Remember that nannies can be cruel

To the editor:

James Rideout’s Monday letter was a bit too focused and typical of those who desperately search for nonsensical analogies in order to justify a bad idea.

Mr. Rideout uses state car insurance mandates to justify a federal mandate forcing people to buy health insurance, yet he ignores the fact that car insurance is primarily designed to protect others. In addition, premiums are based upon an individual’s driving record, and I see no sliding scale associated with giving healthy people a break or charging more to those who milk the system.

Mr. Rideout also laments that hospitals are forced to accept patients who cannot pay. He does not address, however, the issue of how these same people could then afford health insurance, nor is there any talk of holding people accountable for their actions or non-actions in life. If people cannot afford it, there should be a mechanism for paying all or part of their bills, and those who can afford insurance and choose not to should be hounded by collection agencies and have income garnisheed in the same manner as if they didn’t pay for other goods or services.

The biggest problem with the high cost of health insurance is the high cost of providing health care services, yet no one talks about dealing with this core issue.

Much is made of the Nanny State, and we should bear in mind that nannies can be cruel. There is something un-American and dictatorial surrounding this insurance mandate, which in the future can push us further from personal freedom, and it would be done in the form of individual mandates by way of medical exams. Beware.

Fred Bilello

Laughlin

Not insured

To the editor:

Recent letters to the editor have indicated that there is no difference between mandatory auto insurance and mandatory health insurance. If auto insurance is mandatory, why does my auto insurance invoice have a fee for “uninsured motorist” coverage?

Diane Kulesa

St. George, Utah

GOP fringe

To the editor:

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is no different from Medicare, taxes and other mandates that every American is required to follow.

Under Medicare you must report six months prior to your birthday or six months after what you are going to do regarding enrollment. Failure to do so results in fines (taxes?) or higher premiums when you choose to enroll later.

Fines could be called taxes (i.e. the penalty for not purchasing insurance). Taxes are mandated by everyone for everything. Tax avoidance means jail.

You have industries that require or mandate that you have homeowners insurance, etc., otherwise you don’t get a mortgage. There are lots of things that are mandated of us. Please, let’s not be so ignorant to the play on words.

The population that receives the most benefit from health insurance is the elderly, then children — so everyone in the middle supports these two groups.

It just amazes me how quickly people forget and how easily they are manipulated (brainwashed) by Fox News and the fringe of the Republican Party.

m. dixon

Las Vegas

Social reality

To the editor:

In her Tuesday letter, Susan Levy argues that the auto insurance analogy for health care does not apply because she can simply choose not to drive. She fails to acknowledge that, while she will not choose to be hit by a runaway vehicle or fall off her roof, she will choose to find medical attention if she suddenly needs it. She also left out the reality of today’s social state — she knows that if she does not have insurance, the health care industry will fix her on the spot, anyway.

Those who are against participating in a pool for anything — health care, Social Security, Medicare — say that these programs take away their freedom. In the purest sense of that term, they are correct. Just about every U.S. citizen was born into it without being asked.

I, for one, recognize that citizenship is not free. I live in our protected society, where I am allowed to use my earnings to achieve personal wealth. The taxes I pay support the laws and the infrastructure that keep the United States going.

Ms. Levy’s argument suggests that as one of more than 300 million citizens, she should be allowed to cherry-pick the tax burden line items she personally should pay. But citizenship is like a club: You pay your dues or discontinue your membership.

Five percent of the citizenship account for 50 percent of the health care costs. Just about 100 percent of the citizens who pay taxes use the interstate system. As a citizen, I rely on our elected officials to make plans for taking care of both and then paying my fair share.

The common thread here is us — all of us, together, working as a society. Participation in this is citizenship.

Jim Cassidy

Henderson

Big spenders

To the editor:

I actually laughed out loud — and not in a good way — when I read about the extravagant GSA conference that was held in Henderson on the taxpayers’ dime (Tuesday Review-Journal). Seems that our dear leaders in Washington have become experts in vacationing at someone else’s expense.

What really made me howl, however, was when I read that President Obama was “outraged by the excessive spending … and disregard for taxpayer dollars.” Hold on, here. Isn’t that exactly what he is doing when he sends his 13-year-old daughter, Malia, and 12 of her friends to Mexico, complete with Secret Service protection, for spring break?

Mr. Obama is outraged? I think he’s just annoyed that all of this has come to light.

Julie Driscoll

Las Vegas

TOP NEWS
ad-infeed_1x2_1
Home Front Page Footer Listing