gbear

The surprise DC show that I have come to like is Watchmen. I didn't like the movie and was never into the comics, but the show on HBO is amazingly well written and acted.

I just think it is funny that "experts" think Chris Mathews is the one who farted. Who are these experts, and are they paid? If so, I have a new career at which any of my 4 kids can succeed even if they decide to stop schooling now. Heck, even my 4 year old is already an expert.

I don't know. A lot will depend on how much utilization there is. For example, if we cover colon screenings, it might be cheaper for patient x because it keeps him from battling an expensive cancer by catching it early. However if catching it lets him live 10 years more, that is 10 more years to rack up medical costs before eventually falling prey to some other expensive malady. It might be cheaper for a given time span, but ultimately nothing is free. It really comes down to how much will we pay otherwise, and what kind of care will we get for it. Currently, we pay the most in the world per person for our care. Despite this, we are from first on most objective measurements. Easy to say we are fat lazy people so no shock we spend a lot on heart meds and treatments to die early. So maybe lifespan isnt the best measurement. However, the number of women and children dieing in child birth in the U.S. is an embarassment, even if one doesn't look at the stats by race. (Black women die a lot more than White). Universal healthcare remains expensive until we as a culture address some of the expensive issues. How much should we pay for end of life care? How can we provide relatively safe births for a reasonable cost? What can and should we do to take care of the sick particularly those with chronic expensive to treat illnesses. In the U.S. we have a hard time dealing with the beginning and ending of life. Until we can square these ideas with what we are willing to spend, we will have conflicts...and maybe we should.

Just want to add two things I thought About last night. 1. Up until a couple of years ago when the U.S. took back over immigration, CNMI was alowed to continue the practice of hiring Temp immigrants from Vietnam and China and paying them well below minimum wage. The deal was they paid $2 an hour but had to include free room, board and HEALTHCARE. Note, they did not have to cover insurance. I think about why companies went that route, and what does that say about the cost of insurance now versus the costs of treatment for whole population,s of treatment. Those business owners thought there was money to be saved pati,g for treatments. 2. I was happy to see Warren take the position immigration is a boon for our economy. I have been waiting for a dem to start making that point. Hell, I have made the point on here many times how much danger of an aging workforce poses to our economy and other first world countries' economies. However, I have no idea how much imigration can be counted on to fund a healthcare system overhaul.

People should read We Walked and then We Ran. That is a chilling book from a survivor who was a patient of my grandfather -in-law. It is chilling to think about finding out your loved ones were dead when wild dogs were found outside of town chewing on an arm...with a wedding ring that happens to be your spouse's on the hand. That was a few days after the men had been rounded up and taken out of town for some road work. Sadly that wasn't the harshest story. I went to school with the grandson of two refugees from Armenia. When he said he was Armenian, I asked him where that country was...☹️ I know not many in U.S. know of the Armenian genocide. Sadly that is a sign how complete it was that there were and are so few voices who cried out.

Even Hispanics are less religious than years past. Don't count on them to man the next crusade.

I had an interesting conversation with my son as we head into election season. He was asking how anyone could support Trump. He hears many people talk in our house and around school about all the bad things Trumps has done and supported and he does not understand why people listen to him. He asked, “Are people who support him that mean or stupid?” I do not know if my answer makes sense in the broader scheme of things, but I tried to explain our political system rarely comes down to god versus evil. Rather it comes down to competing values. To illustrate this, I told him the dumbed down version of Million Dollar Murray where a town realized it was cheaper to give the town drunk his own apartment and hire him his own social worker rather than continue to pay for his medical care and time in jail. As a result in the 90’s, there was a move towards cost effective treatments. However, how does one tell the single parent working two jobs to put a roof over the head of his or her children and food on the table that their tax dollars are going to pay for Murray’s free apartment because otherwise Murray will drink? Sometimes, it comes down to a choice between solving the problem or being fair. So often today’s politics seem to come down arguments about which is more important, attempting to solve a problem or being fair. With that said, I started listening to the candidates speeches a bit differently because so much of Trump’s and the Republicans’ pitches are how unfair the current laws and customs are. Why do the rich have to pay so much more than the poor? Why do certain people get advantages when they apply to colleges? It seems a lot of their platform is premised on a sense of injustice. That sense of injustice seems bewildering to many of the minority populations (majority Democrats) who see themselves as historically the victim to far greater injustices whether we talk about racial injustice, sexism, or homophobia. Then we have the “solve the problem” group. They are biased to see issues as solvable which is why candidates with messages like Warren’s “I’ve got a plan for that” resonate with them. They are the type likely to propose the apartment for Murray and a social worker. They are the types to look at the Affordable Care Act and call it a success because it increases access to insurance and care on the whole and leads to longer life expectancies where Medicare and Medicaid are expanded. They may not think about how unfair it is when total medical costs increase, and wealthier Americans once again shoulder the costs. Yes, catching that cancer earlier was cheaper than catching it later when it eventually killed the patient. However, that patient is now alive longer to continue racking up medical expenses and will eventually still have the expensive end of life treatments he or she would have had years earlier. I think of this as one of modern liberalism’s frequent failures. One can make a situation better, but the costs of not dealing with or misidentifying the root problems persist. In the case of the costs of improved insurance and access to care going up over time, the root causes of high cost of end of life medical care and treatment for chronic conditions have not been addressed. At some point, both sides should see it is not about good and evil. It is a choice between competing values. Yes, I fall on the side of attempt to make it better for those whom we can. I fall into the Utilitarian camp of preferring the options that lead to the greatest good for the greatest numbers. However, I recognize this bias will put me at odds with those who claim taking from those who have to provide for the greater number of people is unfair to those who start with more. What’s more, they will be correct saying my proposals do not even benefit those to whom I would give if my taking from those with more lowers the amount to be shared significantly enough. If our higher taxes make all the businesses leave, then we are taxing $0 at a higher rate and getting less than we get now with a lower tax rate. Like everything else, the best course is probably one of moderation where both extremes are avoided. Throughout our country’s short history, we have swung from one side of the pendulum to the opposite never reaching the perceived impending catastrophe. The hardest part seems to be our perspective at either end of the swing is straight down, and the truth is the string of our democracy has not yet broken. The optimist in me still sees the rebound and hopes we have reached the point where we swing the other way.

I am less sure than you are. I was recently at a Fed Gov stats conference, and one of the more interesting talks was by the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. For what it is worth, I remember he mentioned consumer confidence dips having a decent correlation with upcoming recessions but still ranked it behind the sentiment of small business owners. So I take the consumer confidence numbers with the manufacturing problems and the farm issues (both trade wars and drought), and I have a bad premonition about the coming year's economic outlook. I hope I am wrong.

I think the more telling stat might be that 3 out of 4 people expect next year to be worse for the economy. That goes right to consumer confidence which could be critical as consumer spending has been the biggest prop to our economy thus far.

With Trump poised for next attempt to unravel the ACA, I thought I should post this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/i-would-be-dead-or-i-would-be-financially-ruined/2019/09/29/e697149c-c80e-11e9-be05-f76ac4ec618c_story.html

Of course our president sees any current economic bad news as the natural result of what is being done unjustly to him. The stock market going down is because he might be impeached. That is a much more plausible explanation to him than automltive sales going way down, manufacturing slowing down, and on going trade wars. That's not the answer he thinks of when he asks his "magic" mirror why all this stuff happens on his world. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/10/02/dow-plunges-more-than-points-wall-street-extends-october-losses/

PCS, that looks like a famous spot in Guam near where a Japanese man hid for decades after WW II.

I took this in Jamaica earlier this year. I still like it as the disappearing path.

Saying the dems should only fight the fights they can win means they shouldnt be passing anything while Mitch controls what comes to a vote. It also presumes the only win in the case of impeachment is one where Trump is removed by the Senate. The hearings themselves are a win for the country that we might better understand what is actually going on inside this presidency. Now I suspect it wont look good for the current inhabitant, but maybe I am wrong. In any event, we, the public, benefit from the potential to make informed decisions.

I consider myself fairly liberal. I think we are suboptimally running a hot economy. We are not taking in immigrants despite needing more labor, a problem with which every industrialized country in the world save Mexico is dealing. We all have aging workforces save Mexico. So in our effort to preserve our current White Anglo dominant culture, we go to great lengths to make our country unappealing. This will hurt us in the medium term. When I look at everything we are doing to stimulate our economy, I think of a car running in the red. We are burning oil, and when our engine starts to overheat, it is going to be bad. The dollar is currently the default world reserve currency which has had a huge benefit stabilizing our economy when we used defecit spending to blunt recessions. It is a situation that has benefited all parties because we were seen as a stable reliable economy. When that perception disappears or another currency replaces the dollar, our recessions will get more severe. Keep in mind the biggest thing preventing this is perception which is reality because so many believe it to be so. This perception is not helped by Trump and trade wars, real and threatened. For right now, our car continues to barrel ahead at 95mph, but a crash or an engine fire at 95mph is a hell of a thing. We might wish we had kept a pit crew instead of deporting them when we finally realize we can't run the whole race alone in the driver's seat with the peddle to the meatle. It might be nice, if others will be there to help us when we need a part for our break down. However, the cost to our pride will be steep if we are left asking for help from those we spit upon now as we deny global warming and our (meaning humanity's) part in causing it, refuse to stand by long alliances, and are seen taking the side of those threatening democracy.

If the WSJ is saying it, then it isn't some source easily written off as another liberal media source saying it. If true, will Republicans in senate finally show there is a bridge somewhere that is finally at long last, a bridge too far to go when supporting Trump.

Did anyone else watching lewandowski when he admits lieing to the press hear in their heads, "you can't handle the truth!" As if spoken by somebody with a moral authority the questioner could not begin to understand like Nicholson's character. However, like Nicholson's character, Lewandowski seems not to imediately recognize his answer admits that which he has been denying ever happened. His lieing to protect the president from what the president asked the him to do is evidence of obstruction...and I hope that clip shows up repeatedly when he runs for Senate.

When talking about drug prices, there are a few things working against the U.S. Start with the largest purchaser of the medicines which is the U.S. government through Medicare, Medicaid and other public insurance. They are forbidden by law from negotiating drug prices. The result is the biggest purchaser pays the highest prices. Then come all of the other private insurances. They can try to negotiate the prices down, but they are starting their negotiation from the high starting point of what the biggest consumer is paying. "Woohoo. We negotiated a 15% savings...from the highest possible price that the government is paying which is still 2 times the cost people in other countries pay." Then there is the issue that happens with the very expensive drugs in this country for things like cancer, MS, and a lot of other chronic conditions. The drugs are more expensive, so insurance companies have developed a tier system of copays. However, the pharmaceutical companies have developed copay assistance plans where they pay the higher copays for the patients and then raise the total cost of the drug to recoup the copay assistance plans' costs. For example, I took a drug tysabri for my MS. The first year I took it, the sticker price for the drug was roughly 90k a year. Because the drug was on the expensive tier of my blue cross, the copay was $65 a month instead of the usual $20 for most drugs. The pharmaceutical company didn't want to lose customers over the difference in cost to the patients, so they did the logical thing and offered to pay the copay. Now I paid $0 a month for the drug, and the next year the pharmaceutical raised the cost of the drug to $95k. Coincidentally, 5k is not unusual as a maximum out of pocket for good medical insurance. So even if the drug was my only expense, they wouldn't be out more than 5K by picking up my copays for their drug. While the average insurance probably has a higher copay max than $5k, the people with MS are sicker on average so 5K might still be close to the max they would be out...and all the while they are still pocketing the money the insurance is paying for the drug which is still loosely based on the Medicare/Medicaid rate I talked about above ($90-95k). The impact of the tiered medication system and the copay assistance plans doesn't end there. Once I meet my out of pocket maximum, I am more likely to get other medical procedures and tests because they now cost me nothing. For years, I delayed my MRI until after my copay for the year was paid (mostly not by me). There are more problems related to regulation, availability and knowledge of alternative medicines in the U.S. which inflates the demand for what we have available here. Add to this the U.S. consumer's constant search for the panacea of the day to cure what ails us, and our supply vs. demand curve is set to constantly overspend so we can overmedicate. I won't pretend this is all that causes us to overspend on medicines. I left untouched what hospitals charge and dozens of other cost inflators to stick with a couple easily understood pressures.

I liked the article about the number of people who showed up at the job fair after the raids. It was estimated at 25 to 30. I keep saying it. We need more immigrants, not less. People will point to the trade war as a cause of any recession we go through. They wont be wrong, but everyone seems to miss the economic growth we are currently losing due to an inability to fill job openings. We throw away another gift of geography, being right next to the only first world country in the world without am aging workforce problem. They send us workers. We moan, complain, and send them back.

As I understood it when I went to PP as a teen w my girlfriend, it was explained to us that the doctors volunteered much of their clinic time there. Now if I volunteered to give reproductive services to a population and I was told I had to do it while being told I couldn't do so in a manner where I promised to give the patients care they trusted me to give? I might very well refuse to enter a doctor patient relationship where I couldn't give the best care or even best medical advice possible. Patients dont know what we dont know. So we have to trust our doctors. If we tie the doctors' hands on the best care they can give or recommend, do we limit the trust doctors can earn? Would you go to an abstinence only teaching center to learn how to deal w sexual issues? Why not? As for the whole give up 97 percent of the care for the 3 percent, do you want a wife/husband who is faithful all but 3 percent of the time? Will you give up the 97 percent of the time? The point isnt that PP isnt giving up the 97 percent for the 3. The point is the 3 percent or lack of 3 percent can fundamentally change the relationship of the patient and doctors.

Whether or not we stop at food, we sure as heck put it ahead of bombs on our priority list. 😁

This screams somebody in our political system has been taking notes from Russia about what to do with people who may have dirt on higher ups.

Lost in most of the general immigration tussle is our jobs situation. For the past four months, we have averaged 0.8 unemployed workers per job opening in the U.S. I have been banging the drum for months about how there is one industrialized nation not facing the problem of an aging workforce due to retire, and it is the country on our southern border from whom we complain about getting immigrants. We are at a point where the lack of workers is slowing our economic growth. Now we can also look at what the threat of tariffs w Mexico did for our projected GDP. The thing is a trade war w China involves tarriffs on end goods. Due to NAFTA, we have goods move back and forth across the border during fabrication. Just the threat of tarriffs lowered the growth projection for Texas becauase it made the Fed reserve bank there recognize what the current impact is of our hyper vigilance on the border. Up until a few months ago, it took a few hours for trucks to go through customs. It went from a few hour average to a day. People act like keeping immigrants out will help their situation. Mostly, we are just shooting ourselves in the foot for the sake of some white supremacist wet dream of how our country should look and operate.

Every time i read Trump said. "and I know nothing" I hear it in Col. Klink's voice.

The Hate You Give is an intense provocative movie with an interesting take on how hard it is to escape the cultures in which we grow up. I thought it provided a better case for the Black Lives Matter movement than much of the TV punditry ever did by attaching a narrative to what seems abstract for those of us not living the crisis. It deserves its Rotten Tomatoes score of 97.