American Healthcare Issues

First off, let me say this isn't an argument for why we should leave health care in America the way it is, or pushing for universal coverage. I'm just doing a little nit-picking and general complaining over a few things.

One of the things I intend to bitch about came up on a blog by Renaissance Guy about a guy with an infected tooth who ended up dying. He went to the local emergency room and they gave him a prescription for some pain meds and an antibiotic and told to go get his tooth pulled. He was uninsured.

The big thing I wondered is why they couldn't have had some doctor come on in and just yank the infected tooth out and go from there with the pain meds and prescription.

One commenter, who goes by the moniker Plainly Spoken, said:

I would suspect that is because ER’s are not equipped for dental work and do not have dentists on staff. I would further think this is because there are not significant numbers of people going to ER’s for dental issues. Also, I would suspect that the large majority of dental emergencies occur because so many people ignore dental issues until forced to deal with them (which may well come from a lack of dental insurance and/or ability to afford dental care).

Fair enough opinion, but still I have to disagree that the people who work in the hospital aren't capable of pulling out a friggin tooth. They have local anesthetics, they have scalpels to cut away the gum if necessary, they have clamps to hold things out the way, and I'm sure something resembling a pair of pliers. Add some gauze to the hole when your done and give the guy some pain meds.

To which another commenter going by Spherical Time replied to my solution:

I think doctors are unlikely to attempt surgery that they haven’t trained for, especially with as few preparations as getting a scalpel, clamps, and a pair of pliers (and the gauze and painkiller).

That’s a good way to kill a patient

As to ST's first paragraph I agree. Although one caveat I might add is how many ER doctors got formal training treating gunshot wounds? Sooner or later it has to be figured out. As for removing a tooth, it isn't exactly rocket science. Yes, it is better to be trained in the professional manner, however, its still pulling a tooth. Take an X-ray to see what the tooth looks like altogether, then yank that puppy out of the guy's mouth. I would assume the reluctance of a doctor in an ER to do such a thing would be more insurance/malpractice/lawsuit related than the ability to do minor in house surgery.

As to removing the tooth killing a patient, I disagree. I've had a few teeth forcibly removed without the help of a trained professional, and I never died from it. I felt like I'd rather have died than deal with that kind of pain, since when it comes to my mouth I'm a big wimp, but somehow I survived it okay.

The stories we were given as kids, and some people may have actually experienced, about tying string to a loose tooth and a doorknob, or pulling a bad tooth out with pliers, they aren't just stories. That kind of thing actually happened... in one's own home, by the babysitter, or whomever.

Heck, for decades, if not centuries, both dental and medical care were administered where ever it was needed. They didn't require a big fancy building and a staff of specialists for every possible scenario in order to do the job. If a guy needed a big gash cleaned and stitched, the old saw bones (doctor) would do it right in his own house which sometimes doubled as his office, or at the patients place. If a guy needed a tooth removed, they removed the dag-blamed tooth.

Who needs big fancy buildings, a board of directors, insurance executives and legal departments to fix minor issues before they become major ones that might require all of the above? Hell, I have known quite a few elderly people who made a trip to the hospital for some reason or another and refused to stay, after the doctor made the decision to keep them, because they knew damn good and well that staying in the constantly sterilized environment might actually be more dangerous in the form of getting a bad antibiotic-resistant staph infection or pneumonia, than going home to heal up from whatever ailment they suffered from. They can check in by phone, or visit the clinic to be followed up with or monitored, and only choosing to stay in the hospital if things get really really bad that they actually physically REQUIRE hospitalization.

But then again, thanks to lawyers, if the doctors don't toe the line and something goes wrong, the patients family can sue the pants off of them. Whether it happened in the hospital or because the doctor didn't make them stay. I do argue for tort reform in the medical field. Not a full on "you can't sue the doctors for shit" kind of tort reform, but for putting a little common sense back into the system. If the doctor fucks something up, sure sue him. Get the cost of the medical requirements covered by the doctor, hospital, and/or their insurance companies. Get the lost wages to the family in the event of death or permanent disability. Even get your mental anguish and pain and suffering payments if you want...not $10 million dollars worth of pain and suffering by any means, but some smaller, more reasonable figure would be fine in my eyes.

I know life is precious and priceless, especially if it is yours or a loved one's, but some of these lawsuits that award millions in damages on top of the economic scope are ludicrous. I don't care if the guy is a $5 million dollar a year CEO of some corporation or some barely making handyman. Cover the health care costs for life for screwing him up, a reasonable wage recovery amount (in the event of the little guy, give him his last 20 years of work he would have done if it hadn't been for this medical "mistake"; as for the CEO, he can do with less than 20 years at $5 million per), and some capped compensation for your pain and suffering.

I'm not a big fan of lawyers and their ability to make a ton of money from your lawsuit while you get a pittance when something goes wrong in the medical business. I'm not a big fan of the insurance and hospital execs who get big pay for essentially "running" a corporation already tracking to succeed regardless of him being a member of the board. I'm not a big fan of the big pharmaceutical companies who insist on pushing their drugs onto everyone at a steep price, and working their damnedest to keep the generic versions from being available, or their working with insurance companies to keep erectile dysfunction drugs covered while not covering other types of more relevant lifesaving drugs and forcing the customer to pony up every penny for them.

I mean look, I'm not anti-regulation. I believe there has to be some regulations to protect all parties involved, but often times we over regulate things, and use too broad of a brush with those that exist that actually stymie the process in some instances.

Yet Another Clueless Congress

It's always something with these clowns we elect to represent us in government. They hold their power due to a mandate of the people. This mandate is not unconditional. It is also not limited merely by the election process. They govern by our consent and by the spirit of that consent, they should be shaping things according to our consent. Not by the consent they grant themselves, or by a mandate from those senior to them, or by the President of The United States, who also is granted power only to see to it that he manage the country according to our will, not his alone.

They govern by our consent alone. However, members of congress have managed through the last couple centuries to further corrupt the system they operate in order to benefit themselves first, and the people second.

Many of our current representatives, including the President, were not elected solely on their platforms but by mere shifting of the political winds when voters felt disenfranchised by the opposing party who previously held control. Many voters are not total platform voters, but often make their decision on who to vote for based on one or two issues, by party affiliation alone, or merely because the candidate of their choice is simply "not the guy we have now".

However, to hear our elected leaders speak, the people voted them in to enact every single aspect of the leaders' platforms and thought processes. I hate to be the bearer of news from the universe of Mr Obvious, but it isn't true no matter how many times they repeat it. The approval rating of Congress is not the fault of one party or the other, but in its entirety. It isn't just about what legislation they are trying to shove down our throats, or just who's constantly filibustering the ideas of the other side. Although these are very valid ideas of why congressional approval has remained in the tank for quite some time. It seems the problem that these people just don't understand is this: IT ISN'T ABOUT YOUR SIDE OR MINE, IT'S ABOUT AMERICA AS A WHOLE!

Those who make the decision to vote for or support only the ideas from a singular party affiliation are point blank, MORONS.

Its funny how we see ideas bantied about in the halls of congress. Ten years ago the republicans came up with an idea, and democrats blustered about how horrible it was. Now, the same idea comes out of the mouth of a democrat, and republicans bluster about the disgustingness that it represents. Or vice verse. And all too often, when the latter party trying the idea defends themselves they use such a ludicrous defense of "well, the so-n-so party tried it first!"

I mean c'mon. Haven't we all grown up with the lesson of of jumping off the bridge or cliff because our friends did it? If you have to defend your idea, why not try to use the skills you learned in the halls of academia that you bragged about so much. Please don't use such a juvenile mindset of "they did it first."

Yesterday it was about war and terrorism, this week its about health care, and it will be something else again down the road after that.

But today I address just a few of the finer points of health care reform, since that's the big topic, and supposedly coming up for a final vote this weekend. (Conveniently scheduled for when everyone will be at home watching the NCAA basketball tournament and worrying about how they do in their office pools)

One one side you have the Democrats pushing hard to pass a monstrous health care bill through, read or not read, debated or not debated, passed or not passed through both houses on an identical passage. And the big argument: We have to do SOMETHING to reform our system of health care in America.

Here are my points on this
1. Yes, you are correct- you do have to do SOMEthing
2. No you do not have to have a zillion pages of complicated legislation that 3/4 of the lawmakers couldn't understand if left to look over it themselves.
3. You do NOT have to do EVERYthing all at once
4. Quit distorting facts, and quit using emotional laden stories as your main basis. Once you forget about logic, your ideas fall flat. No matter how many people you convince of your righteousness, a stupid idea, really is a stupid idea.

On the other side, you have the seeming "Party of No" that has been branded on to the Republicans. They have been deemed as the party that wants to keep the status quo, and keep the special interest insurance companies flush with control and cash from the hard working American population.

Here are my points on this
1. You really are idiots for making a huge deal out of anything that Obama supports. I suspect that if Obama fully supported your very mother, a good legion of you would immediately look for ways to vilify your mother. So quit being idiots.
2. Get focused, and craft an entire bill yourselves. Look to address some problems beyond the most very obvious, and be fair about it. Don't merely countermand that anything the democrats do is stupid and anti-American. Again, this only serves to make you look like idiots.
3. Don't assume you can use fear as a main tactic forever. Sooner or later your words get played out, and no one cares. Remember the little fable about the boy who cried wolf? Yeah, you guys are him.
4. Quit distorting the facts. Inventing ghosts and using end-times equivalent stories to make your point only work so well. Get your facts, check your facts, and be really specific on your points and exactly how things are working. Don't cherry pick your facts, so the people who oppose you can say "hey look he forgot to mention the second half of the statement that shows us to be right". If you fail to use logic, and your idea falls flat when applied to a litmus test, well like I said of the democrats, a stupid idea is a stupid idea, no matter how many people believe in it.

But lets look now at a few specific ideas within the health care bill and the concepts it brings to the table.

1. Individual mandates. In other words, you buy adequate health insurance (as deemed most likely by a government bureaucrat), or you pay a fine. If you won't pay the fine, spend some time in jail. the enforcement of this idea is under the jurisdiction of the IRS. You know, the tax guys.

First of all, even if the health care reform bill is passed, if this clause is in it, the fight has only just begun. It will go to the Supreme Court, and will most likely be struck down. You will have wasted a crap load of money dealing with the legislation, then the court case, and in the meantime while that's being decided, it may well affect a lot of people who will in fact be active dissenters to this clause. Never mind the fact that Congress, according to their position have to consider the constitutionality of their actions even before trying to see how it will go down in a Supreme Court decision. That's their responsibility, which more often than not, they shirk away from on their way to cash that check with their new taxpayer-funded raises they gave themselves.

Secondly, if this is not a tax, as it has been argued...then why are the tax guys in charge of compliance? These are the same guys who will arrest you and jail you for the mere act of following the very letter of the law when it comes time to filing and paying taxes. There's a couple key words in the tax code as it was written that says "voluntary compliance". Interestingly enough, it isn't so voluntary once you get down to the bottom of it all. And with this mandate, as it is worded, there will be nothing voluntary about it, so be prepared to pay a price if you choose not to buy a pre-approved plan.

Thirdly, they say that the argument against health care reform is headed by insurance companies as they are wanting to keep the status quo. Well, in one sense I can see it. However, the mandate specifically adds millions to these companies rolls of paying customers. the very clause says, individuals will buy insurance from private insurance companies. Never mind the unconstitutionality of this, just think about who profits from having millions of new people paying into them. Yeah, so much for "eliminating special interests" from the argument. You can tell with this one clause that those special interests have bought and paid for our elected officials who go along with this plan.

You really want to look at some options to go with? And no these are not merely my GOP provided talking points here.

Take your time. Decide what the problems are with the system. Then divide them up into smaller groups and legislate in a few fixes at a time. Then move on to the next group of problems. If some of the new legislation isn't working, try a different angle that goes into effect and repeals the previous legislation, so as not to keep clogging up our law books with antiquated and irrelevant crap. Any costs associated with the first idea, transfer to the replacement.

In other words, lets solve the problems one or two issues at a time. You don't need 2000 pages and an immediate and complete changeover to get things accomplished.

You want competition against the collusion and monopoly of health insurers??? Try using your power to replace some your predecessors idiotic measures. You know, way back when, our leaders were expected to protect us from trusts and monopolies of companies so that they couldn't take unfair advantage of us Americans. And yet, guess who specifically made an exemption so that health insurance companies could create their own monopolies and leave us to their mercy, god forbid they had any to begin with? Yep..that's right the Congress of the United States of America, and signed into law by our President at that time. Seems to me if you allow interstate commerce, you will see an increase in competition, and you will see premium costs go down, reductions in co pays and deductibles as perks to attract more customers away from the competition.

Allow interstate commerce within the health insurance industry.

Tort reform. Look I'm not talking about ludicrous ideas like capping rewards at a mere $250,000 per case. I'm saying give it a rational look and make monetary awards with a little discretion. If you want to mandate something here is where you do it. Whatever it takes money-wise to take care of a person who is injured or debilitated due to medical malpractice, give them that to start with. Say a free ride to whatever medical facility they have in their area or that treats such things if their isn't a local provider of such services. Just issue them a card that says, I get free treatment. As far as other monetary damages being awarded, look at their salary and years left to retirement, and give them that, maybe with a slight bonus to make up for any inflation. No more $10 million "pain and suffering" awards t someone who makes $20,000 a year and is only going to be working another 10 years before retiring anyways. I understand its their life we're talking about, but 9 out 10 people will never make $10 million in their life total, so lets be realistic here. If the malpractice results in a death, then figure out an amicable financial settlement for the family of the deceased. And again, it shouldn't be $10 million. It should take care of things, but not turn them into instant Forbes 500 kind of people. With a little tort reform, you will see an expansion of some medical services to certain areas that are lacking, geographically speaking. You will also see a lot less wasting of the unnecessary testing that doctors go through knowing full well their patient is not suffering from "hyper-idiomoronic syndrome". Many people will retort that tort reform will only make it harder to sue doctors who screw up, and that defensive medicine costs and malpractice insurance costs are only a sliver of a percentage of why health care is so costly. First off, lets not change the wording that makes it harder to sue, just change the monetary awards to a more common sense level. Secondly, so what about percentages of cost. Isn't every little bit saved that much better for everybody all around? After all, we keep voting in guys who just want me to put in fractions of a penny on the dollars I earn to pay for this program or that program, and everyone seems to be fine with that.

Tort reform should be fair to both sides.

Look, in the end, I don't have all the answers. I don't think there is a single member, much less the collective body, of congress that does. I don't think the President does. I don't think consumer advocates do, nor do the health care industry's many entities. But I think we need to slow down, get off the ideological train wreck we are all on, and figure out a few things a time to see what works, rather than changing up the system entirely in one fell swoop, with hardly a clue of the consequences. No plan goes perfectly in general, but in two areas it really shows its imperfection: battlefields and government.

We don't have to do things like other countries do them. We're America. We have created more wealth than almost every other country in the world combined, in fact some of those countries made a good chunk of money through our system or because of it. The reason we can give so much financial support in pure dollars to other countries to aid them in defense, or in the event of a natural disaster, is because we made the money in the first place. One may say there is something wrong with American exceptionalism. And maybe to a point there is, but it was our exceptionalism that led the world into modern times. You look around the world, and a lot of items were either created here in the U.S. (see: cars, airplanes) or we vastly improved upon items invented elsewhere (see: gunpowder, space travel). We can create our version of health care, improved upon what we have now, and make it unique and better than anyone else's if we step back and put our logical minds instead of our emotional minds to it.

We built our country on the idea of free market, with some government to reign in the players from hurting each other. Let us not just take all the players out and have the government draft only its own players to play the game. You'll never win with that kind of plan. Unless you're already one of the power players or well connected to them. Lets use the framework fo what got us here in the first place, re-tweak it, and use it to propel us ahead to where we need to go.



Let us be that Shining Beacon on the Hill, not just to Americans already here, but be the example for the rest of the world.

Cooties and the Mass Female Gender Problems Associated Therein

By Dr James I (my alias), Senior Advisor of Life Sciences (made up title), James Medical Institute (Grand illusion of my mentalities medical research school)

Description: A short summary of the results concluded from my seminal (can't say I've ever been able to use this word in any of my writings before) work on Cooties research (my specialty).

Body:

Cooties is an inherent trait of the Human race, genetically passed on to each generation ensuring influence over certain biologies and psychologies of 100% of the human race.

I have identified that while all humans are carriers of this disease, full blown cooties infestations only affect a certain percentage of the human race. For those of you playing at home, take out a piece of scratch paper and take note. Draw out the male chromosomal representation as Xy. Now, take that same symbol, and on the lower right side, extend the short line of the 'y' to make an 'x'. You will notice this extra 'tail' is where the cooties gene lies. You will also notice that when you do this you make "XX" or the chromosomal representation of a female.

Clearly this is indicative that why all humans are carriers of the Cooties gene, that only females seemt o be infected, with some exceptions. In certain chromosomal anomalies such as XXY, there may be certain biological differences in anatomical structure. But this person would be truly infected with Cooties. Now some may argue that the XYY would merely be a carrier. But we here at the James Medical Institute disagree. In order for the body to maintain this chromosomal imbalance the second would have to be stacked on top of the other Y and flipped upside-down, thus making an alternate form of X, thereby showing definite signs of cooties infection.

Cooties, while thought to be a made up disease by young children, is in fact real. You can know this by simply looking up the word in the dictionary. And yes, you will see it is a body louse, according to definition. However, unlike most louse, who appear on the surface of the human body, this one is bloodborne and thrives on the internal body structure for its life.

This parasite, obviously affecting anatomical structure noted by the physical differences between males and females, is not the only havoc it wreaks upon humanity. As noted, certain psychologies are affected, and most differences associated with gender, from an early age on up through adulthood for the entirety of life can be in fact attributed to The Cooties Factor.

Scenarios and Causal Determinations:

- Hatred of getting dirty by girls: Cooties
- Avoiding P.E. Class in High School to avoid getting sweaty by girls: Cooties
- Inability to comprehend that male counterparts can indeed be thinking nothing: Cooties
- Emotional outbursts for no apparent reason: Cooties
- Necessity of mass amounts of pillows on a bed when not in use: Cooties
- PMS: Cootie
- Inability to comprehend basic logic and its use to solve everything: Cooties
- Anorexia and Bulimia: Cooties
- Need for expensive things, and Compulsive Shoppers' Disorder : Cooties
- Need for being held and emotional verbiage from the men in their lives: COOTIES!
- Getting pelted in the mouth by a snowball by a hysterically laughing young boy of the same age: Cooties

These are just a few mere examples of the many thousands we have uncovered in our decade of research that are linked directly to the infestation of full blown cooties. Scientifically speaking, men who later develop the ability to speak girly stuff like their emotions out in the open, or those who wish to be a woman, and SOME homosexual men have been identified in our research as having moved from simple carrier to having been fully infected by cooties.

Cures for Cooties:
None. However, Cooties vaccines are being developed as this is written. so far, they are only good for 6 months. We are hoping soon to break through to the once a year cooties shot, and eventually to a permanent vaccine which can be injected into the fetus in order to hopefully eradicating cooties altogether. Of course, careful measures will have to be taken to avoid eliminatng girls from the human race in the process. Sooner or later those girls turn into women. And all non-cooties-infected men love women.

Result of this study's official publishment: Possible death to the author from a certain someone he knows that is obviously riddled with cooties.

Government and/or Insurance Companies Directly Driving Costs Of Healthcare UP?!?!

Below is an interview done by Glenn Beck from his show on Tuesday, March 17, 2009
It really is an interesting case. Is it the case just there in New York, everywhere, limited places, or where? I'd be rather interested in who is behind the decision of the State of New York to say how the doctor operates his private practice when it comes to how he charges his fees for his work. Is it just the state being power hungry, or maybe an insurance lobbyist who saw what was ging on and made the push to keep the insurance industry from losing some of its relevance, power, and all that GLORIOUS MONEY? Read below, and let me know what you think!




GLENN: When it comes to healthcare, do they want to fix the problem? Dr. Muney is a doctor here in the New York area. John Muney is his name. You are originally from Turkey, aren't you, Doctor?


DR. MUNEY: Yes, I'm from Turkey.


GLENN: How long have you lived here in the United States?


DR. MUNEY: Since 1975.


GLENN: Since 1975, you've been a doctor here since 1975?


DR. MUNEY: Yes.


GLENN: And you have a regular practice, and it's a thriving practice.


DR. MUNEY: Yes.


GLENN: How many patients do you have?


DR. MUNEY: Well, in our practice now we have about 7,000 to 8,000 patients.


GLENN: Okay, 7,000 to 8,000 patients, and you decided that there's too much waste, it cost too much money, just in your overhead. Tell me a little about the frustration of being a doctor in America today.


DR. MUNEY: Well, the system, it's the wrong system. That's what we have here. It really is mostly to paperwork, waste, bureaucracy, fraud, abuse and that's why we're paying about 50% increase in our healthcare premiums.


GLENN: Say that again. What do you mean we're paying 50% in healthcare premiums?


DR. MUNEY: I mean, the system, the way it's set up, it lends itself to abuse, waste, bureaucracy. And if we were paying $2.4 trillion in healthcare, I think $1.2 trillion is waste. It can be reduced. It can be eliminated.


GLENN: And how is that?


DR. MUNEY: Well, I mean, you know, the way the system's set up, the patient/doctor relationship is broken. People are trying to make as much as possible the way -- for example, the doctors are seeing the patients as a cash cow now, some of them. So they try to do as much, as many tests as possible, as many surgeries as possible. The hospital bills are enormous. $100,000, $200,000, $300,000 bills are common now. And this goes on and on.


GLENN: Okay. How come they can do this?


DR. MUNEY: Well, the regulations, the system itself allows them to do it.


GLENN: In what way? The insurance companies because it's a third party payor?


DR. MUNEY: The insurance company, it's a third party system and, you know, they are trying to do some job but because of the -- it takes certain amount of money to run the system and plus, the patients come to you, they say, "Doc, I have this insurance, do as many tests as possible." And the doctor said, "Well, okay, I'll do it because I'm getting paid. And the hospital does the same thing. And the cost keeps escalating.


GLENN: So in other words, this is -- and I've had this happen a million times. The doctor will say, "Does your insurance cover X, Y, and Z?" You'll say no. Then they will sit there and think for about 30 seconds and they will say, okay, we'll use this instead. That's where the waste comes in. They don't have to do some of the things that they --


DR. MUNEY: No, they don't have to.


GLENN: And would you include some of that waste in the paperwork, you know, to guard against litigation, et cetera, et cetera, and the insurance for the doctors on litigation?


DR. MUNEY: Oh, definitely, there's no question about it. I think in my estimation is the cost of our practice to our healthcare system's about 10% minimum.


GLENN: Okay. So you're talking now about 60% of what we all pay for healthcare is between waste and guarding against litigation?


DR. MUNEY: That's true. I strongly believe it. I believe that we can reduce our healthcare costs by 2/3 easily.


GLENN: Okay. Now so you know, America, I'm just talking -- this is just one man's opinion. He's just a doctor here in New York.


DR. MUNEY: Yes.


GLENN: But he got sick of it and he decided that he was going to charge all of his patients $79. You weren't going to take any more healthcare, you weren't going to do -- no insurance. Just $79 every month and you can go see him -- you can go -- your patients can come see you as many times in that month as they needed.


DR. MUNEY: That's true. They can come, for $79 there's unlimited preventive checkups and includes the bloodwork, sonogram, x-ray, whatever they need at that time.


GLENN: And if somebody gets sick and they need to see you five times in a month, they only would have paid you $79 and there was no, there was no office pay or anything like that. It was just $79 and you can come as many times as you want.


DR. MUNEY: Yes, that's true. As long as they are coming for preventive checkups, yes.


GLENN: What does that mean?


DR. MUNEY: Well, my original idea was to charge $79 flat rate every month for unlimited visits but unfortunately the state stepped in saying that if I do this, I'm doing insurance business.


GLENN: Okay.


DR. MUNEY: So they --


GLENN: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. But what I want to go to originally is you said anything for $79 a month, they could see you for anything. That was your original idea?


DR. MUNEY: That was my original idea.


GLENN: Then the state came in and said, "No, that makes you an insurance company and so you can't do that."


DR. MUNEY: That's true.


GLENN: And then the state sent you a letter saying that you couldn't do that.


DR. MUNEY: Yes.


GLENN: And then you came on my program.


DR. MUNEY: Yes.


GLENN: And then they said, "Okay, you can do that; however, you can't charge the $79, it can only be for preventative medicine."


DR. MUNEY: Yes.


GLENN: A checkup, which kind of defeats the purpose. And then you also have to charge them, what is it, $33?


DR. MUNEY: Yes, $33 for sick visit only. If they come in for sick visits, I must charge them $33 because, to cover my overhead costs. That's the law.


DR. MUNEY: Why -- yeah, I know. It's convenient, isn't it?


DR. MUNEY: Yes.


GLENN: How does that help people getting healthcare, who don't have healthcare, how is that helping to have $79 for preventative and if you get sick, you can also pay $33 when the doctor himself says "I don't need to charge the $33"?


DR. MUNEY: That's true.


GLENN: How is that helping?


DR. MUNEY: I mean, it really makes it more difficult for us to charge $33 because then it will increase or administrative costs as well. But I think $79 will cover my costs. That's what I believe, and I wanted to do this but unfortunately in order for me to salvage the program, I still believe it's a good deal, no question about it in my mind. But I had to agree to some kind of compromise.


GLENN: Okay. Have you asked them if, that let's say you go to a restaurant and it's all you can eat for $9.99 if that $9.99 is an insurance program? Have you asked them if that $9.99 for an all you can eat, if you also wanted dessert if they would have to charge an extra $33 for dessert if that would be fair? Have you asked them how do they explain gym membership?


DR. MUNEY: Lawyers, retainers fees, it works on the same principle.


GLENN: What is their response to that?


DR. MUNEY: Well, I haven't -- I never talked face to face with them. We've been only communicating through letters, and my lawyer has contacted them several times and so this is a compromise we chose. I'm hoping that hopefully some legislator will sponsor a bill to change the law and take the primary care out of the insurance business.


GLENN: You know, Texas, South Carolina.


DR. MUNEY: Washington. Washington, the primary care is not under insurance law. They can do it and they are doing it.


GLENN: And is it working out fine for them?


DR. MUNEY: Yes, exactly. I communicated with a couple of doctors from Washington State.


GLENN: Be careful when they get all this stimulus money. I wonder what kind of strings are attached in that. Dr. Muney, I appreciate you very much, sir.


DR. MUNEY: All right. Bye-bye.


GLENN: This is why -- just don't believe them when they say, oh, we're just trying to help out. No, they're not. No, they're not. They're looking for their own power. That's all they're looking for. When they say that they're against giving bonuses to the AIG executives, ask them, do they have a contract? Yes. Is it valid? Yes. In your bailout did you not say that all contracts signed before this date are valid and must be withheld -- must be upheld? Yes. Did you guys in congress write that law? Yes. So it's a valid contract? Yes. You said that if it was signed before a certain date that it was valid? Yes. It would be honored? Yes. You don't believe we can break the union contracts, right? Of course not, no. But this contract with AIG that makes you popular to fight, you can break that one? Yes. So that's like we enforce the law sometimes on the border and sometimes we don't. That means that sometimes this drug law we need to go ahead and enforce but sometimes we don't. That means that sometimes you'll pay a tax penalty if you don't pay your taxes and sometimes you'll be made secretary of the treasury? Yes. Okay, I just want to make sure I understand the rules, which basically means there are no rules... unless you're important or powerful, which is weird because I think that's the way communist Russia used to work. But call me crazy.

Debate Analysis- 3 Days Later

This last Wednesday night I saw the first 2/3 of the presidential debate (the first one I've actually watched, and more geared toward doemstic policy) before my wife distracted me with what she likes to call better action than politics, which she hates.
(3 points for the wife)

First off, IF this was my first exposure to the whole campaign, and I came in totally ignorant of everything, Obama won the debate, and I would definitely be voting for him over McCain.
(1 point Obama)

My take on the negative campaigning question, I had issue with both of them. Neither really answered. Obama tip-toed around the question, while McCain expressed disgust with negativity while simultaneously throwing in a few negative sounding jabs at the democrats.
(0 points)

On the economy, Obama sounded really great. McCain's plan was pretty sound on the surface. However its amazing to me that the moderator showed results of both plans adding about $200 billion to the deficit annually. Obama later retorted something to the effect of all independent organizations showed his plan to be perfectly sound and on target (I dont have the exact words, so don't quote me). McCain wasn't exactly on target either, but I think he had a greater grasp on the simple math...added to the fact that he supports line-item vetos, which would greatly help to reduce useless expenditures. Obama said programs would need to be cut in order to make room for some of his programs. I get that, however, his plan still leaves way too much taxation on the group that will provide more tax money either directly, or through new jobs that provide for more taxes through those people. Everytime in history has shown unfair taxation on the producers has resulted in less overall tax rolls.
So just what is Obama going to cut???
I do agree with Obama on working the tax code to encourage American companies to bring their production back home, while discouraging further outsourcing of manufacturing jobs.
(draw- 1 point each)

On energy policy, both had great ideas. Obama is still pondering the whole drilling issue, while McCain is ready to act. I score McCain that point. No matter what we do, we have to utilize all options, not just drilling, and not just anti drilling. As cheap as it makes gas in Iowa, the ethanol mandate needs to go, along with their subsidies. Obama made a point about the oil cmpanies having 68million undrilled acres of land they have leased,where they COULD get oil. The problem with that is, IS THERE ACTUALLY ANY OIL THERE? I'm in favor of them "using it or losing it", but I think we ought to concentrate efforts of drilling where we KNOW its at. I think Obama is, while not saying it, against going that direction. (1 point McCain.
)

On healthcare, I think both candidates have great ideas, and some not so great ideas, but both fall short.
(0 points)

So tallying it up, Obama and McCain score 2 points in my book each. My wife gets her 3 points...so she wins....but I'm biased and she's not running or elegible for the office. Pure scoring would show Obama as the winner of this debate. So given the draw, in my books, the debate goes to McCain for not totally flubbing this one up. Noone expected him to be anywhere near close, at least not according to main stream media outlets, and even a lot of conservative media outlets. He held his own, despite poor coaching from the leadership of the GOP.


Both candidates stuck almost squarely to their side of the aisles arguments. Obama talks about reaching across the aisle, but his words arent as loud as his voting history. He's going to have to adopt a few conservative perspectives to get all those things done he says he will, unless of course the DNC achieves filibuster proof control of Congress. McCain talks about issues, but his words give way in favor of hard-right perspectives on what should be said and done. While associations with certain people can come into question and are important, along with judgement calls on things, the issues based solely on provable facts are the only real strength of a republican platform. Unfortunately the republicans always fall short on following a real gameplan.

What's wrong with America? How about what's right?

A Few Thoughts from Glenn Beck

The last few days I haven't read the newspaper. I read it on Sunday and that's when I said, you know what, I'm not going to read the newspaper until I have to go back to work, because I read this story from the Associated Press. Everything seemingly is spinning out of control. Washington, Associated Press: Midwestern levees are bursting. Polar bears are adrift. Gas prices are skyrocketing. Home values are abysmal. Airfares, college tuition and health care border on unaffordable. Wars without end rage in Iraq, Afghanistan and against terrorism. Horatio Alger, twist in your grave.
The can-do, bootstrap approach embedded in the American psyche is under assault. Eroding it is a dour powerlessness that is chipping away at the country's sturdy conviction that destiny can be commanded with sheer courage and perseverance. The sense of helplessness is even reflected in this year's presidential election. Each contender offers a sense of order and hope. Even so a battered public seems discouraged by the onslaught of dispiriting things.

Let me tell you something, America. That's where I stopped reading because this is nothing but a lie. I know how you feel because it's the way I feel. I know that you say to yourself, how are we ever going to get out of this. Where is that person that is going to lead us out of this? I feel the same way you feel when I fill my tank with gas. I feel like you do every time I watch television and I listen to John McCain or Barack Obama speak. When I hear that they are making a priority of finding biodegradable balloons for the Democratic National Convention, I think to myself, that's your priority? Biodegradable balloons? When I hear that they have just passed a bill in the Senate to bail out 400,000 more people out of bad mortgages, these are people that were too risky for government loans and they're allotting each of these people $750,000. If you're too risky for a government loan, why are you buying a 3/4 of a million dollar home? I feel the same way you do. But maybe I have something that you don't because I rarely have this when I'm away from people. But when I travel around the country and when I hear the voices of the average person in talk radio, when you call in, I know where our strength really is. It's in you.

Now, we're looking for a leader, but since when did America start waiting around for a leader? It shows that the lie of our government in the last 100 years has really taken root deep inside of you. We're pioneers. All the way from the pilgrims to today we're pioneers. We were people that took chances. We were people that took risks. We were people that did the unthinkable and we still are. But every step of the way the government is in there and the media is in there telling you that you're not. Well, you are. You are a pioneer. You are the leader of your family. You are the leader we've been looking for. The media is focusing on what everything -- everything that's wrong with America, and I play a part in that. I think I give you a different spin than the rest of the media. I tell you what's wrong with America and what's really causing it, and it ain't you. So let me tell you some of the things that are right with America because we still lead the world in the principles that matter most, the rules of law, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from an oppressive government, although that one's slipping by the wayside rapidly.

So let's talk about our economy. For everything that I've said about the economy and how much trouble we are in, I have also said look at the body blows this economy has taken since 9/11, one right after another. Body blow, body blow, body blow. Consider that California has the same GDP as the entire country of France. Illinois has the same GDP as the entire country of Mexico. New York has the entire GDP of Brazil. Florida, the same as South Korea. Texas, the entire GDP of Canada. Michigan, the GDP of Argentina. Missouri, the GDP of Poland. The projected GDP of the U.S. in 2007 is just shy of the next four biggest economies on planet Earth combined: Japan, Germany, China, and Great Britain, combined. That's how big this company of ours is. When you think of it just that way and you think of it as a company whose earnings are bigger than Japan, Germany, China and the U.K. combined, you think to yourself maybe we should get somebody who knows a little something about business to run this country.

We topped the world again in technological economic innovation. World survey found 77% of Americans are very proud of their nationality. We're tied with those from Ireland. Canadians come in second at 60%, British 53%. 43% of, oh, the gods of Sweden are very proud of their nationality and only 20% of Germans. So what's right with America? Well, you know we talk all the time about nut job college professors, liberal indoctrination. But the truth is while all of that's going on, our universities are still ranked among the highest in the world. We attract over half a million foreign students every year. They leave their country to come here to study. We open up the same colleges and universities to over 80,000 foreign professors, scholars, educators. We've always wanted and continue to want the best and the brightest to teach and educate, our best, our brightest. That's a part of what makes America great. It's not us versus them. We seek out talent. We invite talent. We don't care about their nationality. We don't care about their race. We want them here. Unfortunately those in Washington are now forcing us to ship their best and their brightest back home. But even with that happening we still have over 250 Nobel Prize winners. We have more than double the number of Nobel Prize winners than the British who have the second highest number of Nobel Prize winners. Double number two. More Americans have been awarded the Nobel Prize than individuals from the next three runner-up countries combined. We have more students studying at universities and colleges, about 14 million. More than India, Japan and China do combined. Even though their combined populations dwarf ours, it's not only the number, but the reality that anyone can go to the best colleges and universities in America. Anyone can go to college. The doors of the university are not reserved for the select, those with the right family connection. It's not reserved only for the children of the political elite, but your son or daughter, the son or daughters of farmers, the son or daughter of a radio deejay or a baker. They can all go to college, top tier college universities, if they work hard. And education isn't just formal in America.

What's right with America? People are allowed to have the freedom to go and do. Americans invented the cotton gin. It revolutionized the world. Isn't it funny that the government didn't come up with the cotton gin. As we talk about illegal immigration, what was the argument against abolishing slavery? The South couldn't pick the cotton. The South couldn't get it done. Their economy would collapse. We fought the Civil War. The cotton gin replaced the slave. Bifocals were invented by Benjamin Franklin. Meat could be stored all year in a refrigerator after an American inventor, Oliver Evans, drafted the plans for the refrigerator. The sewing machine was American. Safety pin, telephone, incandescent light bulb, cash register, Ferris wheel, crayons, bubble gum, photocopiers, the artificial heart, the automobile, the first flight airplane. Coca-Cola. By invented the Popsicle.

Healthcare, our healthcare, oh, have you seen the stories on healthcare? Let me give you the true story on healthcare. In 1900 the life expectancy in America was 50 years old, life expectancy. You were dead by 50. Today it's more than 75 years. But it's more than just living longer. Our healthcare system, our prescription drugs have allowed us to lead and experience more fuller lives. In too many countries it appears that people who are just too old, just too old, have nothing to do but wait and die. Consider this. The vice president of the United States, Dick Cheney, has had four heart attacks, four. He's not only active. He's the vice president. What a commentary on a broken healthcare system. People want to focus on the negative of our healthcare. Say, yeah, but the benefits are only for the rich. Really? Unfortunately the facts don't prove that out.

In 1900 a rich person lived to 60. The poor person died at 45. 15 years separation. Today the life expectancy of an affluent person in America, a rich person, 78 years old. Poor person, somebody who lives in the gutter in America, 74. A four-year difference. Yes, the rich have advanced and they have benefitted, but the poor have advanced and benefitted even more, and that is what makes America great. Right now in the United States we spend roughly $2 trillion on healthcare. We spend more than any other country in the world per capita averaging $4,631 per person. That's more than Switzerland, Germany, Canada and any other country in the world. Heart disease, we haven't conquered it but we're beating it. Death by heart disease, fallen 67% in the last 50 years. The much talked about Canadian system, consider that 400 Canadians in the full throes of heart attack or other cardiac emergency have been sent to the United States, over the border because no hospital can provide lifesaving care that they require there in Canada. In the United Kingdom one in eight patients wait more than a year for hospital treatment. The British government just recently set a new goal, to keep wait times to less than 18 weeks. That, by the way, is four months. In Canada almost a million citizens, a million citizens can waiting for necessary surgery and more than a million Canadians can't find a regular doctor. You think our healthcare is so bad, let me show you the healthcare system up in Canada that everybody wants us to have. In a small town in Norwood, Ontario, they have a drawing every week. Every week they have a drawing. Somebody wins, somebody who lives in Norwood Ontario, somebody wins the right to go see the town's doctor. Congratulations. You are a winner in the Canadian healthcare system.