Assisted living like communist control

From: Diane Ferrian, Dassel

I have lived in a low-income housing in Dassel for two and a half years and I love it here very much. There is no way that I need assisted living.

Being in an assisted living building is like being under communist control. I refuse to be under communist control.

The stress of what is going on here is taking a toll on my mental health. I do not know where I would live if I get evicted.

The cost of assisted living will be above and beyond my means.

Health care debate – crunching numbers

From: Sven Johansson, Cokato

I have taken interest in following the health care debate in the US for many years. In most cases, I have not been impressed by what I have read.

This is a very difficult subject, and not many are able to address the root of the problem. Rather, a political agenda or personal feelings seem to win out over facts and figures.

Having moved to the US in 1987 from Sweden, it would be correct to say that I am one of the few in this area having experienced both sides of the coin. That is – universal health care as it is practiced in Sweden and the private health care as it is practiced in this country.

Allow me to give a sample. As a college student I had to go to the emergency room at the local hospital, and after careful examination it was decided I needed an operation right away. The doctors were right as I later found out, since my appendix was about to rupture. I never saw a bill. I never had to sign any papers. A few days later I was back at school.

Most industrialized countries in the world have universal health care. Interestingly enough, surveys in these countries show that most people are happy with what they get.

There really is no free ride whether you are living in any of these two systems. Money must be collected in some form, whether insurance premiums or income taxes to pay for services rendered.

The root of the problem with private health care in this country is cost, or health care spending. health care spending continues to rise at a rapid rate forcing businesses to cut back on health insurance coverage and forcing many families to cut back on basic necessities.

In the 2009 national health spending is expected to reach $2.5 trillion accounting for 17.6 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP). By 2018 national health care expenditures are expected to reach $4.4 trillion – more than double 2007 spending.

The average employer-sponsored premium for a family of four costs close to $13,400 a year, and the employer foots about 27 percent of this cost. Health insurance costs are the fastest growing expense for employers. Employer health insurance costs overtook profits in 2008, and the gap grows steadily.

It is very easy to see where this is taking us. Assuming job-based health insurance for a family of four would reach nearly $25,000 per year by 2018 we can expect employers to continue cutting back or eliminating health care coverage.

It is also easy to understand why there are some 50 million people uninsured. The primary reason people are uninsured is due to the high and escalating cost of health insurance coverage.

Health care costs are far higher in the United States than in any other advanced nation, whether measured in total dollars spent, as a percentage of the economy, or on a per capita basis. It has been rising faster than the overall economy or personal incomes for more than 40 years, a trend that cannot continue.

There is a lot of Scandinavian ancestry in this area. Let us look at Finland as an example. In Finland, public medical services and hospitals are run by municipalities (local government) and are funded 76 percent by taxation, 20 percent by patients through access charges, and 4 percent by others. Private provision is mainly the primary care sector. There are few private hospitals.

The main hospitals are either municipally owned (funded from local taxes) or run by the medical teaching universities. According to a survey published by the European Commission in 2000, Finland is in the top four of EU countries in terms of satisfaction with their hospital care system. Finnish health care expenditures are below the European average.

Taxation funding is partly local and partly nationally based. The national social insurance institution KELA reimburses part of patients prescription costs and makes a contribution towards private medical costs if they choose to be treated in the private sector rather than the public sector. Patient access charges are subject to annual caps.

For example, a visit to see your doctor costs 11 Euro with 22 Euro annual cap, hospital outpatient treatment is 22 Euro per visit, a hospital stay including food, medical care and medicines is 26 Euro per 24 hours. After a patient has spent 590 Euros per year on public medical services, all treatments and medications thereafter in that year are free. Countries like Sweden, Norway and Denmark have similar systems.

Germany has the world’s oldest universal health care system dating back to 1883. It applied originally only to low-income workers and certain government employees. From there it has gradually expanded to cover the great majority of the population. The system is decentralized with private practice physicians providing ambulatory care, and independent, mostly non-profit hospitals providing the majority of inpatient care.

About 92 percent of the population is covered by a statutory health insurance plan, which provides a standardized level of coverage through any one of approximately 1100 public or private sickness funds. Standard insurance is provided by a combination of employee contributions, employer contributions and government subsidies on a scale determined by income level.

Since 1976 the government has convened an annual commission, comprised of representatives of business, labor, physicians, hospitals and insurance and pharmaceutical industries. The commission takes into account government policies and makes recommendations to regional associations in respect to overall expenditure targets. In 1986, expenditure caps were implemented and were tied to the age of the local population as well as the overall wage increases. Reimbursement is determined retrospectively to insure that spending target are not exceeded. Co-payments were introduced in the 1980s in an attempt to prevent over utilization and control costs. Overall health care expenditure in Germany today is about 10.8 percent of GDP.

The only way the United States is going to be able to provide health care for its people for future generations is to come together as a people and decide if health care is to be your right or if it is to be, like now, a privilege for those that can afford to pay. I have come to find Americans as a very generous and peace loving people, and it hurts me to see the suffering of those less fortunate in our midst who are hard-working people, but cannot afford health care. It is a shame that the richest country in the world that put man on the moon has not been able to provide affordable health care for all. Yes, it is a very difficult area to debate. Feelings and political agendas will not suffice; will not be the answer. Together we are strong, and together we can find a way.

No tax dollars spent on townhomes

From: Terry Moore, Past Meeker Co. EDA Board member and president

I was extremely disappointed when I read Darin Packard’s letter to the editor in the Oct. 26 issue of the Enterprise Dispatch.

He completely misrepresented the county’s role in the funding of the townhomes the EDA built. He wrote, “Now, the county is again funding the townhomes that the EDA built by paying out over $161,800 in 2010 to a non-profit which pays the EDA’s bills. All this, and another $131,000 to pay EDA debt.”

I was a member of the EDA from 1998 until 2009 and I know for a fact that no county money has been spent on anything having to do with the townhomes. The bills and debt service are paid for by the revenues created by the townhomes. In fact, there has been a surplus of money from the townhomes that has been used to fund economic activity in the county.

While reviewing the 2010 proposed budget from the EDA to the county commissioners there is $557,414 in revenue from townhome rent and $543,105 in expenses. No money is requested from the county to support the townhomes.

Another reason I am extremely upset with Mr. Packard is that, as president of the EDA during the time of the townhome planning and construction, one of my main concerns was that no tax dollars be spent either constructing the townhomes or running them long term. I am extremely proud to say this is a reality.

In closing I would like to request that Mr. Packard publicly apologize to the members of the Meeker County EDA and the Meeker County Board of Commissioners for his smearing of them without providing correct facts and numbers.