Insurance Is The Problem

Many of us have this dream that we could have less government in our lives and a better quality of life at the same time. Seems silly doesn’t it? When you look at it objectively, we give the government a lot of money with our taxes. The only thing we need in life from government is a good, safe life and the ability to exercise our freedom.

To have this we need a proper education, good health, safety and the ability to move freely throughout the country at will. This translates into needs for police and fire protection, good schools, protection from our enemies by the military and good health care. If those things were the only things government concerned itself with there would be no reason why Americans could not enjoy good laws, education, health care, highways, parks and recreation facilities—all paid for by the government via our taxes—and our government would probably have money left over. I realize that this is not what we have.

In the case of our national health care we are way behind the curve and our representatives at both state and federal levels are still thinking inside the box. This is bad, very bad. The U.S. is the last democracy that hasn’t yet gone to national health care and we are nowhere near the top 25 on the list of countries with the best quality of national health. Everyone in congress knows this and both political parties are trying to come up with plans to fix our ailing national health care system. The trouble is that nobody is trying to fix this problem. They are looking at this situation all wrong. What they are trying to do is change our current system so that everyone can have affordable health insurance. Looking at our health care crisis from that point of view will produce no better result than continuing to fix an old, broken down piece of machinery instead of replacing it with a new one.

Changing things around so that everyone can afford health insurance will not address the problem. It will not fix the problems that arise when people lose their job while members of their families are going through complicated or expensive on-going medical treatments. Nor will it fix things so that people can have a needed operation that they cannot pay for. Today, nobody gets health care unless they can pay for it—even if it means they will die if they don’t get the treatment. Under the insurance system many people will have their health care interrupted while a family member who just lost their job scrapes and scrambles to find other employment. No matter what fix congress comes up with that includes insurance, that type of problem will not be addressed because in most cases the health insurance probably comes from having the job in the first place. Once the job is gone, so is the insurance. And don’t even think of Cobra. That is simply a way for you to keep your health coverage at three times the original price while you no longer have an income to pay for it.

Insurance is not the solution, it is the problem. We will not get our health care system fixed by changing the cost of our insurance. What we need to do is take the profit out of the health care industry. As a business, insurance companies have to make a profit. In order for there to be profit people must pay enough for the insurance company to provide the health care and have some funds left over after the health care has been provided. This simply cannot happen if everyone’s health care is provided for. Insurance companies don’t make money by providing for people’s medical needs, they make money by not covering them. Did you notice that statement above? “Enough for the insurance company to provide the health care.” That is just it. The insurance companies are really just middlemen. Medical coverage should come from medical professionals, not insurance companies. Letting insurance companies get involved in individual health care played a significant role in the escalation of health care costs in the first place.

Medical care cost increases have outpaced inflation all along. At no time since the introduction of insurance into our health care system has inflation outpaced rising health care costs. If the government really wants to address our health care problems it should bring about national health care and cut the insurance industry completely out of the picture. The system needs an amputation. Only then will it be possible for families to continue to get health care while one or both of the bread winners are out of work.

National health care would fix a number of problems. It would remove from any business's bottom line the need to provide health insurance for their employees. In a large corporation this would be an enormous savings, but in a small business it could make the difference between surviving the start up period and failing to become a viable concern. And we would no longer need to fund Medicare and Medicaid, since national health care would provide for everyone. (Many doctors don't take Medicare or Medicaid anyway.) It would also reduce the cost of health care by at least as much as whatever the profit is. This means that our national health care would be more affordable for the many, than it now is for the few. Since with national health care everyone would receive care, there would be no uninsured people flocking to emergency rooms for the care they cannot afford, which is another factor that drives costs up in our current system. Yet there are still profits.

Changing our system, not altering it, is the cure. Altering things so that more people can afford health insurance isn’t even humane, really. That type of improvement cannot possibly include everyone; it will simply include more than are included now. There will inevitably be some who are left out. Profit is not maximized unless some are denied coverage, and as businesses all insurance companies are responsible to their shareholders for maximized profits. As long as people can be denied coverage for any reason at all, some will die because of the inadequacies of our system. National health care will have some weaknesses, surely, but it can hardly be worse than what we have now. Sadly, judging by the way things are going in congress this type of change doesn’t look likely in the near future.

You Can't Negotiate With Pirates

In view of the fact that piracy off the Somali coast has taken on such huge proportions in the number of vessels taken, monetary value of captured cargo, the number of hostages taken and the distance from their own coast the pirates are traveling to commit these acts—it is unfortunately time for the world to take the long view when planning solutions. Trying to negotiate our way through this is being short-sighted. Yes, we are trying to get through this without losing any lives. But that tactic is probably costing us lives in the long run. They are collecting hefty ransoms for their efforts and as a result, they are growing bolder and upgrading their capabilities. This is not making any solution easier to achieve and is in the long run endangering more lives than it is protecting in the short run. At last report, pirates currently have control of at least 12 ships plus a tug boat and have over 200 hostages.

These pirates, who have stated to the world’s press that they are acting as a form of Coast Guard to protect Somali waters, are now venturing over 200 miles from the Somali coast to board and take ships. No country in the world has ever been able to claim that distance away from their land mass as coastal waters. Although these pirates have told the press that they confront all ships be they fishing vessels or merchant ships carrying oil or containers, they are clearly working for profit here. Among the ships taken are a French yacht, tankers, container ships and a ship carrying tanks and military armaments bound for neighboring Kenya.

They have three potential revenue streams from each vessel taken. They can ransom the crew, ransom or sell the freight and ransom or sell the ship itself. The Pirates have made over $35 million in little over three years and have upgraded their technology to include GPS, sophisticated electronics and upgraded armaments such as RPGs and automatic weaponry. This is a growth industry and it is clearly nothing more complicated than organized crime.

During the most recent confrontation with pirates concerning an American ship, an FBI hostage negotiator working with the U.S. Navy on a case involving a ship’s captain who volunteered to be taken hostage, told the press that the pirates’ actions are all about the money. In his opinion they are not motivated by patriotism or ideology and have no ties to terrorist organizations. Regardless of their motivation, they are presenting themselves as a threat to shipping lane stability that affects the entire world.

The patriotic angle professed by these pirates doesn’t wash, since they are reaching out farther than 200 miles off the Somali coast. Eventually the piracy problem will be eliminated. An Indian warship has sunk one pirate ship and French commandos captured a pirate crew and freed all but one hostage on a sailing yacht. The hostage who wasn’t freed was killed during the rescue. If the French are getting into the actual fight, this problem is serious.

However, taking the cautious approach we are currently trying may be costing the world more lives in the long run than the more ruthless, but prudent action in this case. By paying the ransoms, ship owners and shipping companies are perpetuating this situation by making it profitable. Although it will seem ruthless to much of the world, we should consider how many lives will be saved in the long run by refusing to allow this type of action culminate in a payoff of any kind.

In fact, as horrid as this may sound to many people out there and as unfortunate as it would be for any current hostages and their families—it is just possible that the best solution to this particular problem would be a full scale military action that quite possibly could cost the lives of many hostages. The Joint Chiefs probably have a much better plan of action than I am suggesting here, but a U.S. Navy escort on all American merchant ships in the area seems appropriate. Guided missile frigate escorts in full view for every merchant ship and a permanently deployed submarine to patrol the general area, both with rules of engagement orders to treat the zone as a free fire zone in order to protect shipping lanes and prevent further disruption by piracy seems in order here.

This may sound cruel to some, but we have already missed the opportunity to nip this one in the bud and the net result is that we now have a full fledged piracy problem on our hands in waters that are considered by every country of the world to be open sea. If that isn’t a clear and present danger, what is? These pirates have to know that not only is there is no profit in this type of endeavor, but that this type of activity will immediately cost them there very lives.

To them this is a business model. It may be immoral and it may be wrong, but as long as it is profitable it is viable. If the pirates believe they will be blown out of the water by simply being there at the wrong time they will stop. There is no profit in dying. We have to make the risk too high for them to be willing to continue. If we don’t, we will see it continue and it will escalate. The sooner we stop this, the fewer lives and the less shipping freight will be lost. We cannot negotiate our way to the end of this particular problem. It is the negotiation that leads to their profit.

A Farewell To A Friend

I haven’t written anything for the blog in almost two weeks. During that time I have had two computer crashes and their subsequent recoveries, accompanied by the death of a cherished friend—my Dalmatian, Pepper. I have had a few other dogs in my life, all of them unique and memorable in their own special way, but I will truly miss and remember Pepper more than any other I’ve had so far.

Pepper was my second Dalmatian. I had my first when I got out of the Navy in 1974. His name was Caesar. Since I got Caesar as a new puppy, I was able to train him very well. He was trained in voice commands and hand commands. Every command he responded to by voice, he would also respond to by a silent hand signal. And he was a sharp dog. Sadly, I let the manager of an apartment complex pressure me into getting rid of Caesar under threat of eviction. When I gave Caesar to some friends who lived in the country, Caesar did not want to go anywhere without me.

I will never forget the way he barked and clawed at the rear window of their station wagon when they drove away. He barked until he was out of sight. A year later when I visited the friends Caesar ran to me and ignored his new family until I left. This memory haunted me for a long time.

So 25 years later I had taken up the hobby of hiking fourteeners (mountains with a summit above 14,000 ft.) and I began thinking that I might enjoy a dog to take on the hikes with me. It took no time at all to decide to get a Dalmatian. Since they are inherently hyper-active I figured it would be a good breed to have as a mountain trail dog. I had never forgotten Caesar, and how magnificent a dog he was. Still, I never got over the guilt at having let an apartment manager pressure me into getting rid of the best trained pet I ever had. I found the Dalmatian rescue league and looked at what they had to offer. I thought perhaps I could atone for my previous error in judgment.

There was an adult dog, named Paco who had been abused in some way by a man. The caretaker of house where Paco was staying said that he had been kept outside on a chain for 18 months. This dog shook all over like he was cold—even when he was smiling. I took him home with me. He wouldn’t answer to his name and he had not been trained in any way except that he was house broken. At first I couldn’t get him to go outside and once outside he would not come in. He was afraid of men, but was gentle with women and children. He jumped when ever the fence gate closed because of the sound the latch made as it clacked shut, and I couldn’t even swat a mosquito on my leg without causing him to bolt and run for 50 feet.

My wife, Sherry, and I tossed a few names around the house and he turned his head when I said Pepper. So we re-named him Pepper. I spent three weeks walking him daily on a three-mile long trail in my neighborhood before taking him up a mountain, and in the beginning his tail would stay tucked between his legs when he walked. I took him up Mt. Princeton first, and the next weekend we hiked Mt. Cameron, Mt. Lincoln and Mt. Bross in one hike. During the next four summers Pepper hiked 18 fourteeners with me. He turned out to be the best trail dog anyone could ask for and a fine companion at all times. I was never able to train him to do all the things I wanted, and although Pepper grew accustomed to being around all types of people and became quite gentle around men and women alike—he never completely lost his nervous quiver.

He never learned to heel very well on a leash, but he was outstanding in the open country and in the mountains. We went backpacking in the Mt. Zerkel wilderness area two years in a row and he confronted any and all who would come into our campsite, be they animal or man, until I told him it was OK. And Pepper was once wounded in battle while preventing a large viscous dog, who was charging at me, from getting anywhere close to me. Although Pepper’s leg was bleeding and he was whining when he came over to me, the other dog ran off.

While descending from the summit of one of the mountains we hiked together, Pepper got cliffed out, which is to say he came to a drop off of about five or six feet from a large boulder to ground that wasn’t level. He wouldn’t jump and he couldn’t figure out how to get down to where I was. He whined at me. I was a good third of a football field away by that time. I turned around and saw him shivering on top of a rock configuration while trying to find a way down. I could see the best way for him to come down from where I was so I raised both my trekking poles high in the air so he could see, then lowered my right arm out while fully extended. Pepper saw it and got the signal. He took off in the direction of my dropped arm and went around the rocks to my right and joined me shortly, smiling and quivering when he arrived.

For several days after his death I remembered many endearing things about Pepper. And during the nine years we had him he never quite overcame many of the quirks he acquired while he was in his first home. At first I thought that this quirky dog might be too much trouble. In spite of all of his complications and foibles, he was the best dog I ever had. I miss him very much.