Perverse incentives

One of the advantages of living in more civilized countries rather than the United States is general access to health care. If you travel abroad, you might notice clinics everywhere. People can stop in at any time – not to see a specialist or a surgeon, maybe not even a doctor, but a knowledgeable person. Most of our day-to-day concerns are indeed trivial, and most things take care of themselves. But many times treatment of small issues head off large ones. This is a large part of the reason why health care systems in other countries produce better outcomes than ours – easy access to preventive care.

I have noticed with the insurers that I have dealt with that they are backing away from paying for visits to doctors’ offices. Such visits are highly bureaucratic affairs in our land, needing clearance from an insurer to proceed, and each doctor required to deal with every insurer separately. However, I used to be able to see a doctor and only be charged a modest co-pay. The last policy I carried*, which had increased significantly in premium, dropped this feature. Not only were doctor visits no longer covered, but their costs could not be applied towards the policy deductible. Also, there was before an illusory “discount” applied when we visited a doctor who was part of a larger network – that too disappeared. My health insurance policy premium increased dramatically, and they quietly converted it to hospitalization only.

That’s pretty damned short-sighted from a public health perspective, but what can we expect when we entrust public health to private corporations? No doubt as they sat around discussing more ways to gouge us for profit, they saw elimination of the co-pay as a road to riches.

Private for-profit corporations cannot, by their very design, deliver a public good like health care. They can only limit it.
___________________
*Anthem Blue Cross of Colorado. Others I have looked at are doing this now too – this is the nature of competition in monopoly capitalism – when one stops offering a service, so do the others.

State of another union

thOn February 13 President Obama will address the nation on the State of the Union. It will be a television show, constricted in time due to short attention spans, and include some vox populi features such as real praise for fake heroes and fake praise for one or two real ones. It all adds to the illusion that we are self-governed. He’ll throw crap on the wall.

Vladimir Putin recently gave his own Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. It took a long time to read, so I imagine it must have taken well over an hour to deliver, maybe two. I cannot begin to describe its content and do it justice. But most of it could never be spoken here. I did not find any applause lines. He did say “There can be no place in politics for criminals.” If Obama were to utter that line, there would be cold, malevolent stares. He might fear for his life.

Light sources

Shining_City_Upon_a_Hill_by_hawk862There is a long list of things I would change about Americans if I could – turn off the TV, be more aggressive in criticism of public figures other than coaches and general managers, stop trusting politicians, don’t be taken in by advertising, listen, listen listen to me – that’s a a short list, but at the top would be to simply grow up. Countries are sausage factories, and the people who rise to power are the most ruthless and cunning. They manipulate themselves into positions of power, control of resources and other people. They steal, lie, and cheat. They murder people who threaten them. Most “accidental” deaths of prominent people are actually murders.

They do all of this with impunity, as the law is at their disposal too. I laugh at people who think we need a “new investigation” of 9/11. By whom? The ones that did it? An “international body”? That investigation is ongoing, and the people who are calling for a new one are the ones doing it. We may someday know most of the details, but no one of prominence will ever be punished. People who get too close to the truth will be killed. (I do wish that while they are at it they also investigate the anthrax attack – that is part of it as well, but has slipped down the memory hole.)

The United States, like Monty Python’s Camelot, is a very silly place. If it is like that here, it is like that everywhere. We are, however, a large country with several features that make us exceptional:

  • We have natural resources on our continent that have always assured our ability to take care of our own needs;
  • We have oceans on either side so that it is very difficult to attack us;
  • We have neighbors north and south who are not as aggressive and cunning as us, or are just cowed by our hegemonic power.*

All of that makes us a world power.
Continue reading “Light sources” →

TG takes aim

Tomato Guy would be a good blogger but doesn’t think it is worth his time.

  • TG: It’s all so pointless. You measure success by “hits” and “reads.” So what if someone hits your blog?
  • Me: Book successes are measured by number of copies sold. Who actually reads books but a very few?
  • TG: So you’re like an author? That’s a little presumptuous – authors do careful research, make arguments over many pages, reach conclusions …
  • Me: Blah blah blah.
  • TG: Authors have impact. You don’t.
  • Me: There are been a few authors who have influenced the flow of events by the strength of their work. Most are addressing selected small audiences and stroking them – Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, for instance.
  • TG: Chomsky.
  • Me: I suppose. That hurt.
    Continue reading “TG takes aim” →

Mindsets and the arrival of Tomato Guy

knowledge_is_knowing_a_tomato_is_a_fruit_button-p145206992323868011en872_216During the years of this blog I have had an ongoing dialogue with a friend who wants to remain anonymous, and who I will call “Tomato Guy.” Many years ago when my oldest daughter left for college, she wrote me a letter addressed to “That Tomato Guy.” I do not raise nor do I like tomatoes. It was out of the blue and made no sense. It is appropriate for my friend, as it gives no hint of identity.

Tomato Guy wonders why I do this. I have asked him* to write here, making sure his identity is safe. He has no desire to write for limited consumption and just for the sake of writing.

TG wants to know the following: Since no one who reads Piece of Mind has a change of heart or mind, why bother?

It’s a good question. My first response was the standard one that I have used since 2006, that I like to write and argue. But that is not enough to sustain an effort that really only reinforces people in their ego-traps. We are all in a fog as we try to figure out the substance of reality.
Continue reading “Mindsets and the arrival of Tomato Guy” →

Taking Spain to task for its efficiency

The logic of the fascist is not hard to follow – just think duplicity and lies. Whether it is American justification for current attacks on the rest of civilization or Germany’s cry in 1939 that it was merely defending itself from Poland, it is always easily disassembled and transparent lies. That’s all we get. The shame is that people so easily buy them. But extreme gullibility appears to be the human condition, and it appears incurable.

In most places, that is. Spain has enjoyed a very good public health care system in the post-war era. Currently it spends less than half per capita than the US and achieves better outcomes – full coverage for all citizens and a longer life expectancy.

The bank-generated housing and debt crisis has hit Spain hard, and of course the fascist response is automatic: Attack the public sector, privatize, privatize, privatize. The Spanish government, to “save money,” wants to take its health care system private. Since statistics easily indicate that public systems are far more economical, efficient and effective than our private system here in the US, money cannot possibly be saved in privatization.

There is only one possible outcome here: Less service, higher cost, poorer outcomes, private profit. Spanish people are up in arms. Imposition of a private system, if the US is an example, is unaffordable. But in true fascist tradition, it will be done by force.
__________
PS: This is nothing more than Naomi Klein’s aptly-worded “Shock Doctrine:” To create a problem and then step in with predetermined “solutions.”

Banksters are also drugsters

imageThe US military has long had a drug problem. The army was severely impaired in Vietnam due to drug use, much of it supplied by the CIA via the airline called Air America. In the 1980’s, when the Congress outlawed funding of the Contras in Central America, the CIA turned again to drugs for finance. Gary Webb ran an expose’ in the San Jose Mercury News that eventually cost him his job and his life – suicide was the official cause of death, but with spooks, deaths of those who try to expose their activities are always suspicious.

The money from drug operations has to enter the “legal” economy at some point, and international banks play a key role. As British journalist Ed Vulliami wrone in a Guardian piece last July, “Global banks are the financial services wing of the drug cartels”,

The notion of any dichotomy between the global criminal economy and the “legal” one is fantasy. Worse, it is a lie. They are seamless, mutually interdependent – one and the same.

With that in mind, take a look at the photographs supplied by the Pentagon in this piece, US/NATO troops patrolling Opium Poppy fields in Afghanistan. There is a disconnect between the captions and the images, some hilarious. For instance, farmers are smiling in the photograph above as they “destroy” crops that they are obviously harvesting. Troops walk astride fields, well known to all, not to destroy them, an easy task, but rather to guard them.

This could be a key to understanding out continued presence in Afghanistan – protection of a drug and drug money pipeline. The Taliban was highly effective in destroying the poppy fields prior to arrival of the Americans. Production now flourishes.

Reverse mortgages

Bankers are currently doing a heavy push on a product called a “Reverse Mortgage.” They are targeting seniors. You will see these products heavily advertised on Jeopardy and The Price is Right. Having already bled the working and middle class housing market, they are looking for new ways to feed.

If anyone you know has been approached about such a product, advise them to treat a reverse mortgage as a scam to be avoided like a beer fart. Avoid the person and institution promoting it. Technically speaking, the word “scam” does not apply, but these are among the most expensive financial products ever invented. They are designed to bleed the customer to death rather than merely slashing the throat.

If you or your parents or anyone you know are desirous of enjoying their estate while alive rather than leaving it to descendents, seek qualified advice from a non-banking financial person. There are other, less expensive ways to convert a house to cash while still living comfortably. A “life estate” comes to mind, and surely there are other, less expensive ways to go.

The new Red Scare

imageThis is clipped from Red Scare: Memories of the American Inquisition by Griffin Fariello (1995). I often catch myself saying that the American public has been “dumbed down,” but know better. It’s always been like this. Public opinion is never anything more than a reflection of leaders and the media.

In 1954, Samuel Stouffer of Harvard University attempted to measure the breadth of [American] thought with a national poll. His finding revealed that 73 percent of the respondents would turn in their neighbors or acquaintances “whom they suspected of being Communists.” Seventy-seven percent of those polled wanted to strip admitted Communists of their citizenship, while 51 percent were in favor of imprisoning them.

Yet only 3 percent of Mr. Stouffer’s respondents had ever met an admitted Communist, even though 10 percent harbored suspicions about certain acquaintances. “He was always talking about world peace,” responded a housewife from Oregon. “I saw a map of Russia on the wall in his home,” said a locomotive engineer from Michigan. “I just knew. But I wouldn’t know how to say I knew'” said a Kansas farmer. “She had more money to spend and places to go than seems right,” reasoned a woman from Iowa. “He had a foreign camera and took so many pictures of the large New York bridges,” said another housewife from New York.
Continue reading “The new Red Scare” →

Dark money

Dark money reminded us of who he is.
Dark money reminded us of who he is.
Matt Koehler is circulating Dark Money Helped Democrats Hold a Key Senate Seat, an article from Pro Publica written by Kim Barker. It is a good overview of politics in the post-Citizens United era.

A few thoughts after reading it:

  • American politics was already corrupt beyond repair, with two big-money parties freezing out every reform effort. The ability to corrupt us even further is a remarkable achievement.
  • Citizens United was handed down in 2010. In his 2011 State of the Union address, President Obama criticized the ruling as Sam Alito looked on in disgust (never to return for the annual theater production). Since that time, Obama has done exactly nothing about it – no bully pulpit, no bearing down on congress or stumping to help ground-level reform efforts. What stops him from leading? Does he fear dark money would cost him his office? Maybe he is just insincere. In either case, he is worthless.
  • The hypocrisy of Montana Democrats, who were furious when gubernatorial candidate Rick Hill received a similar, but smaller, influx, is illuminating. Says Tester (in a Baucus-like moment of dissembly), “We had no control over what they were saying. But by the same token, I think probably in the end if you look at it, they were helpful.” Later, “But it was important…We had to remind people of who I am.”
  • Finally, Barker insists on describing the cash influx in the wake of CU as hailing from “liberal” and “conservative” sources. I am parroting someone, and I do not know who, but in politics there are no ideologies. Only interests. The only reason that big money is invested in small people is that they return even bigger money. If Barker were to set aside such notions, she would add another level of insight to her already good work.