems will protest, just like they do with welfare reductions, social security, low income housing, everything else. Punish the people who are doing well, reward those who don't.
So just like when I am successful I pay more taxes, when I keep myself healthy, I'll be punished with an increase in healthcare costs that I don't have.
But wait, this won't work because then the people who have self-caused health problems will protest, just like they do with welfare reductions, social security, low income housing, everything else. Punish the people who are doing well, reward those who don't.
So just like when I am successful I pay more taxes, when I keep myself healthy, I'll be punished with an increase in healthcare costs that I don't have.
wallofvoodoo | 1:06 p.m. June 9, 2009
Belgie, I have a no frills lifestyle. No gadgets, but I still cannot afford
healthcare. What am I doing wrong? I'm not asking for a handout, just for
something that I can afford.
National, I don't have a problem with people getting a profit or making money. But why are we paying CEOs of these companies millions when they can't even come up with an affordable product? It seems like we reward incompetence. That is why having a private company administer a national plan will not work.
National, I don't have a problem with people getting a profit or making money. But why are we paying CEOs of these companies millions when they can't even come up with an affordable product? It seems like we reward incompetence. That is why having a private company administer a national plan will not work.
RE: nowchange | 4:23 p.m. June 9, 2009
Government is a thing, it has no capacity for love or compassion,
nor does Government have anything of it's own to give,
it can take away from one and give to another.
but if you give it power it will control things and people, that is a certainty,
which means what you are doing is gieig it the power to decide who gets care and who doesn't,
which it must do to control costs.
MUch better is to leave life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to the people,
Where you will always have TRUE freedom.
nor does Government have anything of it's own to give,
it can take away from one and give to another.
but if you give it power it will control things and people, that is a certainty,
which means what you are doing is gieig it the power to decide who gets care and who doesn't,
which it must do to control costs.
MUch better is to leave life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to the people,
Where you will always have TRUE freedom.
CGW | 12:44 a.m. June 11, 2009
Nowchange: Oh, I see. Since government is a THING it can't have
compassion. Unlike our oh-so-compassionate warm and fuzzy, warm hearted health
insurance companies. They're so busy making big profits that they even
hire people to find out where they can KEEP from paying for your health
care--though they have no problem accepting your monthly premiums of course. And
some of your unhonored premiums wind up as political payoffs to keep those
profits growing. If our current system was working, we wouldn't be having
this discussion. Stop any stranger on the street and ask for his or her health
care horror story. I assure you, s/he'll have one. Freedom? Yeah, freedom
to be ripped off by greedy insurance companies, for they are the ones who are
currently making the decisions about whether you get needed health care. And if
they can save money on denying you medical procedures, they will.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Springville comes back against AF 11:21 p.m.
- CIA ending Blackwater contract 11:10 p.m.
- 280 arrested in immigration sweep 11:09 p.m.
- Woman, 98, accused of murder 11:05 p.m.
- WSU geared up for SUU 11:04 p.m.
- U.S., Japan reach flight pact 11:03 p.m.
- Draft proposal reached on climate 11:02 p.m.
- World datelines 11:02 p.m.
- U.N. official to step down 11:01 p.m.
- Troop reductions in Iraq on track 11:00 p.m.
- Letters: Global warming a lie
277 - BYU football: Bronco weighs in on Hall195
- Palin signs books, chats with fans169
- Andersen apologizes for Jordan hoax143
- Nude bathers cited for lewdness138
- Max Hall wants to look ahead130
- Jazz fall apart late at L.A.110
- LDS to emphasize helping needy107
- Revive full food tax?106
- Panel passes BCS playoff bill105
David Rankin, one of Utah's youngest and ablest astrophotographers has...
There was a time when free shipping was rare. This holiday season, you...
Can you tell I just got out of a budget meeting with Gov Gary Herbert?
Latest comments
Since they are free tickets, the Conference Center has a formula of what...
I would like to see Boozer back but Memo we Love you but you need to go. We...
I thought the change to Aggie blue was an answer to prayers. Which of you...
Interesting that the poster at 10:39 PM plainly states that the BCS and the...
didnt play anyone even thou their strength of schedule is 45 places higher...
Hey buddy, you comin to the boards tonight? It sure would be nice to see...
Yes we are talking quantity. Per mass, DU has 0.6x the radiation of natural...
Every year the banner talk comes out after 1 goodwin.
and I mean that. How many other celebrities (and politicians) shrug off this...
Thay do not own a camper or RV. Just a minivan. So if they really did go...
Advertisements
In fact a government healthcare program that everyone could have access to would keep the other insurances honest. The government would see the value in Quality healthcare care and prevention programs.
The government would be interested in us being healthy because it would not cost them if we are healthy. It would be a great start on monitoring the private healthcare industry which is corrupt with ethic problems and Republican handouts.