A comprehensive (moderate) health care solution

Here is my comprehensive health care policy.
It is the perfect compromise between the failing status quo and the socialistic and inefficient version of Canada.
We should have a government run insurance business to compete against those in the private sector.
This would be paid into by individuals who chose to be enrolled.
It would provide health insurance with high deductibles (around $2000) for cheap.
The profits would be kept to a lower level than most insurance companies
(maintained at around 30-40% of those profits from 2008- adjusted for inflation and demand). (Or started at 70% of those profits and dropped 5% a year to 30-40%).
(Maybe, the government could also offer $50-$200 dollar deductible plans- this however would be started at 85% of the 2008 profit levels for similar plans offered in the private sector and would decrease 3-5% each year down to 50% by cutting prices – this would then make the increased demand for health services come at a slow enough pace so as not to overburden providers and create long lines.)- It would also give private companies time to adapt and compete.

I must say that those government insurance companies must be, for the most part, ran like companies in the private sector and must contain at least as much fraud detection and prevention capabilities.
The profits that the government does make should go toward medicare and Medicaid as well as tax cuts or tax credits to private companies who lower drug prices and deny less people coverage.
One benefit to getting insurance through private companies is that they will pay for more than just what is ‘necessary to lead a healthy and productive life.’
Which brings me to a reform for Medicaid and medicare. We need to limit when doctors give the best implant or hip replacement which would cost 40,000 and make sure they just give what is ‘necessary to lead a healthy and productive life.’
We also need to combat diabetes which is the largest drain on our Medicaid. We need to remember though that cheaper foods are those most likely to lead to obesity, so we need to work on combating poverty and making healthy foods more affordable…and desirable.
We also must promote and educate people about living wills, which will allow them to be taken off life support if there is little to no chance of improvement.
We must also allow the FDA to consider cost effectiveness when approving new drugs.
We must also not allow pre-existing conditions to have too much effect on payments and certainly not on coverage. (perhaps excluding treatment for suicide attempts after the first- but not excluding treatments to prevent it from happening again.)
We must also build the individual insurance market and portable insurance so that people are less dependent on their jobs.
Last, we should provide malpractice insurance and lawyers available non-profit through the government.
(I realize the private sector could not compete against this, so people from the private sector should be hired to run it.)

Here are some additional thoughts from Newt Gingrich’s book “Real Change”

We should perhaps end Medicaid and provide low income families with vouchers or tax credits to buy their own insurance (this will not work on it’s own of course, due to pre-existing conditions rules that insurance companies employ).
As Jeb Bush implemented in Florida, each state should have web sites like Floridacomparecare.gov and myfloridarx.gov which enables consumers to choose the best performing and highest value hospitals and medications.
Also, more companies should put employees on programs like Healthways myhealthIQ health risk management program which “gives financial rewards based on quantifiable, improved biometrics.” It also provides coaching.
Hospitals must transfer to more IT systems to replace the paper system- this will prevent medical errors, increase efficiency, and save money.
The federal government must lead the way in creating a reimbursement model that takes quality of care (and results), and not just quantity, into account.
We should insist that everyone obtain insurance or post a bond.
We should create a national pool for those who suffer catastrophic illness or disease.

A comprehensive Social Security Solution

My solution is taken from my own ideas as well as others.
The solution is thus:

1. We should institute a 0.45% tax on all stock trades (half charged on buy, half charged on sell) of U.S. citizens in any market- starting when the U.S. market revives (I’d say when the Dow reaches 11,000 or the S&P reaches 1,200).
This would amount to about 77 billion each year (if the stock market didn’t grow at all) and will certainly keep social security solvent for many more years.
I suspect it would also decrease volatility in the market.

2. We should also consider the possibility of turning control of the social security funds over to a private company that has a contract with the government. (Of course we would include things like having caps on executive pay etc).
They could invest a certain percentage of the money in low risk operations, and keep the rest in bank CD’s.
(We could also keep their dealings secretive, and allow them to legally do insider trading

3. We must tie social security benefits to the inflation rate, and not the wage growth rate: which currently significantly outpaces the inflation rate.

Here is a good site to read:
http://www.nextinning.com/socialsecurity2.php
The following ideas are derived from it.
4. ‘We must keep congress’ hands off of the social security trust fund’ should mean that regardless of a government surplus we do not allow any money to be taken from the fund to pay off other government debt, or any other thing.

5. If my other plans are put in action then I would say we should perhaps forgive a significant portion of the government’s debt in bonds/IOU’s to the social security trust fund.

6. I do like this authors ideas for a transition to a privatized system under the subheadings “A gradual move toward privatization” and “But Wall Street is a rigged lottery.”
I desire to implement this with my other plans (possibly excepting the plan to turn control of the social security funds to a private company with a government contract). However, I desire to make the transition somewhat slower than what this author may have in mind, and I would perhaps only allow college educated people nearing retirement to invest. (Or perhaps we could create a mandatory test on investment, saving, and budgeting that people must pass).

I also believe these ideas (slightly modified) from wademan on solutionslab could be incorporated in with my own:
7) Social Security income begins at: 1) 59 1/2 yrs old (65% of entitlement); 62 yrs old (75%); 65 yrs old (85%); 70 yrs old (95%): 75 yrs old (100%).

All US workers, regardless of citizenship status are mandated to pay into Social Security system by payroll deductions, but will not qualify for Social Security unless they are a legal US citizen. (I would change this by having non-citizen workers pay a reduced rate of contribution- perhaps 50% of the normal benefits. I would also say non-citizens may only collect 65% of what they contributed, and former non-citizens may only collect at most 125% of what they contributed to the system unless they have been citizens for 30 years?)

9) Set up a donor program to be marketed to the American people to donate money and resources to go directly into the Social Security Fund–like a charity. ( not likely to do much, but I don’t think it could hurt.)

10) US government opens “stores” in several select cities that sells surplus government/military items, donated items, or items that would have normally been part of govt. waste, for a profit. Part of the income from the “stores” go into Social Security (25%). This would also help to create jobs as well.

11) Raise tax on all imports into the US by 1%, with 25% of the increase going directly into Social Security Fund, other 75% into National Defense, Homeland Security and other departments.

Thank you for reading.  I would appreciate being notified of any other solutions which may be incorporated into the others.
-Matt Ricks (aka MRLocke)

Batman 3, (or 4?) ideas

I am trying to let David Goyer know this possibility for the next batman movie.
Here is my idea- spread it around- I don’t care if I get credit, I just want to see it happen (or something similar- so David Goyer can feel free to change any part he wants).  I realize some things will need to be changed to fit in with the likely brilliant ideas that he already has.
Also, forgive the bad punctuation and the generally bad writing style.  I thought it important to spend more time on story that the writing quality since it may never come to fruition.
Possible villains
black mask?
Hush
Man Bat?
Riddler
The Wrath
pix
Nicodemus
Jane Doe?
Gear Head?
If you don’t know who these are then check out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_villains
Story: 3 months after Dark Knight- and Wayne Manor is half completed and Bruce has moved back in.
The first half of the movie (which may have to be quite long, deals with building the storyline and the villains)
Give intro to Hush, incorporate as much of his story as you can into the film.

Hush comes back to Gotham in a time when Nicodemus and The Wrath (or man bat and the wrath) are both performing heinous crimes, and framing batman for them. (If nicodemus, not many people attribute his crimes to batman, as they do not fit his M.O.)

The employee who knows batman’s identity, lets call him john, (cause I forgot his name) has a wife or best friend who was killed by The Wrath (collateral damage, not a cop), and he believes as most do that it was batman. He goes somewhat mad with rage.
He is consistently questioned by the police who are now searching for batman, but he does not tell them what he knows because he wants revenge himself.
He goes to arkham, seeking advise from the joker (we only here his voice and see a small part of his face), who gets him worked up and confused as the joker would, and rids him of the doubts he has due to the fact that Batman once saved his life (he does not tell the joker it was Bruce). The joker also tells him he does not have what it takes to face batman, at least alone. He then provides him with a profound riddle that john becomes obsessed with.
Soon he goes into hiding and changes his name to Edward Nigma, forging papers.
Here we can return to batman for a while and his battle against being framed. He does go after nicodemus (who uses a flamethrower) first and is able to catch him and do battle. It ends with nicodemus nearly being beat to death and held between the closing ends of a draw bridge over the river. Batman finds out that he had been hired by the new mob boss from out of town (audience does not know, and may not find out that the boss is black mask, in fact they may suspect hush), batman tries to find out more but nicodemus sees a chance to torch batman and uses it, burning batman badly but causing nicodemus to be let go and fall. His fuel tank is caught between the closing bridges and we see a distant side shot of the bridges where it is observable that a human falls down toward the water just a second or two before a gigantic explosion. Batman, once hit by the flamethrower fell down/ rolled down the bridge. We then see Gordon and his partner eating doughnuts and listening to the scanner in their car at the base of the bridge, when batman falls on the hood of their car. They get freaked, and just a second later we zoom out to see the blast. Gordon leaps out of his car and pulls batman into the back seat as rubble is raining down. Gordon’s arm gets crushed by a piece of cement. Gordon still insists that he drive. Once all three are in the car he drives in a hurry to Wayne manner. His partner (Very young- and called officer Grayson) is demanding that they take him to the hospital under arrest. And when Gordon ignores and then refuses the request, telling him that “I know what I’m doing, I know more about this situation” his partner pulls a gun and explains that the batman killed his dad (a detective killed by the wrath) and demands he turn back. Gordon then decides to explain to him all he knows (except that Bruce is batman), even the evidence he has that batman did not kill his father- but says that under the false assumption that batman killed Harvey dent, no one would believe him.
After taking Bruce to the bat cave and doing what they can for his wounds (which are not too severe, but still pretty bad, and had knocked him out for a while- Bruce comes to and learns what happened, and insists that Officer Grayson stay at his place until all things are sorted out- it takes coaxing and eventually a paralytic agent to get him to stay. It is hard to administer it however, due to his martial arts training.
All the while though Edward has become increasingly ill and goes to a new doctor- Thomas Elliot.
In treating him for cancer Thomas Elliot (Hush) finds out about his patients own hatred for Bruce Wayne (but doesn’t learn why at this time) when Edward finds Thomas throwing darts in his office at a picture of Bruce and some news articles about him.
We leave them for now in the middle of a discussion of how to bring down Bruce Wayne.

We then move to pix. After showing how she became what she is now –including a bout with the police, the tale ends with Edward Nigma coming to her and making a proposition.
He brings her to Thomas’s house where Edward and Her are confronted while eating dinner by a man in facial wrappings. Pix is about to attack but Edward tells her to be calm. As the bandages come off we see that it is Bruce Wayne…or at least his look alike.
After taking a moment to take revel in the moment he pulls Edward aside and asks why she is here, saying that they don’t need her help.
Edward then reveals that no one has heard from Bruce Wayne in a couple days and that it is not going to be as easy as Hush may have expected to replace Wayne. He then offers a riddle, which Hush cannot figure out quick enough so Edward tells him- Bruce Wayne is batman. Hush is taken back and is angry that he was not told this before, he puts Edward in a headlock in a manner that would put batman to shame. Edward chokes out that he still needs him and the lady to occupy batman- hush reluctantly lets go. Edward explains that Bruce does not take on his alter ego as much now because the police are hunting him because he is a murderer, and that he and the lady, as well as ‘the wrath’ will be necessary to weaken and distract batman/ Bruce.
Hush chuckles a little and glares at Edward. “You are more expendable to me than you think”

We are then at the point when Bruce, while recovering at home and doing his best to discover who the wrath is, or who he will kill next, after the hunt continues and clever mind games are played with him- almost worthy of the joker- he receives a riddle (how, I can’t think of a cool clever way…)
It is signed “Wrath”
Once deciphered it leads batman to where he meets up against pix and an epic battle ensues-(clearly well planned by the riddler)- which includes some evasion and ambush during one of the periods of evasion it goes back to hush for the meeting and during a second it shows his actions at the mansion.

Meanwhile Hush has gone to a meeting as Bruce Wayne and then has gone back to the mansion.
Before Hush gets to the mansion (actually, as soon as Bruce leaves) we see officer Grayson at the computers doing research on the wrath and then makes a connection. He then finds the old batman suit and uses it, then leaves.
At the mansion Hush does his best to impersonate Wayne but Alfred sees through it. He tries to secretly get help but Hush discovers him and stops him, and shoots him.
He then searches for the bat cave and finds it and begins pulling up files on Wayne’s business and accounts etc.
We return to the battle between pix and batman (it is up to you how it ends- but she ends up injured and escapes).
We then come on Dick Grayson who finds The Wrath. This is the first time we actually see the wrath, as he steps out of the shadows. The Wrath complements him (thinking it is batman) on the murder of Harvey Dent, but he approaches menacingly and the wrath fights.
Grayson holds his own for a little while but soon begins to lose. The wrath recognizes that this is not the real batman when he has him pinned down and asks who he really is. At this point a black knife hits wrath in the side and pierces his suit. And Grayson kicks him off of him to see pix, who looks very surprised and confused, (they are all on a roof) She backs up a couple steps to the stairwell she came up and almost falls but catches herself, she then begins to create a gun aimed at Grayson, but he shoots an electric ‘bat chip’ at her, zapping her and causing her to fall down the stairs. Grayson then turns to wrath who tries to get up and attack him, but Grayson kicks him back down and holds bat blade to his throat. Wrath asks angrily, and in pain ‘who are you?’ Grayson then tilts his head and thinks for a second, then says in a vengeful tone- “nightwing” He then drops the knife quickly grabs the wraths head- struggles, then breaks his neck. He then gets up and we see him staring off into the distance. We then catch a view of pix’s wounds fixing themselves in the stairwell, and she opens her eyes.

Batman has meanwhile been searching from pix, but not being able to find her he returns to Wayne manner. Once the bat cave door opens hush eludes Wayne. Bruce finds Alfred upstairs and calls an ambulance right as he hears something from the bat cave; he comes down just in time to see himself driving off on the bat bike (Hush does not know he was seen). He quickly does a last check on Alfred and regretfully hops in… and chases after.

Hush gets back to his house as he sees pix stumbling up to the door. He gets off, walks up behind her and shoots her. He then goes in, and quickly reapplies his facial bandages. When he comes down to his basement lab he finds riddler, pouring over books on riddles. He sneaks up behind him and grabs him with a gun to his head. He drags him upstairs while yelling at him about his and pix failure. He struggles to stuff riddler into the fireplace and just as he is about to ignite it, batman jumps him.
Another epic battle ensues, batman is loosing. Nightwing joins in near the end but …something happens to him…(where the battle takes them); as batman is about to be killed, we hear a shotgun cock from behind, and we hear Aaron Eckhart’s voice “You know, its odd, when you put me in that- what did you call it…Lazarus pit, you didn’t think about the repercussions. Nor did you when you fixed my face and pumped me full of anti psychotics and anti depressants. We then see Harvey Dent behind him. Hush turns to face him.
“He is still your enemy- he killed your fiancée and you owe” Bang! Hush is shot in the chest and falls stumbles of the bridge.
And you can figure out the rest.

Proposition 8, a moderate’s argument

First it should be known that I am a moderate.
I believe in showing love and support for individuals who have same sex feelings in their life.
However, I support proposition 8, and believe most people should for these reasons.
I also encourage people to beware researching this topic on google, as they have stated their political opinion and have made it obvious by their search returns (compared to yahoo).
First I must address the claim that it would take away human rights.
Where does this come from- the California constitution.
It has provision of equal protection under the law.
Here is part of what wikipedia has on the matter:

“In 1948, the California Supreme Court became the first state court in the country to strike down a law prohibiting interracial marriage. It was the only state supreme court to do so before the United States Supreme Court invalidated all those laws in 1967. The California Supreme Court held that “marriage is … something more than a civil contract subject to regulation by the state; it is a fundamental right of free men … Legislation infringing such rights must be based upon more than prejudice and must be free from oppressive discrimination to comply with the constitutional requirements of due process and equal protection of the laws” (Perez v. Sharp (1948) 32 Cal.2d 711, 714-715). The California Supreme Court explained that “the right to marry is the right to join in marriage with the person of one’s choice” (Id., at p. 715).[7]“

It is clear from this, and has always been clear to me, that restriction of the ‘right’ to marry must be based on facts of why it is better to exclude a group, and not on prejudice.
(in my opinion it would have perhaps been better to amend the constitution to declare marriage to be a sacred union, and not a civil, and make all others civil unions.)
In any case it is obvious to most people that though our society values equality, some rights cannot be granted to those who would cause some harm by it. You may think it wrong to compare the two (and don’t let anger blind you at first because I will explain more fully later), but an example which magnifies the already existent fact of what I am trying to convey, is gun rights. We would not grant gun rights to those who we believed could cause harm by it.
Here is the part which should be either decided by the public, or proven with sociological studies. Both of these have been done and have shown that there is indeed harm caused by homosexual relations.
I shall return to what that harm is, but first I desire to go back to the basics.

Sexual promiscuity has detrimental effects to the emotions of at least those closely connected to the participatory parties (and very often the participants themselves).
Sociological studies have proven the relationship between this and divorce rates (even of non-participants who are exposed to such actions by other means and are lead to be unsatisfied with their own relationship).
Because of this relation with divorce rates it will lead to additional emotional consequences for the couple, and their children. This will thus impede their growth toward being a responsible member of society and a happy person.
Much is the same with same-sex tendencies.
It would provide yer another alternative to the family model and would spread by example (considering that although it is a conscious choice for some people, it is often the result of biological abnormalities or psychological impacts and influences from life- including what is portrayed as common or acceptable.)
It has already been shown in Europe that the same thought processes which allow this, indicate to the populous that there is nothing sacred about marriage, getting married, or staying married. (And make no mistake, this is exactly what the state would be saying to condone homosexual marriage seeing as it is clearly opposed in most religious texts.) (Anyone who believes Christianity would not oppose it is free to request a debate on this matter with me.)
If our society is lead to believe, as has become the case in Europe, that marriage is not sacred to God, then it why should it be important to man.
(If this would be a result then the state- if wishing to avoid the repercussions of more divorce and non-married couples- has a right to act with appropriate measure to prevent it, including separating sacred ceremonies from civil ceremonies, or restricting the right as has been done reasonably with some gun laws. This then does not interfere with the establishment clause of the constitution, or even the ’separation of church and state’ which I hope everyone recognizes is not a part of our constitution.)
So then, why would we not want homosexuality, besides that it leads to increased divorce rates through subtle input to the mind of man? Is it bad, or does it just lead to bad things which seem far separated (but are in fact not separated enough from the cause to unjustify action).
There are not many reasons which are obvious to our limited minds, but here are a few:
1. Aids- which is more prevalent (as a percentage) among homosexuals (and I would say likely began through such actions)
2. Abuse- such relations have been shown to be more abusive.
3. No male, no matter how in touch with his feminine side, can ever replace a female mother in the proper development of a child. (Same with women)
And it would be a lie to think that this would not significantly increase the adoption of children by homosexual couples. It will, and it will likely cause the law to allow it more fully.

Here are a few sites I refer you to:

 

http://prop8discussion.wordpress.com/2008/10/20/separate-but-equal/

http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200402050842.asp

http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html

I realize that there are some provisions in the california constitution to allow parents to remove their children, but it will still get almost as bad as Massachusetts. As proof:

http://prop8discussion.wordpress.com/2008/10/24/ca-kindergartners-treated-to-coming-out-day/

Thanks to Mike Farinha for bringing these to my attention.

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!