Recently, prominent liberal health care mouthpiece and former Colorado Governor, Richard Lamm openly discussed rationing as a financial solution to help fund universal health care ("Better Health Care Through Rationing," The Huffington Post), or as he puts it, "“Old people have a duty to die and get out of the way.”
(Wesley Smith has a good post on Richard Lamm, "Obamacare: Richard “Old People Have a Duty to Die and Get Out of the Way” Lamm Wants Rationing")
Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor and economic adviser to President Obama, also holds this viewpoint. Here he is speaking at UC-Berkeley:
"We're going to have to, if you're very old, we're not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years of your life to keep you maybe going for another couple of months. It's too expensive...so we're going to let you die...
I'm going to use the bargaining leverage of the federal government in terms of Medicare, Medicaid---we already have a lot of bargaining leverage---to force drug companies and insurance companies and medical suppliers to reduce their costs. What that means, less innovation and that means less new products and less new drugs on the market which means you are probably not going to live much longer than your parents. Thank you."
This is a foundational policy for liberals to keep their proposed health care system afloat. This is plain stupid to me because how can you determine when it's the end of life for someone? How do you define "old age" when life expectancy continues to climb higher and the differences between each ethnic profile, socio-economic background, and lifestyle habits create such a moving target for each individual? Let's say there is a second generation Okinawan American (Japan) who maintained the same dietary habits as her parents and will live to 100 years or greater. Will she be treated the same at 80 years as a fourth generation Irish American who is 80 but with a life expectancy of 78 years?
Another example is from a recent situation from the UK (HatTip to WSJ's James Taranto):
A grandfather who beat cancer was wrongly told the disease had returned and left to die at a hospice which pioneered a controversial "death pathway."
Doctors said there was nothing more they could do for 76-year-old Jack Jones, and his family claim he was denied food, water and medication except painkillers.
He died within two weeks. But tests after his death found that his cancer had not come back and he was in fact suffering from pneumonia brought on by a chest infection.
To his family's horror, they were told he could have recovered if he'd been given the correct treatment.
Nice to see the effectiveness of similar policies in action. Seriously, this is just a stupid idea.
Showing posts with label public policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public policy. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Monday, August 3, 2009
Surfacing the Solutions: A Critical Discussion of California’s Water Crisis
Upcoming event on California's water crisis, so save the date for those of you in SoCal. It's hosted by Coro's Southern California center, which is the leadership program I went through but in its St. Louis location.
The Water Conservation Luncheon
Surfacing the Solutions: A critical discussion of California’s water crisis
Thursday October 29, 2009 at 11:30am – 2:00pm
Location: TBD
An overview of Coro:
The Water Conservation Luncheon
Surfacing the Solutions: A critical discussion of California’s water crisis
Thursday October 29, 2009 at 11:30am – 2:00pm
Location: TBD
An overview of Coro:
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
"Health Care Mythology"
Excellent post by Cliff Asness that it deserves its own spot on my blog :)
Health Care Mythology
By Clifford Asness
What We Know That Ain't So
Will Rogers famously said, "It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so."[1] So it is with the health care debate in this country. Quite a few "facts" offered to the public as truth are simply wrong and often intentionally misleading. It seems clear that no truly productive solution will emerge when these false facts represent our common starting point. So, this essay takes on the modest task of simply disabusing its readers of some untrue notions about health care.
I do not take on the harder task of prescribing how we should (and if we should) reform health care, though I offer a few thoughts. Important work must be done here by those who understand, far better than I, the details of health care provision. However, no details are necessary for this essay, and no animals (though perhaps some egos) were harmed in its creation. The fallacies I present are basic and it takes only a rational economic framework to expose them... (full post)
Related news:
"CBO deals new blow to health plan" Politico
"Dean: ‘What’s the point of having a 60 vote majority’ if you can’t pass health reform?" ThinkProgress
Health Care Mythology
By Clifford Asness
What We Know That Ain't So
Will Rogers famously said, "It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so."[1] So it is with the health care debate in this country. Quite a few "facts" offered to the public as truth are simply wrong and often intentionally misleading. It seems clear that no truly productive solution will emerge when these false facts represent our common starting point. So, this essay takes on the modest task of simply disabusing its readers of some untrue notions about health care.
I do not take on the harder task of prescribing how we should (and if we should) reform health care, though I offer a few thoughts. Important work must be done here by those who understand, far better than I, the details of health care provision. However, no details are necessary for this essay, and no animals (though perhaps some egos) were harmed in its creation. The fallacies I present are basic and it takes only a rational economic framework to expose them... (full post)
Related news:
"CBO deals new blow to health plan" Politico
"Dean: ‘What’s the point of having a 60 vote majority’ if you can’t pass health reform?" ThinkProgress
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Sagent Advisors and Other Boutique Investment Banks Picking Up Talent
My younger brother's firm, Sagent Advisors just opened a San Francisco office:
"The independent M&A advisory firm has hired David Bain and Michael Wilkins, both formerly at Wachovia Securities, as managing directors, further expanding its technology, media and telecommunications advisory business. Bain, 42, and Wilkins, 35, will open Sagent's new office in San Francisco."
They have also opened offices in Chicago and Charlotte while hiring in an Alternative Capital Markets team from UBS.
Sagent and other boutique (small to mid-size) investments banks are able to pick up good talent due to the huge layoffs on Wall Street and the pay limits tied to TARP money. Can we say bad policy destroying shareholder value?
More from Bloomberg, "Mack, Lewis Blame Pay Limits for Executive Departures"
"The independent M&A advisory firm has hired David Bain and Michael Wilkins, both formerly at Wachovia Securities, as managing directors, further expanding its technology, media and telecommunications advisory business. Bain, 42, and Wilkins, 35, will open Sagent's new office in San Francisco."
They have also opened offices in Chicago and Charlotte while hiring in an Alternative Capital Markets team from UBS.
Sagent and other boutique (small to mid-size) investments banks are able to pick up good talent due to the huge layoffs on Wall Street and the pay limits tied to TARP money. Can we say bad policy destroying shareholder value?
More from Bloomberg, "Mack, Lewis Blame Pay Limits for Executive Departures"
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Jim Cramer on Obama: "It’s Amateur Hour at Our Darkest Moment"
CNBC’s Jim Cramer on Obama, "It’s Amateur Hour at Our Darkest Moment... Until the Obama administration starts listening, until they start paying attention to what you’re watching – to the stock market, until they realize that their agenda is destroying the life savings of millions of Americans – then all I can give you is caution."
Ah, the Obama supporter and loyal Democrat is now losing faith?
Ah, the Obama supporter and loyal Democrat is now losing faith?
Thursday, February 5, 2009
With All Due Respect Mr President, That's Not True... Cato Ad
Solid campaign by the Cato Institute.
President Obama says that "economists from across the political spectrum agree" on the need for massive government spending to stimulate the economy. In fact, many economists disagree. Hundreds of them, including Nobel laureates and other prominent scholars, have signed a statement that the Cato Institute has placed in major newspapers across the United States.
President Obama says that "economists from across the political spectrum agree" on the need for massive government spending to stimulate the economy. In fact, many economists disagree. Hundreds of them, including Nobel laureates and other prominent scholars, have signed a statement that the Cato Institute has placed in major newspapers across the United States.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Nancy Pelosi is a Leading Green Energy Advocate in Congress? Leader on Church Doctrine? Please
If you already haven't heard, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi displayed her intelligence in full view on Sunday's "Meet the Press":
On NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, the speaker twice seemed to suggest that natural gas – an energy source she favors – is not a fossil fuel.
“I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels,” she said at one point. Natural gas “is cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels,” she said at another.
So this catapults her into political lore with Dan Quayle's "potatoe" incident, Al Gore proclaiming that he invented the Internet, and a few of George W. Bush's gaffes. I've heard her speak on other issues and just thought she was a bit crazy. Now I'm thinking dumb and crazy.
Also not wanting to admit that she's a complete idiot, Pelosi is not taking back her statements about the Catholic Church not being able to define when life started during the same interview. Yes, she is trying to tell these Archbishop and bishops that they don't know their own doctrine. Pretty funny.
"Pelosi stands by abortion comments" AP
"Archbishop Disputes Pelosi's Statements" The Washington Post
Anyway, I don't even know why this is a religious issue. There is enough scientific evidence that life begins at conception. There is enough anecdotal evidence, especially if you've had children yourself. Christopher Hitchens from the far left is a contributing editor to Vanity Fair, "Top 100 Public Intellectuals," leading atheist, and pro-life advocate. As I posted before, since he's lived in the U.K. most of his life, abortion isn't a political issue for him. It's about science and fact not faith and church doctrine.
This is the same for me. I didn't need the church to guide me on my views about abortion. I discovered for myself. Seriously, some people need to read for themselves rather than having Congressional staffers summarize notes and books into one pagers :)
On NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, the speaker twice seemed to suggest that natural gas – an energy source she favors – is not a fossil fuel.
“I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels,” she said at one point. Natural gas “is cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels,” she said at another.
So this catapults her into political lore with Dan Quayle's "potatoe" incident, Al Gore proclaiming that he invented the Internet, and a few of George W. Bush's gaffes. I've heard her speak on other issues and just thought she was a bit crazy. Now I'm thinking dumb and crazy.
Also not wanting to admit that she's a complete idiot, Pelosi is not taking back her statements about the Catholic Church not being able to define when life started during the same interview. Yes, she is trying to tell these Archbishop and bishops that they don't know their own doctrine. Pretty funny.
"Pelosi stands by abortion comments" AP
"Archbishop Disputes Pelosi's Statements" The Washington Post
Anyway, I don't even know why this is a religious issue. There is enough scientific evidence that life begins at conception. There is enough anecdotal evidence, especially if you've had children yourself. Christopher Hitchens from the far left is a contributing editor to Vanity Fair, "Top 100 Public Intellectuals," leading atheist, and pro-life advocate. As I posted before, since he's lived in the U.K. most of his life, abortion isn't a political issue for him. It's about science and fact not faith and church doctrine.
This is the same for me. I didn't need the church to guide me on my views about abortion. I discovered for myself. Seriously, some people need to read for themselves rather than having Congressional staffers summarize notes and books into one pagers :)
Saturday, August 2, 2008
"Tocqueville on China"
Pretty cool project by the American Enterprise Institute:
Today's China-watchers face no shortage of issues or policy areas to study. Experts look at China's economy, foreign and defense policies, human rights record, business practices, corruption levels, environmental policies, even demographics. But for all the important work being done on China today, we believe too little attention has been paid to understanding contemporary Chinese civic culture. Yet it is precisely China's underlying civic culture which will, as much as anything, help inform how particular policy issues are addressed by the Chinese, and more broadly, how China is likely to develop in the future. Perhaps the greatest student of civic culture is Alexis de Tocqueville, whose studies of American democracy and pre-revolutionary France still represent the gold standard in terms of elucidating the fundamental civic spirit--the moeurs--of both regimes. In the tradition of Tocqueville's studies and methodology, AEI's "Tocqueville on China" project convenes a select group of scholars, policy analysts, and government experts to generate innovative studies that elicit the underlying civic culture of post-Mao China, enabling policymakers to better understand the internal forces and pressures that are shaping China's future.
One study from this project, "China's Protestants. A Mustard Seed for Moral Renewal?"
Today's China-watchers face no shortage of issues or policy areas to study. Experts look at China's economy, foreign and defense policies, human rights record, business practices, corruption levels, environmental policies, even demographics. But for all the important work being done on China today, we believe too little attention has been paid to understanding contemporary Chinese civic culture. Yet it is precisely China's underlying civic culture which will, as much as anything, help inform how particular policy issues are addressed by the Chinese, and more broadly, how China is likely to develop in the future. Perhaps the greatest student of civic culture is Alexis de Tocqueville, whose studies of American democracy and pre-revolutionary France still represent the gold standard in terms of elucidating the fundamental civic spirit--the moeurs--of both regimes. In the tradition of Tocqueville's studies and methodology, AEI's "Tocqueville on China" project convenes a select group of scholars, policy analysts, and government experts to generate innovative studies that elicit the underlying civic culture of post-Mao China, enabling policymakers to better understand the internal forces and pressures that are shaping China's future.
One study from this project, "China's Protestants. A Mustard Seed for Moral Renewal?"
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
"Canadian Invasion"
I love The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto (from his Best of the Web Today):
The United States and Canada share the longest unprotected border in the world, and Totonto's Globe and Mail has a story illustrating why that is so dangerous:
More than 100 Canadian women with high-risk pregnancies have been sent to United States hospitals over the past year--in what a doctors' group attributes to the lack of a national birthing plan.
The problem has peaked, with British Columbia and Ontario each sending a record number of women to U.S. neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Specifically, 80 B.C. women have been sent to U.S. hospitals since April 1, 2007; in Ontario, 28 have been sent since January of 2007, according to figures from the respective health ministries.
André Lalonde, executive vice-president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, said the problem is due to bed closings that took place almost a decade ago, the absence of a national birthing initiative and too few staff.
"Neonatologists are very stretched right now," Dr. Lalonde said in a telephone interview from Ottawa. "We're so stretched, it's kind of dangerous."
Aw, look at the cute little Canadian babies! It's all very sweet and innocuous, right?
Don't believe it. Read between the lines, and you realize this is a sinister Canadian plot to take over America. Canada's military is no match for ours, so the crafty Canucks are using infancy instead of infantry to carry out their imperial designs.
Think about it. Canadian officials send women across the border, smuggling in "anchor babies" cleverly disguised as clumps of tissue. The women give birth inside the U.S., which means their Canadian offspring are entitled to U.S. citizenship. As these "children" grow and mature, they receive instructions from their masters in Ottawa about how to undermine American culture.
Before you know it, your kids are stuffing themselves with litres of back bacon, downing kilogram after kilogram of Crown Royal and Labatt Blue, and belting out "God Save the Queen" as they watch hockey on TV.
It's all so horrible to contemplate, but it can be stopped. All we need to do is make America as inhospitable as Canada for expectant Canadian mothers. Hillary Clinton has the right idea: The U.S. needs socialized medicine.
The United States and Canada share the longest unprotected border in the world, and Totonto's Globe and Mail has a story illustrating why that is so dangerous:
More than 100 Canadian women with high-risk pregnancies have been sent to United States hospitals over the past year--in what a doctors' group attributes to the lack of a national birthing plan.
The problem has peaked, with British Columbia and Ontario each sending a record number of women to U.S. neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Specifically, 80 B.C. women have been sent to U.S. hospitals since April 1, 2007; in Ontario, 28 have been sent since January of 2007, according to figures from the respective health ministries.
André Lalonde, executive vice-president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, said the problem is due to bed closings that took place almost a decade ago, the absence of a national birthing initiative and too few staff.
"Neonatologists are very stretched right now," Dr. Lalonde said in a telephone interview from Ottawa. "We're so stretched, it's kind of dangerous."
Aw, look at the cute little Canadian babies! It's all very sweet and innocuous, right?
Don't believe it. Read between the lines, and you realize this is a sinister Canadian plot to take over America. Canada's military is no match for ours, so the crafty Canucks are using infancy instead of infantry to carry out their imperial designs.
Think about it. Canadian officials send women across the border, smuggling in "anchor babies" cleverly disguised as clumps of tissue. The women give birth inside the U.S., which means their Canadian offspring are entitled to U.S. citizenship. As these "children" grow and mature, they receive instructions from their masters in Ottawa about how to undermine American culture.
Before you know it, your kids are stuffing themselves with litres of back bacon, downing kilogram after kilogram of Crown Royal and Labatt Blue, and belting out "God Save the Queen" as they watch hockey on TV.
It's all so horrible to contemplate, but it can be stopped. All we need to do is make America as inhospitable as Canada for expectant Canadian mothers. Hillary Clinton has the right idea: The U.S. needs socialized medicine.
Thursday, April 10, 2003
The Needs for Laws and Enforcement... Most People Are Just Wimps
Another Reason Why Legalizing Drugs is Stupid
I've been in Asia, primarily Korea, for the past three years. I came here forced by my two friends to help build a U.S. tech company's operations in Korea. Even though I miss the U.S. often, my stay has been pleasant because I have so many family members here and great friends.
Living out in Asia has also been beneficial in developing my political and social views. Though Korea is top ten globally in terms of economic power, it is still second tier in terms of social and political development. One thing that you will notice is the lack of enforcement of laws and punishment. In business, it is still common for people to ask for deals underneath the table and bribes. Government officials, journalists, corporate managers, and so on.
The police are a joke in Korea. There is very little fear of punishment among its citizens and actual enforcement of laws by police. For example, with traffic violations, sometimes you see older men yelling at young police officers to get off a violation... benefit of being older in a Confucian society. Other times a policeman will ask for "dinner" money to get you off a violation... friends told me that 20 to 50 bucks will do. I don't have to worry about such hassles since I have an international drivers license, so they let me go because they don't want to do the extra paperwork involved.
Anyway, living out here has allowed me to appreciate the strength of the U.S. legal system and its enforcement. I'm not saying the U.S. system is without faults, loopholes, or that it's perfect, but it is a solid system that I've come to appreciate more while being out here.
I believe people are innately selfish and driven by their desires for money, sex, fame, or whatever else. Laws keep these things in check. Keeps corruption, reckless behavior, theft, and the countless numbers of crimes and unethical behavior to a minimum. Before I moved out here, I thought I didn't have so much of a self-righteous attitude. Before I came out here I saw myself as a Christian with a view that I am no better than anyone else. I am a sinner period as God saw everyone else, and I am probably a worse than most people.
But I began to judge native Koreans... How can they treat women like that? What are they thinking when they try to cut a deal short? How can they be so short-sighted? No consciousness of date rape... so much corruption... legal system is a joke.
After a year or so, I took a step back an realized again that I am really no better. I sometimes had to catch myself when faced with various temptations or short-cuts. And I began to ask myself, who am I to judge or say such things? I realized that laws and their enforcement really do make a difference in a society and nation. I don't believe laws can create morality, but they do create barriers for unwanted behaviors or ones that will have a negative effect on society as a whole.
The average person is risk averse. If the consequences or punishment is great enough, most people will not engage in illegal or unethical behavior. I really began to realize this while living in Asia. Seeing another society and culture operate, showed me how laws, or lack of laws, can effect a society and really made some of my prior opinions clearer. Such as the legalization of drugs in the U.S. Some proponents of legalizing drugs argue that enforcement is a joke and that everyone does it, so what is the use of making them illegal?. Of course this is far from the case and laws were really never meant to eliminate ALL or be an ultimate cure of any social problem. Laws were set up as a barrier and more and more as I get older I realize that most people are wimps. They might do something once or twice to say that they did it or to experience a rush in life, but most people will not jump the legal barrier often. So making drugs illegal creates a barrier for most people. Obviously I'm simplifying the argument for this topic, so please understand why I didn't go into the more complex issues involved.
I believe for Korea to take the next stage of development, it really needs to revamp its legal system, increase its enforcement of laws, and create new laws for its citizens, corporations, and overall environment.
I've been in Asia, primarily Korea, for the past three years. I came here forced by my two friends to help build a U.S. tech company's operations in Korea. Even though I miss the U.S. often, my stay has been pleasant because I have so many family members here and great friends.
Living out in Asia has also been beneficial in developing my political and social views. Though Korea is top ten globally in terms of economic power, it is still second tier in terms of social and political development. One thing that you will notice is the lack of enforcement of laws and punishment. In business, it is still common for people to ask for deals underneath the table and bribes. Government officials, journalists, corporate managers, and so on.
The police are a joke in Korea. There is very little fear of punishment among its citizens and actual enforcement of laws by police. For example, with traffic violations, sometimes you see older men yelling at young police officers to get off a violation... benefit of being older in a Confucian society. Other times a policeman will ask for "dinner" money to get you off a violation... friends told me that 20 to 50 bucks will do. I don't have to worry about such hassles since I have an international drivers license, so they let me go because they don't want to do the extra paperwork involved.
Anyway, living out here has allowed me to appreciate the strength of the U.S. legal system and its enforcement. I'm not saying the U.S. system is without faults, loopholes, or that it's perfect, but it is a solid system that I've come to appreciate more while being out here.
I believe people are innately selfish and driven by their desires for money, sex, fame, or whatever else. Laws keep these things in check. Keeps corruption, reckless behavior, theft, and the countless numbers of crimes and unethical behavior to a minimum. Before I moved out here, I thought I didn't have so much of a self-righteous attitude. Before I came out here I saw myself as a Christian with a view that I am no better than anyone else. I am a sinner period as God saw everyone else, and I am probably a worse than most people.
But I began to judge native Koreans... How can they treat women like that? What are they thinking when they try to cut a deal short? How can they be so short-sighted? No consciousness of date rape... so much corruption... legal system is a joke.
After a year or so, I took a step back an realized again that I am really no better. I sometimes had to catch myself when faced with various temptations or short-cuts. And I began to ask myself, who am I to judge or say such things? I realized that laws and their enforcement really do make a difference in a society and nation. I don't believe laws can create morality, but they do create barriers for unwanted behaviors or ones that will have a negative effect on society as a whole.
The average person is risk averse. If the consequences or punishment is great enough, most people will not engage in illegal or unethical behavior. I really began to realize this while living in Asia. Seeing another society and culture operate, showed me how laws, or lack of laws, can effect a society and really made some of my prior opinions clearer. Such as the legalization of drugs in the U.S. Some proponents of legalizing drugs argue that enforcement is a joke and that everyone does it, so what is the use of making them illegal?. Of course this is far from the case and laws were really never meant to eliminate ALL or be an ultimate cure of any social problem. Laws were set up as a barrier and more and more as I get older I realize that most people are wimps. They might do something once or twice to say that they did it or to experience a rush in life, but most people will not jump the legal barrier often. So making drugs illegal creates a barrier for most people. Obviously I'm simplifying the argument for this topic, so please understand why I didn't go into the more complex issues involved.
I believe for Korea to take the next stage of development, it really needs to revamp its legal system, increase its enforcement of laws, and create new laws for its citizens, corporations, and overall environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)