Comments about ‘Affordable Care Act: Health care for 30 million more citizens will yield prosperity’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, March 3 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Obamcare is projected to cost taxpayers an additional $1.2 trillion each year. Hardly prosperity, is it?

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

Getting sick in America all too often means going broke. We need a single payer system that covers everyone. It's not free health care, but it is more efficient than what we have now.

one old man
Ogden, UT

I would be very, very interesting to see what people like MM say if some day he or a family member is struck by some horribly expensive illness and his insurance company says, "Tough luck!"

Kimber
Salt Lake City, UT

The comments made below about getting sick and being "left in the dark" has been all too true in this country! The ACA is an important step in the right direction and we are already starting to see the benefits of it!

An ACA Volunteer

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

The ACA may or may not yield prosperity. But doing the repub plan and kicking the can down the road most certainly would not only yield prosperity but continue to add to our disasterous tragedy known as our health care system

Doing something is a lot better than doing nothing.

Tulip
West Jordan, UT

Sorry Hutterite, I meant to direct my comment to "one old man"

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "Any short-term hardship that may come from the implementation of the Affordable Care Act will certainly be offset . . . ."

Just another disingenuous "pie in the sky" liberal promise.

But real people don't need pie in the sky by and by. We need for the government to get out of the way and let the economy recover NOW.

Moderate
Salt Lake City, UT

Typical. Those who oppose the ACA still aren't offering an alternate solution.

Kent C. DeForrest
Provo, UT

This opinion is certainly better reasoned than the counter-argument by Grace-Marie Turner, but the question they are debating is the wrong question. We should not be worried about whether or not the ACA will spur economic growth. Economic growth is not the only good in society. The question is, Will the ACA provide health care to those who do not have it, and will it prevent people from having to declare bankruptcy because of medical bills?

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

@ one old man. It has happened to my family and we did the best we could and my family all gathered around like they used to before the government took over health care. None of us ever asked our neighbors to pay for our healthcare! See the difference?

Fibonacci
Centerville, UT

30 million more patients but no provisions for significantly increasing the number of doctors. I worry that in the end the wait for health care will cripple it. What good is being affordable if it's not available?

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

I am still trying to figure out how increasing taxes and a $20,000 insurance plan will lead to more prosperity.

Can one of you liberals explain how this nation is to be more prosperous when everybody is paying more for healthcare or else has higher deductibles that make anything beyond wellness checkups unaffordable?

county mom
Monroe, UT

Obamacare is an aweful burden on all working citizens..
I don't know who is supposed to get the benefits of this massive government takeover of our healthcare system.
For the short term and for the forseable future, we are paying three times as much for less coverage.
How could this possibly make the costs of healthcare less?
Are we going to kill off those with drug addictions, the obese, the elderly, the mentally ill, those born with disease or defects?
What could possibly make the costs go down? When the working people are forced to pay for the nonworking and even the non-citizens healthcare, when those who sneak across our borders are given the same care as those who pay taxes.
We are doomed to never be able to pay in as much as is bleeding out.
The costs will continue to rise.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

Time to be a bitter whiner is over.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

@ one vote. The only people who are bitter are those of us who will actually have to pay for Obamacare! The other 47% won't have to!

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

Mr. Forrest has stated the problem exactly..it's actually pretty dumb to try and make the argument for the ACA in economic growth terms.

MM..you gathered around before the government took over health care? The only government take over of health care is Medicare. Is that what you mean? Nothing else makes any sense.

Country Mom..the only way ACA makes you pay three times as much for insurance is if you didn't have insurance in the first place or are an employer who employees 50 or more people and provided sub par insurance, in which case you would have more coverage not less. To conflate the general trend in rising health care costs with the ACA is simply dishonest.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

@ Pragmat. Obamacare isn't the government take over of our healthcare?

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "Mountanman" I wouldn't call this an all out take over of healthcare. This is a prime example of Liberal Fascism. Now, before the liberals start their rants, you have to remember that Fascism is the governmnet control of business. The government may not take over the health insurance industry, but will effectively control it through regulation and mandates.

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

To all my conservative friends here, I understand your legitimate points about the free market and how government intervention can often make things worse, but in order for those points to hold for healthcare you need to explain how the healthcare industry functions like the automobile or toaster industries - only by demonstrating that can you make the case that an unregulated free market is the best way to provide the maximum health benefits to a society.

Also, ask yourselves why every other developed country in the world has regulated their healthcare systems to some extent (some obviously more than others)? Are they all just gleeful socialists? If so, you’ll have to make that case for not just “shiny, happy people” countries like Sweden and Denmark, but also for countries who are typically much more concerned with things actually working well (e.g., Germany, Switzerland, Japan, etc…).

glendenbg
Salt Lake City, UT

@RedShirt - your definition of fascism is incorrect. Fascism includes many elements, one of which is an alliance between government and corporations to protect corporate power and advance corporate interests while suppressing organized labor and unions. The notion of liberal fascism is nonsense. Fascism is an authoritarian movement of the right and has sought to limit and wipe out liberal institutions and political parties.

Regulated capitalism, of which the Affordable Care Act is an example, has been part and parcel of Western liberalism for over a century - and corresponded with massive improvements in quality of life for millions of people all over the world. Regulated capitalism evolved as liberal nations sought to limit the excesses of capitalism. The ACA represents an attempt to maintain private and non-governmental control of health insurance and health care while moving us closer to universal health care rather than implementation of a single payer system (Canada) or government owned system (the United Kingdom).

There are many reasons to be critical of the ACA in the real world. It seems unnecessary to invent reasons such your claim of liberal fascism.

to comment

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