Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Real Analysis
Something the networks refuse to do is analyze the fundamentals of the so-called healthcare reform bills that went down in flames last week. So I'm going to take my own shot here.
The question to ask is, why were the Democrats willing to bribe their way into this massive bill that they came so close to pushing through, even though it was beyond flawed?
They say that their objective was to make health insurance more affordable and accessible to those who don't currently have it. Their widely reported justifications were based on the accusation that insurance companies will not sell to individuals with pre-existing conditions, then will routinely cancel the policies of individuals who are unfortunate enough to get sick. They go on to be outraged that insurance company executives are fat cats who siphon profits into their own pockets, partly on the backs of those customers they so callously reject.
All that is followed up with an emotionally-charged declaration that healthcare is a right, not a privilege!
Let me start with that last statement. The Bill of Rights doesn't say a word about healthcare. That declaration may sound noble to many, but if it's correct, then would it not follow that people of America also have a right to a decent home and 3 square meals a day? I'm guessing the same Democrats making this statement would answer that question "yes!"
But how can such things be rights? How can it be a right of any person to receive a house, plenty of food, and medical care, all of which presumably had to be provided by someone else, without compensating that provider in some form?
For any right to exist in a just society, how is it just to declare a right that essentially requires confiscating that good or service from someone else?
The essence of the Democrats' end goal of universal healthcare is just that; a system that confiscates goods and services from one citizen to pass on to another, while skimming a healthy percentage off the top for the government who oversees and enforces that transfer.
So to the other justifications for health insurance reform, let's deal with them individually:
Insurance companies should not make a profit from people's suffering. Sounds nice, until you consider the alternative. The Democrat alternative, as defined in their barely disguised incremental approach to ending private insurance in favor of government insurance, is certain to shift those profits into the pockets of the class of bureaucrats they put in place to administer this newer, "fairer" healthcare insurance plan.
They argue Medicare is very popular, so what's wrong with simply extending Medicare to everyone? At face value, I sort of like that idea too. If I could get insurance coverage through Medicare that allowed me to drop my outrageously expensive private health insurance plan, I'd be very happy to participate.
But I have to be realistic. Medicare's already bankrupt. They already collect about 3 percent of every dollar earned by every American, and it's not enough to cover the seniors already in the plan. They have already cut the Medicare reimbursement rates to the point where doctors and hospitals are treating seniors covered by the plan at a loss, which they must pass on to the rest of their private patients who are paying for those treatments.
So let's say everybody says, "Great, sign us all up for Medicare!". First, how much would the tax rate have to increase to cover all of us? Double? Triple? Quadruple? Would even that be enough? Then, when the doctors can no longer pay their bills because everyone's on Medicare and they can't pass costs on to other paying patients, they've already promised they will simply retire. Ultimately, we'll all have Medicare, but won't be able to find any health providers to treat us when we get sick. Because they will all have shut down from the system making it no longer economically feasible to continue.
So what about these evil insurance company practices? Yes, I have heard the stories of companies canceling policies as soon as their customer checks into the cancer treatment center. But I don't actually know anybody personally that has experienced this - do you?
And the little bit I know about contract law says that if you contract with an insurance company to reimburse medical costs, they must abide by the terms of that contract. So as a consumer, our first responsibility is to make sure there are no clauses in the fine print that allow the insurance company to dump you if you get sick. Then, if they try to do that, you have a case to sue them in court.
So maybe government can play a small role in this problem, to whatever extent it may exist, by simply passing a law that says insurance companies may not put such clauses into the fine print of their contracts, or at least that they must disclose those conditions to their customers before issuing a policy. Whatever this legislation might become, it is a far cry from what the Democrats tried to implement.
Fundamentally, I believe each of us has a responsibility to see to our own needs, whether housing, food, education, healthcare, etc. I also believe the healthcare system is in trouble today precisely because of government interference and an out-of-control tort system.
These days if you are employed, you most likely have a decent health insurance plan through your employer. The problem is the unemployed and the self-employed. The unemployed can't afford insurance, and the self-employed generally choose not to pay oppressive insurance rates for plans that don't pay until you exceed the high deductibles & co-pays.
If the government wants to reform the healthcare system, they should prioritize and create conditions that allow the citizens to force reform, rather than the big-brother approach so favored by our leftist Democrats.
1. Reform the Tort system. I have what I think is a pretty good idea for how to do this without abandoning protection for those who have truly been injured by malpractice.
2. Change the payment system. Change the system to have the citizens themselves pay for their services as rendered. We all should see and have to process the invoices, which will automatically make us more informed consumers. Insurance should be geared toward reimbursing us, not the providers.
3. Detach insurance from Employers. Make health insurance more like car insurance. We should be able to shop for and buy the policy we want in an open, competitive market. That way we don't lose our coverage after we leave an employer, and the self-employed are buying insurance the same way everyone else does.
4. Regulate, but open the market. The government can place reasonable regulations on insurance companies to make sure they act responsibly, but should also encourage companies to offer a wide range of policy options that fit individual customers' needs, and of course a pre-existing condition should affect an insurance purchaser no differently than an accident would affect a car insurance purchaser.
Too bad there isn't a single politician out there with anything close to these ideas.
The question to ask is, why were the Democrats willing to bribe their way into this massive bill that they came so close to pushing through, even though it was beyond flawed?
They say that their objective was to make health insurance more affordable and accessible to those who don't currently have it. Their widely reported justifications were based on the accusation that insurance companies will not sell to individuals with pre-existing conditions, then will routinely cancel the policies of individuals who are unfortunate enough to get sick. They go on to be outraged that insurance company executives are fat cats who siphon profits into their own pockets, partly on the backs of those customers they so callously reject.
All that is followed up with an emotionally-charged declaration that healthcare is a right, not a privilege!
Let me start with that last statement. The Bill of Rights doesn't say a word about healthcare. That declaration may sound noble to many, but if it's correct, then would it not follow that people of America also have a right to a decent home and 3 square meals a day? I'm guessing the same Democrats making this statement would answer that question "yes!"
But how can such things be rights? How can it be a right of any person to receive a house, plenty of food, and medical care, all of which presumably had to be provided by someone else, without compensating that provider in some form?
For any right to exist in a just society, how is it just to declare a right that essentially requires confiscating that good or service from someone else?
The essence of the Democrats' end goal of universal healthcare is just that; a system that confiscates goods and services from one citizen to pass on to another, while skimming a healthy percentage off the top for the government who oversees and enforces that transfer.
So to the other justifications for health insurance reform, let's deal with them individually:
Insurance companies should not make a profit from people's suffering. Sounds nice, until you consider the alternative. The Democrat alternative, as defined in their barely disguised incremental approach to ending private insurance in favor of government insurance, is certain to shift those profits into the pockets of the class of bureaucrats they put in place to administer this newer, "fairer" healthcare insurance plan.
They argue Medicare is very popular, so what's wrong with simply extending Medicare to everyone? At face value, I sort of like that idea too. If I could get insurance coverage through Medicare that allowed me to drop my outrageously expensive private health insurance plan, I'd be very happy to participate.
But I have to be realistic. Medicare's already bankrupt. They already collect about 3 percent of every dollar earned by every American, and it's not enough to cover the seniors already in the plan. They have already cut the Medicare reimbursement rates to the point where doctors and hospitals are treating seniors covered by the plan at a loss, which they must pass on to the rest of their private patients who are paying for those treatments.
So let's say everybody says, "Great, sign us all up for Medicare!". First, how much would the tax rate have to increase to cover all of us? Double? Triple? Quadruple? Would even that be enough? Then, when the doctors can no longer pay their bills because everyone's on Medicare and they can't pass costs on to other paying patients, they've already promised they will simply retire. Ultimately, we'll all have Medicare, but won't be able to find any health providers to treat us when we get sick. Because they will all have shut down from the system making it no longer economically feasible to continue.
So what about these evil insurance company practices? Yes, I have heard the stories of companies canceling policies as soon as their customer checks into the cancer treatment center. But I don't actually know anybody personally that has experienced this - do you?
And the little bit I know about contract law says that if you contract with an insurance company to reimburse medical costs, they must abide by the terms of that contract. So as a consumer, our first responsibility is to make sure there are no clauses in the fine print that allow the insurance company to dump you if you get sick. Then, if they try to do that, you have a case to sue them in court.
So maybe government can play a small role in this problem, to whatever extent it may exist, by simply passing a law that says insurance companies may not put such clauses into the fine print of their contracts, or at least that they must disclose those conditions to their customers before issuing a policy. Whatever this legislation might become, it is a far cry from what the Democrats tried to implement.
Fundamentally, I believe each of us has a responsibility to see to our own needs, whether housing, food, education, healthcare, etc. I also believe the healthcare system is in trouble today precisely because of government interference and an out-of-control tort system.
These days if you are employed, you most likely have a decent health insurance plan through your employer. The problem is the unemployed and the self-employed. The unemployed can't afford insurance, and the self-employed generally choose not to pay oppressive insurance rates for plans that don't pay until you exceed the high deductibles & co-pays.
If the government wants to reform the healthcare system, they should prioritize and create conditions that allow the citizens to force reform, rather than the big-brother approach so favored by our leftist Democrats.
1. Reform the Tort system. I have what I think is a pretty good idea for how to do this without abandoning protection for those who have truly been injured by malpractice.
2. Change the payment system. Change the system to have the citizens themselves pay for their services as rendered. We all should see and have to process the invoices, which will automatically make us more informed consumers. Insurance should be geared toward reimbursing us, not the providers.
3. Detach insurance from Employers. Make health insurance more like car insurance. We should be able to shop for and buy the policy we want in an open, competitive market. That way we don't lose our coverage after we leave an employer, and the self-employed are buying insurance the same way everyone else does.
4. Regulate, but open the market. The government can place reasonable regulations on insurance companies to make sure they act responsibly, but should also encourage companies to offer a wide range of policy options that fit individual customers' needs, and of course a pre-existing condition should affect an insurance purchaser no differently than an accident would affect a car insurance purchaser.
Too bad there isn't a single politician out there with anything close to these ideas.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Glimmers of Hope
Interesting in the wake of our freshman president's campaign promising "hope" and "change", recent events actually have provided the first glimmers of hope for me since he took office.
To have a Scott Brown come out of nowhere to beat the Democrat establishment candidate in the deepest of blue states means there seem to actually be enough people with enough sense even there to turn out to kick out the establishment.
Flipping channels the morning after that election, I happened across Meredith Viera on the Today show interviewing the new Massachusetts senator. She has always seemed to me a sweet lady, but I saw a completely opposite side of her in this interview. She was angry and combative, and pummeled Brown with a litany of accusations more than questions.
The gist of her grilling of the new Senator, as far as what I heard, was
"How dare you take over Ted Kennedy's seat in the Senate with the intention of stopping passage of the health reform he dedicated his entire political career to making a reality!"
I couldn't help but once again wonder, while listening to her line of questioning, whether she really is that ignorant about why people across America oppose the healthcare bill. But of course, I also can't imagine anybody who has paid even minimal attention to the contents of the bill and the shady deals made to buy votes for it still believing it's a good idea.
I see a lot of the same on CNN, and forget about MSNBC. These talking heads are so incredibly partisan that they can't even identify a turkey when it's right in front of them in broad daylight.
There may be hope for us yet.
To have a Scott Brown come out of nowhere to beat the Democrat establishment candidate in the deepest of blue states means there seem to actually be enough people with enough sense even there to turn out to kick out the establishment.
Flipping channels the morning after that election, I happened across Meredith Viera on the Today show interviewing the new Massachusetts senator. She has always seemed to me a sweet lady, but I saw a completely opposite side of her in this interview. She was angry and combative, and pummeled Brown with a litany of accusations more than questions.
The gist of her grilling of the new Senator, as far as what I heard, was
"How dare you take over Ted Kennedy's seat in the Senate with the intention of stopping passage of the health reform he dedicated his entire political career to making a reality!"
I couldn't help but once again wonder, while listening to her line of questioning, whether she really is that ignorant about why people across America oppose the healthcare bill. But of course, I also can't imagine anybody who has paid even minimal attention to the contents of the bill and the shady deals made to buy votes for it still believing it's a good idea.
I see a lot of the same on CNN, and forget about MSNBC. These talking heads are so incredibly partisan that they can't even identify a turkey when it's right in front of them in broad daylight.
There may be hope for us yet.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
See Why I Don't Gamble
1 for 4 in my picks this weekend.
That's why I don't gamble. I'm a bookmaker's dream.
The NFC results didn't really surprise me, as I did pick the underdogs in both games. Although I was mildly surprised that both games were blowouts.
The biggest surprise of the weekend was the Jets beating the Chargers. Is it possible that San Diego took them for granted and looked ahead to the Colts just a bit?
Or is the Jet defense that good?
We'll get to find out.
The important thing is I had the right pick for the most important game of the weekend.
It was fun to be there Saturday night.
That's why I don't gamble. I'm a bookmaker's dream.
The NFC results didn't really surprise me, as I did pick the underdogs in both games. Although I was mildly surprised that both games were blowouts.
The biggest surprise of the weekend was the Jets beating the Chargers. Is it possible that San Diego took them for granted and looked ahead to the Colts just a bit?
Or is the Jet defense that good?
We'll get to find out.
The important thing is I had the right pick for the most important game of the weekend.
It was fun to be there Saturday night.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Football Diversions
Just for fun, a post about this weekend's NFL playoff games.
This is the weekend that pretty much anything can happen. Past history indicates that seedings are unreliable predictors of the outcome, as each division's final four teams square off.
The NFC has two interesting matchups -
Arizona will try to steal the chance to play for the Super Bowl at New Orleans, where the Saints have had perhaps their best season ever. But the Saints stumled late in the regular season, looking very average against some average opponents. Meanwhile, the Cardinals won an overtime shootout last week against Green Bay, where until the Cardinal defense sacked and forced a Rogers fumble for the winning touchdown, it seemed that neither team could stop the other.
Did New Orleans use their bye week to rejuvenate their lagging team? Or will their dream season come to an anticlimactic end against Kurt Warner's passing game?
The Cowboys go to Minnesota to try to keep their late-season surge alive. This is an interesting game, with both teams looking strong late in the year. The Vikings' running game with Ardrian Peterson seemed to tail off a bit late, but it doesn't seem to translate into predictions of doom against the hot Cowboy defense.
This game is a tough one to pick. Of the four weekend games, this seems the most likely to stay even to the end. I think the winner will be decided by a late official's call or non-call, a dropped pass, or a lucky (or unlucky) bounce of the ball.
The AFC would seem to be more predictable in theory, but I'm not ready to predict either game as a sure thing.
It would seem that the underdog Jets have no shot against the talented Chargers, playing on the opposite coast. The Jets needed the gift they received from the Colts in the second-to-last game just to qualify for the playoffs.
But the Jets also beat Cincinnati convincingly, have a very good defense, and are one of the best rushing teams in the league.
I think the Chargers will likely win, but only if they play their best and don't take the underdog Jets for granted.
Finally, in the game that has my biggest interest, the Colts host the Ravens.
Ravens fans, and apparently the entire city of Baltimore, hate Indianapolis with every fiber of their being. They feel the Colts were stolen from them, when Bob Irsay packed up the team in the middle of the night and sneaked out of the city to relocate to the Hoosier state.
So more than anything, Ravens fans want the sweet revenge of taking down the Colts in one of their finest regular-season years in history.
In theory, the Ravens team shouldn't have a prayer. They don't have much of a passing game, and must win behind a strong running game and outstanding defense.
But that approach worked amazingly well last week against the Patriots on a cold day in Massachusetts. That Ravens defense rattled Tom Brady so badly that he almost looked like some rookie quarterback, rather than one of the best at this position (outside of Peyton Manning, of course).
The Colts will try to stuff the Ravens run and ask Peyton and the gang to put up a 2 or 3 touchdown lead as early in the game as possible. Then the Ravens will have to change their game plan and start passing to get back into the game. That's when the Colts will turn loose their all-pro defensive ends, Freeney and Mathis, to terrorize Joe Flacco.
I think the Colts should win this one, but they're not likely to put up a lot of points against that Ravens defense. The game will be close because the Raven's won't allow Peyton too much room, but the Ravens offense still won't be able to keep up.
My predictions for the divisional championship games?
Chargers - Colts
Cowboys - Cardinals
I'm picking the favorites to win in the AFC, and the underdogs to win in the NFC.
Than again, my track record for picking winners isn't great.
But it will be fun to see how things actually play out.
This is the weekend that pretty much anything can happen. Past history indicates that seedings are unreliable predictors of the outcome, as each division's final four teams square off.
The NFC has two interesting matchups -
Arizona will try to steal the chance to play for the Super Bowl at New Orleans, where the Saints have had perhaps their best season ever. But the Saints stumled late in the regular season, looking very average against some average opponents. Meanwhile, the Cardinals won an overtime shootout last week against Green Bay, where until the Cardinal defense sacked and forced a Rogers fumble for the winning touchdown, it seemed that neither team could stop the other.
Did New Orleans use their bye week to rejuvenate their lagging team? Or will their dream season come to an anticlimactic end against Kurt Warner's passing game?
The Cowboys go to Minnesota to try to keep their late-season surge alive. This is an interesting game, with both teams looking strong late in the year. The Vikings' running game with Ardrian Peterson seemed to tail off a bit late, but it doesn't seem to translate into predictions of doom against the hot Cowboy defense.
This game is a tough one to pick. Of the four weekend games, this seems the most likely to stay even to the end. I think the winner will be decided by a late official's call or non-call, a dropped pass, or a lucky (or unlucky) bounce of the ball.
The AFC would seem to be more predictable in theory, but I'm not ready to predict either game as a sure thing.
It would seem that the underdog Jets have no shot against the talented Chargers, playing on the opposite coast. The Jets needed the gift they received from the Colts in the second-to-last game just to qualify for the playoffs.
But the Jets also beat Cincinnati convincingly, have a very good defense, and are one of the best rushing teams in the league.
I think the Chargers will likely win, but only if they play their best and don't take the underdog Jets for granted.
Finally, in the game that has my biggest interest, the Colts host the Ravens.
Ravens fans, and apparently the entire city of Baltimore, hate Indianapolis with every fiber of their being. They feel the Colts were stolen from them, when Bob Irsay packed up the team in the middle of the night and sneaked out of the city to relocate to the Hoosier state.
So more than anything, Ravens fans want the sweet revenge of taking down the Colts in one of their finest regular-season years in history.
In theory, the Ravens team shouldn't have a prayer. They don't have much of a passing game, and must win behind a strong running game and outstanding defense.
But that approach worked amazingly well last week against the Patriots on a cold day in Massachusetts. That Ravens defense rattled Tom Brady so badly that he almost looked like some rookie quarterback, rather than one of the best at this position (outside of Peyton Manning, of course).
The Colts will try to stuff the Ravens run and ask Peyton and the gang to put up a 2 or 3 touchdown lead as early in the game as possible. Then the Ravens will have to change their game plan and start passing to get back into the game. That's when the Colts will turn loose their all-pro defensive ends, Freeney and Mathis, to terrorize Joe Flacco.
I think the Colts should win this one, but they're not likely to put up a lot of points against that Ravens defense. The game will be close because the Raven's won't allow Peyton too much room, but the Ravens offense still won't be able to keep up.
My predictions for the divisional championship games?
Chargers - Colts
Cowboys - Cardinals
I'm picking the favorites to win in the AFC, and the underdogs to win in the NFC.
Than again, my track record for picking winners isn't great.
But it will be fun to see how things actually play out.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Living on the Road
When opportunities come around for grabbing solid paying consulting work, I feel I have to take advantage of them. Even when it means living on the road and having little to no time to take a breath, let alone take care of my myriad administrative duties as a small business entrepreneur of sorts.
The weekend seemed to be short to the degree of barely existing. Saturday was about 70% planned, and of course Sunday afternoon meant another flight. So I was able to barely squeeze in the most vital of paperwork in the gaps of a short and busy weekend.
I have to admit to being a bit grumpy this weekend. The commodity I value highly but seem to suffer a lack of lately is sleep. Chris' Saturday evening basketball game, where several unfortunate factors led to his team losing a game they had well in hand in the fourth quarter, made a contribution to my foul mood.
As did getting pulled over for expired license plates. And being unable to squeeze in any time to try figuring out how to recover from losing my office in the Christmas fire at the United Way building. Even experiencing the bizarre disappearance of my socks from the laundry added to my pain.
Then there was the Sunday trip. TSA must not have planned on the number of travelers they would be screening this afternoon, because the lines were long and slow. Then a gray-haired executive type, who happened to show up across from me on my flight, tried to cut the line. I was pleased to see the deft maneuvering of the guy he tried to cut in front of, who managed to position himself in such a way as to deny the jerk his sought-after spot without overtly seeming to be confrontational.
Finally, the woman that sat next to me had to lather up with an extra-pungent hand lotion as we were making our approach. I was only just able to avoid unloading my mostly-digested breakfast into her lap. Seriously, do these people have any clue whatsoever that somebody might not appreciate their fragrant lotions and perfumes? I suspect they might, but simply don't care.
Oh yeah, and the hotel's wi-fi is down. So I just finished emailing my weekend reports using the hotel's "Business Center", which is a wired connection.
A week here in one of the nation's coldest places, then a week back down south, then finally I will get a Monday & Tuesday at home (but with at least a week's worth of work to try to fit into those days).
Yeah, I'm a bit grumpy.
The weekend seemed to be short to the degree of barely existing. Saturday was about 70% planned, and of course Sunday afternoon meant another flight. So I was able to barely squeeze in the most vital of paperwork in the gaps of a short and busy weekend.
I have to admit to being a bit grumpy this weekend. The commodity I value highly but seem to suffer a lack of lately is sleep. Chris' Saturday evening basketball game, where several unfortunate factors led to his team losing a game they had well in hand in the fourth quarter, made a contribution to my foul mood.
As did getting pulled over for expired license plates. And being unable to squeeze in any time to try figuring out how to recover from losing my office in the Christmas fire at the United Way building. Even experiencing the bizarre disappearance of my socks from the laundry added to my pain.
Then there was the Sunday trip. TSA must not have planned on the number of travelers they would be screening this afternoon, because the lines were long and slow. Then a gray-haired executive type, who happened to show up across from me on my flight, tried to cut the line. I was pleased to see the deft maneuvering of the guy he tried to cut in front of, who managed to position himself in such a way as to deny the jerk his sought-after spot without overtly seeming to be confrontational.
Finally, the woman that sat next to me had to lather up with an extra-pungent hand lotion as we were making our approach. I was only just able to avoid unloading my mostly-digested breakfast into her lap. Seriously, do these people have any clue whatsoever that somebody might not appreciate their fragrant lotions and perfumes? I suspect they might, but simply don't care.
Oh yeah, and the hotel's wi-fi is down. So I just finished emailing my weekend reports using the hotel's "Business Center", which is a wired connection.
A week here in one of the nation's coldest places, then a week back down south, then finally I will get a Monday & Tuesday at home (but with at least a week's worth of work to try to fit into those days).
Yeah, I'm a bit grumpy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)