Letter: Misery index

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 11, 2013 8:41 a.m.

    The people who couldn't afford health insurance before (many because they had other priorities), will be shocked when they login to the website and find out they still have to pay for it... and now it costs more than it did before.

    It costs more because rates must go up because people can come to them AFTER they have been diagnosed with an expensive problem and the insurance company has no recourse but to accept them and pay (even if they drop the insurance the day after treatment).

    If you couldn't afford it before... you probably can't afford it NOW (with the higher premiums)?

    I know SOME will get government help, but most are just REQUIRED to buy it now (by law). Whether they think they NEED it or not, or THINK they can afford it or not (it's up to the government now to decide if you can afford it or not, and if they will give you at tax credit or not). But you have to pay the premiums for 18 months before you see one dime back from the Government (if you ever see a cent from the government).

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 10, 2013 12:02 a.m.


    If you walk into many Drs. Offices or call to make an appt. and you have no insurance, they will require you to pay up front. And what about prescriptions? If you have no insurance you will pay full price.

    Deseret News Sept 2013:
    "More than 370,000 Utahns are uninsured, and about 123,000 would be eligible for state and federally funded Medicaid programs under a full expansion of the program, which is an option under the Affordable Care Act."

    What is going to happen to those 123,000 if Gov Herbert doesn't expand Medicaid?

    Bart Combe doesn't look sick. He hardly even looks his age.

    But Combe, 53, is sick enough that he lost his job as an industrial electrician due to an inability to work. And since losing his job, he's also lost his South Ogden home and his health insurance.

    A kind friend has taken him in, but Combe has yet to find a way to cover necessary medical expenses for the progressing multiple sclerosis he suffers.

    "The state has no option for single men without insurance," Combe said Thursday. "There's no program for us."

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 9:02 p.m.

    Re: "The facts say otherwise."

    Actually, they don't.

    No American is today refused medical care. Most have insurance or qualify for one or another government/subsidized plan.

    The rest receive care in emergency rooms. Their care is paid by increasing costs to covered patients.

    No one is turned away. That's reality.

    Under Obamacare, illegal aliens and 30 million Americans remain uncovered. They'll continue to receive treatment as they do now, and it'll be paid, as it is now.

    Obamacare changes nothing for 40+ million.

    But for the rest of us? Well first off, our premiums will immediately increase by 40 to 60%, and they'll keep going up, since Obamacare does nothing to control costs.

    Secondly, millions lose coverage they now have, as it becomes too expensive for them or their employers. They'll revert to treatment in emergency rooms, driving costs and premiums even higher, forcing more and more of us out of coverage.

    Finally, Obamacare collapses the system, as it was designed to do, giving liberals new crises to exploit, politically.

    Obama wins. But we lose.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 6:34 p.m.

    Joe: " I have to laugh every time the left tries to suggest that Obamacare was somehow the brainchild of Romney, the GOP, the Tea Party or any other conservative group."

    Laugh all you want, but the indisputable fact is that the core elements of the ACA, especially the individual mandate, originated with the Heritage Foundation.

    Re: "doubling-down on the status quo is not a viable alternative."

    "Sure it is. It's working now. It has been working for years."

    The facts say otherwise. Tens of millions of Americans either can't afford or can't buy health insurance due to pre-existing condition, and the number growing rapidly. Medical costs are the #1 cause of personal bankruptcies. The claim that the status quo is serving us well is completely disconnected from reality.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 6:22 p.m.

    Move along, folks, nothing constructive here.

  • E Sam Provo, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 4:48 p.m.

    The delayed implementation of the employer mandate was requested by the business community, and is a very minor part of the ACA. The individual mandate, though, had to be coordinated with the roll out of the exchanges. Come on, folks, the implementation of almost any legislation requires a certain flexibility. Another talking point worried to death by GOP attack dogs.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 4:07 p.m.

    The Misery Index is a real thing. It played a pivotal role when government entitlements were out of control, taxes inflation and the price of living were skyrocketing, and America was so weak we had to give up the Panama Canal and nobody respected our military so we couldn't even get our embassy employees back from Iran.

    It's a real thing. It can swing elections. I think Republicans need to get off the pot and let ACA become fully implemented in time for the affects of it to be known and fully accounted for in the misery-index by the next election. The longer they hold out, the less chance there is people will even know what the full impact of the ACA is on them before then.

    Obama was able to delay implementation of most of ObamaCare till he doesn't have to face the electorate again. Now Republicans are playing into the NEXT Democrat candidate's hands by delaying it so nobody knows, and we have to "wait and see", and Democrats will have a good case that Republicans are taking away your healthcare... which makes people vote Democrat.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 3:17 p.m.

    Re: "doubling-down on the status quo is not a viable alternative."

    Sure it is. It's working now. It has been working for years. It's only disingenuous liberal bleating about health care that insists we have something other than the best health care delivery system in the world.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 2:10 p.m.

    Mr. Brown,

    A tempting proposition. Reinstate the employer mandate. Do away with every exemption. It is truly what democrats deserve.

    But the problem is that this program will sink the whole country, and we are all in that ship together. People like Lee are trying to keep us ALL afloat. I guess we conservatives are just kind that way. We look out for everyone, not just our own selves and our big business buddies.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 12:57 p.m.

    You don't think very far ahead do you? If we did as you want and, "did away with private health insurance companies once and for all"... do you know what the consequences would be?

    How many Americans work for Insurance companies today? Close them and you have hundreds of thousands of unemployed Americans. Do you think Obama wanted credit for THAT... right before a mid-term election?

    Do you really want them closed and applying for unemployment? Back in 2011 Obama didn't (because he was trying to get re-elected and no President has won re-election with over 8% unemployment and we were right around 8% at the time). So do you see why Obama couldn't do what the radical-left wanted?

    Like Obama said... it will take about a decade. Then people will be so miserable and self centered that they don't care if unemployment goes over 15%... and you will get what you REALLY want.

    It will work. It's inevitable. Socialism looks so good to so many until government grows so large it collapses on itself and you have to go back to the "Participation Society" like they are now in Norway.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 12:36 p.m.

    BLue, I wasn't outraged over "Romneycare" because I don't live in Massachusetts and it didn't affect me. That was a state program that had NOTHING to do with Obamacare. I have to laugh every time the left tries to suggest that Obamacare was somehow the brainchild of Romney, the GOP, the Tea Party or any other conservative group.

    I know that you would love a single-payer (i.e. total government control) health care system and that many like you on the left think that Obamacare was a big compromise because it still includes private insurance companies. But let's be clear, Obamacare is not a free-market solution. It FORCES everyone to participate and dictates what kinds of policies you must have. It regulates the whole industry to death all the way from the worker who pays in to the doctors who provide the actual service.

    I guess the government has to actually own the hospitals and force all the doctors to be government employees before it constitutes "taking over" for you.

  • okeesmokee SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 11:57 a.m.

    We call that malicious compliance. Seldom works because there is always some new or repeatable excuse for something not working. What we really need are adults elected into government.

  • GiuseppeG Murray, Utah
    Oct. 9, 2013 11:56 a.m.

    Uh...yeah...except that enforcing ACA as written was the House's final bill put on Senator Reid's desk prior to the shutdown. Already been tried and rejected by Senator Reid and the POTUS.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 9:44 a.m.

    Joe, doubling-down on the status quo is not a viable alternative.

    BTW, how is possible to conclude that enrolling Americans in _private_ insurance plans constitutes taking over "all health insurance for the whole country!" ??

    Don't get me wrong - given my druthers we'd adopt a national single-payer system and be done with private health insurance companies once and for all. But that's just me.

    Where was the conservative outrage over this plan when it was "Romneycare" in Massachusetts or when it came out of the Heritage Foundation in the 1990's?

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 9:18 a.m.

    Blue wants a "detailed, workable, superior alternative" to Obamacare from the GOP.

    How about we "Don't try to take over all health insurance for the whole country!", as a solution?

    We don't need to create another huge government program that disrupts the lives of nearly every American and a wasteful bureacracy to go with it, just to solve a problem that only affects a small minority.

    Help those who can't afford health insurance and have huge medical bills directly without making it hard to hire new workers or forcing everyone in the country to buy stuff they don't want.

    Instead with Obamacare we get yet another "redistribute the wealth" program that liberals love so much. What's next, force everyone to live in a 4 bedroom house in a neighborhood they don't want to live in, just to solve the homeless problem?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 9:07 a.m.

    I kinda agree. Republicans should change tactics and enforce EVERY LINE of the 2000 page law to the hilt (including removing the delay Obama requested for big businesses). Enforce every part of it until people are so miserable with it that they see what Republicans were talking about and DEMAND that it be changed.

    The obvious risk with that approach is... You can never take what people perceive as their government benefits away from them (that's 100% political suicide). So realize there's no going back. But you can make changes to it. But every change has to be carefully presented as not touching anybody's government benefits (or Democrats will stop it, and use it in their campaign to get all Republicans removed from Washington).

    The other risk is that the misery index skyrocketing (which is pretty much inevitable even staunch Democrat's expect it)... so will push people to want change... but they are so afraid of losing their healthcare (and you can't go back)... so the only alternative is Socialized Medicine. Oh wait... that's just what Democrats what!

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 8:25 a.m.

    Sure, because the GOP has offered a offered a detailed, workable, superior alternative to our existing healthcare financing system... haven't they?

    I mean, it's not like the Affordable Care Act is based on "Romneycare" in Massachusetts or was originally the brainchild in the 1990's of the conservative Heritage Foundation.

    Oh... right.

    Dang you, reality! You always mess everything up for conservatives!

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 8:25 a.m.

    Except republicans don't want that to happen... "they might like green eggs and ham" and they will see how all the lies and misinformation being passed around are just that.

  • Hamath Omaha, NE
    Oct. 9, 2013 4:58 a.m.

    Except that he as the executive branch is the one who choses how to enforce things. You can't force him to enforce it. Just like he can't force Congress to fund it.