Utah needs to expand Medicaid

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Feb. 17, 2013 2:50 p.m.

    Why is it that ignorance, greed, and envy hiding behind proponents of socialism? Socialism is Anti-God at its core. It is achieves 'charity' by compulsion, an oxymoron if there ever was one. Charity can only be administered by those who freely give of their substance, which blesses both receiver and giver. Government, on the other hand, compels and redistributes, thus reducing the indigent to a beggar requesting assistance from the equivalent of an impersonal object, hardly a charitable act. Evan those who hide their contempt of the poor by allowing government to redistribute his wealth is not being charitable. Socialism is not the answer to anything and at its core is against God's way of blessing the poor.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Feb. 17, 2013 7:29 a.m.

    UT Brit.. I for one noticed how the Brits celebrated their national health care system at the olympics. I heard nothing but "the sounds of silence" from the right wing on that demonstration. The right wing does not understand that there are certain services that are best handled on a collective public basis and that health care bill paying is one of them.

  • Oldy Glocks Orem, UT
    Feb. 17, 2013 6:21 a.m.

    Read the Constitution including the section about lawful money.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Feb. 16, 2013 11:01 p.m.

    The humane thing to do is get to get out of the welfare business and allow Charity to take over,which becomes even more problematic with the an ignorance populous that believes that more government will bring more charity! Unleash the free market and a belief in humanity's best to provide charity. Return to God, instead of Godless Socialism, for a stronger America. Obama is a socialist and far too many Americans are walking down the same path.

    Edmund Burke, the great British political philosopher, warned of the threat of economic equality. He said,

    A perfect equality will indeed be produced—that is to say, equal wretchedness, equal beggary, and on the part of the petitioners, a woeful, helpless, and desperate disappointment. Such is the event of all compulsory equalizations. They pull down what is above; they never raise what is below; and they depress high and low together beneath the level of what was originally the lowest.

    Educate yourselves America if you want a future worth living in!

  • UT Brit London, England
    Feb. 16, 2013 12:46 a.m.


    Because the US health care system is a disaster. You cant apply free market principles when it comes to health care.

    The US has the least regulated and supposedly open system in the first world. It also spends twice as much per person and has worse results for nearly every discernible metric.

    Every other first world country has managed it Redshirt. What makes Americans so incapable of doing the same? Please try and answer without talking about American exceptionalism.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Feb. 15, 2013 12:46 p.m.

    To "UT Brit" the US isn't setting up a taxpayer funded healthcare system. THey are setting up a taxpayer funded health insurance system. The IRS has found that for the government to provide health insurance equal to what the private companies provide, the cheapest plan will be $20,000. The government costs more to do the same thing that private companies can do.

    The big question is why would you want a government running healthcare when they can't do simple things like balance a budget, or prevent wasting and losing healthcare money at 2 times the rate of private companies?

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 15, 2013 11:20 a.m.

    But to the broader issue, how health care should be provided. Health care is more a social issue than a commercial one. Health care requires a socialist sollution. Instead we are trying to solve the health care crisis by serving a variety of private interests. This is like squareing the circle.

  • AT Elk River, MN
    Feb. 15, 2013 10:56 a.m.

    Eric, the expansion of Medicaid is not humane. It is the State, by force or the threat of force, robbing from one group of people and giving to another. Nothing the state does is humane. People, acting on their own, voluntarily, commit humane acts. Government is force. Now, if a local church or other non-government agency wants to establish a fund to help people without insurance, that is humane.

    The federal government does not pay 100% of the expansion. We, the people, pay 100% of the expansion. And then, when the ratio changes to 90%, that'll be an extra 10% that's taken by the local robbers.

    Oh, how cold and heartless I must be. These people are SUFFERING. Yes they are. I believe I should help. However, I don't believe that help should come by way of a government agent threatening me with the loss of life, liberty, or property. And, when all the layers of velvet are removed, Eric's cry for humanity administered by the government, is enforced by a gun.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Feb. 14, 2013 9:02 p.m.


    The figure for Obamacare you cite is gross cost--not net cost.

    The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the Affordable Care Act will have a net savings in comparison to there being no bill. The CBO and Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) now estimate the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net decrease in federal deficits of $2 billion over the 2012-2021 period

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Feb. 14, 2013 8:46 p.m.

    Single payer system is the answer. We're already spending more than enough to make it work. We can include everyone. Bankrupt no one.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Feb. 14, 2013 6:37 p.m.

    Sounds to me like thinkin man and mm are advocating a single payer system! I knew you'd come around. Single payer systems are cheaper, more efficient, and better. Get rid of the for profit insurance nonsense. Tell them to get real jobs

  • morpunkt Glendora, CA
    Feb. 14, 2013 5:23 p.m.

    That is precisely my point. The reason why taxes are so high here is to pay for their decadent pensions. Their lobbyists in Sacramento are essentially the robber barons of our time.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Feb. 14, 2013 2:37 p.m.

    @ Morpunkt. You are right, most of my neighbors are former Californians. I frequently ask them why they left California to live here. Typical response: escape from high taxes, the school systems, pollution and crime. I get along with them well and welcome them here!

  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    Feb. 14, 2013 10:46 a.m.

    The core argument in the article is that since the Federal Govenment is going to give us all this free money, we would be stupid to not take it.

    This is exactly how the federal government is currently ruining our education system. Local districts can tap into a large reserve of funds, if they only conform to the guidelines dictacted by the federal government.

    What we end up with are bad educational practices pushed by people who have no connection to the distinct needs and desires of the local parents and students. All funded by ... oh yea, us. Or more realistically, by our children's children's children.

    Nothing is free, not even free healthcare. If Utah capitulates to the federal bribe, doesn't that make us co-conspirators in the crime being committed against our posterity?

  • SLars Provo, UT
    Feb. 14, 2013 10:18 a.m.

    I've read that much of the 1.5 billion will provide health care to those here illegally, once Obama care kicks in.

  • jean22 Bountiful, UT
    Feb. 14, 2013 9:36 a.m.

    I agree: Utah needs to accept the Medicaid Expansion!

  • micawber Centerville, UT
    Feb. 14, 2013 9:18 a.m.

    @Thinkin\' Man:

    "Do away with the middleman". If by this you mean have a single payer system, I agree with you. You also say we should open insurance to nation-wide competition. So, wouldn't we still have a middleman? You recommend we cut government red tape, but the administrative costs for Medicaid are lower than private sector insurance companies.

  • Makid Kearns, UT
    Feb. 14, 2013 9:17 a.m.

    Thinkin\' Man,

    The only way that the US will see a drop in medical expenses is to remove all middle men. Hospital administration is fine, most are very lean already.

    The US pays nearly 10 times the next closest country for medical care yet receives less than nearly all countries.

    France, UK, Canada, Germany, Norway, Finland, Sweden, etc., all have a single payer system. They pay into it via taxes, they pay co-pays at the doctor and all have better access to care, better care, lower infant mortality rates, longer life spans and healthier lives.

    The problem is that we have been sold a bill of good from the insurance companies that this is the best way when it is proven incorrect everywhere, even in the US.

    If we dropped the insurance companies and went to a dedicated single payer (1 large insurance company) medical costs would drop overnight.

    Of course, we would have nearly 10 Million unemployed due to the nature of insurance companies but with lower medical, more money would enter the market creating more jobs at all levels. The economy would normalize in about 3 years.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Feb. 14, 2013 9:09 a.m.

    Good article. Medicaid expansion would not be neccesary if we had a truely universal single payer system. You poeple who push the goverment scare stuff crack me up. Mountanman is right we should not be pushing costs of to the next generation, but we really aren't doing that with this medicaid expension, so as usual he raises a red herring.

  • UT Brit London, England
    Feb. 14, 2013 9:07 a.m.

    @Thinkin\' Man

    Why does government run health care have to be expensive? All other first world countries have some form of government health care and run at close to half the costs of what the US spends per person.

  • Thinkin\' Man Rexburg, ID
    Feb. 14, 2013 8:48 a.m.

    This is like saying "people keep getting cuts on their feet, so the government needs to buy more band-aids for them."

    No, the answer is to wear shoes or sweep the dang floor!

    If medical care were cheaper, the major problems would go away. Do away with the middleman system. Cut hospital administrations. Limit malpractice awards. Open insurance to nation-wide competition. End the collusion between health care providers and insurance companies that guarantee high payments. Cut government red tape. And most important of all, DO NOT create a big expensive Federal health care bureaucracy.

    This ain't rocket science.

  • morpunkt Glendora, CA
    Feb. 14, 2013 8:16 a.m.

    With all due respect to the good people of the area of Idaho that you live in, I have to ask myself the very same question, in terms of the wealthy retired California pensioners who live in your area, Who in California can afford to pay them such luxurious pensions? Certainly our Iraq/Afghanistan veterans should at least get their fare share of sacrificing themselves as well.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Feb. 14, 2013 7:53 a.m.

    Important question no one is asking? Who is going to pay for it? We don't have the money and we can not just keep borrowing from our grandchildren.

  • morpunkt Glendora, CA
    Feb. 14, 2013 7:09 a.m.

    This is the reason why I am grateful I live in California. Much more is available for assistance for my Down Syndrome son over here. Because of that, my wife and I are extremely "blessed".