I have mixed feelings about capping the pay of executives at bailed out firms. I think that we need to keep in mind that no one gives money without strings attached, and the Federal Government should be no exception. However, one consequence of this action will be a brain drain at these firms. That will be a negative consequence for TARP recipients. But if these executives leave these companies and start their own firms, it could be a positive for all of the rest of us. If you can get the capital, this may be the best time in since the start of the Second World War to create a new company. Real estate prices and interest rates are low. As is the price of just about anything else you would need to go into business. Plus there are plenty of smart and hard working people unemployed who would accept a position with a start of firm that normally would stay away from this type of enterprise. Normally, I would be against the Obama administration, or any government agency taking this action, but this time, I say OK. It could turn out to be the one thing that get's this economy moving.
Let me also say that I am totally against government intrusion into the content of information on the Internet. These type of controls are scary in the hands of either Democrats or Republicans. The internet is the one truly free media in this country. It is both a dangerous and and wonderful thing. Let's leave it alone and not deal with the consequences of letting the government control it.
Finally, let me repeat my healthcare talking points. Pulbic healthcare is welfare for everyone. We are addicted to insurance, to really be a free market system, we need to pay cash for everything we can. We need more doctors, nurses, physicians assistants and pharmacists. Tort reform will stop endless unnecessary medial testing. Bring the invincible population into the insurance family. Don't cross the line between delaying death and extending life. Stop using the ER as your primary care physician. Let people who can not pay their bills work off their medical debt through public service.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Friday, October 9, 2009
Davis School District Bond Information
I received the following from a Vice Principal at North Davis Junior High...
Dear Parents, The Davis School Board is presenting a School Bond Resolution for a public vote November 3rd. For more information you are invited to attend one of the following Open Houses or go to www.davis.k12.ut.us/district/2009_bond. Additional bond information may be obtained from your school. Bond Presentations for Public - Open House Tuesday, Oct. 13th Davis High Choral Rm. 7:00pm
http://maps.google.com/maps/place?cid=9779717095333364127&q=Davis+High+School+Kaysville,+Utah&hl=en
Tuesday, Oct . 13th Viewmont High Choral Rm. 7:00pm
http://maps.google.com/maps/place?cid=15719481086706740440&q=Viewmont+High+School+Bountiful,+Utah&hl=en
Thursday, Oct. 15th Syracuse High Choral Rm. 7:00pm (south east end of school)
http://maps.google.com/maps/place?cid=13960508366291156805&q=Syracuse+high+school+Syracuse,+Utah&hl=en
Thank You
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Letter to the D-News about Letterman
Here is my letter as it appeared in the D-News. It was edited a little:
As funny and sometimes crude as David Letterman has been over the years, the fact that he was having many secret affairs with his staffers comes as no surprise to me. What I find creepy about it is the fact that he played the whole matter to his audience for laughs and applause.
It is no laughing matter.
It creates a hostile environment for every female on the staff.
It invalidates the system of merit raises and promotions for everyone on the staff, regardless of gender.
It creates a negative image for all of Letterman's advertisers.
It sheds a bad light on CBS and all of its affiliates.
If CBS continues to support Letterman, then KUTV should drop the program.
I also suggested that the advertisers of the program would be better served by dropping their support for the program. There is no victim in this "sexploitation" case. Letterman is no hero.
Now reading the comments about this letter, I think that most people missed the point. This letter is not about the moral issue of adultery. It is about the legal issue of sexual harassment.
If two peers at the office meet and it leads to an intimate relationship and neither is married. I say--keep it professional at the office.
If to peers have a physical relationship and one of them is married, it is a non issue until someone brings work into it. Then there will be consequences.
If there is a relationship between a manager and a sub-ordinate, you have a problem. If I am a peer of the sub-ordinate, then I have to wonder about all of my performance reviews, merit increases and promotions. This is true regardless of my gender. Sexual harassment hurts everyone, including everyone.
Also, I expect to make a major announcement in about 4 weeks.
As funny and sometimes crude as David Letterman has been over the years, the fact that he was having many secret affairs with his staffers comes as no surprise to me. What I find creepy about it is the fact that he played the whole matter to his audience for laughs and applause.
It is no laughing matter.
It creates a hostile environment for every female on the staff.
It invalidates the system of merit raises and promotions for everyone on the staff, regardless of gender.
It creates a negative image for all of Letterman's advertisers.
It sheds a bad light on CBS and all of its affiliates.
If CBS continues to support Letterman, then KUTV should drop the program.
I also suggested that the advertisers of the program would be better served by dropping their support for the program. There is no victim in this "sexploitation" case. Letterman is no hero.
Now reading the comments about this letter, I think that most people missed the point. This letter is not about the moral issue of adultery. It is about the legal issue of sexual harassment.
If two peers at the office meet and it leads to an intimate relationship and neither is married. I say--keep it professional at the office.
If to peers have a physical relationship and one of them is married, it is a non issue until someone brings work into it. Then there will be consequences.
If there is a relationship between a manager and a sub-ordinate, you have a problem. If I am a peer of the sub-ordinate, then I have to wonder about all of my performance reviews, merit increases and promotions. This is true regardless of my gender. Sexual harassment hurts everyone, including everyone.
Also, I expect to make a major announcement in about 4 weeks.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
More competition does not always equal lower prices.
Why allowing insurance companies to cross state lines will not make a big difference.
In addition to the rivalry among current competitors, there are four other components of competition in business. First is the threat of new entrants. Second is the power of the customer. Third is the power of the supplier. Fourth is the threat of substitute products and services.
There are two problems with the health insurance competition equation. One is that in the doctor, patient and insurance company relationship, arguably the insurance company is the most powerful. They have the money and control the access that the patient has in the system. The other, is that there are no substitutes for health insurance.
One reason to move to a catastrophic-only insurance system is to break the power that the insurance company has in the relationship. Then the price the doctor charges a patient can be based upon the laws of supply and demand. This will also help the doctor become more responsive to the needs of the patient. Whereas now, the insurance company has too much say.
Lifting the state boundaries will improve the quality of the product that the insurance company provides, but competition alone does not, in and of itself, guarantee a lower price. There are many, many things that are very expensive in-spite of the competition. Examples include such items like houses, cars and energy. The threat of new entrants is only a part of the equation and not the entire story. First, break the power that the insurance companies have in the doctor-patient relationship and then competition can make the price fall.
There are no substitutes for health insurance or insurance in general. For auto insurance, in some states you can have a lawyer notarize a document stating that you have enough liquid assets to cover the minimum state requirements. So, there is a substitute for auto insurance--of sorts. Operating an automobile is also not a requirement. If you do not want auto insurance, you have the option of parking your car. You can avoid directly paying for home owners insurance by renting. You can avoid the need for life insurance by purchasing your casket, tombstone and grave site in advance. How can you avoid the need for health insurance?
So, no substitutes with power over the customer and supplier relationship. Therefore, opening the state boundaries is not much of a threat.
Eight Points:
1. Catastrophic-only insurance. Government as a last-resort safety-net. Pay out of pocket for simple and common doctor visits and meds.
2. Diffuse the risk. Bring low-risk populations that are not currently covered into insurance plans. These populations include immigrants, college students and younger workers. Reward those who take steps to lower their personal risk by joining gyms, loosing weight, etc.
3. Tort reform to end unneeded CYA-type tests.
4. Realistic end-of-life care that focuses on extending a quality of life instead of simply delaying death.
5. Train more providers of all types. Introduce more competition into the system by ending the shortage or doctors, nurses, physician assistants and pharmacists.
6. End the use of the Emergency Room when an unplanned medical problem arises. Have more insta-care type facilities.
7. Alternative payment methods. Patients who can not pay for their medical bills should work them off through community service in lieu of forcing them into bankruptcy. No one gets a free ride. End the practice of just writing-off unpaid bills. End the expectation of a free ride.
8. Aggressively prosecute medical fraud. Recovering from criminal losses adds to everyone's costs in one way or another.
In addition to the rivalry among current competitors, there are four other components of competition in business. First is the threat of new entrants. Second is the power of the customer. Third is the power of the supplier. Fourth is the threat of substitute products and services.
There are two problems with the health insurance competition equation. One is that in the doctor, patient and insurance company relationship, arguably the insurance company is the most powerful. They have the money and control the access that the patient has in the system. The other, is that there are no substitutes for health insurance.
One reason to move to a catastrophic-only insurance system is to break the power that the insurance company has in the relationship. Then the price the doctor charges a patient can be based upon the laws of supply and demand. This will also help the doctor become more responsive to the needs of the patient. Whereas now, the insurance company has too much say.
Lifting the state boundaries will improve the quality of the product that the insurance company provides, but competition alone does not, in and of itself, guarantee a lower price. There are many, many things that are very expensive in-spite of the competition. Examples include such items like houses, cars and energy. The threat of new entrants is only a part of the equation and not the entire story. First, break the power that the insurance companies have in the doctor-patient relationship and then competition can make the price fall.
There are no substitutes for health insurance or insurance in general. For auto insurance, in some states you can have a lawyer notarize a document stating that you have enough liquid assets to cover the minimum state requirements. So, there is a substitute for auto insurance--of sorts. Operating an automobile is also not a requirement. If you do not want auto insurance, you have the option of parking your car. You can avoid directly paying for home owners insurance by renting. You can avoid the need for life insurance by purchasing your casket, tombstone and grave site in advance. How can you avoid the need for health insurance?
So, no substitutes with power over the customer and supplier relationship. Therefore, opening the state boundaries is not much of a threat.
Eight Points:
1. Catastrophic-only insurance. Government as a last-resort safety-net. Pay out of pocket for simple and common doctor visits and meds.
2. Diffuse the risk. Bring low-risk populations that are not currently covered into insurance plans. These populations include immigrants, college students and younger workers. Reward those who take steps to lower their personal risk by joining gyms, loosing weight, etc.
3. Tort reform to end unneeded CYA-type tests.
4. Realistic end-of-life care that focuses on extending a quality of life instead of simply delaying death.
5. Train more providers of all types. Introduce more competition into the system by ending the shortage or doctors, nurses, physician assistants and pharmacists.
6. End the use of the Emergency Room when an unplanned medical problem arises. Have more insta-care type facilities.
7. Alternative payment methods. Patients who can not pay for their medical bills should work them off through community service in lieu of forcing them into bankruptcy. No one gets a free ride. End the practice of just writing-off unpaid bills. End the expectation of a free ride.
8. Aggressively prosecute medical fraud. Recovering from criminal losses adds to everyone's costs in one way or another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
