Sorry Mediaite. Your embed option was broken.
Monday, December 2, 2013
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
The Death of Health Care and Innovation
Oh the delusional public. I hope you are happy now. You've signed our death warrants.
How?
This delusion that health care is a right. You all voted for a monster that made promises he broke and unilaterally and unconstitutionally changed rules of the law. The empty suit wears no clothes and has no experience. He acts as Caesar and you seem to be okay with it; some of you champion it.
Do you not realize that this savior of health care uses as a solution the original poison? That poison is government.
The first step in destroying health care was not government monkeying around with it but with wages. Businesses used the offer of health care to gain desired employees in defiance of the government's wage controls during World War II. This masks the end consumer from the true cost which is bad; this distorts the market.
The government follows suit a couple decades later with Medicaid and Medicare. The market is further distorted, especially since accountability is lessened and fraud is easier with government programs.
So that is the short story of how the market was distorted.
Back in the 90's an unelected woman behind the man of power was to design a government solution to a "problem" that was originally caused by government; the solution was designed outside of the public eye. This man of power we learned was not just a liar but a perjurer and the woman in fact supported his lie and even accused the accusers of being the guilty ones. Thankfully, and hopefully not surprisingly, the solution failed. People of that character should not be allowed to lead or succeed.
So in the late 2000's we get the empty armour of Caesar. The people would become subject to passing of the Affordable (snicker) Care Act (ACA); supported by only one political party through backroom deals and exemptions; this is just a reworking of the 90's failure and a variant of a health care plan of his slain foe. Believe it or not, the foe did not believe the plan was good.
And so the is a recap of recent history. However, I do need to reiterate an important quote to frame the rest of this talk.
And so legislation is passed by the support of a single party without reading it. And none of these trolls were assassinated?
And so empty armour Caesar unilaterally and unconstitutionally gave business a free pass on their obligation when it came due; ironically Caesar did claim business the bad guy and that he would slay it, but instead indulged in its slushy compensations.
And time has come for the axe to fall on the citizens not under the protection of business; yes, business protects people due to the bizarre circumstances designed by the government in which the government would otherwise punish the people. Once again Caesar tries to dictate unconstitutional deference of law after rebuking the opposition for not supporting the law, but it is much more noticeable now that he does not have the authority because it affects the bare public.
We wait for what will happen. Will a change happen under approved processes; will change be allowed under an unconstitutional declaration from Caesar; will the law be implemented as stated?
From here we have to move on to what is next. This is the scary part. Since we needed to pass it to find out what is in it, what's next might be scary.
What of the sick? You must cover pre-existing conditions. This is bad.
Am I mean? Am I mad?
No. I am going to explain the big picture and how we might not improve health care under this new set of laws and regulations.
Normally pre-existing conditions would have a higher price if they could get a policy. If they could not get a policy due to lack of funds or unavailability how would a person get treatment?
Charity.
Charity swells from those that have excess funds. Those that are in need benefit from charity. Charity picks up the slack.
But now since the law forces providers to cover all and that all buy insurance, insurance costs goes up and those that used to receive charity might be able to afford health insurance. Insurance is forced to pick up charity's tab. That hidden safety net is forced on everyone, not just those that can afford it and want to provide it.
So if that charity recipient now uses insurance instead, their care is limited by what the government allows, not what a charity will pay for. Hence, death panels.
Since we haven't read the law, do we know if charity can still give help? Or is it illegal for outside charitable functions to help people?
What about Doctors? There are Doctors that do charitable work for free. Does this law control this action of kindness? I have heard zero comment on this, but it worries me because ACA does price control; price control might interrupt charitable services.
Even worse, laws and regulations tend to only control knowns. New ideas and innovations quickly fall outside of this scope because the law does not cover the new ideas. How can people get access to new procedures if they are not legalized? Government control of health care will make only current knowns legal and new methods are unknown and hence, illegal. Hence, innovation is illegal and uncovered.
Well, you voted for this. Enjoy.
How?
This delusion that health care is a right. You all voted for a monster that made promises he broke and unilaterally and unconstitutionally changed rules of the law. The empty suit wears no clothes and has no experience. He acts as Caesar and you seem to be okay with it; some of you champion it.
Do you not realize that this savior of health care uses as a solution the original poison? That poison is government.
The first step in destroying health care was not government monkeying around with it but with wages. Businesses used the offer of health care to gain desired employees in defiance of the government's wage controls during World War II. This masks the end consumer from the true cost which is bad; this distorts the market.
The government follows suit a couple decades later with Medicaid and Medicare. The market is further distorted, especially since accountability is lessened and fraud is easier with government programs.
So that is the short story of how the market was distorted.
Back in the 90's an unelected woman behind the man of power was to design a government solution to a "problem" that was originally caused by government; the solution was designed outside of the public eye. This man of power we learned was not just a liar but a perjurer and the woman in fact supported his lie and even accused the accusers of being the guilty ones. Thankfully, and hopefully not surprisingly, the solution failed. People of that character should not be allowed to lead or succeed.
So in the late 2000's we get the empty armour of Caesar. The people would become subject to passing of the Affordable (snicker) Care Act (ACA); supported by only one political party through backroom deals and exemptions; this is just a reworking of the 90's failure and a variant of a health care plan of his slain foe. Believe it or not, the foe did not believe the plan was good.
And so the is a recap of recent history. However, I do need to reiterate an important quote to frame the rest of this talk.
But we have to pass the bill to uh find out what is in it away from the fog of the controversy.
uncredited Witch
And so legislation is passed by the support of a single party without reading it. And none of these trolls were assassinated?
And so empty armour Caesar unilaterally and unconstitutionally gave business a free pass on their obligation when it came due; ironically Caesar did claim business the bad guy and that he would slay it, but instead indulged in its slushy compensations.
And time has come for the axe to fall on the citizens not under the protection of business; yes, business protects people due to the bizarre circumstances designed by the government in which the government would otherwise punish the people. Once again Caesar tries to dictate unconstitutional deference of law after rebuking the opposition for not supporting the law, but it is much more noticeable now that he does not have the authority because it affects the bare public.
We wait for what will happen. Will a change happen under approved processes; will change be allowed under an unconstitutional declaration from Caesar; will the law be implemented as stated?
From here we have to move on to what is next. This is the scary part. Since we needed to pass it to find out what is in it, what's next might be scary.
The Speculation
What of the sick? You must cover pre-existing conditions. This is bad.
Am I mean? Am I mad?
No. I am going to explain the big picture and how we might not improve health care under this new set of laws and regulations.
Normally pre-existing conditions would have a higher price if they could get a policy. If they could not get a policy due to lack of funds or unavailability how would a person get treatment?
Charity.
Charity swells from those that have excess funds. Those that are in need benefit from charity. Charity picks up the slack.
But now since the law forces providers to cover all and that all buy insurance, insurance costs goes up and those that used to receive charity might be able to afford health insurance. Insurance is forced to pick up charity's tab. That hidden safety net is forced on everyone, not just those that can afford it and want to provide it.
So if that charity recipient now uses insurance instead, their care is limited by what the government allows, not what a charity will pay for. Hence, death panels.
Since we haven't read the law, do we know if charity can still give help? Or is it illegal for outside charitable functions to help people?
What about Doctors? There are Doctors that do charitable work for free. Does this law control this action of kindness? I have heard zero comment on this, but it worries me because ACA does price control; price control might interrupt charitable services.
Even worse, laws and regulations tend to only control knowns. New ideas and innovations quickly fall outside of this scope because the law does not cover the new ideas. How can people get access to new procedures if they are not legalized? Government control of health care will make only current knowns legal and new methods are unknown and hence, illegal. Hence, innovation is illegal and uncovered.
Well, you voted for this. Enjoy.
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
Saturday, October 12, 2013
Hats Off to the Obamacare Website Programmers
You may think I am about to tear into the programmers for the Obamacare websites or make fun of them. You may think this post will be some tongue-in-cheek sarcasm. But it is not.
Everyone wonders how after three years that the website launch for signing up for Obamacare could fail. It is simple. The programmers did not have three years. In fact, how long did they have?
Just this summer I remember the talk shows having discussions about states in which it was not still decided if they would open up a health care exchange or the federal government would. This summer that happened. No one was sure whom would be responsible.
This means not a single line of code could have been written yet. Only two or three months maybe for some sites to program and get ready for October first and millions of users. Unless you are a programmer you might not know what an insane request that is.
In these past three years Obamacare has been coming into shape and facing legal challenges. Obama himself has delayed parts of the legislation in a manner that is unconstitutional. How the whole system works has been free form regardless of the law. No one knows what it will look like in the end.
It is still changing.
So I cannot stand by and let people make fun of the programmers. They are at the mercy of the blowing winds of regulations. It is like herding cats. How can the programmers make a finished product for a system with changing rules?
You can not stress test a system if it is not finished. Obamacare is under an ever changing set of rules. We still don't know what it will all come down to.
How do you program that?
Herding cats, man. Herding cats.
You don't want to program that.
Everyone wonders how after three years that the website launch for signing up for Obamacare could fail. It is simple. The programmers did not have three years. In fact, how long did they have?
Just this summer I remember the talk shows having discussions about states in which it was not still decided if they would open up a health care exchange or the federal government would. This summer that happened. No one was sure whom would be responsible.
This means not a single line of code could have been written yet. Only two or three months maybe for some sites to program and get ready for October first and millions of users. Unless you are a programmer you might not know what an insane request that is.
In these past three years Obamacare has been coming into shape and facing legal challenges. Obama himself has delayed parts of the legislation in a manner that is unconstitutional. How the whole system works has been free form regardless of the law. No one knows what it will look like in the end.
It is still changing.
So I cannot stand by and let people make fun of the programmers. They are at the mercy of the blowing winds of regulations. It is like herding cats. How can the programmers make a finished product for a system with changing rules?
You can not stress test a system if it is not finished. Obamacare is under an ever changing set of rules. We still don't know what it will all come down to.
How do you program that?
Herding cats, man. Herding cats.
You don't want to program that.
Get Arrested for Telling a Joke in America
Get arrested for telling a joke in America. Seriously. A recording playing at an airport announces that you can be arrested for making jokes about the TSA.
Come on people. The TSA are hard working people! Why would you make jokes?
Meanwhile an airport was evacuated because of burnt toast.
Come on people. The TSA are hard working people! Why would you make jokes?
Meanwhile an airport was evacuated because of burnt toast.
The World Will End by 2050
The Weather Channel website makes this claim in a blogpost, or is it a news story?
Read it for a good laugh. It is an insane diatribe about the demise of people with illogical linking of calamities linked to climate change that is described as global warming; a lot of disasters.
I'm not even going to bother rebuffing anything in the post. It would take too long. Just read it and laugh.
<sarcasm>Thanks Weather Channel. You are soooo credible.</sarcasm>
Read it for a good laugh. It is an insane diatribe about the demise of people with illogical linking of calamities linked to climate change that is described as global warming; a lot of disasters.
I'm not even going to bother rebuffing anything in the post. It would take too long. Just read it and laugh.
<sarcasm>Thanks Weather Channel. You are soooo credible.</sarcasm>
Sunday, October 6, 2013
The World Will End by 2030
So says Sir Bob Geldof.
He didn't say the world would end but that humans would be extinct by 2030. Why?
Climate change.
It's good to get your world ending predictions from a semi-successful musician, isn't it?
He didn't say the world would end but that humans would be extinct by 2030. Why?
Climate change.
It's good to get your world ending predictions from a semi-successful musician, isn't it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)