Health Care First

Posted by Nathan Pralle On August - 12 - 20094 COMMENTS

I fail to understand at all those who are completely against the health care reform that the United States is currently debating unless, of course, they are simply shilling in favor of the insurance company that they work for.    Who hasn’t had to deal with the twisted quagmire of plans, coverage, premiums, deductibles, copays, coinsurance, pre-existing conditions, and denials of coverage?

Oh, right — THE RICH haven’t, because they can just pay for it all to be taken care of.

This is not to say I don’t like the rich or the Republicans that often represent them.    Some of their work ethic is very admirable — work hard, save much, be smart, frugal, and conscientious and you will reap much good.     Anyone can become wealthy and live in the lap of luxury — after all, that’s the American way and ultimately, I have no issues with that philosophy.

The problem with these ideals is that they break down in the face of major health issues.    Even the best planners, savers, and investors amongst us living on a modest income can be thrashed into a bloody pulp by one large medical issue and the costs it incurs.     Considering that they can run into six figures in a hurry, even if your savings account has a wonderful $20,000 balance in it (which most of us can only DREAM of), it’s simply a drop in the huge ocean of expenses you can rack up for a heart attack, stroke, cancer, or any number of other problems that nobody plans on having.     The birth of my son was $56,000 before insurance alone, with us having to shoulder about $8,500 of that in payments that are still being made.    (We’ll own him outright one of these days, by golly.)

lifepreserverSo while the conservatives are saying, “Government running health care is a bad idea; just work hard and you’ll get enough to afford coverage, the system works like it is,” the reality is that even with hard work it may not be enough.    You may get coverage, but at such a huge price that you cannot afford it, and likely you will earn too much to be eligible for “poverty” status and the coverage that provides.    You could get coverage denied because you have a pre-existing condition or because you develop a condition that the insurance company chooses to not cover.     Maybe you’re switching jobs and the coverage will drop in between, leaving you exposed and vulnerable.   The drugs for your particular condition may fall outside the blanket of your prescription plan and rack up thousands of dollars every month.  If you’re lucky and receive coverage you can afford and it kicks in to cover your problem, you might be slogged with paying a high deductible, copays, or your insurance can hit the lifetime cap and all assistance dries up for everything now-and-forever.

Any one of these situations is enough to throw a reasonable middle-to-lower class person into despair; many have had to struggle with several blows for a single situation.   The fact is that these are more the norm than the exception and we all know someone who has dealt with the hassles of at least one of these is testament large this problem looms over our society.

I don’t begrudge the insurance companies for being a business and making a profit, but at the same time it’s the point of the entire system that has been lost, and that point is caring for a real human’s health and well-being.    People are being analyzed, economized, and marginalized due to numbers, not needs.    Uncle John’s cancer treatment has become a fiscal decision, not a best-tool-for-the-job selection.   The pregnant mother in between jobs can’t get maternity coverage for herself and her baby in the month in between because it’s not a good risk profile.    Because it’s a drain on the bottom line, the lifetime cap slams the door on the couple with the bouncing baby boy with the genetic disorder who has used up all the benefits and now has no coverage for his intensely-expensive needs.

We need to get our health care system back to one that takes care of people first, profits second;   patients, not liabilities.    This is what the propopsed health care bill is fighting to achieve through some regulations that ensure coverage when things don’t go right and life hands you lemons you are too weak to squeeze for yourself.    In the end, if it costs each of us a bit more out of our paychecks to ensure that anyone and everyone has access to affordable, useful health care in all situations, then I say, sign me up;  I’m all for something that gets us back to one of the most important causes we have to fight for today — taking care of each other.

Sinking, Floating, or Just Getting By

Posted by Nathan Pralle On December - 12 - 20084 COMMENTS

The car industry “bail out” issue is one that has been pressing on my mind of late and there’s many facets of it that I’m trying to consider and draw up conclusions in my mind.   None are very clear and I’m never completely certain I always know what’s best for the situation, but like most people, I’m forming opinion anyway.    The difference with myself, however, is that I readily admit that I may be taking the stance of a raving idiot.

Here’s some things I do know:

- Without extremely strict guidance as to where funds are used in the corporations, they will be misused.     Period.    Clearly the folks couldn’t properly use their own money; what makes us think they’ll use loaned money any better?     To paraphrase Olbermann, piles of cash sitting around are a bad idea.

This Sinking Ship

- There’s loans to hold your current business open and keep it running, and there’s loans to restructure it into something better.    Everyone says it’d be bad to let them go into bankruptcy, but for restructuring?   I think that’s exactly what they need.    Telling someone to stop being bad or hold a gun to their head and see which method gets more response.

- I really, really hate unions.   Always have — I think they’re fundamentally unnecessary in today’s modern market.    And now we are going to (probably) see a prime example of why they’re a bad idea when everyone has to go along with the negotiated terms.    UAW Suckers.

- Letting these companies die scares a lot of folks, and don’t get me wrong — it’s a big deal.   But to be honest, I’m leaning more and more towards letting them die.    Yes, it’ll be extremely painful, but in the long term I think we’ll end up with something better than we will if we limp things along.   It’s like a broken bone — if you snap a bone straight through, when it heals it’ll be very strong, stronger than it was before.   But a “green” fracture that only bends or frays the bone takes longer to heal and is never the same again.    I think that can be applied here, and as painful and traumatic as it is, a clean break may be our best bet.

I worry — a lot.   We’re struggling big-time to make it right now, but if I had my choice, I’d rather dive into a horrific couple of years to emerge victorious and more productive than ever before vs. limping a broken economy along for the next 10 years.

Your thoughts and discourse on these reflections and any others are appreciated.