Weatherford Democrat

October 8, 2013

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Contrasting opinions


Weatherford Democrat

Contrasting opinions

Dear Editor,

In the Oct. 3 “Viewpoints” there were two contrasting thoughts.

One was by Zan Prince, which was easy to follow, stressing the importance of strong families, businesses, national defense and personal accountability. She went on to say that smaller government is important and all life is precious.

Then following was another Dennis Tilly letter that was hard to follow but emphasizing the importance of more and more government programs that the majority are against.

I would like Mr. Tilly to convince the voters of Parker County and Texas why liberal, socialist policies are superior to a more conservative form of government.

Von Dunn, Weatherford



Perfect little darlings

Dear Editor,

Have you ever noticed that Democrats are always innocent and never take responsibility for their screwed up policies?

I got the impression that collapse of the housing bubble is what caused the recession. The community reinvestment act of 1977, promoted by President Carter, was the beginning of the disaster. Democrats are going to better the lives of the poor and middle class. What could be more noble than helping the folks to have better homes?

The only problem with the program is there is a tendency for humans to grab more than they can hold on to. The idea was that you could finance a property at 110 percent of appraised value w’ith no down payment and roll closing costs into the loan. Instead of paying a deposit and a first months rent, you could move into a brand new home for nothing.

The Republicans made feeble efforts to rein in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but Democrats threw a hissy and conniption fit, so President Bush, more or less, joined the liars club and said that Americans are the best housed people in the world. Barney Frank said that there is no problem with Fannie and Freddie, and if there ever is the taxpayer would not have to bail them out.

That was not the case. The price of homes were going up at an accelerated rate, but when the money ran out folks found themselves living in houses that they owed $300,000 on and was worth only about half that much. My friend that is the result of government meddling in the free market, and should stay out of it. The stupidity cost the folks to lose money in the stock market, and their homes.

I guess I’m dumb, but I can’t see the connection between the 30-hour work week and President Bush. Mr. Tilly said in his letter of Oct. 3: “The surge in part-time jobs was a result of the Bush recession and the predictable employer reluctance to hire full time when the Republican House has been doing everything in their power to delay the recovery.”

The economy is recovering slowly, because of President Obama’s health care law. The reason that President Obama was re-elected is due to no information voters. A reporter was interviewing people on the street and the question was, “Do you like Obamacare, or the affordable health care?” The answer was, I like the affordable care better. Asked, “Why do you like it better?” the answer was Obamacare has too many problems. The reporter said they are the same thing and he was accused of lying.

A couple of quotes from Sir Winston Churchill: “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”

I don’t know what type of insurance Mr. Tilly sells, but he needs to advertise, if it is health insurance. A friend had her premium to more than double.

Richard Feuilly, Weatherford



Obamacare’s failure lies in the numbers

Dear Editor,

While I appreciate Mr. Tilly’s effort in responding to questions regarding the purported benefits of Obamacare to the American public, the substance of the response – a compilation of what, in the interest of civility, can only be called misstatements – is essentially meaningless.

If, as Mr. Tilly states, the “large group medical plans” complied with “almost all requirements of the AHA [sic]” any necessary adjustments would have been relatively minor and there would have been no need for 1,200-plus waivers to favored corporations and unions. As for the one-year delay in the business mandate and the exemption granted Congress, the administration has no authority under this law or any other to grant such.

Mr. Tilly attempts to conflate lower rate projections with lower actual rates – the rates may be lower than projected but are, nevertheless, much higher than what was available in the market prior to Obamacare. The “unsubstantiated, dreamed-up huge rate increase” is all too real. Delta Air Lines alone foresees, for just the first year, an increase of $100 million in health-care costs due to this law.

Despite Mr. Tilly’s claim that the shift to part-time employment is “a result of the Bush recession,” the increase of newly created part-time jobs from 14 percent of the total to 80 percent of the total has occurred in the last two years – attributable mainly to the provisions of Obamacare. (As an aside, it is well past time for this administration’s sycophants to stop trying to blame the prior administration for the widespread failures of the current one. After five years, the carcass of that horse is looking decidedly seedy.)

That businesses are dropping health care coverage for their employees (e.g., Walgreen’s, Home Depot) or their employee’s families (e.g., UPS) is not a “half-truth” in any sense. Those now being forced to obtain their health insurance elsewhere will find themselves paying more – saving money being the principal reason any employee joins their spouse’s plan. Few would agree with Mr. Tilly that this outcome is “very reasonable.”

As for the remainder of Mr. Tilly’s “answer,” being a compendium of willful distortions, backtracking, and palpably untrue assertions, there is little if anything to be gained by dissecting it.

The reason American citizens are being forced to participate in Obamacare is that no one of sound judgment would choose to pay more to receive less. Mr. Tilly’s incessant efforts to obfuscate this fact does not obviate it.

Sincerely,



William Picou, Weatherford