A+ A A-

Only competition lowers prices naturally, not the government

To the editor,
Johan Andersen of Gilford wrote recently on health care and its costs. His thinking typifies the same "lost in outer space" logic Jimmy Veverka often illustrates when he puts his crayons to paper. Johan suggests we all would be happier if health care cost less. If only the people in health care would just agree to accept lower wages our troubles would disappear.
Like Jimmy, Johan produces some incredible comedic material while attempting to write straight stuff. If problem solving was as simple as asking people to take wage cuts wouldn't it be nice if the people working in the oil industry took a pay cut allowing expensive gasoline to cost less. Wouldn't it be nice if teachers and professors took a 25 percent pay cut so taxpayers and parents didn't have to go BROKE trying to educate their kids. Johan's logic reveals his COMPLETE lack of understanding of how economics and free enterprise works. Wouldn't it be nice if an ice cream cone cost less... just slash the wages of those working a Dairy Queen to make it happen. Come on Johan ,use your noggin for something besides a hat rack. The price of items and servicers are a function of what they are worth in society on a comparative basis. They reflect the value the market place puts on them between a willing buyer and a willing seller.
WORSE. . . government often sticks it's pig snout in to DISTORT competitive free markets that continually determine the fair value of all goods and services. This creates government/business/collusion/cronyism that hurts all of us. Government interference in private enterprise does nothing but drive up costs or CREATE self-induced SHORTAGES of that product or service. If something is worth a dollar in the real world and government demands it cost 50 cents, I guarantee you that product will soon be IMPOSSIBLE to find. No one will accept LESS than their skills are worth under capitalism for very long. In addition, investors and risk takers, the required INGREDIENTS to lower the cost of anything, run for the hills when prices are artificially held back by government.
Health care is expensive for countless reasons that go far beyond what doctors or nurses make in wages. Why isn't Johan screaming at Democrats for not promoting LIMITS on tort judgments in health care? It is a well known fact that hundreds of billions of dollars are urinated out the window annually to pay for tests prescribed by doctors to COVER their rears legally from an army of ambulance-chasing lawyers. Doctors do not have to take a pay cut, nor any one else in health care, to have costs drop. That government DICTATES cuts for them will only reduce health care availability and dilute the quality of care.
There is nothing better to lower costs for ANYTHING than improved efficiency. It is ONLY more competition that reduces prices NATURALLY. Lasik eye surgery is the perfect example. Prices keep dropping from intense competition because government has kept its snout out. What is GOVERNMENT doing in general health care? KILLING COMPETITION while cramming down 3,000 pages of NEW rules, regulations and ENORMOUS TAXES that will have ONE RESULT — HIGHER COSTS. Even Obama admits Obamacare will do NOTHING to reduce health care costs for the typical middle class American family. That you suggest we arbitrarily CUT THE PAY of workers in a particular industry because you do not like the costs is pure funny page material.
The NEW Obamacare has 100,000 codes (up from 16,000) to define what health service a doctor or hospital has provided. Did you get hurt in a chicken coop or a pig sty — they have different codes. Did you bump into the light pole from the left or right — they have different codes. It will take tens of millions of man hours from the health care industry to SIMPLY COMPLY with the reports and regulations of Obamacare, costing HUNDREDS of billions of dollars that provide ZERO HEALTH CARE TO even ONE person but will make the cost of health care RISE. Then we have people like Johan walking the world suggesting the only way to reduce health care costs is to cut doctor and nurse wages. A comedy writer could not produce funnier material than his.
Tony Boutin
Gilford

Last Updated on Saturday, 11 May 2013 12:43

Hits: 427

Granite State Future forum was not about sharing opinions

To the editor,
I want to compliment you on the very accurate article in your May 8, 2013 edition titled: At Granite State Futures Talk, Tensions Over Competing Perspectives.
I attended the meeting because I wanted to hear ideas from other Lakes Region citizens, and I wanted to see if N.H. Listens was going to employ the unethical Delphi Technique. I'm pleased to report I wasn't disappointed on either account.
I didn't witness any tension in my small discussion cell, but it could have been present in one of the other six or seven gathering circles, if that's what you want to call them. You see, the folks at N.H. Listens don't allow everyone in the room to hear what everyone has to say. They divide and conquer. That strategy worked pretty darned well for Caesar.
N.H. Listens uses a facilitated meeting format when they host these Granite State Futures meetings. They advertise the meetings telling citizens that if they attend, their opinions will be included so that all in New Hampshire can hear what you have to say.
Guess what? That doesn't happen, not by a long shot. You see when you get Delphied, as did 116 people who attended — I left myself out of the count because I know how to resist all the psychological tricks that N.H. Listen employs at these facilitated meetings — you have a better chance of landing a 15-pound lake trout in Opeechee Bay than you have of all of your opinions being shared.
Here's why. Each discussion cell, usually made up of about 8 to 12 people, meets on their own for nearly 90 minutes. Believe me, lots of opinions about lots of topics are talked about in that amount of time. But at the end of the meeting, each discussion cell gives a very very brief summary of just a few of their discussion points. Each summary, read aloud to the entire group, only lasts about two minutes, maybe three. You can't say much in 150 seconds.
If you were at the meeting and you put forth five or six stellar ideas, there's a good chance not one of them made it into the final summary. Doesn't that stink? I wouldn't call that "listening", would you? I'd call that ignoring.
Also, the N.H. Listens group provided a handout filled with biased talking points that each cell was to use to "guide" the discussion. This is also classic textbook Delphi Technique. The meetings N.H. Listens runs, like the one in Laconia on Tuesday night, all have a predetermined outcome based on the discussion points and the plants they summon to attend the meeting.
For example, there was a section in the handout about global warming that contained all this biased data about how the Lakes Region and New Hampshire are in peril! Nowhere in the handout did they talk about the four periods of Continental Glaciation that occurred here in North America in the past two million years.
Do you want proof of what a good job Mother Nature can do when it comes to climate change? Visit Mt. Major and you'll see a glacial erratic boulder that weighs hundreds of tons that was dropped there by the last glacier that was here just 15,000 years ago! Or drive up through Franconia Notch on I-93. See the shape of the notch right where the Old Man used to look down? That's a classic glacial carved valley.
Now tell me, how much climate change does it take to create ice thousands of feet thick that stretched from Cape Cod back up to the North Pole? And then how much climate change does it take to melt it with no factories, buses, trucks or man around? See my point how the Delphi Technique is unethical?
Finally, at the end of our meeting it was time to select a spokesperson for our cell. I volunteered. No one else in our group volunteered. The facilitator of our group was a young woman named Molly trained in the ways of the Delphi Technique by N.H. Listens. She tried her best to not have me be the spokesperson. When we voted, I got eight out of the ten votes, but she only counted five.
After a boisterous protest from myself and two others, she finally backed down. Talk about unprofessional. I can't for the life of me figure out why she didn't want me to be the spokesperson for the group.
Well, honestly I can. I've sort of developed a reputation here in the community of telling the truth about what's going on with this Granite State Futures initiative and the unethical behavior of N.H. Listens group. I'm sure all the facilitators were warned I'd be at the meeting.
If you want to discover more truth and facts about the Granite State Futures project and see a video about the Delphi Technique being used at a N.H. Listens meeting that happened in Plymouth about two months ago, you should visit a website I discovered about a month ago. Go to: www.GraniteStateFutures.org
P.S. If you don't believe me about the Delphi Technique and NH Listens, just go to Bing.com and type in "delphi technique". If you were at the meeting on Tuesday night in Laconia with me, you'll probably be pretty upset when you discover you were flimflamed.,
Tim Carter
Meredith

Last Updated on Saturday, 11 May 2013 12:38

Hits: 347

Time in voting booth will still be a lot shorter than town meeting

To the editor,
A recent letter from a Sanbornton resident stated that Sanbornton voters entering the voting booth after SB-2 is approved, would take too long. It expressed the concern that residents would show up to vote not having any previous knowledge of what is being voted on. And it also maintained that reading all the warrant articles and proposed budget items in the privacy of a voting booth could cause delays in voting.
This is a rather insulting assumption and perhaps the writer should apologize to all the voters of Sanbornton.
Any resident/ taxpayer of Sanbornton knows that all the warrant and budget information is available weeks before voting day. First the proposed budget is reviewed at a public meeting held by the town Budget Committee and the public is invited to ask questions and is offered a copy of the proposed budget. Secondly the warrant and budget information is available on the town website. Last but not least, there are copies of the town's Annual Report available at the town office and Library. These contain all the information needed to make an informed decision.
And as far as delays go, no matter how long a wait at the election booth, it will still be a heck of a lot shorter than the time spent at a town meeting!
Sanbornton voters — please vote YES on Question #1 on election day Tuesday May 14th from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
Bill Whalen
Sanbornton

Last Updated on Saturday, 11 May 2013 12:28

Hits: 295

Gun control advocates are mostly pro killing of 1M fetuses annually

To the editor,
Gun control advocates say their proposals are worth whatever the impact to law abiding citizens, "if they save just one life". History teaches that gun controls create more, not fewer victims, but gun control advocates persist anyway, ignoring the additional deaths.
Aside from their refusal to learn from history, what makes me so skeptical of their claimed desire to save lives is gun control advocates' unconcern about millions of other unnecessarily lost lives.
Most gun control advocates support Obamacare. Obamacare's Independent Patient Advisory Board (IPAB) essentially will ration spending on those "too young" or "too old" (suggested as under 15 and over 40), thus causing millions of Americans to die prematurely or live limited or painful lives.
Some people in President Obama's inner circle (Steven Ratner, former Obama car czar, economist Paul Krugman, and Peter Orszag, Obama's OMB Director) admit that the IPAB is, essentially, the much ridiculed "death panel."
President Obama says, "maybe you are better off not having the surgery but taking the painkiller". While this may be true, such a decision should be made by the patient and doctor based on the patient's circumstances, not forced by remote, faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats.
Gun control advocates are mostly pro-abortion, pro killing over one million fetuses annually. That's more than 100 times as many lives as are taken by murder.
The trial of Dr. Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia shows that these million plus annual abortions include living breathing moving babies killed after birth. Where is the outrage against these barbaric murders? Where is their concern for these lives?
Are gun control advocates fighting for other things that save lives? E.g., tougher sentences for violent criminals, elimination of "gun free zones" which create so many defenseless victims, or elimination of bureaucratic obstacles to getting a gun when a person is faced with credible threats? No.
Are they protesting President Obama's cutting federal gun prosecutions nearly in half, or his releasing criminal illegal aliens from prison unnecessarily in response to the sequester? No. Have they condemned President Obama for the "Fast and Furious" program that funneled guns to Mexican drug cartels who used them and other weapons to kill Americans and about 30,000 Mexicans? No.
Gun control advocates' lack of concern for millions of other destroyed lives is inconsistent with their claimed concern for gun victims. While I am sure many gun control supporters do care, they are being deceived by their liberal leaders who know their proposals won't save lives. Liberal leaders advocate these proposals because they advance their objectives of increasing government power at the expense of the freedoms and independence of law abiding, and in particular middle class, American citizens.
Don Ewing
Meredith

Last Updated on Saturday, 11 May 2013 01:44

Hits: 299

SB-2 worked in Gilmanton without a hitch; don't be bullied

To the editor,
I've been reading the articles in the newspapers regarding information pertaining to SB-2 in Sanbornton and I must say I'm amazed at the amount of incorrect information, scare tactics, and pressure put upon the citizens of your town. You might ask, "Why would someone from Gilmanton write to the newspapers about our town? What does she know?" Good questions. Let me respond.
Two years ago our town tried for the 5th or 6th time to pass SB-2. Prior attempts were met with much the same rhetoric I'm seeing from your town: "Deliberative Session will take away the rights of the town to make decisions" or "SB-2 is destructive and complicated. My response is BOLDERDASH!
A small group of us got together in my town and put to rest the lies and distortions put out by the "nay sayers" who really don't know what they're talking about. My suspicion is that either there is something untoward going on with the select people who bash SB-2 or they just don't like change.
This year was our first chance to try SB-2 for our town and for the school district and guess what? IT WORKED WITHOUT A HITCH! We had more people show up for the Deliberative Sessions (otherwise known as Town Meeting or School District Meeting), people stood and voiced their opinions, added or deleted from the budgets and Warrant Articles, just as is done at any town meeting. Then they had the opportunity to look over the final budgets during the month before our town election so as to be informed before going into the voting booth to vote on how our tax dollars would be spent. Not everyone in the town showed up for the Deliberative Sessions; and yet, no less showed up than we usually have at the Town Meetings.
Sanbornton, don't be bullied or fooled by those who would say differently. SB-2 opens up opportunities that you now don't have. You will be able to vote for your choices for elected positions as well as vote for the budget, including Warrant Articles, in the privacy of the voting booth, or by absentee ballot (people on vacation, those in the military, and any others who cannot physically come to the polls). Tell your town how important it is that YOU make the final decisions on how your tax dollars are spent at your Town Election. It's YOUR money.
Elena Ball
Gilmanton Iron Works

Last Updated on Saturday, 11 May 2013 01:39

Hits: 325

 
The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register

LOG IN