Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letters: Not just the name’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, March 9 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Eric Samuelsen
Provo, UT

"Reiser then lists the positive parts of the ACA: insurance exchanges, help for those who can not afford health insurance, guaranteeing coverage for pre-existing conditions, banning insurance companies from canceling policies because a person becomes ill, etc. Doesn't Reiser realize that these positive attributes could be better enacted within the framework of the American free enterprise system?"
In other words, all the main provisions of the ACA can be achieved without the ACA? Followed by the usual right wing rant against socialized medicine.
Here's the thing; we know you're wrong. We can compare Medicare to 'free enterprise.' Medicare provides much better care for a fraction of the cost. Those are the facts, and they are not in dispute.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Why am I having trouble believing that this writer was actually "an international consultant on healthcare?"

Could it be that I have several friends in "socialist" countries who tell me the healthcare and other programs supportive of their citizens is better that what they experienced in the United States? It would have been nice if this writer had included some solid documentation of his claims.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

This letter is big on opinion but extremely low on facts. Socialized medicine systems in w Europe have failed? Huh?

I'd also like to know which 3rd world countries you have been to. I'd guess that he majority if not all have been devastated with wealth inequality, corporationism, and raping and pillaging of natural resources (including the pillaging and abuse of the native peoples)

Face it, if privatized medicine was successful then all other industrialized systems wouldn't have moved away from it.

Ralph West Jordan
Taylorsville, UT

"guaranteeing coverage for pre-existing conditions, banning insurance companies from canceling policies because a person becomes ill, etc. Doesn't Reiser realize that these positive attributes could be better enacted within the framework of the American free enterprise system?"

I ask the writer of this lette as an alledged "health care consultant" to explain who he thinks and when he thinks these "attributes would be enacterd within the framework of the existing "American free enterprise system".

Correct me if I am wrong, but haven't we been waiting and or trying to accomplish this fete for decades. The AFA is definitely not perfect but is a definite starting point, and instead of trying to destroy what has been accoplished, wouldn't it be refreshing for all parties who are genuinely intersted in improving the countries health care system to come togeather and build on what has been started.

But me thinks that those who complain loudest about the AFA are not really interested in improving, just destroying!

Grover
Salt Lake City, UT

The problem is not with Obamacare. The problem is that the entire system of healthcare has been failing in this Country for more than 10 years. Every year premiums go up and coverage is limited yet again. Every year citizens who can no longer afford insurance have to ask the government to pay or just go to the E room and worry about the cost later. Instead of talking about Obamacare, let's hear other solutions to the problem...or do you just want to make yet another partisan rant?

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "The problem is not with Obamacare."

Yeah, it is.

Obamacare, by its patient and provider mandates, needless, expensive bureaucracy, and punitive, classist nature amounts to nothing more than a takeover of the means of production [of healthcare services], coupled with a method of addressing the inevitable descent into rationing of what will become an ever more scarce and expensive commodity.

The crowning irony is, of course, its laughably inaccurate official title. Nothing about Obamacare can or will make health care more affordable. Nor is "care" its real object.

Rather, Obamacare is a large step toward that "progressive" dream of government expropriation of ALL means of production, and establishment of a Soviet-style oligarchy, with liberal apparatchiks as its hereditary nobility, and abundant gulags to house dissenting American patriots.

We'll take only small comfort from the inevitable "I-told-you-so" chorus we'll be singing in a couple years, as "progressives" are forced to admit they destroyed the best heart care delivery system the world has ever known.

In the name of "fairness," no less.

Emajor_
Ogden, UT

Excuse my ignorance here, but the premise of this letter makes absolutely no sense to me.

Lets start with this quote: "Doesn't Reiser realize that these positive attributes could be better enacted within the framework of the American free enterprise system?"

Then why, exactly, has the private sector been unable thus far to provide those positive attributes? Isn't the entire point of the ACA that the free enterprise system hasn't been taking care these problems?

"advising third world countries on how they could improve their failing socialized health care systems"

We don't have a socialized health care system and the ACA doesn't turn it into one. As an "international health care consultant" I'm surprised Mr. Rasmussen doesn't understand that.

EDM
Castle Valley, Utah

Blaine,

Let all mighty competition bring down health care costs! Whatever works. But tell me, what on earth have conservatives brought to the table except a flat-out refusal to do anything constructive?

to comment

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