- U of I expert: Rauner’s pension fix ‘unconstitutional’
- State Senate approves lesser penalties for marijuana possession
- State Roundup: Natural gas vehicle tax stalls in committee
- Raptors, Rangers FC announce June camp
- Student debt 101: dearth of data fuels common misperceptions
- ‘Millionaire tax’ clears House panel
- Memorial Day events at Midway’s LZ Peace Memorial
- Wallace calls for Rockford crime task force
- How we discovered the 3 revolutions of American pop
- Something is rotten in the state of US education
Obamacare deprives patients of choice
Free enterprise is the best system for getting goods and services from the producer to the consumer. The incentive to produce is so much greater under this system than a more socialist approach. Hence, it is more successful.
Obamacare is much closer to a socialist approach, and it has allowed many waivers from it. If it is such a great idea, why would any organization not want to accept it willingly?
Obama has criticized a free market solution to our health care when he chastises doctors “lining their pockets” and insurance companies for their excessive profits (actually, quite a bit lower than other private entities).
He compares doctors to auto mechanics in relating the latter as more appropriate in regard to failure to perform the assigned task. He ignores the fact that many mechanics refuse to have the owner remove his vehicle if the bill isn’t paid in full. How would a doctor do likewise to patients that didn’t pay in full — lock them in their office?
Looking at the many obstacles Obamacare has, not only in waivers but also in cost, Obama seems to want his system to fail so he can finally claim his eventual goal, socialized medicine.
Michael A. Smith
From the Sept. 7-13, 2011, issue