|
Get real,
Americans!
You have been ripped off!
By Mary Pitt
12/27/07 "ICH"
-- -- At long last, the age-old problem of health care for
the poor and near-poor is being discussed in open forum. The
problem has existed since the ethos of class differentiation was
begun with the invention of wampum. In this modern age, it is
only through the acivities of individual greed that it
continues, despite the glaring fact that one solution is the
only alternative.
Mitt Romney's Massachusetts experiment has already been exposed
as a failure as will be any other program for "mandatory
insurance". As with the assistance that is provided to the
elderly holders of policies for Medicare Part D, recipients of
the plan must be totally destitute in order to be free of the
required "deductible and co-payment" muddle. Even if they have
"insurance coverage" they still cannot afford the cash outlay
that is necessary in order to obtain the necessary treatment.
How, then, to be sure that even those who are marginally above
the "poverty level" can have the health care they need? How do
we care for those who are ill before the condition creates a
crisis? How to keep the healthy in good condition so that they
can continue to lead productive lives?.
Half a century ago, a good businessman named Henry Kaiser joined
other automobile and equipment manufacturers in ceasing the
making of their former product in order to make the needed
equipment that the country needed in order to effectively engage
in World War II. He built huge shipyards on the West Coast and
people poured in from all over the beleaguered nation to work in
them. Soon it was apparent that these folks were physically
devastated by the medical neglect, malnutrition, and other
maladies inflicted by the Great Depression. The absenteeism
troubled him until he reached one infallible conclusion: "It is
less costly to keep people healthy than to get them well once
they become ill."
On that philosophy he built his own clinics and hospitals where
employees of his operations could receive physical check-ups
regularly, necessary medications, dental care, and visual
examinations and treatments. A small amount was deducted from
the paychecks of the workers and Kaiser workers bcame healthy,
happy, and productive. Only later did the Bess Kaiser Memorial
Hospital system become the largest Health Maintenance
Organization on the West Coast. With the end of the war and the
closure of the shipyards, the program became open to other
employers on a group plan, though only those who were employed
by such an employer could benefit from the total coverage, the
excellent care, and the reasonable cost. With the advent of
other, similar companies, Kaiser became just another HMO in
order to deal with the competition.
But the principle that was discovered by Henry Kaiser remains as
true now as then. Even with the S-CHIP program, small chidren
must either attend or miss school while suffering from an ear
infection or a bad cough while his working father, mother, or
both, must wait for a payday so they will have the necessary
nine or ten dollars to make the "co-payment"in order to see a
doctor. Employees go to work feeling ill but "toughing it out"
because they cannot afford to risk a hospital stay for fear of
the "deductible" and its devastating effect on the family
budget. What we have is not working and the plans that are
proposed will not work. The news site, Alternet, has done a good
series on the problem which may be read here. http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/.
There are many arguments from those who oppose the Universal
Health Care plans as proposed by Dennis Kucinich and others. One
is that it would raise taxes. Horrors! Have you computed the
amount that you pay in insurance premiums each year? The
insurance companies have been "taxing" you for half a century
and you take it in stride. The added taxes to cover your health
care would not be likely to be more than you are paying now to
the insurance company and the coverage would be better.
Another is that it would "destroy an industry". Perhaps an
unfeeling industry should be brought to account for the
exhorbitant profits that they have amassed as the result of
denying care, requiring co-payments and deductibles to deter
people from fully utilizing their benefits, and refusing
coverage to "high-risk individuals". Let them go back to
insuring lives and property, cars, houses, and business
liabilities.
The third argument against free universal health care is that it
would cost too much. This argument is the least effective when
viewed in the light of realism. The insurance companies declare
an annual profit of some Ten Billion Dollars! How many of the
40% of Americans without adequate health care could be kept
healthy by the addition of that amount to be paid to physicians,
hospitals, and pharmacists?
It is time that the American people take a clear-eyed look at
the reasons why our children are being weakened, our workers
hindered, and our elderly going without medications at the end
of the year because of the dread "donut hole"while we bear the
burden of making the rich even richer. We manage our personal
budgets with care to be sure that we spend our money in the most
efficient and cost-effective manner. Why should we ask less of
those firms that are stealing our health care dollars while
leaving us without that for which we are paying? As they "cream
the market", insuring only the healthy and discontinuing
coverage for those with serious illnesses, those left uninsured
must liquidate their homes and other assets to pay for their own
medical care until they are destitute and qualify for Medicaid
and welfare.
That is why our nation, which spends more for health care than
any other can only rank 45th in the quality of care. Those who
can afford it have access to the most modern technology and
life-saving procedures where those who cannot are left with
medical care that is reminiscent of the nineteenth century. This
is the great shame of our vaunted democracy where we expound
that "all men are created equal". The big lie is exposed when
you learn that the rich get the best while the poor are shunted
aside to die of neglect. When a plan is suggested that would
care for the poor while costing the rich no more, we owe it to
ourselves to give it serious consideration.
The author is a very "with-it" old lady who aspires to bring
a bit of truth, justice, and common sense to a nation that has
lost touch with its humanity in the search for societal
"perfection."
Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse
and meaningful commentary. Do not include
personal information such as names, addresses,
phone numbers and emails. Comments falling
outside our guidelines – those including
personal attacks and profanity – are not
permitted.
See our complete
Comment Policy
and
use this link to notify us if you have concerns
about a comment.
We’ll promptly review and remove any
inappropriate postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
