Episode 325 Scott Adams: Dale Reads “MuellerPorn” on CNN.com, Healthcare, France, Wall Funding, #MeToo

Topics: 

  • Dale reads and enjoys “Mueller Porn” from CNN
  • Government status report on low cost healthcare
  • Canada’s Fentanyl problem and China
  • French riot against their climate change gas tax
    • Apparently, at a 16% increase in gas cost…
    • …people stop caring about climate change
  • Climate change math (the economics) indicate climate change is an illusion
    • GDP will increase and compound many times over in 80 years
    • Climate change will cause a 10% GDP pullback in 80 years
    • Nobody is pushing back on that interpretation
  • Cohen emailed the Kremlin at their GENERIC email address
    • I thought he had Russian contacts?
  • Dems decide negotiating is a loser proposition

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

The post Episode 325 Scott Adams: Dale Reads “MuellerPorn” on CNN.com, Healthcare, France, Wall Funding, #MeToo appeared first on Dilbert Blog.


Dilbert Blog

Episode 315 Scott Adams: Why Healthcare Costs Could Fall by 75%. With Whiteboard

Topic: 

  • Whiteboard discussion
  • Categories of healthcare costs and how each could cost less

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

The post Episode 315 Scott Adams: Why Healthcare Costs Could Fall by 75%. With Whiteboard appeared first on Dilbert Blog.


Dilbert Blog

Episode 293 Scott Adams: Antifa Terrorists, Caravan, Guns, Healthcare, Mueller

Topics: 

  • Oil prices are crashing, more bad news for Iran
  • Election recounts and election fraud
  • CNN notes that Fox News invasion stories have disappeared
  • Fox News seems to label their news vs. opinions better than CNN
  • President Trumps opponents fear things he might do…but hasn’t
    • A brilliant persuasion tactic by the President
  • Zero chance we won’t find out anything bad that Mueller finds
    • If it matters…we will eventually know about it
  • Suggestion: Appoint a “budget judge” for Mueller’s team
  • Out of the box gun safety thoughts:
    • If you own a gun, you must about join the NRA
    • The NRA is all about gun safety
    • App to report gun risk people
  • Why can’t there be 2 separate healthcare tracks?
    • Public system and a competing private system
    • Easily tested systems, no need to guess which is better
  • Medical apps using your phone to test EKG, blood tests, more
    • Self-healthcare possibilities are coming fast

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

The post Episode 293 Scott Adams: Antifa Terrorists, Caravan, Guns, Healthcare, Mueller appeared first on Dilbert Blog.


Dilbert Blog

Episode 227 Scott Adams: Kavanaugh, Healthcare by Innovation

Topics: 

  • False memories are extremely common and well documented
  • Men…and the Democrat party today
  • Midterm elections and turnout
  • Reducing healthcare costs, the only viable path to universal coverage
  • North Korea denuclearization

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

The post Episode 227 Scott Adams: Kavanaugh, Healthcare by Innovation appeared first on Dilbert Blog.


Dilbert Blog

Episode 161 Scott Adams: Fake News, Dalai Lama, Healthcare and Optimism

Topics: 

  • Could the press take the country to war…for ratings?
    • War is good ratings, money, prestige for the press
    • It would be legal, with massive incentives for the press
    • Are the press, the enemy of the people?
  • Jake Tapper says Democrat party is weakest it’s been since 1920
  • Dalai Lama says our biggest problems are psychological
  • Cost of healthcare for all
  • Shy bladder (paruresis)

 

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

The post Episode 161 Scott Adams: Fake News, Dalai Lama, Healthcare and Optimism appeared first on Dilbert Blog.


Dilbert Blog

Episode 162 Scott Adams: North Korea, Iran, Twitter, Healthcare, 3D Guns

Topics: 

  • NK doing things they haven’t negotiated to stop doing yet
  • Misleading cost estimates of healthcare proposals
  • 3D printed guns, is that a big deal?
  • The clear advantage of my “48 Hour Rule”, allowing clarifications
  • NFL new rule on kneeling, worse than the old rule?
  • President Trump approval polls
  • Is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez “the real thing”?
  • Who is the best Democrat Presidential candidate?
  • Koch brothers vs. President Trump

 

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

The post Episode 162 Scott Adams: North Korea, Iran, Twitter, Healthcare, 3D Guns appeared first on Dilbert Blog.


Dilbert Blog

Why the New Healthcare Bill Will Be a Loser

People accuse me of imagining that everything President Trump does is brilliant (persuasion-wise) no matter what he does. But I expect the next version of the Republican healthcare bill to be a complete failure. That’s because Republicans seem deeply committed to a losing path, thanks to what might be called the Contrast Problem. 

Contrast is the driving principle behind all decisions. You have to know how your options differ, and by how much, or else you have no basis for a decision. President Obama solved for the contrast problem by designing Obamacare to cover more people than before. The rest of the details – especially the costs – were hard to predict, so our brains flushed that noise and focused on the greater number of people covered. 

Everyone knew Obamacare would need future tuning to get it right. That gave us mental permission to focus on the good parts we understood – the greater coverage – and hope the other details would get worked out later. President Obama nailed the Contrast Problem like the Master Persuader he is.

That was then.

Now, President Trump and the Republicans have the “going second” problem. The public will compare their proposed bill with Obamacare and conclude that the one metric they understand – the number of people covered – does not compare favorably with Obamacare. The contrast is fatal.

We know Paul Ryan will do his wonkish best to tell us about all the amazing advantages of this new bill. And we know the public won’t understand any of it. But they sure will know it doesn’t cover as many people. Done. Bury it.

During the campaign, candidate Trump made some references to taking care of everyone. It sounded like universal coverage, but no one thought he meant it. 

He did mean it. 

He meant it because he understands the contrast problem.  Any Obamacare replacement needs to cover more people than Obamacare, or else it is dead on arrival. Any skilled persuader would see that. 

Paul Ryan doesn’t see the Contrast Problem as important, evidently. 

I think most trained persuaders would agree that the one-and-only path to a successful replacement of Obamacare should include AT A MINIMUM a plan to reach greater coverage. And the only way to get there is by goosing innovation in the healthcare field. We can’t tax our way to full healthcare coverage. We need to lower the costs. And President Trump also needs to solve the Contrast Problem.

To that end, I suggest creating a special low-cost (or free) plan for low income people who are willing to accept a bit more risk. If the plan is robust enough, it could provide a path to greater patient coverage compared to Obamacare and solve the contrast problem. As a mental exercise only, the plan might have the following elements:

1. Online doctors for 90% of routine cases.

2. Require big pharma to provide free meds for people in this plan as a condition of selling in the United States. The low-income people covered would be the ones who would not otherwise buy these drugs, so the companies would only lose the cost of the materials themselves, which is trivial.

3. Recruit and approve special doctors for this plan who are by law exempt from any malpractice suits so long as they provide reasons for their decisions. This would allow them to avoid some red tape and also use new and inexpensive medical technology before full FDA approval – but only for the new stuff that common sense tells the doctors would not be especially dangerous. I’m not talking about pills and internal medicine. I’m talking about medical devices, mostly. It would be up to the doctor to decide when it was safe to risk using the new methods.

4. Patients agree to wear health monitors – the newest prototypes – and to share their medical information (anonymously) for the greater benefit of society. This would allow early detection and treatment. Perhaps the low-cost insurance could be free to those who walk 10,000 steps a day, or something of that nature.

5. Shine a government light on any medical technology or systems improvements that would lower cost, to guarantee that the good ones are known to doctors and investors. (Then stay out of the way.)

This is just a starter concept for what a special low-cost plan (with slightly higher risks) might look like. The main point is that you could cobble together a low-cost plan if you had some government muscle behind it to clear out the useless regulations and to focus energy in the right places.

If President Trump presents us with a healthcare plan that doesn’t cover as many people as Obamacare, but will cover more people eventually, that’s a winning contrast.

Otherwise, the bill will die on the Contrast hill. And that’s the direction we’re heading.

As I’ve said before, America can’t make a strong claim to greatness if we can’t do healthcare right. So let’s do it right. Or at least have a plan to get there.

You might enjoy reading my book because it will keep you healthy. 

I’m also on…

Twitter (includes Periscope): @scottadamssays​

YouTube: At this link.

Instagram: ScottAdams925

Facebook Official Page: fb.me/ScottAdamsOfficial


Scott Adams’ Blog

The Only Way to Fix Healthcare Insurance in the U.S.

Our system of government has been amazingly robust for hundreds of years, but it fails when you have these two conditions:

1. An issue is too complicated for the public to understand.

2. Big companies are willing to distort the system for profits.

That situation describes the healthcare debate going on in the United States right now. Our undersized brains can’t grasp all the nuances and implications of any particular healthcare plan. And when our brains are confused, we default to our biases (usually party loyalty) or to whatever metric is simple enough to understand. With healthcare, the one metric that matters is how many people will be covered compared to Obamacare. If the Republican plan covers more people, it will pass. If not, it will fail. 

Sure, Republicans will argue that the CBO projections are inaccurate. They will argue that comparing a mandatory plan with an optional one is comparing apples to oranges. They will be right about all of that, but it is irrelevant to the outcome. People will look at the number of people covered and stop there. So any Republican bill that covers fewer people than Obamacare is dead on arrival. That’s where we are now. And we don’t have a system of government that can fix this situation. 

But what we do have is an active citizenry and social media. That’s a better system for designing a healthcare system. I’ll describe one way to go about it.

Some of you are aware of Github, a company that lets software developers contribute bits of code that are made available to all other Github users. Github is a big deal, and software developers almost can’t live without it. Perhaps it is time to build a similar system for fixing health insurance in the U.S.

Imagine a website where any interested party can contribute suggestions for improving any individual element of healthcare in the United States, with a focus on lowering costs while improving outcomes. Perhaps you have an idea about lowering drug prices, and I have an idea about online doctors. We submit our ideas, and the Github-for-healthcare users gets to improve on them or ignore them. The system would allow users to rank the ideas. In time, citizens could develop multiple ideas for every element of healthcare. Citizen volunteers could eventually create up to three plans and present them to Congress for a vote.

I’ll get the ball rolling here by framing the problem as an innovation challenge, not a cost issue.

I think Congress can pass a bill that overspends in the short run so long as it comes with a plan (or path) to greater coverage than Obamacare. In my picture above, you see the growing gap between future health care costs and tax revenue. That growing gap can only be closed by some combination of innovation, cutting regulations, improving competition, and improving prevention. Let’s call that a “moon shot” challenge. We don’t know how to get there right now, but Americans are good at figuring out this sort of thing.

My suggestion for getting a healthcare bill passed is for Republicans to create a credible story for how they will cover more people than Obamacare, at a reasonable cost. And the best way to make that case is with visual persuasion, starting with this sort of simple graph and extending to images of startups that promise to lower medical costs.

At the moment, Paul Ryan and the Republicans are trying to sell their plan with facts, concepts, details, and logical arguments. That won’t work. You need an aspirational story about how to get to better coverage than Obamacare via American ingenuity. Everything else is just noise.

I don’t mind letting Congress take its best shot at improving healthcare. But realistically, they can’t. They are not the right form of government for this sort of complexity. 

Perhaps citizens can do what congress could not.

You might enjoy reading my book because it will make you healthier. (True story, according to my readers.)

I’m also on…

Twitter (includes Periscope): @scottadamssays​

YouTube: At this link.

Instagram: ScottAdams925

Facebook Official Page: fb.me/ScottAdamsOfficial


Scott Adams’ Blog

Can Your Boss Tell Your Spouse ‘Tough Luck’ on Healthcare?

2015-09-07-1441643117-5017377-SAM_2557.JPG
A small reminder on the ongoing need for equality outside the Provincetown HRC store.

Managed Care Magazine recently published an article on employer-sponsored health insurance and same-sex couples. The piece noted that in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide, insurers must recognize the same-sex spouses of beneficiaries. However, author Joseph Burns contends, this does not mean that employers must offer these benefits to employees in same-sex marriage at all.

In other words, a boss can tell employees in an opposite-sex marriage that their spouse is eligible for benefits, but deny those benefits to employees in same-sex marriages.

True? Probably. If the absurdity of the Kentucky court clerk denying same-sex couples marriages licenses teaches us anything, it’s that even when something seems pretty obviously unconstitutional, there are always stubborn individuals who will try it anyway.

So an employer certainly could give opposite-sex spouses of employees benefits and not same-sex spouses. But the latter group of employees would probably sue, and they’d probably (eventually) win.

There is growing case law (the most recent from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) supporting the idea that existing laws banning sex discrimination at work should apply to instances of discrimination based on sexual orientation. And there are a number of theories that lead to this conclusion, such that even though not all will work in every court, the chances of winning these cases are growing.

Under some courts’ reasoning, if an employer would give spousal benefits to a guy named Joe’s partner Jane, but would not do so if Joe was a woman, that’s straightforward discrimination on the basis of sex. Some courts are also recognizing that, since sex stereotyping is also illegal under Supreme Court precedent, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is illegal on this theory, too. It’s a centuries-old stereotype that men should be partnered with women, and women should be partnered with men, so employers who make policies based on this stereotype are thus breaking the law.

But until these cases make their way through the courts – or Congress just passes a direct law to ban discrimination against LGBT people — there will still be uncertainty in these issues.

The Obama administration can do more to make sure same-sex couples get access to care. In the five years since Congress passed the Affordable Care Act, the administration has yet to get its act together and issue regulations to define what “sex-based discrimination” means in Section 1557 of the law.

I first broke the news back in April 2014 that the Department of Health and Human Services intended to deny gays, lesbians, and bisexuals equal protection under this regulation. Some in the “Big Gay” industry were quick to jump to their defense. Interviewed by the Huffington Post, a spokesperson for the National Center for Lesbian Rights who recently took a job with the administration said that this was “reflects our interpretation” of how the regulations would turn out. It certainly felt like a slap in the face (and a pandering to their friends at HHS) for those of us who were pushing for equality under a legal theory that has been increasingly embraced by the courts.

As the clock ticks down on the Obama administration and its mixed record of courage on LGBT issues, those in our community are left to wonder if some of these legal questions will be answered in our favor by the time a new administration takes office in January 2017. Then again, maybe we’re better off waiting.

You can learn more about your rights with respect to healthcare with the Healthcare Bill of Rights project.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.




Gay Voices – The Huffington Post

Chemistry.com gay - First Date 300x250

Women Pay More for Healthcare Than Men (Come See HOW Much More!)

I'm always amazed that I seem to have so many more doctors' appointments than my husband does—you know, just for preventative care and general upkeep. As a result? I log more medical expenses. And you…




Subscribe to All
FASHION NEWS UPDATE-Visit 2 Spendless Online today for the hottest deals online!