Quantcast

Comments about ‘John Florez: Are we losing our sense of morals?’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, April 6 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
higv
Dietrich, ID

People are very charitable in Utah and other places. I do not know of any documented case of someone dying because they did not have health care. ER is required to take all people. They just don't believe in charity with someone else's property.

Does the city council have a right to go in someone's home and take food out of there cupboard for there needy neighbor? I listen to Walter Williams sometimes and said that Grover Cleveland didn't authorize federal funding for disaster no basis for it. We need to help neighbors out of our own pocket not someone else's.

Wonder
Provo, UT

Good points. I think some people think the only morality that is important is morality related to sex.

george of the jungle
goshen, UT

My code of conduct is:
1. Watch what you say.
2. Don't tack what any one said to you to heart or personalty.
3. Never assume any thing.
4. Always do your best.
When it comes to money; I will take care of my self first, my family second. and third the general welfare last.

The elected cant see that they earn enough that they and their family are taken care of. It just goes to show that It's not how much money you have it's what you do with.

KJB1
Eugene, OR

higv:

The "everybody can go to the ER" argument makes as much sense as me going to a car lot and expecting them to just give me a Porsche. They still get billed and their credit can still be destroyed if they're unable to pay (Medical bills are the leading cause of bankruptcy.)

In an ideal world, private charity would be sufficient to take care of everybody's needs, but in this world, that's not the case. Government is needed to cover the gap, and unless you pave your own roads and deliver your own mail, you're taking from others for your own good as well. To paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes, we buy civilization with taxes, and too many people choose to whine nowadays when it's time to pay the bill.

10CC
Bountiful, UT

higv:

You may not know of documented cases of people dying from lack of healthcare, but deaths certainly occur. For example, ERs don't do cancer screening or chemo-therapy.

I visited a friend, and based on their symptoms, it was clear they were having a heart attack, and I said we needed to go to the ER. He resisted, saying they had no insurance and couldn't afford going to the ER. I finally had to get belligerent, we went to the ER, they were admitted and had 5-way heart bypass surgery. The surgeon told him he would have certainly died had he not come in to the ER.

Clearly, there are instances of good, moral, responsible people who are dying because they don't have insurance or the money to pay. They fear the bill and don't want to burden others.

Studies of the states that have expanded Medicaid show a clear improvement in mortality rates.

This information appears to make this a clear-cut moral decision, but the information is ignored, in favor of demonization of Obama, and opportunities for a few to make money by moving the prison.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

The most moral system we could create would be a single payer health care system. One that cares for all, which we would support without grudge or fear someone else is getting more out of it that we are.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

"People are very charitable in Utah and other places. I do not know of any documented case of someone dying because they did not have health care. ER is required to take all people. They just don't believe in charity with someone else's property."

First off, use google. It is a wonderful tool that apparently conservatives are still trying to learn. If you were to search you could easily find deaths.

Secondly, when folks use the ER for non-emergency situations our entire society is hurt. Is that what repubs really want? Pay if you can but use the ER for all other situations? Is that the repub solution to our health care?

Where are our priorities!? Our morals? We move so slow for health care but cannot move fast enough for handouts to developers. Why? Why is our legislature (over) analyzing health care but don't think twice about the moving of the prison? Could it be because our senate leader has ties to those developers? Could it be that our elected officials are sharing the same bed with special interest groups? That would never happen in Utah, right???

Wonder
Provo, UT

higv -- So whose health care have you paid for? Giving a couple of bucks at a carwash or in a jar at the local store doesn't cut it for someone needing thousands and thousands of dollars worth of medical care they can't pay for. Why don't you even want to think of a way that these people can have insurance? Why do you insist that it is better for them to suffer than for you to pay one penny in taxes to help them?

EJM
Herriman, UT

The bigger picture is one where we refuse to address the problem of "what is morally right and what do we, as a society, view as morally wrong?" the lines have become increasingly blurred. Our young people, in ever increasing numbers, do not care about ever telling the truth. The adults around them don't. Why should they?

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

"People are very charitable in Utah and other places. I do not know of any documented case of someone dying because they did not have health care. ER is required to take all people. They just don't believe in charity with someone else's property."

First off, use google. It is a wonderful tool that apparently conservatives are still trying to learn. If you were to search you could easily find deaths.

Secondly, when folks use the ER for non-emergency situations our entire society is hurt. Is that what repubs really want? Pay if you can but use the ER for all other situations? Is that the repub solution to our health care?

Where are our priorities!? Our morals? We move so slow for health care but cannot move fast enough for handouts to developers. Why? Why is our legislature (over) analyzing health care but don't think twice about the moving of the prison? Could it be because our senate leader has ties to those developers? Could it be that our elected officials are sharing the same bed with special interest groups? That would never happen in Utah, right???

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

How many people have paid thousands of dollars for medical care for an adult sister, uncle, cousin etc? What about for a neighbor? Ward member? I'm guessing many would say they could donate some money--but not thousands. What if everybody the person knew--family, neighbors and friends were also destitute?

Absolutely people die for lack of medical care.

Twelve-year-old Deamonte Driver died of a toothache. A routine, $80 tooth extraction might have saved him.
If his mother had been insured. If his family had not lost its Medicaid. If Medicaid dentists weren't so hard to find.
If his mother hadn't been focused on getting a dentist for his brother, who had six rotted teeth.
By the time Deamonte's own aching tooth got any attention, the bacteria from the abscess had spread to his brain, doctors said. After two operations and more than six weeks of hospital care, the Prince George's County boy died.
(2007 The Washington Post)

Maudine
SLC, UT

@ higv: Yes - the ER has to help everyone who comes in regardless of ability to pay - but all they are required to do is stabilize the patient. They do not have to provide continuing care.

And, out of curiosity, who do you think covers the ER costs associated with providing this care to those who cannot afford to pay? Let me give you a hint - it starts with "t" and ends with "axpayers". The question you need to ask yourself is: do you, as a taxpayer, want to pay for the cheaper care or the more expensive ER care?

TheWalker
Saratoga Springs, UT

I have lived in countries where patients, regardless of need, were not permitted to enter the hospital w/o proof of ability to pay. We are already being taxed at close to 40% of our income, and I am concerned about the taxpayer cost should we make all healthcare available to everyone, regardless of whether or not they have insurance.

Should we pay for the drug addict's rehab? How about the homeless man's cancer treatment? How much can we take from those that are working and giving to those that aren't?

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

Re:TheWalker

How will Drs./staff verify ability to pay before treating victims of heart attacks, car accidents, or any other number of health crisis'?

have you thought about moving back to those countries which only treated those who had the ability to pay?

one old man
Ogden, UT

This is an excellent and thoughtful piece. Unfortunately, there are some folks who will never understand.

Their minds are clouded with selfish greed and nothing more.

4word thinker
Murray, UT

The taxpayers are not the ones paying for ER visits, unless the patient is on medicaid.

Doctors and hospitals charge the cash customers double what they charge insured customers because half the cash customers never pay, so the other half of the cash customers pay for their own treatment plus someone else's treatment.

All you seeking fairness, what is fair about that?

Insurance companies love this arrangement. It guarantees them lots of customers who they can charge exorbitant fees because the cash payer gets screwed by the current system.

But you go ahead and argue about who should pay for the health care of the poor. In the mean time, many hospitals such as Shriner,s and Primary's provide services at no charge to those in need and they get their money from the donations of generous people, (many are those who are so resented by the democrats as being too rich). I think that is proof enough that we do have the capacity to help the poor through the kindness in our hearts without the government taking the money force-ably and wasting 50% of it in the bureaucracy before using any to actually help people.

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

Latter Day Saints dominate the Utah electorate. They are by and large fine moral people. Why then is Utah so politcally retrograde when it comes to dealing with health care and why is Utah so hostile to publicly provided safety nets? The answer is well known. Utah's religious leadership is and has always been hostile to anything which they believe even hints of socialism. The radical Birchism of the 50's and 60's still rules. The result is what Florez talks about. Still in the afterglow of a great conference I reluctantly make thes nonetheless realistic points.

The Hammer
lehi, utah

Socialism does not allow the individual to feel gratitude for the gift nor the giver love from giving. Socialism is forced kindness and creates a feeling of resentment from both sides because of the freeloaders who infect socialist systems and the poor workers who slave 40% of their time or more to provide these benefits they can barely afford themselves.

Greed could be seen from both sides as many entitled drug addicts and lazy individuals abuse the disability insurance programs to get something from nothing and as rich look on their riches as their own and not God given.

I want everyone to have medical care but I hate to see the large amount of freeloaders who take advantage of free care. The cost of free care to everyone means that we will have to pay more than we are paying right now in taxes to pay for it. This burden will be born by those that work whether they will see it through reduced wages from employers, Higher taxes on their business, Less quality in medical care and/or greater out of pocket expenses for all products. SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR IT!

UT Brit
London, England

@The Hammer

You cant get more American than this. You will not implement a system proven by the rest of the developed world to be cheaper and more effective because you are terrified that someone might get something without paying for it.

By the way you might want to get rid of the socialised, army, emergency services, roads, railroads etc.....

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

"Socialism does not allow the individual to feel gratitude for the gift nor the giver love from giving. Socialism is forced kindness and creates a feeling of resentment from both sides because of the freeloaders who infect socialist systems and the poor workers who slave 40% of their time or more to provide these benefits they can barely afford themselves." Pure hogwash. I thank God everyday for the social security my mother received and the medicare benefits she received (the first decent health care of her entire life, and BTW she was as faithful a member of the LDS Church as you could find). LDS simply think government safety nets are Satanic, wheras the Church safety net, such as it exists, is devine. It's a matter of perspective, and gross bias.

to comment

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