Private-sector cure II
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Thursday, Aug. 29, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
In response to Alex Vargo's letter “GOP solutions needed” (Aug. 19 and TribLIVE.com): The alternate solution to the massive, intrusive Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) is to have all levels of government (county, state, federal) get out of the health-care business and turn it back to the health-care providers, i.e., doctors and hospitals.
I would suggest Vargo research for himself how health-care programs were started.
When I was a young man, I was able to purchase health insurance with reasonable premiums and deductibles offered by health-insurance companies. Later, health care was offered to workers by their employers as a benefit to offset wage freezes and price controls.
As premiums and the cost of health care increased, HMOs were formed to manage the cost of health care. It became a political issue when the Democratic Party placed health care as its top priority.
Today, we have ObamaCare, which will place a person's health care totally into the hands of bureaucrats who will decide whether you should live or die. What is the GOP alternative, you ask?
Get government out of the health-care business and give it back to the real health-care providers and to the private health-insurance companies.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ‘We the people’ are veterans
- Corbett’s choice
- Invest in pre-K
- Islam & women
- Lebo’s coyotes
- Putin’s actions I
- Medicaid’s future
- Slots & property taxes
- Drought answer?
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- Fix icy hazard on Rt. 66