Quantcast

Comments about ‘Should states accept health insurance exchanges?’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Feb. 10 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Hutterite
American Fork, UT

In answer to the question...No. What states should be doing is demanding a national single payer system, and get rid of the whole mess and inefficiency that insurance creates.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

Should states accept health insurance exchanges? ... Of course they should. How is it that all the tea party types who were only a few months ago saying 'the law is the law and has to be followed' now even considering trying to get their state to not allow health insurance exchanges?

Kent C. DeForrest
Provo, UT

So, the Republicans, who flat out refused to consider a single-payer system because they have figured out ideologically (but not practically) that a market-based system will work better, are now suggesting that states sabotage the ACA so that it won't work. They think there is political power to be gained by being obstructionist about everything. Are they not getting the picture that the American people are tired of their act, and the American people are also getting tired of being the only industrialized country with a dysfunctional health-care system.

Even though single-payer systems are not perfect, they are far superior to our hodge-podge of health-care lunacy. We are incredibly dense to not just adopt any of 20 systems that have already proved by their results that they can provide adequate, if not excellent, health care at half the price we pay.

UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

My company has some of the best benefits packages available..... have been rated in the top 5 companies to work for now 10 years running. We also have one of the highest retention rates of most any company. And we also pay under our peer companies..... what does that have to do with this.

If no one has noticed, our states are in a fierce battle to attract companies to call our states home. The better services the states provide, the better infrastructure, the better education offered, the more companies choose to locate in those areas... because their employees want to live in those areas. Its all about competing both nationally and globally for jobs.

Now a state can choose to be the low cost local alternative to other low cost nations, but that does nothing positive for the residents of the state. It just makes the state Mexico north - or China West. If you want to have a strong vibrant economy, you need employers that want well educated, healthy, happy employees. A state can play a big role in attracting businesses to locate their good jobs locally.

It a choice of paths the states need to make.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments