Quantcast

Comments about ‘Topic of the day: Obamacare problems continue to pile on’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Feb. 4 2014 11:15 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

The Stephen Dinan article in the Washington Times quotes the CBO's figures. The entire article should be read. It foretells, using the CBO's own figures, what will happen to destroy our economy by 2024 - which is as far as the CBO projects. It shows that not only ObamaCare, but Obama's complete financial package is destroying America's finances. People are being paid not to work. It quoted Jay Carney, Obama's Press Secretary,who said that ObamaCare will give workers the freedom to retire rather than working.

Perhaps Mr. Carney would like to explain to us how workers, who are not even able to find full time work, workers who pay 50% more for health insurance than they did last year, workers whose deductible is 50% higher than it was last year, can afford to retire. What world does Mr. Carney and Mr. Obama live in?

Millions are out of work because of the uncertainties caused by ObamaCare. Millions more will lose their health insurance because of ObamaCare. Even more millions will have their hours cut back because of ObamaCare. This is what Obama considers a "success"! What would he consider to be failure?

Utah Health Policy Project
Salt Lake City, UT

After reading this article, I'm glad to focus on how the ACA or Obamacare is operating in Utah.
>We have 91 private insurance plans for sale on Utah's ACA marketplace
>These 91 plans are offered by 6 private insurance companies
>Utah's Avenue H offers insurance for small businesses and their employees
>Utah has one of the most competitive and affordable ACA marketplaces in the nation
>After January 1st, no Utahns can be denied insurance (or charged more) based on an illness or their health history
>After January 1st, older Utahns pay less for insurance because their age is less important in calculating premiums.
>Over 18,000 Utahns signed up for ACA private insurance in 2013
>82% of Utahns enrolling in ACA insurance received a premium subsidy to make it more affordable
>A Utah family of four can earn between $23,000 and $94,000 a year and receive monthly subsidy to help with insurance payments
>Utahns have until March 31st 2014 to sign up for ACA insurance on healthcare-dot-gov
>Find answers to your questions, or receive help signing up for insurnace at takecareutah-dot-org, or call United Way's 2-1-1

elisabeth
American Fork, UT

Thanks Utah Health Policy for the useful information.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

I am so grateful for the ACA. Without it, millions of Americans would be without healthcare. Give it some time and repubs will attempt to reclaim the ACA as their own. Too bad, because the rest of the country has left the GOP in the dust.

J Thompson
SPRINGVILLE, UT

The "Utah Health Policy Project" comment should leave us speechless. It reported that 82% of those who have signed up in Utah expect another American to pay (at least in part) for their health insurance. It reported that a "family of four can earn between $23,000 and $94,000 a year and receive monthly subsidy to help with insurance payments".

Just who is paying those subsidies? Subsidies are not paid by the government. Subsidies are paid by you and me. In addition to paying for someone else's insurance, we still have to pay for our own.

The "Utah Health Policy Project" thinks that subsidies are a good idea?

If the system is fair, it would allow all to buy insurance at the same price with no subsidy of any kind. Subsidies are another word for "transfer of wealth". Nothing in the U.S. Constitution allows the Federal Government to transfer wealth from one class or group of citizens to another class or group. Russia does that. China does that. Cuba does that. America was not built on the premise that government gives personal welfare to its citizens.

FT
salt lake city, UT

The article identifies the real objection behind the ACA, and that's the redistribution of wealth. The wealthy have theirs and don't want to sacrifice for those who don't.

Star Bright
Salt Lake City, Ut

A Utah family of four can earn between $23,000 and $94,000 a year and receive monthly subsidy to help with insurance payments

That statement hit me in the stomach too.
Can you imagine? Up to $94,000 for 4 and you get someone else to help pay for your health insurance?

What a country? Printing presses will be going night and day.
And don't worry "the real maverick" no Republican will ever, ever take any credit for this criminal enterprise.

1conservative
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT

Up until now I didn't realize that the DN allowed "press releases" in the comments section. The "Utah Health Policy......" is nothing more than a press release.

For instance: how MANY insurance policies were offered to Utahns BEFORE Obamacare? Also, Utah always HAS HAD some of the most affordable insurance in the nation - thats' nothing new!

Also, to the DN; I have always thought web addresses were NOT allowed in the comments section. The last line quotes a web address.

The Utah Health Policy.....seems to think its GREAT that people have subsidies; its' almost as if subsidies are "free" money.
There is no such thing.

IF Obamacare is so great, why does Obama continue to spend millions on ads to promote it? If its' so great, I would think people would be "lining up" to sign up.
Thats' not happening and we all know it.

Irony Guy
Bountiful, Utah

I'm not big on ad hominem reasoning, but when the Washington Times says something, I'm afraid I have to discount it. It's sort of like not trusting the daily GOP Briefing I get on the internet. With some people you don't trust . . . and it's not worth the bother to verify.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Perhaps "FT" would like to tell us where he draws the line? President Obama drew the line at $20. He refuses to send $20 to a half-brother in Africa, even though that $20 would DOUBLE the yearly income of his half-brother. In other words, President Obama is totally against the redistribution of HIS own wealth, but he continually talks about the "rich guy" that needs to have the government help him rid himself of excess wealth. What is excess? Obama has everything furnished, yet he gets a salary of more that $400,000. In addition to that, he makes another $1 million a year. What is enough?

Does "FT" want his wealth redistributed to the poor in other parts of the world? Does he want to pay for health-care for Obama's poor half-brother? If not, why does he demand that only those who are wealthier than he should have their wealth confiscated to pay for his or someone else's health insurance? If the principle is a good principle, it should extend to everyone all over the world, shouldn't it?

FT
salt lake city, UT

Mike Richards-
You interpert or assume a lot from my short post. A sizeable amount of our taxes are a redistribution of wealth. Social Security, Education, Food Stamps, Unemployment, etc. The ACA is another tool of wealth redistribution which I believe is the biggest objection critics have of the law. As I stated, many of the wealthy have their insurance and don't want to sacrifice further for those who don't. Why don't we just get down to debating what the ACA, SS, Education, Food Stamps, etc are (wealth redistribution) and if it is benefical to our society or not? Not sure all the other points about BO's 1/2 brother or his salary are really relevant to the discussion and am suprised the DN review did not reject them for being out of context.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Obamacare has lots of problems but the largest of them all and the one that will untimely harm our economy the most is that it has far too many takers and far to few payers and is hemorrhaging red ink! The Demos are already planning a massive tax payer bailout of insurance companies from an ocean of red ink in an effort to salvage Obamacare from imploding.

Gildas
LOGAN, UT

"If a man will not recognize the inequalities around him and voluntarily, through the gospel plan, come to the aid of his brother, he will find that through "a democratic process" he will be forced to come to the aid of his brother. The government will take from the "haves" and give to the "have nots". Both have lost their freedom. "

Howard W Hunter: The Teachings of Howard W Hunter: Page 169, under sub-heading "Personal unrighteousness can lead to a welfare state".

Thid Barker
Victor, ID

@ Gildas. Obamacare is no "gospel plan". Perhaps you should read what the prophets (especially Ezra Taft Benson) have taught about the evils of the government dole which is exactly what Obamacare is!

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

FT,

Do you want your wealth taken from you and given to Obama's half-brother? It's a very simple question. You've told us in both your posts that you support the redistribution of wealth. Are you willing to participate fully? Are you willing to pool your money with all people in all places and let each receive back an equal amount? Are you willing to work 40, or 50 or sixty hours a weeks so that someone else can live without working? Obama is not willing to do that. I am not willing to do that. I don't expect you to do that for me or for my family. That is a sure way to ruin a man, his family and the society that he lives in. If he wants to help others, he is already free to do that. If he believes is assisting the poor and the needy, he can contribute his time and his money as freely as he desires.

What you are advocating is forced charity. Who is the father of forced charity? His use of "force" caused him to be ejected from heaven.

Res Novae
Ashburn, VA

It's not really on point to the article, but since the comments predictably fell into "lazy people don't deserve my charity" rhetoric, I submit the below quotation:

 "Suppose that in this community there are ten beggars who beg from door to door for something to eat, and that nine of them are impostors who beg to escape work, and with an evil heart practise imposition upon the generous and sympathetic, and that only one of the ten who visit your doors is worthy of your bounty; which is best, to give food to the ten, to make sure of helping the truly needy one, or to repulse the ten because you do not know which is the worthy one? You will all say, Administer charitable gifts to the ten, rather than turn away the only truly worthy and truly needy person among them. If you do this, it will make no difference in your blessings, whether you administer to worthy or unworthy persons, inasmuch as you give alms with a single eye to assist the truly needy."
-Brigham Young

FT
salt lake city, UT

Mike-
Neither of my post said I support the redistribution of wealth. Both of my post said the ACA redistributes wealth, as does SS, Medicare, and Education. I think a more pertinent question anyone needs to ask is how much of their own wealth would they support to be redistributed by goverment. I don't have a solid opinion on that. I truly don't know that there is a correct answer of if I know what it is. I pay over 30k a year in taxes and feel more grateful than bitter to live in a country that takes that from me but provides me with freedom, security and a right to pursue hapiness.

Gildas
LOGAN, UT

Thid Barker

Might I respectfully ask that you read the statement more carefully. Howard W Hunter is not recommending the world's version of welfare at all.

As the sub-section title cited obviouisly suggests, welfare comes b'c of a failure of the better off to deal sympathetically with the problems of the many honest poor people. He states that this is not a good thing since it takes away the freedom of both giver and recipient.

I am a big fan of Ezra Taft Benson and am not inferior to you in my knowledge or understanding of these things. However I do not take a partisan view. It is very obvious that a "dole" is a bad system, but it comes about when private philanthropy fails to meet the needs of the honest portion of the worse off.

Roland Kayser
Cottonwood Heights, UT

"Obamacare will push approximately 2 million people out of the labor market by 2017, according to Stephen Dinan of the Washington Times, citing the latest estimates Tuesday from the Congressional Budget Office."

This comment was given three pinochios by the Washington Post fact checker. In other words, it's mostly a lie.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "I am so grateful for the ACA. Without it, millions of Americans would be without healthcare."

Uh . . . maybe you missed the memo.

Millions of Americans are without health care. And millions more will soon be, when their employers dump their health care benefit. And most of the millions Obamacare promised would quickly be newly insured . . . aren't.

Millions that believed the cynical lie, "if you like your plan, you can keep it," couldn't. And most of them can no longer afford insurance, because Obamacare forced them out of their familiar plans, into weird boutique plans, with rates based on offering expensive anti-life, anti-sanity, anti-health items that are the darling of one or another Democrat constituency, but are completely irrelevant to real people.

It's just sad that liberals are grateful for so much pain and misery.

to comment

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