Author Archives: 40andover

Health Care Debate — in diagram form

Posted on by
Reply

Whether or not to reform the health care industry comes down to some basic ideas:  what is our collective expectation of our health care options, and how can we lower costs and increase caliber of service over the long term?

1.  Do you think health care is (a) a privilege, (b) a right or (c) regardless of whether it is a right or a privilege, it is a broken system that needs fixing?  If (a), then skip to the bottom.  If (b) or (c), then go to the next question.

2.  Do you think AFFORDABLE, adequate, health care is (a) a privilege or (b) a right or (c) regardless of whether it is a right or a privilege, it is a broken system that needs fixing so those who have it can benefit from it?  If (a), then skip to the bottom.  If (b) or (c), then go to the next question.

3. Do you view health care reform as essentially a political issue?  If yes, then skip to the bottom.  If no, then go to the next question.

4.  Do you agree or disagree: companies should not be able to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, impose annual or life time limits, or drop coverage for those who develop illness? If you disagree with all or part of the statement, then skip to the bottom.  If you agree with the statement, then go to the next question.

5.  How do you think it is best to keep premiums down? (a) a best practices safe harbor from malpractice claims; (b) cooperatives; and/or (c) public option.  If none of the above, then skip to the bottom.  If any of the above, go to the next question.

6.  How do you reduce the costs to the taxpayers of uninsured people? (a) refuse medical attention to anyone without proof of insurance; (b) require all persons residing in this country to have insurance, (c) tax those who don’t get coverage and/or (d) some other option that induces people to get coverage or at least takes the burden off of taxpayers for those who cheat the system.  If (a), then skip to the bottom.  If (b), (c) or (d), go to the next question.

7.  If you are at this question, then grab a seat at the table and start negotiating.  Let’s assume that the polls are correct and that the overwhelming majority of Americans want some kind of reform.  FAILURE IS NOT AN OPTION. LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES, ARE YOU LISTENING? 

 Bottom:  Here you are at the bottom.  It is a dog-eat-dog world, huh?  Just some follow-up questions: 

  1. Did you ever see Glenn Beck’s iReporting after his botched hemorrhoids surgery?  (Now he is a raging you-know-what.)  You might not trust his currently analysis after viewing the video. 
  2. Or maybe you are invincible, lucky or just too rich and selfish? 
  3. Or maybe you are delusional, like the actor Craig T. Nelson, who said no one helped him when he was on food stamps and welfare (yes, idiots can be actors). 
  4. You are a patriot, right?  So you aren’t going to leave the country when the deficit rages out of control because health care costs are ballooning out of control and the taxpayers will have to pay a large percentage of their incomes just to meet interest payments on the deficit?   
Share

Why I should run a major bank

Posted on by
Reply

Why should I run a major bank?

  1. I have no pre-existing alliances to the current regimes. 
  2. I will learn how things ought to be run and make that the way things are done, instead of cleaving to entrenched viewpoints or defending previous stupid acts. 
  3. I don’t need to earn as much as the current big guys because that is not how I measure my worth. 
  4. I believe that there should be nothing in the fine print that undoes the agreement in the big print. 
  5. I believe that bonuses should depend on a banker’s track record of success. 
  6. I believe that common sense must prevail and paper profits are meaningless unless they reflect real profits. 
  7. The bank’s portfolio should be a healthy mix of low, moderate and high risk deals. 
  8. Kick me out in 3 years, even if I do a good job.  And give me a nice cake at my going-away party.
Share

Tainted Beef, Still a Problem after 100 years

Posted on by
Reply

I read this weekend about a young girl paralyzed by eating a hamburger tainted with bacteria.

In the 1900s, reporters and journalists — among them Upton Sinclair, Lincoln Steffens and Ida Tarbell — wrote articles and books detailing, among other things, the unclean practices in meat-packing factories. 

One hundred years later, we still read about tainted meat.  Not in a third world country.  Right here in the USA.

It seems that most of the strides made in sanitary food preparation have been lost in the era of de-regulation. 

We need more and better inspectors and real, catastrophic economic sanctions against operators of packaging companies that produce tainted food.  In some of the most egregious cases, the unsanitary conditions are obvious to the untrained eye.  We need to make it too costly to produce unhealthy products.

How many more children must die or be crippled by E Coli or other dangerous bacteria festering in our food production plants?

Share

David Letterman, Senator Ensign, Roman Polanski

Posted on by
1

There are no parallels among these men.

David Letterman did get out in front of the “scandal”. That was smart media.  As long as the women with whom he was intimate were consenting adults — that means without fear for their jobs or career advancement — then it is just another philandering person.  What makes it news is that he is a TV star.  What is sad is that sexual harassment happens everyday and there is no famous star to blackmail to make it stop.  David Letterman has a lot of heartache ahead of him.  But he doesn’t need to apologize to me.

Conversely, Senator Ensign needs to apologize to his voters because he is a fraud — he is not the “family values” candidate that his constituency elected and he broke the public trust in the cover-up. His extra-marital affair was not criminal or actionable — consenting adults without any specter (so far) of harassment in the workplace.

Roman Polanski is, based on the information available, a scoundrel and a sexual predator.  A thirteen year-old is a child and is not capable of consent in sexual circumstances.  Justice delayed is justice denied.  Lock him up and throw away the key.

Let’s not lump these men and their actions together.  None is a shining star, but in only one case was there a sexual criminal.  In another, it was the cover-up that is criminal.  The third, well, unless we hear more, is just disappointing and ooky.

There is one guy, whose handle is TheFlaCracker on Twitter, who refers to all Libiots (liberal idiots) as defending Roman Polanski.  That’s unfair.  I am a G-d damn Democrat and liberal and a Hillary-lover.  I am proud of it.  But, child abuse is not a liberal or conservative issue.  It is solely about our expectations and demands for the safety of society’s and our children.

The true measure of our society is how we treat the children others have “cast off”and those who abuse them.

Share

People forgive mistakes but not lies

Posted on by
Reply

To err is human, but to cover up inane.  Haven’t we learned that time and again?

Senator John Ensign promoted himself as Mr. Family-Values, which — must I say it? —  precludes extra-marital sex. Now, he is faced with three problems: (1) he had an illicit affair with a staffer; (2) he abused his office to give this woman’s husband access to corridors of power and decision-making in order to keep the affair quiet and (3) he breached the public trust.  In short, he is a fraud who broke the law and sold out his constituents to preserve his fraudulent image and, if karma is a boomerang, he will get hoisted on his own petard.

Compare Senator Ensign with former President Clinton.  No one had any illusions about Clinton’s lechery. People were angry that he lied under oath.  But, the GOP made the impeachment proceedings about sex and morality and, because of that, Clinton avoided conviction.  If the GOP had been less mesmerized by the salacious details, the outcome might have been different.  Clinton squeaked by because we elected him knowing about his infidelity and his morally-challenged ways and, right or wrong, his lie was in a private lawsuit.  He did not sell out his office.

What did Clinton pollsters say at the time?  The public will forgive mistakes but not lies.  Clinton told one lie; Senator Ensign IS a lie.

Share

Home Sick

Posted on by
Reply

My son complained of a sore throat and running nose this morning, enough so that my partner (POB — partner of blogger), who usually takes no prisoners, relented and let him stay home.  She had meetings and I could telecommute, so I am staying home with him.

He wanted to watch cartoons, especially a particular one that combines his favorites — dinosaurs and trains.  I told him no because being home sick is different than a vacation day.  Now, he is feeling better and is bored and misses his friends at school.  My child is whining, angry and saying hurtful things out of frustration.  (I am not really sure he was sick in the first place.)

The usual child sturm und drang, right?  No, not for our child.

This is a breakthrough for him to feel included, to say he misses his friends, to prefer to leave his toys behind and engage in a group activity, ALL at school.  This is a great, great day in our lives.

Share

The Bridezombies

Posted on by
1

My partner and I are totally committed to each other.  We both want a wedding.  We just can’t seem to start the process of the wedding.

So, how do we get from desire to action to event?

Friends, seeing the pitiful sight, are offering to help with details and decisions.

Here are my thoughts:

  1. There has to be a separate area if people want to talk while the band plays.
  2. The band has to play 1960-80s classics, as well as some swing era stuff. Loud enough for dancing but not so loud that we all run for cover.
  3. The food has to be good but healthy.
  4. The place has to have an airy open feel but with an intimate feel.
  5. I am thinking about 100 people.
  6. I am thinking simple dresses for us, but not matching dresses because then we will look like bridesmaids at our wedding.
  7. No bridesmaids but chupah carriers.
  8. No toasts — just pre-cleared, vetted statements from the two brides, my sister (the SOB, as in “sister of the bride”), possibly our fathers and a representative of my college friends.
  9. We have an offer for a stand-in mother of the brides.  Her job is to criticize the food and the band even though we are paying, and then remember that she is supposed to have fun and then actually have fun.

I invite any comments and additional conditions.

Share

So Jon Stewart called Sen. Schumer a [censored] idiot

Posted on by
Reply

Ok, that may have been a little harsh, but I understand the frustration.

I held my breath during the general election, through the contested senatorial elections, through the swearing in of Sen. Al Franken.  Just as I was about to exhale — because the logjam has been removed — the Republicans hijacked the public dialogue and sent Democrats, fractured, and on the run.

I am not an ideologue; I just want effective financial, health care and government reform to start.  I don’t need Jay Rockefeller’s public option (although I think it is the right thing) right now, but we need to stop talking about what could be and deal with what is possible.

The government once seemed on the verge of great things.  But now it is frozen and ineffectual. The Republicans are doing what they always do; and, unfortunately, the Democrats are doing what they always do — promise big and then crash and burn because of in-fighting and factionalism.

But we gave the Democrats another chance in 2008.  We believed this time that Washington would be different.  We dared to hope and believe in change.

Crazy is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different outcome.  Ok, we were crazy but now, Congress, I think we’re angry.

Share

WHY WE NEED IRAN

Posted on by
Reply

McCain thinks time is running out to send troops to Afghanistan?  Is this the same man who thought we could “muddle through” in Afghanistan and the real fight was Iraq?

Our last president sent hundreds of thousands of troops into a quagmire with an ever-changing rationale and an aimless strategy.

There is talk about how well the “surge” worked in Iraq.  Psssssst, Iraq is not Afghanistan.  Afghanistan has humbled would-be conquerors throughout history, the most recent being Russia. The terrain is rugged, the tribal alliances are unsure, the drug trade is king and the government is corrupt.

Before more troops go in, we need to have a defined, winning strategy (and then an exit strategy) against two different groups, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.  They ARE different groups, but right now are joined in common purpose, to drive out the NATO forces from Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Ironically, one country can help us with a winning strategy in Afghanistan.  And that country is the Islamic Republic of Iran.  Iran helped Bush’s military team early in the war until relations chilled again.  Then Ahmadinejad came to power.

Iran shares NATO’s desire to subdue the Taliban.  The Taliban is Iran’s enemy.  The Taliban ideology and jihadist purpose threaten to undermine the Islamic Republic, and Iran does not want to share a long border with a Taliban-controlled nation again.

So, we need Iran for success in Afghanistan and Iran needs us to be successful in Afghanistan.  Iran is also close to having military nuclear capabilities and the US backs sanctions.  President Obama needs to walk the thinnest of tightropes.

I know Jon Stewart pokes fun at the diplomatic tiptoe-ing around Iran, but whatever choices President Obama makes with Iran or Afghanistan will have consequences far beyond any sound bite or comedy skit.

Share

The Public Option

Posted on by
Reply

For my first and last sports analogy — you can’t score if you don’t get on base. 

Reform is a process.  I think many of us would be surprised by the narrow focus of the Social Security Act when originally enacted.  

If the emphasis on the public option defeats the broader reform bill, then that is a bigger tragedy.

I believe that a public option is necessary because insurance companies will now refuse to insure the currently uninsured at a reasonable cost because of the other reform measures that circumscribe an insurance company’s ability to deny coverage to existing policy holders.  

But first we need:

a law that eliminates pre-existing condition exclusions, prevents “dropping” coverage when an insured person gets sick, and eliminates life-time maximums.

a “best practices” safe harbor so doctors aren’t forced into costly, defensive medicine practices.  We need computerized record keeping to reduce costly, tragic mistakes from insufficient information.

If, within a year after bill passage, there is a spike in health care premiums, even the GOP and Blue Dog Democrats will want a public option because their constituents will demand it.

There are two other reasons to wait a year: 

one, the cost of creating a public option may be more than our economy can handle right now.  Do I know for sure?  No.  No one can know for sure.

two, we need to see how identifiable changes affect the system.  The law of unintended consequences may yield a different set of problems or a different set of options when we see how the reforms actually affect the economy.  And we need some room for tinkering.

I applaud those who recognize that a public option is necessary.  But, please, don’t hold up the other reforms that the nation needs. 

Share