Mailbag: 10/26

We can’t tolerate lack of health care

Thanks to Mr. Sprecher for clarifying the German health system. As stated, "...the cost of medical procedures and medications are significantly higher in the U.S. than in Germany."

German health insurers have a 15.5 percent premium limit and must keep costs low. Insurers send blue letters, (inquiries) to providers when they think they are being overcharged or charged for unnecessary procedures. Providers must justify their charges. The premium limit encourages competition and efficiency resulting in a cost of $3,228/person versus $7,200 in the United States.

States control tort reform in the U.S. However, the Dartmouth study shows McAllen, Texas hospitals and clinics charge double for Medicare compared to Wisconsin, though we have less strict tort laws than Texas. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that tort reform could save U.S. customers 1 percent or $24 billion/year.

U.S. for profit health insurance company overhead is 21.5 percent, Medicare’s is 3 percent. Halving overhead would save customers $150 billion/year and introduce competition and efficiency into U.S. health insurance and care. These two reforms could insure 24 million uninsured Americans at the national average of $7,200. Or it could cover the poorest 10 million and subsidize another 28 million or so.

U.S. median income was $26,182 in 2008 for individuals and $42,326 for households. A 15.5 percent premium limit would give an average earner a $4,058 maximum premium, a family $6,560, less than half of current U.S. premiums. Those earning double the average: $52,364 and $84,652 would pay $8,116 and $13,121 maximum. In a Germany-type system employers would pay half.

It is more complex than that. How would the government subsidize health insurance? Would Americans want to drop Medicaid, Medicare, CHIP, or the VA health systems? Would we require insurance companies to take all applicants or include dental and vision? An American version could be based on the German, but would be different in detail.

The choice of a nationwide nonprofit health insurance plan could be a more American solution. It would require fewer changes and less government regulation and oversight than the German system or than taxing or regulating wasteful overhead of insurance and health care providers. After five months discussing health care reform it is good to see progress being made. However, legislation must not only provide universal health care but also a incentive system to contain costs while improving quality.

Switzerland, Austria, France, and Taiwan have health care systems similar to Germany’s: universal health care with private insurers. I hope people who know these systems will write and inform Baraboo readers of strategies that might work in the U.S.

No country has a perfect system but according to the World Health Organization ours is 37th below the best. I don’t understand Americans who feel we must put up with our failing system and say we cannot have as good a system as 36 other countries. We cannot tolerate 45,000 Americans dying every year because of lack of health care. Defeatism is very un-American.

 

Bill Dagnon, Baraboo

Bromley column not a funny thing

Dear Ben Bromley:

I read with interest and disappointment, your Oct. 22 column declaring Oct. 23, "Slap Your Irritating Co-Workers Day."

We all have irritating co-workers; the examples you list are right up there with anyone who has ever worked anywhere.

The best we can all do is laugh and go on. I thought for sure you would suggest a bit of humor since your column subtitle states, "It’s a funny thing."

That possibility went to a dead (pun intended) stop when I realized the extent of your very detailed and explicit column. I read on, and was disheartened with your examples and suggestions.

With the ever present and realistic danger of classroom and workplace violence, bullying in the schools, tragic cases of child and domestic abuse, among other violent tragedies, it is appalling you would actually suggest (albeit you thought it was in jest and fun) physical violence as a way to solve issues. (Including the use of objects to do this.)

Suggesting assault and/or battery and other destructive means to solve any issue is just wrong in any form, and the BNR should be ashamed for printing such ideas, even if in jest.

Have you not read your own local paper to know these things happen right here, in your town, in your city, in your county, in your state and in your country let alone throughout the world?

People get hurt. People die. For the simplest of reasons, or for no reason at all.

I would suggest educating yourself on better ways to vent your workplace anger.

We all have obnoxious and irritating people in our lives, it is life, after all, and nothing is perfect. But the way you handle and present yourself carries you far further than resorting to violence.

No need for a group hug, just take a deep breath and walk way.

May I suggest a couple of good books — one in particular is "Emotional Intelligence" and another is "Terror in Beslan." Can’t find them? I’ll loan you mine.

I would suggest the following quote (author unknown):

"Keeping a tight lid on your emotions might not be possible today, but you do need to at least control your temper. Don’t fly off the handle when someone says something annoying or accusatory — take a deep breath, count to 10 (or 20 if you have to) and be the bigger person.

You need to find a way to let this person know how you feel that isn’t combative or insulting. You have the manners of a diplomat, when you give yourself time to dig them up."

Mr. Bromley, I’ll bet you are right about one thing, it wouldn’t be fun if you are getting pummeled hourly. It is not a funny thing.

P.S.: This is not my virtual slapping as you would suggest, but instead, my counting to a hundred then letting you know how I feel without being insulting ...

Sincerely,

Melanie Cook, Baraboo