The EU

Google says the EU requires a notice of cookie use (by Google) and says they have posted a notice. I don't see it. If cookies bother you, go elsewhere. If the EU bothers you, emigrate. If you live outside the EU, don't go there.

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

TSW Nominee

The Boston Globe has an editorial today, suggesting former Governor Michael Dukakis as the TSW.

This is the Michael Dukakis who thinks high speed rail is 110 mph.

The good news is that at least former Governor Michael Dukakis is not former President Jimmy Carter.

And, the White House is urging the Massachusetts Great and General Court to create the position of TSW so that health care reform can be passed.  The White House, and the US Congress, would be better off focused on getting together a bill that meets the needs of the American People and does it in a way that is politically acceptable to those same American People.  Having a Senator Dukakis there won't change the outcome if we don't change the bill.

We need to change the way we are doing business with health care.  The problem is, the monster bill HR 3200 and its siblings, are not getting the job done.  A simpler bill, which addressed the need for more providers where they are needed and a simplified safety net would be a much better solution than what we have now.  Don't break the current system—find solutions to the problems on the edges.

And, as for those who are concerned that we rank down in the 30s in terms of life expectancy, I suggest they urge their US Representative and their Senators to spend some money on newborns and the very young. Our high infant mortality is what is driving the our life expectancy numbers, statistics being what they are.

Regards  —  Cliff

  The Teddy Seat Warmer.


Craig H said...

I think your chosen statistic to explain our life expectancy gap (infant mortality) points to the exact crisis in our healthcare debate--the "haves" (you and me) do not (apparently) feel the moral imperative to ensure that the "have nots" are given the same access to our healthcare knowledge and delivery infrastructure. In the case of socio-economically disadvantaged pregnant women, this results in a statistically alarming incidence of infant mortality and other early development problems in their offspring. Fix one, and you fix the other.

My observation is that we can't afford to maintain the current standard of care at its current cost and extend it to everyone. The obvious conclusion is that we have to find a solution that drives significant cost out of the equation, or we will have to compromise care to make up the difference. Either way, the fact that huge portions of our population are un and under-insured is unconscionable.

I like suggestions to subsidize medical education in return for a period of public service. (A reverse medical GI Bill). I like proposals to remove monopolistic and other un-competitive pricing advantages currently enjoyed by large pharmaceutical companies. I truly believe we have to stop allowing extraordinary life-extending techniques (heart transplants, etc.) without heavy taxation/surcharges on the wealthy who wish to pursue them.

Whipping public emotion into a frenzy to insist on the perpetuation of a system of unequal rights needs to be offset with an equal public frenzy that calls this sort of Animal Farm slash apartheid economics for what it is.

Renee said...

The main concern for young pregnant women is stress that relates to much of the concerns during their pregnancy, not as much as prenatal care. It is a concern, one we all recognize but the stress of the pregnant women in relationship with the father of her child and family, is something that even a healthy diet, exercise, and regular check-ups can't overcome.

Stress and natural labor work against each other, you have to ask what type of environment a woman will be going home with baby into after giving birth? When the dad bails out, it's stinks.

Up the marital rate, and lower the divorce rate. It's not about forcing couples to marry or forcing couples to stay in unhealthy relationships. It's about a public policy that encourages lower income families to marry, without losing public benefits they would other wise receive if never-married.

My daughter's godfather just had a liver transplant, he had a week to live, now he has fifteen. He was worth it.

My father had by-pass (six by-passes at the time of surgery) eight years ago. He was worth it too.

Yes I realized these procedures cost six figures.