Infinite Monkey Theorems 20100621

Ahhh… the NY Times – telling us how great it is to die in Rwanda of a heart attack with health insurance, than to survive a heart attack in the US without (via Cato here).  The premise from the NY Times is a Rwandan official who is just besides themselves when they met an American college student who doesn’t have health insurance.  Cato wonders what they are thinking when:

…[In Rwanda] Dialysis is “generally unavailable.”  As are many treatments for cancer, strokes, and heart attacks, making those ailments “death sentences” more often than in advanced nations.  Life expectancy at birth is 58 years, compared to 78 years in the United States.  Rwandan children are 15 times more likely to die before their first birthday (7 vs. 107 deaths per 1,000 live births) and 25 times more likely to die before turning five (8 vs. 196 deaths per 1,000 live births) than U.S.-born children.  (If you want to meet some Rwandan kids struggling to make it to age 5, read my friend’s blog, Life of a Thousand Hills.)  And yet, the saddest thing is a healthy-but-uninsured American college student…..

But the NY Times isn’t alone in their idiocy (as usual).  Via Reason.com (here), they wonder how a floating grocery store can possibly be a bad thing?

Nestle has put together a floating supermarket barge, and on Friday it sailed the product-laden boatmarket (superboat? grocerybarge?) into brave new Amazonian emerging markets…

My first reaction: Neat!…

Apparently that reaction is not shared by all. At Alternet, Michele Simon, a public health lawyer and author of Appetite for Profit: How the Food Industry Undermines Our Health and How to Fight Backcalls this an “especially disgusting news item” about which “writing about it is the only way I know to release my outrage. My version of screaming from the rooftop.”…

Yes, apparently many pundits from around the world are working tirelessly to keep all the options they have out of the hands of lesser people… for their own good of course.  As reason writer Ms. Mangu-Ward summed it up:

…Nestle is sending its boat into the hinterlands precisely because those hinterlands are now full of people who might be able to swing the purchase of the occasional chocolate bar, something well outside the scope of their financial lives just a few years ago. Hardly the sort of thing that makes me want to take to the rooftops–or the Internet–to express my outrage….

Arlen Specter….you remember, the guy who was going to lose his Senate seat so changed parties from Republicans to Democrats…. only to be soundly defeated in the primary?  Well, if you care, you can see an example of the last, desperate gasp of a man losing all of his power (via Politico here).

Good news on the medical front.  Via Bloomberg, Stem Cells From Own Eyes Restore Vision to Blinded Patients, Study Shows:

Patients blinded in one or both eyes by chemical burns regained their vision after healthy stem cells were extracted from their eyes and reimplanted, according to a report by Italian researchers at a scientific meeting….

An Alternative: The Market Option

Late last week, Michael F. Cannon @ Cato released a study entitled, Yes, Mr. President A Free Market Can Fix Health Care in response to a challenge made by President Obama in March 2009:

“If there is a way of getting this done where we’re driving down costs and people are getting health insurance at an affordable rate, and have choice of doctor, have flexibility in terms of their plans, and we could do that entirely through the market, I’d be happy to do it that way.”

This is very much a presumption based question, like “When did you stop beating your wife?”  It holds within an assumption the only plausible answer is one which uses the power of the government to control the market, and by extension individual citizens, with complete skepticism about any power of the free market.

While this seems to be the default assumption of many of my fellow citizens these days, I don’t know that I’ll ever understand how an objective look at market success versus an objective look at governmental success would lead one to believe the government is capable of much more than simple, repetitive tasks.

Having said that and even knowing the Democratic leadership and the White House is likely to ignore the answer, Mr. Cannon presents a pretty convincing case about a market solution (@Cato).  He explains:

how Congress can remove the impediments that currently prevent markets from doing so:

  1. Give Medicare enrollees a voucher (adjusted for their means and health risk) and let them purchase any health plan on the market,
  2. Reform the tax treatment of health care with “large” health savings accounts, which would give workers a $9.7 trillion tax cut (without increasing the deficit) and free them to purchase secure coverage that meets their needs,
  3. Free consumers and employers to purchase health insurance across state lines (i.e., licensed by other states), which could cover up to one third of the uninsured,
  4. Make state-issued clinician licenses portable, which would increase access to care and competition among health plans, and
  5. Block-grant Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, just as Congress did with welfare.
  6. Whole thing here.

    The Public Option

    If you’re anything like me, you too are getting nauseous about the “public option” in the health care debate.  One day it exists, the next day it will never exist.  The day after, it’s required…

    Well, apparently legislators might have a compromise to pass a bill including an “opt-out public option” (@theHill.com):

    Democratic senators continued to remain bullish on the chances of creating a government-run public option as part of health reform….

    …Schumer echoed the calls of several senators who this week said that Democratic negotiators has garned the 60 votes necessary to invoke closure on the measure. Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) last week put it in even stronger terms, saying that Reid had 60 votes for a “robust” public option.

    …According to Schumer, Reid “is leaning strongly” toward including a provision that would allow states to opt out of public health insurance if they want to keep private insurers.

    Schumer added that the liberal senators are “able to live with” an opt-out public option under which states could decline to participate in a public program….

    So there we are;  in a compromise between moderate and liberal Democrats only, a public option seems likely.  Not only has the White House and Democratic leadership dropped any pretense of working across the isle, but people at large seem unwilling to question the claims of their leaders.

    One suc spurious claim, is that this option will result in increasing competition:

    …”We need some competition for the insurance companies,” Schumer said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” A government-run insurance plan would “have to play by the same rules as the insurance companies and it would negotiate rates with the providers,” Schumer said. Having a public option would bring competition to states that only have one or two insurance providers, Schumer said….

    Proponents everywhere continue to take this stance, even though a public option is logically inconsistent with their stated goal of increase competition.

    If Mr. Schumer and others truly wanted to add some competition for insurance companies, adding a new company would not be necessary.  In deed, removing the laws the disallow selling of insurance over state lines doesn’t cost the tax payers one single dime, yet increases competition dramatically, both in the total number of competitors and the speed at which they can begin competing.    Additionally, given the benefits a public option will have over its private competitors, this isn’t really competition.

    As Michael Tanner wrote over @ Cato, this support for a public option isn’t likely what it seems (@Cato):

    Cognitive dissonance is defined as holding two completely contradictory ideas at the same time.

    That seems to be the case with the American public, with a new poll showing rising support for a so-called public option in health care, even as the public continues to oppose greater government control over the health care system….

    All in all though, the Democrats hands seem to be very strong hand right now with recent polls showing 57% of the country expressing approval of a public option.   With uninformed voters, an uninformed and uninformative press, and politicians more worried about winning than engaging in honest debates, this compromise might soon become law.

    That’s freedom for you – as unfortunate as it seems, whether most people truly understand what the public option entails is irrelevant.  So long as they are willing to approve things they know little about and skip any hard work necessary to critically analyze the problem and various solutions, this new government boondoggle will just continue going forward.

    Is this reality or a weird parody?

    Without apparent concern about the percentage of people who loudly proclaim their dislike of the DMV and use it as an analogy for all that is wrong with the government… the Senate version of the health care bill includes a portion that would allow citizens the pleasure of getting health care insurance through the DMV (Townhall.com):

    The most revelatory passage in the so-called “plain English” version of the health care bill that the Senate Finance Committee approved on Tuesday (without ever drafting the actual legislative language) says that in the future Americans will be offered the convenience of getting their health insurance at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

    This is no joke. If this bill becomes law, it will be the duty of the U.S. secretary of health and human services or the state governments overseeing federally mandated health-insurance exchanges to ensure that you can get your health insurance at the DMV.  You will also be able to get it at Social Security offices, hospitals, schools and “other offices” the government will name later. …

    I guess a Social Security office makes a little sense and even perhaps schools as a temporary sign-up location, but it seems to me signing up at a hospital or school isn’t a good idea over the long run.  I think the idea is that we will all live in the beautiful world with top of the line health care we got when  dropping our children off at school…  If so, it seems that getting insurance at the hospital or waiting until my child goes to school would  be a little late…

    Even assuming all three of those are brilliant ideas – did they really mean to include the DMV?

    I have this sinking feeling politicians everywhere laughing at us.  Either that or we need a new term other than “out of touch” that connotes the gap between everyday individuals and our leaders is so large as to make the Grand Canyon seem tiny by comparison.

    Do they honestly think adding health care insurance to the duties of the the normal DMV clerk will help them pass the bill?

    Who knows though?  Maybe I’m completely off base and this is setup behind the scenes by some mysterious genius who brainwashed unwitting politicians. <begin dream sequence>

    In fact, it’s not stupidity that created this language.  Not at all; in fact, it’s a creative attempt at a self destruct device for the bill as is.  Where exactly in the world is Hank Scorpio <end dream sequence>

    Of course the latter would assume a complex network of contacts and some people with super powerful persuasion skills while the former only requires a belief in the group ignorance of our current set of politicians.

    In experience and recent history is any guide, the safe bet is on idiocy.  All day, every day, and twice on Sunday.

    Social Service Verification for Helen   Kelly


    America’s Leader in Employment & Income Verification

    UNOFFICIAL COPY    For Demonstration Purposes Only
    This information is provided as historical information and cannot be used to verify employment or income.

    The following information is provided in response to your request on: 10/15/2009 .
    The employer provided this information to The Work Number to act as their official agent for employment and income verification. Any inconsistency between the most recent start date and the total time with the employer is due to a prior work period. If you have questions, please call our Client Service Center at 1-800-996-7566 (Voice) / 1-800-424-0253 (TTY/Deaf).Information not provided by the employer is shown as “Data not provided.”

    Where can I go?
    Print This Verification Print Verification
    Back to previous page
    Get another verification


    Exit/Logout
    Social Service Verification

    Employment and Income Information current as of: 09/15/2009
    Reference Number for this verification: 22578611
    EMPLOYER
    Employer: 11472 – Johns Hopkins University
    Headquarters Address: 3400 North Charles Street
    Baltimore , MD 21218
    US
    Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN): 52-0595110
    Division: 52-0595110
    EMPLOYEE
    Employee: Helen  Kelly
    Social Security Number: XXX-XX-0652
    Address: 307 S Cornwall St
    Baltimore , MD 21224
    US
    Employee Phone Number: Data not provided
    Date of Birth: Data not provided
    EMPLOYMENT
    Employment Status: Active
    Most Recent Start Date: 02/15/1999
    Original Hire Date: 02/15/1999
    Reason for Termination: Data not provided
    Total Time with Employer: Data not provided
    Job Title: Administrative Program Coordinator
    Union Affiliation: Data not provided
    Work Location (Job Site): Data not provided
    MEDICAL INSURANCE
    Medical Insurance Available: Data not provided
    Employee Eligible: Data not provided
    Reason for Ineligibility: Data not provided
    Employee Enrolled: Data not provided
    Eligibility Date: Data not provided
    Next Open Enrollment Date: Data not provided
    Coverage Start Date: Data not provided
    Coverage Termination Date: Data not provided
    Medical Carrier Name: Data not provided
    Medical Carrier Address: Data not provided
    Medical Carrier Phone Number: Data not provided
    Medical Insurance Policy Number: Data not provided
    Medical Insurance Group Number: Data not provided
    Coverage Level: Data not provided
    Annual Cost for Medical Insurance: Data not provided
    Dependent Coverage Available: Data not provided
    Per Pay Period Cost to Add Dependent: Data not provided
    Number of Dependents Covered: Data not provided

    Dependents SSN Birth Date
    Data not provided
    Participating in Medical COBRA: Data not provided
    DENTAL INSURANCE
    Dental Insurance Available: Data not provided
    Employee Eligible: Data not provided
    Employee Enrolled: Data not provided
    Dental Carrier Name: Data not provided
    Dental Carrier Phone Number: Data not provided
    Dental Insurance Policy Number: Data not provided
    VISION INSURANCE
    Vision Insurance Available: Data not provided
    Employee Eligible: Data not provided
    Employee Enrolled: Data not provided
    Vision Carrier Name: Data not provided
    Vision Carrier Phone Number: Data not provided
    Vision Insurance Policy Number: Data not provided
    WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
    Receiving Workers’ Compensation: Data not provided
    Carrier: Data not provided
    Date of Injury: Data not provided
    Date of Award: Data not provided
    Claim Number: Data not provided
    Claim Pending: Data not provided
    INCOME AND DEDUCTIONS
    Average Hours per Pay Period: 81
    Rate of Pay: $2,237.25 / Semi-monthly
    Pay Cycle: Semi Monthly
    2009 2008 2007
    Total Gross: $37,989.39 $51,359.92 $48,890.04
    Payroll Deduction for All Insurance Coverage: Data not provided
    PAY PERIOD DETAIL   9/15/2009
    Income Withholding
    Total Gross Earnings $2,274.75
    Pension Data not provided
    Other Income Data not provided
    Federal Tax $152.13
    State Tax $52.03
    Local Taxes $34.81
    Social Security $141.03
    Medicare $32.99
    Retirement/401k $916.66
    Cafeteria Plan $0.00
    Garnishments $0.00
    Other Withholding $0.00
    HISTORICAL PAY PERIOD SUMMARY
    Pay Period End Date Pay Date Hours Worked Gross Earnings Net
    09/15/2009 09/15/2009 $2,274.75
    08/31/2009 08/31/2009 $2,274.75
    08/15/2009 08/14/2009 $2,274.75
    07/31/2009 07/31/2009 $2,274.75
    07/15/2009 07/15/2009 $2,274.75
    06/30/2009 06/30/2009 $2,274.75
    06/15/2009 06/15/2009 $2,445.09
    05/31/2009 05/29/2009 $2,189.58
    05/15/2009 05/15/2009 $2,189.58
    04/30/2009 04/30/2009 $2,189.58
    04/15/2009 04/15/2009 $2,189.58
    03/31/2009 03/31/2009 $2,189.58
    03/15/2009 03/13/2009 $2,189.58
    02/28/2009 02/27/2009 $2,189.58
    02/15/2009 02/13/2009 $2,189.58
    01/31/2009 01/30/2009 $2,189.58
    01/15/2009 01/15/2009 $2,189.58
    12/31/2008 12/30/2008 $2,189.58
    12/15/2008 12/15/2008 $2,189.58
    11/30/2008 11/26/2008 $2,189.58
    11/15/2008 11/14/2008 $2,189.58
    10/31/2008 10/31/2008 $2,189.58
    10/15/2008 10/15/2008 $2,189.58
    09/30/2008 09/30/2008 $2,189.58
    09/15/2008 09/15/2008 $2,189.58
    08/31/2008 08/29/2008 $2,189.58
    08/15/2008 08/15/2008 $2,189.58
    07/31/2008 07/31/2008 $2,189.58
    07/15/2008 07/15/2008 $2,189.58
    06/30/2008 06/30/2008 $2,189.58
    06/15/2008 06/13/2008 $2,487.08
    05/31/2008 05/30/2008 $2,040.83
    05/15/2008 05/15/2008 $2,040.83
    04/30/2008 04/30/2008 $2,040.83
    04/15/2008 04/15/2008 $2,040.83
    03/31/2008 03/31/2008 $2,040.83
    03/15/2008 03/14/2008 $2,040.83
    02/29/2008 02/29/2008 $2,040.83
    02/15/2008 02/15/2008 $2,040.83
    01/31/2008 01/31/2008 $2,040.83
    01/15/2008 01/15/2008 $2,040.83
    12/31/2007 12/28/2007 $2,040.83
    12/15/2007 12/14/2007 $2,040.83
    11/30/2007 11/30/2007 $2,040.83
    11/15/2007 11/15/2007 $2,040.83
    10/31/2007 10/31/2007 $2,040.83
    10/15/2007 10/15/2007 $2,040.83
    09/30/2007 09/28/2007 $2,040.83
    09/15/2007 09/14/2007 $2,070.79
    08/31/2007 08/31/2007 $2,033.34
    08/15/2007 08/15/2007 $2,033.34
    07/31/2007 07/31/2007 $2,033.34
    07/15/2007 07/13/2007 $2,033.34
    06/30/2007 06/29/2007 $2,033.34
    06/15/2007 06/15/2007 $2,033.34
    05/31/2007 05/31/2007 $2,033.34
    05/15/2007 05/15/2007 $2,033.34
    04/30/2007 04/30/2007 $2,033.34
    04/15/2007 04/13/2007 $2,033.34
    03/31/2007 03/30/2007 $2,033.34
    03/15/2007 03/15/2007 $2,033.34
    02/28/2007 02/28/2007 $2,033.34
    02/15/2007 02/15/2007 $2,033.34
    01/31/2007 01/31/2007 $2,033.34
    01/15/2007 01/12/2007 $2,033.34

    Fear & Risk Aversion

    Well – this will be one of those additional times that I’m a pariah that no one agrees with, but I think I’m  getting used to it by now :)

    First – a brief disclaimer.  I think flying a plane around low level areas in NYC without warning wasn’t a smart move (article here), however the fear born out by some was an obvious overreaction to what was taking place.

    It amazes me how scared as a society we are of things that will likely never affect us, like abduction of a child from strangers or a terrorist attack using the exact same tactic as before or worrying about whether a neighbor has a gun, while things that are much more dangerous such as driving, we don’t seem to care about.

    Frank Furedi (his site) a professor of sociology at Kent University has written extensively on the politics of fear including a new article about the next big scary thing, the dreaded swine flu

    The explosion of global fear about the outbreak of a deathly flu virus in Mexico is more a response to the dramatisation of influenza than to the actual threat it poses.

    There is nothing unusual about the outbreak of flu. Every year, thousands of people die from the flu, and, in normal conditions, society has learned to cope with the flu threat. From time to time, an outbreak of flu turns into a global pandemic, leading to a catastrophic loss of life. However, there is no evidence that the so-called swine flu, which has so far claimed a relatively small number of lives, will turn into a pandemic. Rather, what we are faced with is a health crisis that has been transformed into a moral drama…

    Even in a recent Stratfor article detailing risks we are posing to counterintelligence operations not only now, by Obama releasing the torture memos, but in the past as well (here):

    …Politics and moral arguments aside, the end effect of the memos’ release is that people who have put their lives on the line in U.S. counterterrorism efforts are now uncertain of whether they should be making that sacrifice. Many of these people are now questioning whether the administration that happens to be in power at any given time will recognize the fact that they were carrying out lawful orders under a previous administration. It is hard to retain officers and attract quality recruits in this kind of environment. It has become safer to work in programs other than counterterrorism…

    …Other than during the peak times of this cycle, counterterrorism is considered an ancillary program that is sometimes seen as an interesting side tour of duty, but more widely seen as being outside the mainstream career path — risky and not particularly career-enhancing. This assessment is reinforced by such events as the recent release of the memos.

    At the CIA, being a counterterrorism specialist in the clandestine service means that you will most likely spend much of your life in places line Sanaa, Islamabad and Kabul instead of Vienna, Paris or London. This means that, in addition to hurting your chances for career advancement, your job also is quite dangerous, provides relatively poor living conditions for your family and offers the possibility of contracting serious diseases…

    …Unlike in television shows like “24,” it is not uncommon in the real world for a meeting called to plan a counterterrorism operation to feature more CIA lawyers than case officers or analysts. These staff lawyers are intricately involved in the operational decisions made at headquarters, and legal issues often trump operational considerations. The need to obtain legal approval often delays decisions long enough for a critical window of operational opportunity to be slammed shut. This restrictive legal environment goes back many years in the CIA and is not a new fixture brought in by the Obama administration. There was a sense of urgency that served to trump the lawyers to some extent after 9/11, but the lawyers never went away and have reasserted themselves firmly over the past several years…

    This is just another example of the asinine fear laden, risk averse society we have built.  This type society not only makes stupid runs of panic possible, like some of the current economic issues and this idiotic plane deal, but it also stops innovation and potentially makes us less safe.

    A society that can’t take risk is a society that will slowly wither away.