tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32985035727341642382024-03-06T12:02:49.776-08:00MedicalSavingsAndLoany-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.comBlogger214125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-27720574758983525152017-08-11T12:56:00.002-07:002017-08-11T14:43:59.998-07:00Book of Commandments on Health Care ReformI need to explain to readers my circumstances. I live in <a href="http://UtahColor.com">Utah</a>. Utah is controlled by the LDS Church. I am not a member of the LDS Church.<br /><br />
Anyway, In 1833, Joseph Smith published a work called "<a href="http://mit.irr.org/files/imagecache/node-gallery-display/BoC183392_0.gif" src="http://mit.irr.org/files/imagecache/node-gallery-display/BoC183392_0.gif">The Book of Commandments</a> which was renamed to "The Doctrine and Covenants." You can find the original plates on the <a href="http://mit.irr.org/scanned-images-of-entire-1833-book-of-commandments-and-1835-doctrine-and-covenants">The Institution for Religious Research</a>.<br /><br />
This is the part of the work relevant to the health care debate.<br />
<blockquote style="border: 1px dashed #666; font-family: courier, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; padding: 8px;">
25 Thou knowest my laws, they are given in my scriptures, he that sinneth and repenth not, <b>shall be cast out</b>.<br />
<br />
26 If thou lovest me, thou shat serve me and keep all of my commandments; and behold, thou shalt consecrate all thy properties, that which thou hast unto me, wih a covenant and deed which cannot be broken; and they shall be laid before the bishop of my church, and two of the elders, such as he shall appoint and set apart for that purpose.<br />
<br />
27 And it shall come to pass, that the bishop of my church, after that he has received the properties of my church, that it can not be taken from the church, he shall appoint every man a steward over his own property, or that which he has received, in as much as is sufficient for himself and family:<br />
<br />
28 And the residue shall be kept to administer to him who has not, that every man may receive according as he stands in need:<br />
<br />
29 And the residue shall be kept in my storehouse, to administer the poor and needy, as shall be appointed to the elders of the church and the bishop; and for the purpose of purchasing lands, and the building up of the New Jerusalem, which is hereafter to be revealed; that my covenant people may be gathered in one, in the day that I shall come to my temple.
</blockquote>
<br />
The first sentence emphasizes that these are commandments directly from God. These commandments were intended to be the beating heart of Mormonism.<br /><br />
A person who does not follow God's Commandments is a sinner. God commands that the faithful <b>cast out</b> anyone who challenges the commandments revealed by Joseph Smith.<br /><br />
The Commandment is that people are to give all their property to the church. The church will give back to people as the church sees fit. This new system was called "The United Order of Enoch." Mormon Fundamentalist groups such as the FLDS continue to practice the laws of the United Order. The church owns all the property. The people subsist on what the church doles out.<br /><br />
Joseph Smith's followers rose up after he published the "Book of Commandments." Smith changed the word "all" to "of" in the "Doctrine and Covenants." Members of the mainstream LDS Community take the commandment to mean that they are to buy insurance. <br /><br />
I want to argue for true free market reform as an alternative to insurance. I routinely experience the following. I go to a meetings hosted by the GOP or other Conservative group. I mention that I favor free market reform. An enforcer from the LDS church realizes that free market reforms are against the fundamental teachings of the LDS Church. I get thrown out of the meeting. I have actually been called "a Servant of Satan" simply for considering the free market alternatives to a socialized market.<br /><br />
I would like to point out that most LDS politicians favor the basic structure of PPACA. Senator Harry Reid (a Democratic Senator from Nevada) was the primary architect of PPACA. His plan was based on the plan by Mitt Romney. Governors Mike Leavitt, Gary Herbert, and Jon Huntsman all support variations of PPACA. Most LDS politicians are all openly opposed to free market reforms.<br /><br />
As for the accusation that I am a Servant of Satan for considering free market reform. This argument is based on the dubious claim that Joseph Smith is the Prophet of God. In the same book that Smith proposed socializing our economy, Smith restored the doctrine of polygamy. This self-proclaimed Prophet of God said that God demanded that he sleep with multiple women. There is documentation that Smith sealed himself to at least 49 wives. Some were as young as 14. There are reports that he made advances on many more.<br /><br />
I read the Book of Mormon and the D&C several times. They appear to be written by a con artist.<br /><br />
I prefer the US Constitution to the words of a con man.<br /><br />
The Mormon notion that one should cast out people for questioning their prophet is against the principles of freedom of speech, but the LDS Church controls the state and there is really not much I can do except hope that I can find a group outside of the state of Utah interested in free market care. Quite frankly, I feel things are quite hopeless.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-19523650039193184652017-08-03T12:00:00.002-07:002017-08-03T12:00:27.494-07:00The PackageAs mentioned in my last post: The <a href="http://medicalsavingsandloan.blogspot.com/2017/08/how-did-people-fund-health-care-before.html">Medicals Savings and Loan is based on a mathematical model of the way that people financed health care before the invention of big insurance</a>.<br />
<br />
I created this project because I realized several decades ago that the only way that we could have free market health care reform.<br />
<br />
Prior to insurance people financed care through a combination of savings, loans and grants.<br />
<br />
The Medical Savings and Loan creates a formal structure around a traditional structure. The formalized structure includes an accounting system and a position called a health care advocate.<br />
<br />
Creating an accounting system is not an anti-market activity.<br />
<br />
The development of accounting played a vital role in the evolution of our understanding of markets.<br />
<br />
Conservatives spit in my face and kick me down for saying that we to create an accounting system.<br />
<br />
Creating an accounting system is pro market.<br />
<br />
After creating a mathematical model, I created a business model for the Medical Savings and Loan. The basis business model has few dependencies on government beyond what is needed for basic contracts.<br />
<br />
BTW, we depend on government for most basic contracts. For example an employment contract might say that employees get paid at the end of the month. The government helps enforce this contract.<br />
<br />
The idea that we can completely eliminate government is stupid.<br />
<br />
Just like the idea that we should oppose the use of accounting in business is stupid.<br />
<br />
What I've contended for these last eight years is that: If a group of people got together, created a mathematical model (aka an accounting system) for free market health care, that group could have a positive impact on the debate.<br />
<br />
Specifically, the group would end up demonstrating that insurance is anti-market contrivance of the ruling elite.<br />
<br />
Insurance is based on the false assumption that the free market is incapable of delivering health care. Because the free market can't deliver care, we must put all of our health care dollars in huge pools controlled by the ruling elite.<br />
<br />
The people who control these pools become billionaires. Notably Warren Buffet made his billions by owning insurance companies and controlling the money in insurance pools.<br />
<br />
My presentation on the Medical Savings and Loan shows that insurance transfers trillions of dollars from the working poor to the upper middle class and ruling elite.<br />
<br />
Our health care debate for the last century has been built around the insurance industry. Single payer care is a system with one insurance company owned by the state and made totalitarian.<br />
<br />
Insurance requires a great deal of government oversight and regulation.<br />
<br />
ObamaCare was based on an idea from a conservative group called The Heritage Foundation. The idea is that we can regulate insurance through a network of state run health exchanges. The plan was first put in place by the self-described "severely conservative" Mitt Romney.<br />
<br />
Conservative politicians systematically fall back on the basic structure of the PPACA. The Repeal and Replace Legislation put forward by Trump and the GOP replaced ObamaCare with a slightly less toxic version of ObamaCare.<br />
<br />
If Americans wanted to restore free market health care, then we would need a group of people to do something radical. I suggest that we do the following.<br />
<br />
We start by creating a mathematical model of free market health care (an accounting system). We should build a business model around this accounting system. We should then run simulations that compare the result of this model to the insurance model.<br />
<br />
A group that engaged in this type of discovery would be in a position to create real free market reforms.<br />
<br />
The process is quite detailed an involved.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, the very first step in this process is to find people who are willing to talk about free market reform.<br />
<br />
<br />Freedom isn't free. To maintain freedom, we need people who are brave enough to sit in a room and talk about numbers. <br />
<br />
I've been working on this program for about thirty years. I have yet to meet a conservative brave enough to actually talk about the details of freedom in mathematical terms (by mathematics, I mean Accounting which really is a branch of mathematics).<br />
<br />
One way to start the program is to create an open source project. Getting the project going would involve people sitting in a room and talking.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-59882284891783264122017-08-02T22:10:00.004-07:002017-08-02T22:10:36.709-07:00How Did People Fund Health Care Before Group Insurance?One question people should ask in a health care debate is: How did people fund health care before insurance?<br />
<br />
Well, people funded their health care through savings. Often doctors would render service on credit and there were charities for people who needed care beyond their resources.<br />
<br />
Wait a second: This thing called "The Medical Savings and Loan" funds care through a combination of savings, a loan reserve and grants.<br />
<br />
Something seems very fishy.<br />
<br />
Okay, I will finally divulge what I've been up to.<br />
<br />
This thing I call "The Medical Savings and Loan" is really just a formalized model of traditional health care.<br />
<br />
While working at an insurance company, I asked myself the fundamental question: Does group health insurance do a better job of funding care than traditional methods?<br />
<br />
I simply created a mathematical model for traditional health care and insurance based care. The simulations I ran kept showing that traditional care provided greater care for the working poor and small business than insurance.<br />
<br />
Insurance benefits the upper middle class and the uber-rich at the cost of the working class.<br />
<br />
The big problem with traditional care is that it lacked a good accounting system. The system did not give people adequate information about the amount of money they needed to save. It did a poor job tracking how much people spent on health care and it did a poor job of identifying the people who needed additional help.<br />
<br />
We live in the Information Age. What I wanted to do was to create a distributed database so that people could track their care. Realizing that people would have a hard time interfacing with the system, I realized that this new program would create a need for a new position called which I called "A Health Care Advocate."<br />
<br />
To streamline the lending process, I created a thing called a Loan Reserve. I also created a streamlined process for administering grants.<br />
<br />
With this model in hand, I can prove that a savings based model of health care delivers better care to the working poor and middle class than the insurance model.<br />
<br />
I argue that if one enhanced traditional care with health care advocates and a good data reporting system, we could easily create a health care system that would put all other health care systems to shame.<br />
<br />
What I've been doing for the last eight years is simply trying to find people brave enough to discuss the mathematics of health care.<br />
<br />
The actual system I am discussing isn't really radical. It is just a formalized version of traditional care. I enhance traditional care with an accounting system and a position called "The Health Care Advocate."<br />
<br />
My presentation also discusses how one can incrementally transition from the insurance model to a savings based model.<br />
<br />
The program can replace ObamaCare without disruption. Quite frankly it is likely to get more resources to the people in need. All I need to do is find people brave enough to discuss the mathematics of health care.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-29342378758686379952017-08-01T12:07:00.000-07:002017-08-01T12:07:25.354-07:00Health Care LiberalizationFor the last eight years I've had the goal of attending a meeting about free market health care.<br />
<br />
My goal was to find candidates to support.<br />
<br />
To my horror, I could not find any conservative candidate or conservative group that was making a strong appeal for real free market reforms.<br />
<br />
The conservatives I encountered suffered the illusion that insurance was health care. At best they sought reduced regulations on the insurance industry.<br />
<br />
I worked for a state run insurance company writing computer programs to track claims and calculate premiums. I realized that the insurance industry was creating more inequities than it solved. I decided to leave what I considered a morally bankrupt industry.<br />
<br />
After leaving insurance, I worked on a little project where I reverse engineered an insurance pool into individual accounts. This simple plan created an account that tracked an individuals income and net savings. It supplemented the account with a loan reserve and grants. It replaced the insurance agents and claims adjusters with a new position called a Health Care Advocate.<br />
<br />
The program I created eliminated the inequities that made me leave insurance.<br />
<br />
Back to the health care debate.<br />
<br />
Unable to find a candidate who was talking about free market health care reform, I decided to host a presentation. This presentation would present the model I used for health care reform. I would then use the model to expose the inequities caused by group insurance.<br />
<br />
I put a lot of work into the presentation.<br />
<br />
<br />
For example, I introduce the concept by creating a business. I chose this path because I want to emphasize that funding health care is a business problem. As it is a business problem we need to think in terms of creating new businesses.<br />
<br />
In the presentation, I create a new business. I chose the name "Medical Savings and Loan" to invoke images from the movie "It's a Wonderful Life." In this movie, George Bailey (played by James Stewart) runs a local savings and loan and competes against big finance.<br />
<br />
After creating the Medical Savings and Loan, I compare it to the model used for group insurance. I show how group insurance creates inequities and concentrates wealth.<br />
<br />
Insurance does something even worse. Insurance takes individual risks. Puts the risks in a huge pool and creates a systemic economic risk.<br />
<br />
I highlight this by looking at the collapse of the savings and loan industry. Savings and Loans were insured by a Federal agency called the FSLIC (Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Company).<br />
<br />
The Carter Administration sought to stimulate the economy by increasing the interest paid at savings and loans and encouraging savings and loans to take on more risk. Many savings and loans developed absurd portfolios and the FSLIC became untenable.<br />
<br />
Reagan tried to address the problem by further deregulation. The federal government program that insurance savings and loans collapsed and wiped out an entire sector of the banking market.<br />
<br />
The FSLIC is an example of a Federal insurance program creating systemic risk that wiped out a sector of the economy.<br />
<br />
I think the name "Medical Savings and Loan" is adequate for the conversation I wanted to have.<br />
<br />
After I talk about the insurance industry. I then talk about using the basic model of the MS&L in social policy.<br />
<br />
This is where things get progressive.<br />
<br />
The Medical Savings and Loan creates an interesting framework in which one can create income brackets.<br />
<br />
The program starts with the statement: "Those who can self-fund their care should."<br />
<br />
(A corollary to the statement is those who can't need assistance.)<br />
<br />
The program will encourage people to save for their health care.<br />
<br />
Lets imagine two people. The first person makes $10,000 a year. We might deem it reasonable that this person saves $1,000 for health care. A second person makes $500,000 a year. This person might save $50,000 or more for care.<br />
<br />
(Much, if not all of this money is invested in a loan reserve). <br />
<br />
After 10 years, the first person has $10k and the second $500k. These people have a $300,000 health care expense. The first person takes out a loan. I guess the second person could pay in cash.<br />
<br />
Repayment of the loan is based on the ability of the person to repay the loan.<br />
<br />
The person who made $10k a year sees his income drop to $5k a year. This person can't repay the loan; so we write it off. The second person saw her income drop to $100k after the health problem. This person could pay off the loan.<br />
<br />
The program creates a vehicle for means testing medicare. Let's imagine two retires. The first has $100k in assets. The second $10M in assets. They both have $300k of end of life expenses.<br />
<br />
The person with $100 can't pay back the whole loan. Maybe the person should payback $50k leaving $50k to heirs.<br />
<br />
The person with $10,000,000 in assets could payback $300,000 and still leave heirs with a tidy inheritance.<br />
<br />
Note, asking the person with $10,000,000 to pay back a loan for medical services is not a tax. It is the way a free market is supposed to work<br />
<br />
NOTE, the formulas created by the Medical Savings and Loan are far more versatile than those used in standard insurance. It is possible to replace the pools used in the current health care system with loans over a period of time.<br />
<br />
To recap, the Medical Savings and Loan works as follows. It starts with the statement that those who can self fund their care should. It creates an accounting system that tracks a person's income, net worth and health care expenses. The program creates a loan reserve to assure that people have access to sufficient funds to pay for care at any given time.<br />
<br />
The program gives everyone a Health Care Advocate. The advocate will help people find doctors and apply for loans and grants when people need care.<br />
<br />
The money in the system flows from individual accounts to the health care provider. People are now paying for their care with their money. They have a knowledgeable advocate to help negotiate bills. This will restore the pricing mechanism in health care and drop prices.<br />
<br />
Most people can self fund their care. The program will identify the people who can't self fund care. The loan reserve will write off the loans for people who can't repay their loans (my presentation talks in detail about the grant process).<br />
<br />
So, while the Medical Savings and Loan is built around the ideal: "Those who can self fund their care should." It also creates a mechanism that transfers money from the rich and healthy to the poor and sickly.<br />
<br />
The program is not about eliminating wealth transfer in health care. What the program does is determine the amount needed to transfer for a good health care system and is more efficient in transferring the money than either insurance or socialism (A reminder: Single Payer Health Care is insurance made totalitarian).<br />
<br />
There is a lot more to my health care presentation than this blog post.<br />
<br />
The Medical Savings and Loan creates a new mathematical model for funding health care and compares this model to insurance.<br />
<br />
The really hard part to convey in my presentation is conveying the versatility of the mew mathematical model. The presentation shows how the model can be implemented as a small business. It ends by showing how basic concepts from the model could be used by policy makers to identify the people who need assistance, how assistance they need and it creates mechanisms for transferring resources to the people who need assistance in an efficient manner.<br />
<br />
It is actually an intriguing presentation. I've been hoping for the last several years to find people brave enough to discuss alternatives to the current group insurance market.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-29935544764964019222017-07-28T14:13:00.001-07:002017-07-28T14:13:59.319-07:00Bottoms Up to Health Care Reform<p>A primary reason that GOP failed with Repeal and Replace was that the GOP was trying fix health care from the top down.</p>
<p>A top down approach inevitably benefits the people at the top while depriving health care to the people on the bottom.</p>
<p>Real Health care is about our daily lives.</p>
<p>The best approach to health care reform is to start at the bottom and work up.</p>
<p>The great thing about open source design is that the open methodology allows for a bottom up approach.</p>
<p>The open source proposal is that a group of people get together to talk about free market health care reform. The group would start an open source project to create an alternative to group health insurance.</p>
<p>The plan would include the creation of a distributed database to hold health care data. It would also include the creation of a new business plan to fund health care.</p>
<p>The business model is a real business model with a real profit potential. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://medicalsavingsandloan.blogspot.com/2017/07/an-open-source-project.html">Open Source Project</a> would lead to a detailed discussion of the mathematics of funding health care.</p>
<p>The business model I propose requires a different set of regulations than insurance. The creation of this new business model ends up highlighting the problems created by ObamaCare, TrumpCare, RomneyCare and related efforts at health care reform.</p>
<p>I live in <a href="http://slsites.com">Salt Lake City</a>. I am willing to travel, but I would need a guarantee that there would be people willing to dedicated several afternoons to the discussion of the health care before I travel.</p>
<p>Conclusion: The Open Source program that I propose would create a bottoms up approach to health care reform. Essentially the program creates a network of small businesses to take on big insurance. This bottoms up approach to health care reform would provide people with more and better care than the top down approaches to health care reform that come from Washington DC.</p>y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-85094323219981999762017-07-28T09:36:00.002-07:002017-07-28T09:36:51.799-07:00An Open Source ProjectThe Senate's "Skinny Repeal" failed and it appears that the GOP's plan to Repeal and Replace PPACA has gone down in flames.<br />
<br />
IMHO, the GOP's efforts failed because the GOP did not have a compelling alternative to PPACA.<br />
<br />
The GOP did not have a compelling alternative to PPACA because conservatives have failed to discuss health care in detail.<br />
<br />
For the last eight years I have contended that group of people could radically change the health care debate if they sat down and discussed health care.<br />
<br />
An interesting way to start a conversation is to start an Open Source Project.<br />
<br />
<br />
The current health care debate holds is premised on the idea that group health insurance is the only possible way to fund health care. If insurance is the only way to fund health care, then we must have a public policy to force people to buy insurance.<br />
<br />
NOTE: Single payer health care is group insurance with a single provider. Single Payer is insurance made totalitarian.<br />
<br />
I hold that the way to radically change the health care debate is to create an alternative to centralized insurance.<br />
<br />
So, I propose launching an Open Source Project to create an alternative to insurance. I will tweet about the idea using the hashtag #OSHCR.<br />
<br />
Insurance companies use intrusive centralized database to track health care. They use massive centralized pools to fund care.<br />
<br />
These centralized databases and centralized pools lead to a concentration in wealth and power.<br />
<br />
The Open Source Health Care Reform would use a distributed database and distributed pools to fund care. <br />
<br />
The goal of the project isn't to create a single business. The goal is to create a network of small businesses. The project would create business models for these small businesses.<br />
<br />
The project would create a new position called a "Health Care Advocate" to replace the insurance agents, medical transcriptionists and claims adjusters in insurance.<br />
<br />
The Open Source Project is not just about writing computer code. The project will create new businesses. <br />
<br /><br />
Anyone who participates in the Open Source Project would be on the inside track to starting a business in a very lucrative field.<br />
<br />
I have already thrown in several thousand hours into creating a market based alternative to insurance.<br />
<br />
My analysis has shown that breaking up huge insurance pools into a distributed network would do several things. The program would restore the pricing mechanism in health care: Giving people more care for less. It would create a model that promotes maintaining health over the current model that just treats sickness. The program would create thousands of new businesses. The program would reduce the gap between rich and poor.<br />
<br />
Above all, the program would be fun.<br />
<br />
My claims aren't just pie in the sky. The claims are based on common sense.<br />
<br />
Putting all of our health care dollars in centralized pools controlled by a ruling elite has the predictable effect of concentrating wealth.<br />
<br />
This is basic common sense. If we put all of our health care dollars in centralized pools. The people who control these pools will get immensely wealthy while everyone sees the financial condition deteriorate.<br />
<br />
Conversely, if we broke huge centralized pools into smaller accounts, we would see a more equitable distribution of wealth.<br />
<br />The really fun thing about an Open Source Project is that such a project would get people to talk about the foundations of health care.<br />
<br />
<br />
The failure of the GOP to pass a Repeal and Replace bill shows that groups that fail to discuss health care will never be able to create a compelling health care reform plan.<br />
<br />
Anyway, I will start tweeting using the hashtag #OSHCR (my apologies to the Occupational Safety and Health Registry of Ireland for taking your tag).<br /><br />
The goal of this Open Source Project is to reverse engineer a centralized health pool into smaller businesses and individual accounts.<br />
<br />
<br />
The project would create a business model for a network of small businesses. It would create a distributed database to be hosted in the cloud and it would create a new profession called a Health Care Advocate.<br />
<br />
I contend that this Open Source Project would have a positive affect on the debate and is likely to have a positive effect on the health care debate.<br />
<br />
I will tweet with the hashtag OSHCR. If there is interest in the idea, I will run either an Indiegogo or Kickstarter campaign to raise funds to have a meeting a publish a book about the effort.<br />
<br />
Anyone interested in helping write a book would get title credit on the book.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-65710451839227568862017-07-28T00:04:00.000-07:002017-07-28T00:04:15.229-07:00The Constitution and Health CareRepublicans tend hold the separation of powers held by the US Constitution in high esteem.<br />
<br />
The Constitution did not give the US Congress the powers to regulate health care.<br />
<br />
I have a great deal of respect for traditional Republicans who balk at this process of writing a Federal Health Care bill.<br />
<br />
The US Congress is not the correct venue for setting health care policy.<br />
<br />
The problem we face right now is that the PPACA passed by the Democrats undermined the health care market and created an environment where insurance companies are collapsing under unreasonable regulations.<br />
<br />
<br />
The PPACA created a regulatory environment where one cannot simply repeal PPACA because the insurance market would collapse after its repeal.<br />
<br />
People are depending on their insurance companies for their health care.<br />
<br />
<br />
The "Repeal and Replace" argument started with the realization that repealing would harm the American public.<br />
<br />
Instead of spending the effort to develop a replacement. A large number of conservative candidates (including Donald Trump) began using "Repeal and Replace" as a slogan.<br />
<br />
Conservative candidates ran on the slogan "Repeal and Replace" without taking the time to develop a replacement.<br />
<br />
While I respect traditional candidates who simply want the Federal Government out of health care. I am livid with those candidates who campaigned on "Repeal and Replace" without taking the time to create a replacement. Campaigning on Repeal and Replace without a replacement in mind did a great deal of harm to our nation.<br />
<br />
Of course, all is not lost. I still contend that if a group of people sat down and spoke about free market health care reform that that group could revolutionize the health care sector and restore our health freedom.<br />
<br />
<br />y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-16281218343028941212017-07-27T13:32:00.002-07:002017-07-27T13:32:11.739-07:00Choking on Health CareI am delighted that, after eight years of mindless posturing, conservatives have finally started to debate health care.<br />
<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, the debate in the Senate simply shows that conservatives do not have a positive health care plan. The sad result is that the Republican Party is choking.<br />
<br />
In the last eight years, conservatives had ample time to devise an alternative approach to health care.<br />
<br />
Rather than taking the high road. Conservatives did nothing but posture on the issue while attacking their enemies.<br />
<br />
Health care is the most important issue of our generation. Unfortunately, there is no way to develop a health care bill without discussing health care.<br />
<br />
Right now, the Senate is having the most important debate of the Trump presidency.<br />
<br />
What do conservatives do?<br />
<br />
Since they are choking on health care. Conservatives return to their culture war playbook.<br />
<br />
To divert attention from health care, President Trump issued a provocative tweet about transgendered members in the military. The Trump administration also issued a major initiative against MS13.<br />
<br />
Once again, Conservatives show that they have no interest in delivering better health. Conservatives simply want to play culture war and divert attention from the most important debate.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-24230922738090664602017-07-24T13:07:00.001-07:002017-07-24T13:07:16.325-07:00Sorry, but Mr. Trump is the Liar Here<p>Sorry Mr. President, but the campaign slogan of "Repeal and Replace" was a lie.</p>
<p>Donald Trump's slogan of Repeal and Replace was a <a href="http://medicalsavingsandloan.blogspot.com/2017/07/fake-promise.html">fake promise</a>.</p>
<p>The slogan implied that Trump had a great plan to replace the PPACA in the works. People voted for Trump believing that he had a plan.</p>
<p>The pathetic health care debate that just unfolded in the House and Senate indicates clearly that neither Trump nor the GOP had a plan for replacing PPACA in mind. The conservatives in Congress simply had hollow words.</p>
<p>A person who says that they are going to do something without having a plan to carry the action through is engaged in a lie.</p>
<p>The current effort at health care reform is not salvageable.</p>
<p>The best path forward is to scrub the current fiasco. The GOP needs to go back to the drawing board. Debate health care and develop a good plan for replacing the PPACA.</p>
y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-21413709060751930022017-07-24T12:30:00.000-07:002017-07-24T12:30:16.780-07:00Fake Promise<p>Donald Trump loves to complain about "fake news."</p>
<p>As it turns out, Donald Trump did something far worse. Trump campaigned on the promise that he would "Repeal and Replace ObamaCare" when did not have a substantive plan for replacing the bill.</p>
<p>Of course, Trump was not the only conservative to use use the slogan "Repeal and Replace" without first engaging in a substantive debate about alternatives.</p>
<p>So, I decided to pen a few posts with the absurd hash tag #FakePromise on the horrible job that conservatives have done on the cause of advancing liberty.</p>
<p>Technically a "Fake Promise" is a promise that is not really a promise. A better word is "False Promise." A hash tag is like a trademark and does not need to make sense.</p>
<p>While my hashtag is absurd the issue of health care is serious.</p>
<p>Conservatives had eight years to work on a replacement for ObamaCare.</p>
<p>What happened during these years is that conservatives positioned themselves as champions of the free market while actively suppressing debates about free market reforms.</p>
<p>I know for a fact that conservatives actively suppress discussions of free market reform.</p>
<p>As you see, I have several thousand hours developing a framework for enacting free market reforms.</p>
<p>I gave this framework for discussing health care reform the campy name "The Medical Savings and Loan."</p>
<p><i>The Medical Savings and Loan</i> is a model for funding health care that uses a combination of savings accounts, a loan reserve and a generously funded system of grants to fund health care.</p>
<p>I worked for a half decade in a state run insurance company writing programs to track claims and calculate insurance premiums. I discovered that the insurance model created predictable inequities and that the industry as a whole created a market that favored the extremely wealthy and upper middle class over the working poor and small business.</p>
<p>I created a mathematical model that replaced centralized insurance pools with a combination of savings accounts, a loan reserve and generously funded grants. The plan creates a new position called "The Health Care Advocate." The simulations I ran indicated that such a model would dramatically improve the health care of the working poor and small businesses.</p>
<p>I gave this model the campy name "The Medical Savings and Loan." The name is a reference to the movie "It's a Wonderful Life" in which George Bailey's Savings and Loan stands against big finance represented by the curmudgeon Henry Potter.</p>
<p>To contribute to the health care debate, I developed a presentation in which I develop the Medical Savings and Loan as a business model then argue that it serves people better than big insurance.</p>
<p>The presentation takes about two hours.</p>
<p>The presentation leads immediately to action items and possible ideas about enacting free market health care reform.</p>
<p>What consistently happens is that, when I bring this presentation to conservatives, they immediately shut down debate when I question big insurance.</p>
<p>Personally, I believe that the path I am following with the Medical Savings and Loan could lead directly to better health care legislation.</p>
<p>I understand that my belief is my belief. I understand that my beliefs might be wrong.</p>
<p>What I've discovered in these last three decades is that both progressives and conservatives systematically shut down debate when ideas are put forward.</p>
<p>Donald Trump's fake promise to repeal and replace ObamaCare was just one lie in a long string of lies put forward by conservatives to stifle debate.</p>
<p>So, I figured that, while Trump tries to push a corrupt health care plan on the nation, I would call Trump out as the liar that he is.</p>
<p>Trump campaigned on a fake promise that he had a great plan to replace PPACA, when he did not have such a plan. By pushing a fake promise, Trump contributed to an environment which suppressed the discussion of ideas. The result is that the GOP does not have a decent health care plan.</p>
<p>The American people are suffering because Donald Trump made a #FakePromise.</p>y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-23422725517204251432017-04-02T08:40:00.001-07:002017-04-02T08:40:53.912-07:00On Attacking the Freedom CaucusWow, the venom being aimed at the Freedom caucus in the wake of the TrumpCare vote is something to behold.<br /><br />
The Tea Party and freedom caucus played a vital role in tempering government expansion in the Obama years and were the primary reason for the revival of the Republican Party.<br /><br />
The GOP establishment sees the Freedom Caucus as a band of useful idiots who help the power mongers of the GOP when in the minority, but need to be soundly scolded and sent packing when the GOP is in power.<br /><br />
I have to admit. I am extremely upset with the Freedom Caucus myself.<br /><br />
I am not upset that the Freedom Caucus stands for liberty. I am upset that they spent seven years posturing on freedom but failed to create a viable alternative to ObamaCare.<br /><br />
Because the members of the freedom caucus will not discuss health care, we are stuck with TrumpCare.<br /><br />
TrumpCare is nothing more than ObamaCare with fewer benefits. TrumpCare, ObamaCare and RomneyCare are all the same damn thing.<br /><br />
Americans have a bigger reason to be upset with Trump than with the Freedom Caucus. Trump campaign slogan was to "Repeal and Replace Obamacare." His plan turned out to be little more than the to rename and rebrand ObamaCare (with fewer benefits).<br /><br />
Trump's campaign of "Repeal and Replace" was a lie. I am extremely upset with the lie.<br /><br />
Americans need to discuss health care. The only possible way to come to create a decent health care system is to discuss health care.<br /><br />
Trumps lie that that he had a plan to repeal and replace Obamacare made it that much more difficult to find people to discuss health care reform.<br /><br />
It was obvious, to me at least, that there was no substance behind Trump's campaign slogan. If Trump had a viable plan to repeal and replace Obamacare, he would have presented the plan and not just the slogan.<br /><br />
But, none of the GOP candidates were presenting viable paths to free market reform.<br /><br />
We are eight years into a health care debate, and I haven't found anyone in the GOP, with the Exception of Ben Carson, who has even the slightest interest in discussing health care reform.<br /><br />
I love that members of the freedom caucus is standing up for freedom.<br /><br />
Unfortunately, the Freedom Caucus is in a losing fight. Because Conservatives systematically fail to discuss health care, we are guaranteed to lose our liberty.<br /><br />
Simply standing for liberty does nothing. Simply <b>standing</b> for something is nothing but empty posturing. For people to realize liberty, we need leaders who actively engage in debates and who seek to solve our nation's problems with liberty.<br /><br />
A free society is not simply a society in which the government does nothing. A free society is one where people are engaged, at multiple levels, to improve the society.<br /><br />
A free society is not won through obstruction alone. It is one in which people are actively engaged in improving their personal lives and their communities at large.<br /><br />
The Freedom Caucus has failed to date because they have been following the Conservative methodology of obstruction and reaction. By following the path, the Freedom Caucus uses obstructions as its primary tool of engagement, the Freedom Caucus has failed to create a viable alternative to ObamaCare.<br /><br />
I am angry that the Freedom Caucus failed to create an alternative to ObamaCare, but, as they are the best that we have at the moment, I can't share in the hatred that Trump and the media have directed at the Freedom Caucus.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-23705716801784603872017-03-24T13:22:00.001-07:002017-03-24T13:22:55.034-07:00Told You So<p>Not that it's worth anything, but I was completely right in my predictions about the Trump Administration.</p>
<p>During the campaign, I kept saying that Trump did not have a plan to restore free market health care.</p>
<p>Sure enough. Donald Trump came out with a health care reform package that, at best, can be called "Obamacare Lite."</p>
<p>While Trump's plan reduces some of the benefits, some of the costs and some of the regulations of PPACA, the basic framework of TrumpCare is the same as ObamaCare (which is the same as RomneyCare).<p>
<p>To make matters even more depressing. The so called "Freedom Caucus" does not seem to have any substantive ideas on how to restore free market health care either.</p>
<p>The conservative movement has just proven itself to be as big a joke as the progressive movement.</p>
<p>I would be laughing, but the pathetic and disingenuous nature of the Conservative Movement is destroying our country.</p>
<p>Members of GOP are trying to cover the corrupt nature the conservative movement with claims that health care reform is hard.</p>
<p>They are wrong. If implemented correctly, free market health care reform could be delivered with minimal disruption in individual lives.</p>
<p>Free market reform might lead to the break up and dissolution of Fortune 500 insurance companies and it might reduce several billionaires to millionaire status, but it would not disrupt the lives of the people at large. It would actually improve the finances of most Americans.</p>
<p>The reason that Conservatives do not have a free market insurance plan in hand is because conservatives systematically refuse to discuss free market reform.</p>
<p>If there was a true discussion of free market health care; people would realized that employer based health care is an anti-market approach to health care. Employer based insurance is a revival of the feudal order. Your employer is the new feudal lord that controls your health and the person who controls your health controls your body.</p>
<p>A true and honest debate about free market health care would question the formulas used by the insurance industry. Such a debate would discover that these formulas do an inadequate job of providing care and have the negative side effect of concentrating wealth in a ruling elite.</p>
<p>True free market reform would not start with a discussion of regulations, but would start by creating new mechanisms for funding health care.</p>
<p>This silly thing I created called "The Medical Savings and Loan" was based on such a debate.</p>
<p>What I do in this program is break apart an insurance pool into individual accounts. The system funds care through a combination of savings, a loan reserve and generous grants. The system is administered by a new position called "The Health Care Advocate."</p>
<p>The system can be created organically from scratch, or it could be created by taking an existing pool.</p>
<p>If we created the MS&L from existing pool, we would see that the M&SL would have the same amount of resources as a health insurance pool. I can prove that the actual allocation of funds would be more equitable than an insurance company. Since people would start negotiating prices with health care providers, it is likely to dramatically drop the cost of care.</p>
<p>If I could find people willing to sit down for an evening and talk health care, I can prove that not only is free market health care reform possible. I can prove that the distribution of care would be more equitable.</p>
<p>Donald Trump is correct about one thing. All plans have winners and losers.</p>
<p>There is one group that would lose a substantial amount of money and influence.</p>
<p>The group that would be harmed by the Medical Savings and Loan is called "The Ruling Elite."</p>
<p>Progressives like to call this group "The One Percenters."</p>
<p>The insurance industry transfers trillions of dollars from the working and middle class to the ruling elite.</p>
<p>Creating an alternative to insurance would stopped this artificial transfer of wealth.</p>
<p>The wealthy and powerful people who control our nation would lose wealth. They would lose power. The leeches in our society who feed off the transfer of wealth from the people to the elite would lose as well.</p>
<p>It would be chaos in the Congressional Lobby as people who make their money by leeching off a corrupt health care system see their once lucrative pools of capital dry up.</p>
<p>Everyone else, of course, would benefit.</p>
<p>Personally, I don't care if billionaires see their position diminish. I care about the people, not the elite.</p>
<p>I have no problem supporting ideas that stop the artificial transfer of wealth from the people at large to the elite.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the leaders of the Conservative movement care more about the elite than about the people. The very nature of the Conservative Movement is to favor the elite over the people.</p>
<p>The non-debate surrounding TrumpCare simply proves, once again, that the conservative movement is inherently corrupt. While conservatives are known to posture about free market reforms. They are unwilling to debate or even consider reforms that stop the transfer of wealth from the people to the elite.</p>
<p>So, while I deserve bragging rights and say "I Told You So." I actually feel extremely depressed because our nation is still on the Road to Serfdom. The election of the GOP simply changes the names of our feudal lords. It does not free the people.</p>y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-65407824218426830782016-11-23T13:55:00.000-08:002016-11-23T13:57:05.336-08:00On Insurance Workers<p>This is an interesting Tweet from <a href="https://twitter.com/docshanep">Dr Shane</a>:
</p>
<blockquote style="border: 1px dashed #777; margin: 1em 5%; padding: 5px;">
"for every two doctors in the U.S., there is now one health-insurance employee—more than 470,000 in total" David Goldhill #DPCrising
</blockquote>
<p>Dr. Shane and David Goldhill blog about the rising costs of health care regulations.</p>
<p>I want to approach the number of insurance positions from a different perspective.</p>
<p>I once worked in insurance. My experience was that insurance employees are wonderful people who really want to help people with health care.</p>
<p>I see 470,000 wonderful people, most of whom are trying to make a positive difference.</p>
<p>The reason I left the insurance world was because I realized that the nature of insurance prevented me from making the positive difference that I imagined insurance offered.</p>
<p>The problem is not with the people, but with the configuration of insurance.</p>
<p>In the current system, our health care dollars sit in enormous pools. The money in this system flows from powerful insurance pools to industrial style hospitals.</p>
<p>A bureaucracy configures itself to the flow of money.</p>
<p>The careers of these 470,000 people end up aligning with the needs of the the insurance pool and not the the needs of the people.</p>
<p>The reform I propose is called: "The Medical Savings and Loan."</p>
<p>This reform starts by giving policyholders a medical savings account. All medical transactions flow through the account.</p>
<p>We replace the insurance pool with a thing called a loan reserve. Policyholders buy a share in a loan reserve. This reserve has about the same amount of money in it as the insurance pool.</p>
<p>When a person needs care, the money comes from their savings account. If there is not enough money, they can get an interest free loan from the pool. People who make enough to repay their loans are expected to repay the loans. Those who cannot receive grants.</p>
<p>The Medical Savings and Loan changes the flow of the money.</p>
<p>As bureaucracies shape to the flow of the money, the flavor of these 470,000 positions will change. The worker's efforts will start aligning to the needs of the people.</p>
<p>To emphasize this re-alignment, I created a new title: "The Health Care Advocate."</p>
<p>The driving mantra of the Medical Savings and Loan is: Those who can self fund their care should. The system redistributes money for those who cannot.</p>
<p>The Health Care Advocates help policyholders set up their savings plan. When people need care, the advocates help people find doctors and help in the negotiation of prices. When needed the advocates will apply for loans and grants.</p>
<p>Because the money flows from personal accounts to health providers, the work of these professional changes.</p>
<p>If we simply changed the structure of our health care system from pools to personal accounts, we could force a complete re-alignment of the insurance industry and all the positions in it.</p>
<p>Our problem isn't that people in insurance are bad and evil. The problem is the flow of the money.</p>
<p>Follow the money. The way the money flows creates an inefficient system.</p>
<p>If the money flowed from personal accounts to providers; then we would see these jobs align with the needs of the people.</p>
<p>Insurance companies have the job of protecting the pool. Health Care Advocates have the job of helping people maximize the return from their health care dollars. These advocates would be like personal financial assistants. Changing the flow of mone changes all the positions in health care and this improves care.</p>
<p>I think it is wonderful that 470,000 have jobs in insurance. I have no desire to make these wonderful jobs go away. I want to see their jobs aligned to the needs of the people and not the needs of an insurance company.</p>y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-87272489597898205452016-11-17T07:44:00.002-08:002016-11-17T08:00:17.194-08:00A Doctor on America's News RoomI walked by a TV set and saw some talking heads on Fox actually talking about health care reform. The people may have been Bret Baier and Dr. Marc Seigel.<br />
<br />
I am ecstatic. Most conservatives I know are intent on preserving Obamacare (under a different name) and refuse absolutely to discuss free market health care reform.<br />
<br />
Sadly, what the doctor said was idiotic.<br />
<br />
The doctor said the two keys for health care reform were <b>tax deductions</b> and the ability to<b> buy insurance across states lines</b>.<br />
<br />
I wanted to scream. Tax deductions only help those who have active income streams. The people who are most in need of help have no income.<br />
<br />
Buying insurance across states lines is going to make health care a nightmare.<br />
<br />
The biggest problem is that interstate insurance companies do not have contracts with local health care providers.<br />
<br />
If your employer decides to save money by buying insurance across state lines; you are likely to find that few local health care providers are willing to take you case because they do not have a contract with your insurance company.<br />
<br />
This next paragraph might sound strange to readers, but it is the basis of insurance.<br />
<br />
Group insurance works as follows. A group of people place their health care resources into a pool. When individuals need care, they and their doctor file an insurance claim against the pool.<br />
<br />
The insurance claim is a lawsuit which is overseen by the court system. Currently the jurisdiction takes place at a state level.<br />
<br />
I need to repeat this: <b>An insurance claim is a lawsuit.</b> You put your money in a pool and you must sue the pool to get the money back out to pay for care.<br />
<br />
The reason that medical billing is so bizarre is because it is designed for processing through the legal system.<br />
<br />
The current system is nuts.<br />
<br />
Insurance companies and doctors try to streamline the claims by creating local buyers network. In these networks, insurance companies negotiate the prices of goods and services with local doctors.<br />
<br />
These insurance networks are, theoretically, the cost saving mechanisms of insurance. <br />
<br />
Insurance companies often have large directories showing which doctors are "in network." These doctors have negotiated with the insurer to provide care at a set price.<br />
<br />
When your employer decides to save some money by buying insurance across state lines, you will find that there are few "in network" doctors.<br />
<br />
Having few in network doctors means you will not receive the care you desire.<br />
<br />
If your employer buys insurance across state lines, you might find that many doctors refuse to accept your insurance because they do not want to take on the hassle of filing an insurance claim in a different state.<br />
<br />
Anyway, I was ecstatic to see people on TV discussing health care reform.<br />
<br />
Yes, I was disastisfied with the discussion, but people have to go through multiple discussions to find a good solution.<br />
<br />
A discussion about free market health care reform must go deeper than talk about tax deductions and state lines. We need to discuss the foundations of health care. If anyone wants to engage in a substantive discussion about health care reform, they could contact me. I have research on hand that would serve as a basis for an illuminating discussion.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-37837413580602470022016-11-13T08:04:00.001-08:002016-11-13T08:04:27.555-08:00Nationalized Health Care RegulationPrior to ObamaCare, Insurance was regulated at the state level. <br /><br />Sadly, state regulators tended to become the lapdogs of local insurance companies. State level regulations tended to align with the desires of insurance executives and not with the needs of the people.<br />
<br />
I want to point out that this problem arises from the nature of health insurance. Putting all of our health care dollars in huge insurance pools creates powerful entities that can bully the state.<br />
<br />
<br />
The US founders did not want an overbearing Federal government. This is why they created a Constitutionally limited Federal Government.<br /><br />The founders wanted a system where the individual states could experiment with different ideas about local governance.<br /><br />ObamaCare wrested control from the states and gave it to the national government.<br />
<br />
BTW, the process of wresting control of an industry and giving it to the national government is called: "nationalization."<br /><br />ObamaCare nationalized insurance regulation.<br /><br />Repealing ObamaCare means denationalizing insurance regulation and returning it to state control.<br /><br />Donald Trump's going on air and saying that he seeks to keep provisions of ObamaCare means that we will keep regulation of insurance at the national level. It also means that we lose the ability for the states to become laboratories of local regulation.<br /><br />I did not jump on the Trump bandwagon during the campaign because I did not hear the campaign give specifics on health care reform. <br /><br />The only specific Donald Trump gave was the idea that companies should be able to sell insurance across state lines.<br /><br />So, lets jump back to the question of state regulation. It turns out that regulations dramatically affect the performance of a pool.<br />
<br />
Lets say Nevada regulations said the maximum deductible was $5,000 and California set it at $6,400. A pool in Nevada would behave differently from one in California.<br /><br />The goal of selling insurance across state lines requires that the Federal government becomes the primary regulator of insurance.<br />
<br />
This is why I was complaining before the election. Trump's statement that he would repeal ObamaCare was different from his statement that he wanted companies to be able to buy insurance across state lines.<br />
<br />
I am really sad that things are turning out the way that they are. But the only way we could free market heatlh care reform is if people spoke with one another. But there is no way that this could happen in the current political climate.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-36221668169896212022016-11-12T12:05:00.000-08:002016-11-12T12:05:30.687-08:00Trump plans to keep portions of ObamacareMy criticism of Donald Trump was that he did not present a coherent alternative to PPACA and I have yet to see anyone in the GOP talking about substantive health care reform.<br /><br />
In interviews with <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-willing-to-keep-parts-of-health-law-1478895339">Wall Street Journal</a> and others, Donald Trump said that he planned to keep key provisions of Obamacare.<br /><br />
This style of politics is precisely what happened in the Bush presidency. GW Bush made a few allusions to free market health care reform. There was never any serious discussion of alternatives. In the end, GW Bush dramatically expanded the role of the Federal Government in health care.<br /><br />
It is not too late. I still contend that, if a group of people met and discussed free market health care reform. That group could prevail.<br /><br />
But, as long as conservatives refuse to even discuss free market health care reform, we will have no option but to continue with PPACA and all of the inequities that PPACA creates.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-57799852367557861212016-11-10T12:02:00.000-08:002016-11-10T12:02:16.433-08:00American Needs a New Health Care Plan. The first step is to talk.Funding health care is a business problem. It is not a political problem.
<br /><br />
I've complained that Trump does not have a clear plan for repealing Obamacare.<br /><br />
This really is not a problem. As I said in the opening sentence. The solution should come from the private sector and not the president.<br /><br />
The big problem we face is that there are no viable business solutions on the table.<br /><br />
This is an easy problem to solve: A half dozen people could sit at a table. Talk about free market health care reform. They would write up and publish a business plan.<br /><br />
At this stage in the game the six people don't even have to be serious about starting a business.<br /><br />
The way I see this going is that group meets. The group draws up a business plan for funding health care. The group then creates an advocacy group for this business model.
<br /><br />
Back in the 1980s I worked designing program for an insurance firm. I concluded that insurance fails to give us the health care that we need. This is easy to prove.
<br /><br />
So, I created an alternative to insurance which I called "The Medical Savings and Loan."
<br /><br />
This MS&L funds health care with a combination of savings accounts, a loan reserve and grants. The center piece of the plan is a new position called "The Health Care Advocate." The advocate replaces insurance agents and claims adjusters.
<br /><br />
I created the MS&L as a mechanism for breaking apart insurance pools into individual accounts. A defining characteristic of the program is that the money flows from individual accounts to the health care provider.
<br /><br />
This simple change opens up a huge debate about the nature of insurance. Since the money for care is flowing through individual accounts, the MS&L creates a better picture the health care that we need in our society.
<br /><br />
It turns out that, in free society, the vast majority of people (over 90%) could self fund their care. The mantra of the MS&L is simply: "those who can self fund their care should."
</br /><br />
The program has a generous system of grants to help those who cannot self-fund their care. The mathematical model I created indicates that the MS&L is likely to get more money to the people in critical need than group health insurance.
<br /><br />
Since the money is flowing through individual accounts, the MS&L will restore the pricing mechanism in health care which will lower health care costs.
<br /><br />
Of course, delivering health care is about people and not mathematics. The central piece of the MS&L is a position called "The Health Care Advocate."<br /><br />
The business model I want to create is for the advocate. The advocate replaces the health insurance agent.<br /><br />
The presentation I have starts with the MS&L as a mathematical model, but it ends up talking about the advocate and the human side of health.<br /><br />
Anyway, if there was someone interested in discussing health care reform, they could contact me. I have some wonderful ideas that could profoundly affect the health care debate.<br /><br />
The down side. I live in Utah, but I am willing to travel. If a person can guarantee a group of six people willing to discuss and work for free market health care reform, I would be willing to take out a loan to travel and meet the group.<br /><br />
The upside of living in Utah. We have great skiing. If people want to have a ski vacation and talk about free market health care reform when they are off the slopes. I could work that out. The only problem. The snow isn't here yet.<br /><br />
To recap:
<ul><li>Trump does not have a plan for repealing Obamacare.
</li><li>Not a problem: Funding Health Care is a business challenge and not a political one.
</li><li>What needs to happen is for a group meet to create an alternative model for funding health care.
</li><li>The group would create a business model.
</li><li>After creating the business model the group would create a non-profit advocacy group to promote the model.
</li><li>The advocacy group would select a spokesperson. That spokesperson would go to TV stations and talk about the model.
</li><li>The spokesperson would meet with leaders in their state and might even go to Washington to meet the president and people in Congress.
</li>
</ul>
Funding health care is a business challenge. It is not a political challenge. The first step to facing this challenge is for a group of courageous people to sit down and discuss alternatives to group health insurance.<br /><br />
There may actually be wonderful rewards for anyone who is brave enough to think.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-72252827967276103962016-11-06T15:40:00.001-08:002016-11-06T15:40:32.163-08:00Trump Does Not Have a Health Care Reform PlanI suspect that Hillary will win the election.<br /><br />This might be good for the nation. Folks on the left are finally waking up to the realization that both their party and their ideology are corrupt. <br /><br />The Affordable Care Act is failing. A Hillary presidency might lead to a substantive debate about health care reform.<br /><br />As I write, there is a growing possiblity that Trump might win.<br /><br />I find this problematic because Trump does not have a health care plan.<br /><br />Vague statements about repealing and replacing Obamacare is not a plan!<br /><br />Obamacare is a fiendish piece of legislation that is difficult to repeal and can only be replaced if the people repealing the legiistation had a framework in hand for free market health care reform.<br /><br />I am one of those people who read the bill before it passed. PPACA is tricky. <br /><br />PPACA is regulated at the Federal level and implemented at the state level.<br /><br />States spent billions of dollars implementing PPACA. Were Trump to simply repeal Obamacare, America would still be saddled with the state level apparatus.<br /><br />It is true that, after a repeal of PPACA, individual states will begin working on replacements for Obamacare. But, without a framework for restoring free market health care, the state level legislation is likely to produce even worse results than PPACA.<br /><br />The right wing talking point is that PPACA is a government take over of health care.<br /><br />The truth is that PPACA includes a grab bag of goodies for the insurance industry accompanied by federal regulations that limit profits and are believed by progressives to make insurance more equitable.<br /><br />Insurance companies want to keep those part of Obamacare that line their pockets while shunting off those parts which limit profits.<br /><br />Local insurance companies are very good at manipulating state regulations. The insurance companies know the financial impact of each line of the local insurance code and have the financial resources to control the local political process.<br /><br />This means that blindly repealing PPACA is likely to create a regulatory environment that is, for most Americans, even worse than Obamacare.<br /><br />Recapping: PPACA is Federal legislation implemented by the states. Repealing the Federal Legislation leaves the state regulations. PPACA is a grab bag of goodies for insurance companies. Local insurance companies will keep those aspects of the bill that line their bottom line while reducing those that do not.<br /><br />To restore free market health care, one needs to create a framework for the repeal that will actually create free market institutions.<br /><br />I created "The Medical Savings and Loan" to serve as such a framework. <br /><br />In this work, I create an alternative to group health insurance called "The Medical Savings and Loan." It funds health care through a combination of Savings, a Loan Reserve and Grants. A key figure in this program is a new position called The Health Care Advocate who replaces the insurance agent and claims adjuster.<br /><br />This structure is uniquely suited to discussing the difference between health care delivered through a collective mechanism such as insurance and socialism. It also provides people seeking free market health care reform a frame to discuss such reform.<br /><br />NOTE: I developed this presentation a long time ago, but have yet to find an audience interested in the topic. I live in conversative Utah. Conservatives tend to suppress discussions of ideas.<br />
<br />
<br />
I do not consider my presentation a panacea. But I have studied the issue in sufficient depth to know that we cannot restore free market health care just by waving the "repeal" wand.<br />
<br />
To restore free market health care, we need leaders willing to discuss free market health care. I have yet to see anyone in the Trump camp discuss the issue.<br />
<br />
I do not for certain that, without a framework for restoring free market health care. Simply repealing Obamacare will make things worse.<br /><br />I figure that the best hope for repealing Obamacare is for Hillary to win and maybe liberals will finally realize that they've been duped and that the best way for providing care starts by talking about the issue.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-11186158042263900572016-10-20T11:01:00.002-07:002016-10-20T11:01:45.308-07:00Big Business and State Lines<p>For years I've wondered why conservatives have been so insistent on allowing companies to sell insurance across state lines.</p>
<p>Prior to Obamacare, Insurance was regulated by the states. State by state regulations would determine the behavior of health pools. A health pool in <a href="http://UtahColor.com">Utah</a> behaves dramatically different from one in California. To be able to sell insurance across state lines, insurance would need to be regulated at the Federal Level.</p>
<p>Perhaps this is the reason:</p>
<p>In our present system health care is socialized at the employer level. In this bizarre system, employers place the health care resources of their work force into a single pool. Employers can then leverages the health care of their employees for political and economic gain.</p>
<p>Wall Street and big business see the United States as a single market. Big businesses like to have entities in multiple states to grab as large a share of this market as possible. When big business seeks to expand nationwide they have to set up separate health care pools in each state. This reduce their ability to leverage health care.</p>
<p>Regulating health care at the Federal level (so that insurers could sell insurance across state lines) would allow Wall Streets and Big Business to consolidate the health care of their employees into a single pool that would have greater leverage.</p>
<p>Unlike conservatives, I prefer small business and local control. I have so thoroughly broken with <s>The Tories</s> conservatives that I even question the wisdom of socializing health care at the employer level. Giving employers control over the health care resources of their employers creates a situation where employers can act like the feudal lords of old.</p>
<p>Speaking of Feudal Lords. Did you know that the grand ideology of Conservatism was created by King Williamn IV in the 1830s as an effort to rebrand the Tory Party in the wake of electoral reform.</p>
<p>The goal of Conservatism (The New Tories) was to preserve the social structure of the feudal system.</p>
<p>The Tories (<b>also known as Conservatives</b>) favor socializing health care at the employer level because it creates a class society with a distinct employer class that owns the resources of the nation and a working class that lives from hand to mouth dependent on the benefits given by the employers.</p>
<p>In the old world conservatives still proudly bear the name "Tory." In the United States, Conservatives are whimpering cowards who simply deflect conversations and refuse to engage in open debate about health care policy like the slimy little worms that conservatives are.</p>
<p>The issue of "buying insurance across state lines" is a perfect example of the way that Tories engage in conversation. Insurance is a regulatory product. Health care pools behave according to the state regulations. The great conservative cause of "buying insurance across state lines" means transferring control of insurance from the state to the federal government.</p>
<p>Conservatives will speak about state's rights in one sentence then demand the ability to buy insurance across state lines in the next (failing to mention that the sentences are are contradictions). Conservatism today is as flawed and corrupt an ideology as it was in 1830s when the Tory Party changed its name to "The Conservative Party."</p>
<p>The conservative cause of buying insurance across state lines means the creation of a single health care market controlled by central bankers on Wall Street with even less local control than we have today. Trump and his conservative followers are marching in the wrong direction.</p>y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-88704686178264353832016-02-09T12:33:00.001-08:002016-02-09T12:37:16.001-08:00Health Empowerment Accounts<p>For the last eight years I've held that, if a group of people engaged in a serious conversation about free market health care reform, that group of people could have a decisive effect on the heatlh care debate.</p><p>
I've been been perplexed by the unwillingness of Conservatives to discuss free market reforms and had given up on the GOP.</p><p>
However, I was delighted to hear Doctor Ben Carson mention the words "Health Empowerment Account" before the moderator cut him offer and diverted to less pressing concerns.</p><p>
I was astounded. A word about free market health care reform was spoken in public and, just maybe, some people somewhere started thinking about the issue.</p><p>
Maybe some people asked themselves: "What is a Health Empowerment Account"?</p>
<ol>
<li>How can an account empower people?</li>
<li>How is a "health empowerment account" different than a "health savings account"?</li>
<li>Why did the moderator cut Ben Carson off?</li>
<li>Why haven't any other conservatives discussed free market health care reforms in the last eight years?</li>
</ol>
<p>I actually do have answers to the questions above. Let's answer the easy questions first. Going in reverse order:</p><p>
4) The moderator cut off Ben Carson because conservatives (and members of the GOP Establishment) do not want the American people to discuss free marketh health care reform.</p><p>
3) Conservatives don't want Americans to discuss free market health care reform because true free market reforms would hurt the insurance industry.</p><p>
Conservative opposition to free market reform is itself a very interesting story. For this paragraph I will simply state that Conservative think tanks are often funded by insurance and the goals of Conservatism and Big Insurance companies are closely aligned.</p><p>
This thing we call ObamaCare (PPACA) is a network of state run health exchanges. The structure for the health exchanges was created by a Conservative group called "The Heritage Foundation." The basic idea is that the industry could improve coverage if the state were to combine insurance mandates with regulations that forced insurance companies to provide coverage for pre-existing conditions.</p><p>
The Heritage Foundation believed that insurance mandates might help it achieve a variety of conservative social goals. After all, the group that controls access to health care can control the people.</p><p>
2) Conservative have a long history of passing legislation that benefits insurance companies. The system of Health Savings Accounts is a prime example.</p><p>
The HSA program gives a tax credit for money put aside in a "Health Savings Account." My first observation is that only people with large incomes benefit from the tax credit.</p><p>
An HSA is usually given in conjunction with high deductible insurance policy. The high deductible frees insurance companies from having to process small claims for day to day care.</p><p>
The pernicious effect of the HSA is that only upper income employees benefit from the tax credits. Lower income workers simply receive health coverage with high deductibles which they cannot afford to pay. While it is true that low income workers with no children and no health expenses can benefit from an HSA, the HSA model artificially decreases the income of low income with children and those with health expenses.</p><p>
The HSA model was created by the insurance industry as an add on to insurance to benefit insurance and people in upper management. The fact that one model built around savings benefits the rich does not mean that all models will benefit the rich.</p><p>
1) This is why I was excited to hear Ben Carson mention the words "Health Empowerment Accounts" during a public debate.</p><p>
I believe strongly that, if one built the health care system around a health account that one could create a system that empowered people to take control of their health.</p><p>
I am not an expert on the Ben Carson plan. Okay, the only thing I know about the Carson plan is that it starts by giving each person an account that is used to track their personal health savings and expenses.</p><p>
I know that this statement will sound weird at first. But this simple step of giving people an account to track their savings and expenses would fundamentally change health care in America.</p><p>
The current health care system is built on a collectivist model. In the current system, health care is provided at a group level through insurance companies. Insurance companies collect premiums for care to build a health care pool. The insurance company tracks the expenses of the pools and the wealthy investors speculate on the pool. Claims adjusters within the pool determine who receives care and when.</p><p>
For more information on the philosophical model behind insurance. I suggest reading a rather dense tome titled "Das Kapital" by a nineteenth century thinker named Karl Marx. (I never really understood insurance before I read this work by Marx who could rightfully be considered the founder of modern insurance).</p><p>
And yes, I did just state that employer based healthc are is socialization of health care at the corporate level. From a mathematical point of view, there is little difference between health care collectivized at the employer level and health care collectivized at the state level.</p><p>
The most direct path to breaking apart a collectivized system is simply to start tracking expenses at the individual level.</p><p>
The money for health care could still be in a pool. The simple fact that the system is tracking the health of individual people and not collective health would fundamentally change the system.</p><p>
The simple fact that individual accounts would allow individuals to start seeing their health as their concern would dramatically change the health care system and health in this nation.</p><p>
I admit, I am part of that radical fringe who wants America to take the anti-social step of removing some of the money from insurance pools and giving individuals greater direct control over their health care dollars.</p><p>
Like other free marketeers, I have a tendency to jump of ahead of myself and start talking about how our society would appear if there was a more equitable distribution of capital. (Hint there would be more small businesses, less big businesses, a more equitable distribution of income, and healthier people.</p><p>
People are so cowed by big insurance that, at this point in time, people are in capable of imagining health care without huge pools.</p><p>
But, if they had direct access to information about their personal health, people would start to realize that they would be better off with direct control of their health care dollars.</p><p>
Anyway, I was really excited to hear Ben Carson say the word "Health Empower Account" on the TV set before being cut off by the moderator.</p><p>
My head has been spinning with all of the possibilities that could take place if there were people brave enough to talk about free market health care reform.</p><p>
Now, both Ben Carson and Rand Paul seem to be out of the running for this presidential race. None of the other GOP candidates seem to have any interest in free market health care reform.</p><p>
I can't imagine a debate about free market health care reform taking place in this political cycle; So, I admit I am somewhat at a loss as to where we should take this debate.</p><p>
Dr. Carson's system of "Health Empowerment Accounts" would go a long way to restoring freedom in America. I think what we have to do is discuss why recording health information on an individual basis would change health care and work to differentiate this idea from Health Savings Accounts. Above all, those seeking to advance free market reforms have to counter this fiction that Conservatives support free market reforms, when the truth is that conservatives actively silence discussion of such reforms at every step. Just hearing a person mention a word in a debate before being silenced should be enough. But I can't figure out where to proceed with that.
</p>
y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-91640323284798895352015-11-09T14:47:00.001-08:002015-11-09T14:47:13.985-08:00The Difficulties of Discussing MathematicsTruthfully, I stopped following Utah politics. While watching national news, I discovered that Utah's Health Coop was one of the dozen of health coops which have failed. Apparently, the coop officially failed on October 27th and the Utah insurance industry is ripping at the dead carcass of this beast as I write.<br />
<br />
I was really upset when the Utah political machine shoved the Utah health coop down our throat with very little debate. Had Utahans engaged in a conversation about insurance, I am sure the state could have pieced together a much better deal.<br />
<br />
I read several of the reports on the failure of the coop and wondered if the failure of this entity might lead to an open discussion about alternative approaches to health care reform.<br />
<br />
I feel like a broken record here. For the last seven years, I've contended that if a group of people got together to discuss the mathematics of free market health care reform, that group could create an alternative to group health insurance that would get our nation out of the mess created by the insurance companies.<br />
<br />
The discussion involves mathematics (Junior High level mathematics) but math is still math and people are scared of math.<br />
<br />
As you see, a discussion about health care simply must start by creating a mathematical model that describes individual income and individual health care expenses.<br />
<br />
There is no way to discuss health care reform that does not involve discussing the mathematics of health care.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, it is impossible to talk about mathematics of health care online because people browsing the internet simply lack the attention span to discuss mathematics.<br />
<br />
Let's take a very simple equation A = B, where A is a complex express and B is a complex expression.<br />
<br />
To discuss "A = B," I might start by creating a post about "A."<br />
<br />
The post is likely to lead into a huge flame war about "A."<br />
<br />
After the flame war settles a bit, I will try to talk about "B" and another flame war will ensue with trolls accusing me of hypocrisy because B is different from A.<br />
<br />
The way people behave on the Internet, I will never get to the sentence that "A = B."<br />
<br />
The battle is lost from the get go.<br />
<br />
One does not find a large number of web sites discussing mathematics
on the internet, because people on the Internet lack the attention span
to discuss complex ideas in depth.<br />
<br />
<br />
The "Medical Savings and Loan" is a conversation about health care that starts by creating a mathematical model of income and health care expenses. The model has several components: Every member of the plan has a health savings account. Members buy into a loan reserve. The system includes a generously funded grant program. The plan is administered by independent agents call Health Care Advocates.<br />
<br />
These components work together to create a mathematical model of health care.<br />
<br />
I put together a presentation in which I talk about each of the components of this plan. I talk for almost 15 minutes about each component. This is about an hour.<br />
<br />
After creating this model, I create a mathematical model of group health insurance. (Employer health insurance and socialism are essentially the same thing. Socialism is group insurance at the state level. Employer based care is socialism at a corporate level). From a mathematically point of view there is little difference between group insurance and socialism. The only real difference is political.<br />
<br />
An hour and twenty minutes into my presentation, I get to the point where I can compare the Medical Savings and Loan to Group Care.<br />
<br />
At this point in the presentation, I start to compare the models of group care to individual care. I contend that if people started having this conversation, they would not only opt for individual health care, they would use the mathematics I discussed to create viable alternatives to Obamacare.<br />
<br />
<br />
I live in Utah. Utah is a closed and intolerant society.<br />
<br />
Anyway, I see that exchanges have failed in Arizona and Nevada. It is possible that people in neighboring states might be interested in discussing health care reform.<br />
<br />
I am still convinced that if people studied the mathematics of funding health care and discussed free market health care reform, that the group could have a positive impact.<br />
<br />
Of course, a person who is locked out of society can't do much ... which is why I had stopped blogging.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-2588579632147109962015-07-27T09:45:00.001-07:002015-07-27T09:45:19.387-07:00Dehumanized CareThe "Center for Medical Progress" is making a stir by showing videos of people from Planned Parenthood negotiating the sale of body parts from aborted babies.<br /><br />
<iframe width="480" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MjCs_gvImyw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<br /><br />
Pro-life groups are using these shocking tapes to target the abortion industry. The sad truth is that this type of behavior is likely to become common throughout our entire health care system.<br /><br />
Planned Parent receives a substantial amount of federal and state funding. It is the model of the highly regulated medical industry envisioned by the progressive movement.<br /><br />
The path that the health care industry is following is dehumanizing. Socialism is dehumanizing. Socialism sees the community as having greater value than the individual humans in the community. And when the system stops seeing people as living inviolate beings, the system is likely to start seeing the harvest of body parts as a legitimate form of income.<br /><br />
In a true free market system, health care is a service provided by doctors directly to patients. This direct contract forces the system as a whole to align with the needs of individuals.<br /><br />
In socialized care, insurance is a form of socialized care, throws a third party into the mix.<br /><br />
As the system aligns to the desires of the third party, the system become dehumanized.<br /><br />
Planned Parenthood is the poster child of this industrialized form of health care. According to <a href="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/planned-parenthoods-new-annual-report-we-did-333964-abortions-1-every-94-seconds">CNSNews</a> Planned Parenthood performed 333,964 abortions in fiscal 2011.
<br /><br />
Reports say that the Holocaust took six million lives. So, every 18 years, Planned Parenthood commits a Holocaust.
<br /><br />
Our industrial style approach to health care reduces people to statistics. When the "health care system" simply sees people as parts processed through a machine, the harvesting of body parts in the system is soon to follow.<br /><br />
Please note, I don't see this problem as unique to government funded care. The Health Insurance industry is as bad as government. The insurance industry attempts to fund care by putting us in groups and providing care to people on a group basis. The actuaries and underwriters who determine the scope and quality of our care see us as statistics. This dehumanized approach to health care has no moral compunction against harvesting body parts from the people who flow through the system.<br /><br />
I am delighted that prolifers are outraged at Planned Parenthood. I only wish that people on the right realized that their precious little insurance companies, the fertility industry, as other aspects or our industrial approach to health care (including insurance companies) are as dehumanizing as Planned Parenthood.<br /><br />
The abortion machine in the Planned Parenthood corporation is just one of the more flagrant examples of an entire health care system which is off track.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-52735105851002064032015-02-15T13:45:00.002-08:002015-02-15T13:45:47.845-08:00The Best of Care and the Worst of CareMy father is 87 and is finally at the part of his life where he has huge health expenses and has spent the last several months trapped in the American health system. In the last two years he has had a heart attack, two major strokes (many minor strokes) along two broken hips. The health experiences involved three stays in rehabilitation.<br /><br />
My family members are active and aware of nutrition; so we have had very few health issues until now. The last prolonged illness we experienced was that of my Grandmother who moved in with my parents for three years back in the early 1980s while I was away in college.<br /><br />
My father's experience seems to be the same as many Americans. Our experience with doctors, nurses and physical therapists have been wonderful. Our experience with the health care bureaucracy has been horrible. Our experience with insurance, social workers and fuzzy left wing type therapy has been negative.<br /><br />
While the real medical care has been top notch, the political side health care system kept forcing us into making costly decisions that did not enhance the care.<br /><br />
I should say that it forced bad decisions with one major exception. The insurance forced my father into rehab. If he was paying for his own care he would have insisted on coming directly home after each operation which would have turned my mother's life into a living hell.<br /><br />
The hip surgery involved pinning a fracture in the femur that was just below the hip. The problem with this surgery is that the patient's hip needs to immobile for six weeks after the surgery. But if a person is inactive for six weeks, he will pretty much turn static and die. Hip patients need a trained physical therapist who knows how to keep a patient with an immobile hip active.<br /><br />
Because of insurance, the doctors were able to pull the trick of requiring the physical therapy. Refusal of physical therapy would be against doctor's orders, in which case the insurance company would deny the claim for the surgery. The insurance put my father in a bind that forced him to do what was best and follow doctor's orders.<br /><br />
There is a strong temptation to say that the health care system must be structured in ways that doctors can force patients into making the decisions that are best for the patient.<br /><br />
This was my first direct experience with hip surgery. The orthopedic surgeon, of course, had experience with hundreds of operations and access to literature based on millions of operations.<br /><br />
So while my family were neophytes in the hip surgery arena, the professionals know the choice intimately. One must keep the hip immobile and patient active. Without a trained therapist in the mix, the patient either becomes sedentary and dies or moves in a way that causes extreme pain and requires another expensive surgery.<br /><br />
There are options to pinning a fractured femur. For example a costly complete hip replacement could be done on more of an outpatient basis, or the surgeon could have amputated the entire leg which can be done on an outpatient basis. Although I am applauding the insurance for forcing a good decision, I can see other ways to force the right decision of attending physical therapy after a surgery.<br /><br />
For example, the doctor knew before the surgery that the procedure he was undergoing would require physical therapy. He could have informed us of options before the surgery. In the way it happened, the doctor did the surgery then gave us the ultimatum of attending therapy or paying the full cost of the surgery out of pocket. If my father had the choice between a hip surgery and six weeks of rehab or an amputation; I am pretty sure he would have chosen the surgery with rehab.<br /><br />
Although I am glad that the bind placed on my father by the insurance company forced him into physical therapy, I cannot say that such binds are the best course of action.<br /><br />
Anyway, I thought about blogging about this decision a few months ago. But I have been stuck on a problem. I realized that conservatives are as much a part of the problem as progressives, and I have to come up with an approach to discussing health care to show that the Conservative approach to the subject is as bad as the progressive approach.
<br /><br />
The real science based medical care delivered by doctors is part of the classical liberal tradition. Both conservatives and progressives are guilty of piling political garbage on the health care industry. No matter how one goes about it, the politics involved in care generally diminishes the care.<br /><br />
Anyway, I held off on writing any blog posts until I found a good way of showing that both Conservatism and Progressivism hurt care.<br /><br />
The primary problem in American health care is politics. Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are as bad for our collective health as Barrack Obama and Harry Reid. I fear that my blogging about health issues is feeding the false narrative that conservatives have solutions to health care when conservatism and progressivism are both parasites feeding off the system.
y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-72825885144254591512014-12-01T14:11:00.002-08:002014-12-01T14:11:43.640-08:00Economies of ScaleIt is possible for a manufacturer to achieve economies of scale by building a huge factory that buys everything in bulk and processes the material through an assembly line.<br />
<br />
This idea applies to the supply side of manufacturing. It does not apply to the demand side.<br />
<br />
Buying in bulk is not the ideal approach for the demand side.<br />
<br />
For example, lets say you are thirsty for a soda: Are you doing yourself a favor by ordering a Big Gulp?<br />
<br />
Attempts to apply supply side thought on the demand side actually leads to waste.<br />
<br />
We see this clearly in diet. <br />
<br />
A healthy diet should include a steady stream of fresh fruits and vegetables. The best way to eat a healthy diet is to establish a steady stream of seasonal fresh vegetables.<br />
<br />
On the consumption side of the equation, people maximize their resources through moderation.<br />
<br />
<br />
It is possible for the food industry to supply a steady stream of such vegetables by growing a huge winter crop in <a href="http://tumblr.arizonacolor.us/">Arizona </a>and then shipping it around the county. But, there is an asymmetry in this equation.<br />
<br />
One can achieve economies of scale on the demand side, but the consumption side should be ruled by moderation.<br />
<br />
It is possible for a physician to set up an assembly line for select procedures. This happened in laser eye surgery. A doctor might streamline the procedure for cataract surgery by carefully analyzing and optimizing each step of the process. The doctor can then efficiently treat this problem by having a steady stream of eyeballs rolled through the operating room.<br />
<br />
This procedure is great when there is a large population needing the surgery, but doing cataract surgery on a population that does not need it is harmful.<br />
<br />
There appears to be a correlation between cloudiness of vision and diet. <a href="http://www.allaboutvision.com/nutrition/cataracts.htm">AllAboutVision </a>cites studies claiming that people eating a diet high in anti-oxidants and certain vitamins have a reduced need for such surgery and people with a diet high in carbohydrates seem to have an increased need for surgery.<br />
<br />
While I applaud ophthalmologists for developing industrial treatment for laser eye surgery. I believe that individuals are best served by learning about the effects of diet and health on the eyes to postpone cataract surgery for as long as possible.<br />
<br />
The secret to developing a good diet is information.<br />
<br />
The world is in the process of transitioning from the industrial age to the information age.<br />
<br />Seeking "Economies of Scale" was a mantra of the industrial age.<br />
<br />
The direction of the information age should be learning how to employ all the wonderful information we receive from scientific discoveries to improve the quality of life.<br />
<br />
<br />
In the industrial age, people were seeking the benefits of economies of scale.<br />
<br />
The goal of the information age is to use information to maximize the benefit of our consumption of resources.<br />
<br />
In some circumstances, manufacturers can reduce waste by manufacturing on a large scale, but the real benefits of the information in the information age arise by applying information in ways that properly size our consumption to our needs.<br />
<br />
In many cases, economies of scale actually harm us by creating wasteful imbalances.<br />
<br />
The insurance industry preaches that they can reduce health care costs by pooling local resources and buying health care on a massive scale.<br />
<br />
The insurance industry has made this promise for over a century. The system has systematically failed to reduce the cost of care.<br />
<br />
Pooling our resources seems to have the effect of concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a insiders in the insurance industry while creating wasteful imbalances in the application of care.<br />
<br />
My presentation on health care shows why this happens. When one realizes that health care is a matter of many things taken in moderation, it is easy to prove that pooled health insurace (including socialism) is incapable of achieving the economies of scale that it promises.<br />
<br />
I have to repeat. If there is a large market for a given product such as cataract surgery, doctors can achieve efficiencies by creating a streamlined surgical procedure that passes patients through assembly line medicine.<br />
<br />
These efficiencies are achieved on the supply side. Physicians will create streamlined procedures with or without group health insurance.<br />
<br />
Insurance salesmen lie to us with the claim that we can achieve economies of scale by putting our health care resources in a pool. They are taking a legitimate idea from the supply side of the equation and applying it to the demand side.<br />
<br />
Proper health care is a matter of balance and moderate consumption of many different things. Yes, individuals can benefit by streamlined health processes. Our individual consumption of these resources still must be ruled by moderation.<br />
<br />
The best way to achieve the right balance in health care in the information age is with the concept of mass customization.<br />
<br />
Attempts to apply economies of scale from the consumption side, as is done with insurance and socialism, leads to a wasteful imbalance in the consumption of resources and eliminates the customization of care that would happen if health care were left to a free market.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3298503572734164238.post-23795931043765710382014-11-07T08:10:00.002-08:002014-11-07T08:10:36.008-08:00The People v the KleptocratsThe GOP won an election, but they seem to lack vision or direction. A political movement that lacks direction can be dangerous.<br /><br />
The vision from the political parties should come from the people. If the people fail to provide a vision, the lobbyist will step and sell their vision. The vision of lobbyists is best called "kleptocracy." (kleptocracy: rule by compulsive theives).<br /><br />
Than antidote for this lack of vision is simple: People need to start talking about solutions and a positive direction for the country.<br /><br />
I am interested in free market health care reform. My goal for the last six years has been to attend or host a meeting in which people spoke about free market reform. I admit what I am saying is radical. I believe that if people actually got together and spoke about the issue of health care reform they could help clarify and provide vision to health care reform.<br /><br />
I realize that my vision of people meeting and actually talking about free market health care reform is a radical step which conservatives are unwilling to even contemplate. But this is what has to be done to save our nation.<br /><br />
A little shameful self-promotion is in order here: To make a meeting productive, I put together a presentation.
<br /><br />
I believe that funding health care is a business problem and not a political problem. We need business solutions and not political solutions.<br /><br />
This sentence alone puts us on a path to fighting the kleptocracy of Washington because is says we are not looking for the lobbyists to provide a solution, we want the lobbyists and government to get out of the way.<br /><br />
The statement: "leave us alone" is not enough to insure a good tomorrow. The next step is to talk about what we will do when left alone.<br /><br />
My presentation starts by creating a mathematical model of health care expenses. I then create a new business model to help people cover these expenses. I then discuss how an improved business model for funding health care would overcome the inequities of the insurance industry.<br /><br />
I have searched high and low to find meetings to attend and groups to support. If we want to repeal ObamaCare and restore free market principles in health care, people have to talk. This continued dead silence and intransigent unwillingness to discuss health care reform means that the GOP will surrender our health care to kleptocrats.<br /><br />
The presentation I put together is a nice starting point for a discussion of health care. The presentation has a role for individuals. It has a role for health care providers. It has a role for private charities and a greatly reduced role for government.<br /><br />
I keep trying to have meetings, but no-one has ever attended (PS: I live in <a href="http://UtahColor.com">Utah</a>. I am not LDS). I am happy to attend meetings by others, but no-one is holding such meetings.<br /><br />
Anyway, I've been stuck in a rut for the last six years on the idea that the first step to restoring free market principles health care is for people to talk about the issue. But Conservatives are scared of mathematics; so no discussion will ever occur, and we are left to surrender our society to the kleptocrats in DC.y-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.com0