"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.
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.
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.
"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!
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?
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.
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.
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?