It seems that insurance is the topic I have been inundated with the past two weeks. Life insurance and Obamacare have taken up my time recently. To say that I have been intrigued and saddened about both over the past two weeks is an understatement.

TERM LIFE INSURANCE--An older gentleman came by the office the other day to discuss some final arrangements. He brought in an old life insurance policy, the kind of policy that is normally sold through mail delivery. We all receive those ads. The gentleman stated he had bought the $15,000 term life insurance policy back in the mid 1950s and had been paying $80 a month since then. 

I looked at the papers he showed me and simply felt bewildered. I did the math in my head and then used the calculator to confirm what I already knew. The policy was purchased by a young man to protect his family from an untimely death. The payment was simply a monthly bill that he paid religiously. The thought of doing the math never occurred to him. He was protecting his family and it was simply a monthly bill. 

The math tells a hard story. The gentleman has paid well in excess of $60,000 for a policy that will give his beneficiaries $15,000 at his death. Today, he might as well pay the premiums as the actuarial tables would indicate he will depart this life before he spends another $15,000 in premiums. Those premiums invested in stocks or a whole life policy would have garnered him more than six figures of wealth. 

The lesson from this is to be wary when you are buying life insurance. Term life insurance has a value in that it is normally cheap and provides that needed protection for the family. But the consumer must always remember, term life is just like car and homeowner’s insurance. It provides you with protection for the term of the policy, but does not give you a cash value. That $60,000 in premiums is simply gone and the life insurance company made all the money. Please take a moment before you buy any policy, or make any investment, and do the math. Talk with a licensed and honorable insurance/financial agent before you make lifetime arrangements. There are many quality insurance agents and financial planners out there. Use them, don’t fall for mailed sale’s pitch. Ask questions.

OBAMACARE/RYANCARE—The last few weeks have totally disgusted me. I have voiced my displeasure with OOBAMACARE and have listed the math in previous columns. When Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi said you have to vote for the bill to see what’s in it and President Obama said we could all keep our doctors, one simply knew they had over promised. The Republicans were right to object to this “insurance” being force fed to the nation. The Republicans had six years+ to come up with an alternative that was fiscally responsible and met the nation’s needs. The bill the Republicans put forth angered many who were certainly opposed to OBAMACARE, by not being a comprehensive plan. Calling it OBAMACARE-LIGHT looks to me to be a fair criticism. It is a whole lot easier to attack an idea or program than it is to devise and implement a program. Republican and Democrats are both so partisan that common sense and reasonable negotiations are simply ancient history. I personally would suggest that both political parties need to take a trip to the woodshed for that proverbial “whupping”.

If I am going to criticize those who simply attack, what then would I suggest? I tend towards a very pragmatic approach to government. Like it or not, the United States already has a form of national health insurance. We call it Medicare and Medicaid. The country is already funding those program through payroll taxes and grants. Medicaid is basically free for the indigent. Medicare, if you have basic coverage at age 65, is primarily an 80/20 major health insurance policy. That policy can be modified by a supplement or an HMO  advantage policy.

I would propose that all citizens be covered under what would look like a Medicare basic plan paid for by payroll taxes paid one-half by the employer and one-half by the employee just like the current social security tax. I would also give some consideration to taxing the capital gains income. 

The above provides basic coverage for all, understanding that the traditional Medicaid client would probably not be able to pay the 20 percent of the major copay. I would then use the truly open market to allow for numerous supplemental plans and HMOs to be developed by the private insurance sector to augment the basic coverage. Individuals could then choose which supplement they desire, much like Medicare today. For large employers that supplement payment could be part of labor contract negotiations. 

You may have a different, or even better suggestion, but we need to convey those thoughts to our representatives. What we have isn’t working and insanity is to keep funding a broken program.