Here is one you never thought of. What does automation have to do with Obamacare? Good question. Everything! What Obamacare is going to do is to increase the cost of labor in the USA faster than the increase in productivity. Further, it is going to increase the cost of labor the most for the lowest paid people. Look at it this way. If the average health care cost for the lowest paid people is now $3,000 per year and $5,000 for the highest paid people and with Obamacare, it will become more "equal". That means the cost for the lower paid person will increase to at least $6,000 per year and the highest paid person to $7,000 per year. What is the net impact of all this?
For the person who now makes only $36,000, it will mean that he will now cost $3,000 more to hire. For the person making $100,000, it will mean $1,000 more to hire. On a percentage basis, that works out to an increase of 8.3% for the lower paid person and an increase of 1.0% for the higher paid person. Now we are getting to the main point. If I have a business that hires a lot of lower skilled people and thus these lower paid people, my labor cost is going to increase by 8.3% just due to Obamacare. For my higher paid more skilled people I am only looking at an increase of 1%. What do you think I am going to do? I am going to send more of my work to China or "automate" the jobs out of existence. I don't have to pay for Obamacare on my automated machines!!
It is a fact that the easiest jobs to automate are the lowest skilled and lowest paid jobs. The main problem with automation is that the machines cost a lot and in many cases, it is cheaper to go with the lower skilled, lower paid people. If we have to pay these lower skilled people more than they are worth, it means we would be much better off automating them out of existence and that is exactly what is going to happen.
The other thing in the equation is the cost of money. The lower the interest rates are the easier it is to justify the capital expenditure for the automation equipment. You know where we are going with interest rates. Combine lower interest rates with Obamacare and you have the ingredients of the "perfect storm" for low skilled, low paid workers. What Obamacare is going to do is just the opposite of what Obama has been promising to his supporters. Because Obama's supporters are so blind to the simple facts of economics, none of them see what is coming down the pike. With much cheaper computers, automation is now going to go into high gear and much of the automation is going to come from China. Like Japan after WWII when Japan just made simple toys for exports, Japan has shifted to high tech. China will be doing the same thing. That is why they will supply the cheap automation that our business can now justify much better with Obamacare.
This is a little complex for some of you, but wait and it will become clear in a few years. There is no free lunch. Obamacare is not a free lunch, the people who will pay are the people who Obamacare was supposed to help. It always turns out that way doesn't it?
PS-----What about the "minimum wage"? What additional impact do you think that will have? Combine minimum wage, Obamacare and the Fed printing money to keep interest rates down and you have the perfect storm for the people Obama wants to help. Just watch MacDonald's and their new automation programs to see the impact. It will not be a nice picture for Obama's friends.
PS-----One "smart" person can eliminate 10 low skilled workers with automation. The only thing that will save the low skilled jobs is our shortage of "smart" people to build and maintain the automation equipment. Is that sad or what? Welcome to France.
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Understanding Obamacare With 4th Grade Math
I use my 4th grade math a lot because it is about as complex as the average voter can understand. In the case of Obamacare, all you need is 4th grade math to see how stupid it is. The answer to the liberal call to, "do something for the uninsured" was Obamacare. What was the reason for "doing something". The claim was that there were about 40 million people who did not have health insurance and we had to "do something". The starting point was that about 85% of the people already had health insurance and it was costing us 17% of our total GNP. For the record, we were spending more for health care as a percentage of our GNP than any other country in the world. Now the 4th grade math.
We have about 320 million people, so 40 million means we need to add 14.3% more people. If we can do that for the same amount that we now spend per person, the 17% of our GNP will jump to 19.4% of our GNP. There are a couple more things that need to be considered. How about those extra mandates that are required by Obamacare to "correct" the substandard health insurance plans most people now have. Let's say that those will add 5% to the cost of insurance under Obamacare. That works out to increasing our health care to 20.5% of our GNP. Finally. do you think that people in Washington DC can run health care more efficiently than us individuals spending our own money? No way! Let's say that the efficiency drops to 97% of what it is now. That means the share of our GNP will jump to 21%.
The impact of all this is that we will have to give up some of the things that we spend our 83% share of our GNP on now. If the spending on health care goes up from 17% to 21%, that means our 83% share will drop to 79% of the GNP. 4% drop means that our standard of living will drop 4.8% due to Obamacare alone.
Notice that my numbers do not take into account the fact that the cost of health care is going up at over twice the rate of increase of our GNP. That means it will be even worse than what my 4th grade numbers show. If you can handle 4th grade math, check out my numbers. Make your own estimates and see what the impact of Obamacare will be.
We have about 320 million people, so 40 million means we need to add 14.3% more people. If we can do that for the same amount that we now spend per person, the 17% of our GNP will jump to 19.4% of our GNP. There are a couple more things that need to be considered. How about those extra mandates that are required by Obamacare to "correct" the substandard health insurance plans most people now have. Let's say that those will add 5% to the cost of insurance under Obamacare. That works out to increasing our health care to 20.5% of our GNP. Finally. do you think that people in Washington DC can run health care more efficiently than us individuals spending our own money? No way! Let's say that the efficiency drops to 97% of what it is now. That means the share of our GNP will jump to 21%.
The impact of all this is that we will have to give up some of the things that we spend our 83% share of our GNP on now. If the spending on health care goes up from 17% to 21%, that means our 83% share will drop to 79% of the GNP. 4% drop means that our standard of living will drop 4.8% due to Obamacare alone.
Notice that my numbers do not take into account the fact that the cost of health care is going up at over twice the rate of increase of our GNP. That means it will be even worse than what my 4th grade numbers show. If you can handle 4th grade math, check out my numbers. Make your own estimates and see what the impact of Obamacare will be.
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
The Predictable Just Happened Regarding Obamacare
I was talking to a group of friends, one of which, was a typical liberal. This person challenged the rest of the group by asking, "If you don't like Obamacare then what is the Republicans answer to our problem with so many of our people being without good health insurance". I think that he was expecting some monster program run out of Washington DC to come from us conservatives. We all said that "doing nothing was better than Obamacare". Again, this liberal challenged that "doing nothing was not acceptable". The group could see that this typical liberal had a very serious "blind spot" when it comes to public policy. Here is how the conversation went.
Out of no where this liberal stated that we have one of the worst health care systems in the world. We tried to pin him down, but he kept jumping to different points without any basis He did not seem to want to stay on the subject until the group could sort out the different aspects and present different views. I can only conclude that this person had such a weak grasp of the subject that his view could not stand up to the light of day.
I tried to develop the point that "doing nothing" is an important alternative in any decision situation, but the person just could not grasp the simplicity of this important point. As I pointed out in a prior blog, this close minded attitude seems to be a typical human failure when it comes to decision making. Several in the group pointed out that it is better to do nothing than to do something that just made the situation worst, but again this typical liberal responded with a closed mind. I already knew that most liberals thought this way, but I felt that with the right presentation of the facts that they may change their minds. I am very sorry to have to conclude that once a person buys into the liberal "do gooder" mind set that it is next to impossible to ever bring them back to reality thru simple logic.
This point only shows how serious it is for our country when we turn over the minds of our children to the unionized school teachers and college professors. The people who help shape the minds of our kids are at least 90% Democrats and liberals. These are the same people who cry out for "diversity" yet they are mostly union members, Democrats and liberals. They are just as blind to this fact as my friend was above.
Like most problems, the first step is to admit there is a problem and Democrats have not gotten to this first point yet. There is no point in discussing solutions until the other party can admit that there is even a problem. Regarding the minds of our kids, only a very few conservatives realize how serious the problem in our schools is and thus we can not expect any serious discussion. Like Obamacare, our schools have gotten worse as they have gotten larger and controlled more centrally. The one room school house did a better job than what we have now even with our greater spending. Obamacare is going down exactly the same road. I think that I could say the same about Mega-Churches. Bigger is not better and the "guy behind the tree" does not know more than you do about what is good for you nor does he know better how to spend your money.
If you think this blog has wondered, think again. There is a common thread that goes thru all of this and that is "Bigger is not better". 325 million minds solving their own problems is much better than a dozen minds in Washington DC trying to tell us all what is good for us. Think about it? It is real simple and what we don't need are big complex systems to solve simple problems.
Out of no where this liberal stated that we have one of the worst health care systems in the world. We tried to pin him down, but he kept jumping to different points without any basis He did not seem to want to stay on the subject until the group could sort out the different aspects and present different views. I can only conclude that this person had such a weak grasp of the subject that his view could not stand up to the light of day.
I tried to develop the point that "doing nothing" is an important alternative in any decision situation, but the person just could not grasp the simplicity of this important point. As I pointed out in a prior blog, this close minded attitude seems to be a typical human failure when it comes to decision making. Several in the group pointed out that it is better to do nothing than to do something that just made the situation worst, but again this typical liberal responded with a closed mind. I already knew that most liberals thought this way, but I felt that with the right presentation of the facts that they may change their minds. I am very sorry to have to conclude that once a person buys into the liberal "do gooder" mind set that it is next to impossible to ever bring them back to reality thru simple logic.
This point only shows how serious it is for our country when we turn over the minds of our children to the unionized school teachers and college professors. The people who help shape the minds of our kids are at least 90% Democrats and liberals. These are the same people who cry out for "diversity" yet they are mostly union members, Democrats and liberals. They are just as blind to this fact as my friend was above.
Like most problems, the first step is to admit there is a problem and Democrats have not gotten to this first point yet. There is no point in discussing solutions until the other party can admit that there is even a problem. Regarding the minds of our kids, only a very few conservatives realize how serious the problem in our schools is and thus we can not expect any serious discussion. Like Obamacare, our schools have gotten worse as they have gotten larger and controlled more centrally. The one room school house did a better job than what we have now even with our greater spending. Obamacare is going down exactly the same road. I think that I could say the same about Mega-Churches. Bigger is not better and the "guy behind the tree" does not know more than you do about what is good for you nor does he know better how to spend your money.
If you think this blog has wondered, think again. There is a common thread that goes thru all of this and that is "Bigger is not better". 325 million minds solving their own problems is much better than a dozen minds in Washington DC trying to tell us all what is good for us. Think about it? It is real simple and what we don't need are big complex systems to solve simple problems.
Future Shock
It is human nature to wonder about the future. The expression "future shock" has been over used, but in this case, it just may be appropriate. What will the future be like? How will the future affect me? Will the quality of my life be better or worse? What should I do now to prepare for the future? These are all good questions, but they don't tell you what the future will be like. That is the point of my blog.
If history is a predictor of the future, then what was the most significant "trend" of the last 100 years? Notice that I said "trend"? The "trend" is the first derivative of that history. The first derivative only deals with what was changing. It tells you the direction of that trend and how steep that trend was. What I noticed about that historical trend is that the trend is "not" a straight line. It is curving up. That means the rate of change is going faster and faster. After all of this, what is the trend that I have been talking about? Here it is.
The currency of the recent past and the future is intellect and smarts. Your value as a worker is based more on your intellect and smarts than your physical skills and that trend is going up faster and faster. The relative value of physical skills is going down, but it is even more significant than that. What I have done is to propose a simple test that will clearly show the affects of this trend. If you don't get the message after this test, I do not think there is any hope for you or your children. Here it is.
We first take a group of 8th graders and give them two tests. The first test is a test to see how many nails they can drive into a piece of wood in a set amount of time. We will not count nails that are bent over. Got it? The second test of the same group of kids will be to add up sets of three digit numbers, and again for a set amount of time. Simple test, right?
Next, how will we use the results? We will first take the results of the nail driving test and find the average nails driven in the set amount of time. We will pay each kid one dollar for each nail driven. They get to keep the money for doing the test.
Next, we will look at the results of the number adding test. Only correct answers will be counted. Like in the nail driving test, we will find the average of sets of numbers correctly added. For that average, we will give the same number of dollars that we gave for the nail driving test. This makes the two test approximately equal. The kids will then get paid based on the percentage of sets of numbers that they correctly added compared to the average. Little complicated so make the two test have an equal pay off.
Here are the results of 10 kids who took the tests;
* Nail driving test
*Best kid-----------------16 nails------------$16-------------$8
*Average-----------------13 nails------------$13-------------$6.50
*Lowest kid-------------- 7 nails------------$ 7--------------$3.50
* Adding numbers test
*Best kid-----------------22 sets-------------$28.60
*Average-----------------10 sets-------------$13
*Lowest kid-------------- 0 sets-------------$00
Notice that the "best" kid on the adding test earned over twice the average and one kid did not earn any thing at all. Is this fair? Each kid was paid according to what they actually did. I think that was fair. The key point that I did not show was that there are so many kids who can drive nails compared to those who are fast at adding numbers that the "value" of driving nails in the future will only be worth half of what I have shown.
Notice in my adjusted numbers for driving nails that the best kid at adding numbers earned almost 4 times the best kid driving nails. This is the "future shock" that I am blogging about. The distribution of earnings is going to get worse and it is going to get a lot worse. That is real "Future Shock". The differences between individuals in physical performance, like driving nails, is small. Where as, work that requires intellect or smarts is much greater. That is the "future shock"!!
The whole world is in this game so there is no painless way that we can change the rules or get out of the game. We can't vote to take our ball home on this one. The future game is that we just have to play the game where intellect and smarts count for more than physical performance, like it or not. Sorry!
PS----In the old days, when driving nails was a typical job, the best nail driver only made 23% more than the average nail driver. Those were the old days. In the future when intellect is the name of the game, the best number adding kid will make 220% more than the average number adding kid. The kids who can only drive nails will make less in the future than they do now. That means the difference will be even greater between nail drivers and number adders. Is this a wake up call or what?
If history is a predictor of the future, then what was the most significant "trend" of the last 100 years? Notice that I said "trend"? The "trend" is the first derivative of that history. The first derivative only deals with what was changing. It tells you the direction of that trend and how steep that trend was. What I noticed about that historical trend is that the trend is "not" a straight line. It is curving up. That means the rate of change is going faster and faster. After all of this, what is the trend that I have been talking about? Here it is.
The currency of the recent past and the future is intellect and smarts. Your value as a worker is based more on your intellect and smarts than your physical skills and that trend is going up faster and faster. The relative value of physical skills is going down, but it is even more significant than that. What I have done is to propose a simple test that will clearly show the affects of this trend. If you don't get the message after this test, I do not think there is any hope for you or your children. Here it is.
We first take a group of 8th graders and give them two tests. The first test is a test to see how many nails they can drive into a piece of wood in a set amount of time. We will not count nails that are bent over. Got it? The second test of the same group of kids will be to add up sets of three digit numbers, and again for a set amount of time. Simple test, right?
Next, how will we use the results? We will first take the results of the nail driving test and find the average nails driven in the set amount of time. We will pay each kid one dollar for each nail driven. They get to keep the money for doing the test.
Next, we will look at the results of the number adding test. Only correct answers will be counted. Like in the nail driving test, we will find the average of sets of numbers correctly added. For that average, we will give the same number of dollars that we gave for the nail driving test. This makes the two test approximately equal. The kids will then get paid based on the percentage of sets of numbers that they correctly added compared to the average. Little complicated so make the two test have an equal pay off.
Here are the results of 10 kids who took the tests;
* Nail driving test
*Best kid-----------------16 nails------------$16-------------$8
*Average-----------------13 nails------------$13-------------$6.50
*Lowest kid-------------- 7 nails------------$ 7--------------$3.50
* Adding numbers test
*Best kid-----------------22 sets-------------$28.60
*Average-----------------10 sets-------------$13
*Lowest kid-------------- 0 sets-------------$00
Notice that the "best" kid on the adding test earned over twice the average and one kid did not earn any thing at all. Is this fair? Each kid was paid according to what they actually did. I think that was fair. The key point that I did not show was that there are so many kids who can drive nails compared to those who are fast at adding numbers that the "value" of driving nails in the future will only be worth half of what I have shown.
Notice in my adjusted numbers for driving nails that the best kid at adding numbers earned almost 4 times the best kid driving nails. This is the "future shock" that I am blogging about. The distribution of earnings is going to get worse and it is going to get a lot worse. That is real "Future Shock". The differences between individuals in physical performance, like driving nails, is small. Where as, work that requires intellect or smarts is much greater. That is the "future shock"!!
The whole world is in this game so there is no painless way that we can change the rules or get out of the game. We can't vote to take our ball home on this one. The future game is that we just have to play the game where intellect and smarts count for more than physical performance, like it or not. Sorry!
PS----In the old days, when driving nails was a typical job, the best nail driver only made 23% more than the average nail driver. Those were the old days. In the future when intellect is the name of the game, the best number adding kid will make 220% more than the average number adding kid. The kids who can only drive nails will make less in the future than they do now. That means the difference will be even greater between nail drivers and number adders. Is this a wake up call or what?
Thursday, November 14, 2013
Obamacare Or Doing The Right Thing
If you have ever seen an emergency event in a movie in almost every case, someone screams, "Do something". It seems to be human nature for most to act this way. That is the point of this blog. In the case of Obamacare, the Democrats "did" something and see what has happened? Human nature is such that "doing nothing" never seems to be one of the alternatives. You have to admit that doing the "wrong thing" is worse than "doing nothing". If you understand that simple point, then you will see that Obamacare was the "wrong thing" to do. The Republicans wanted to "do nothing" and as it has turned out "doing nothing" was the "right thing" to do.
The news media keeps pointing out that all the Republicans want to do is to "do nothing". That's right and it is the "right thing" to do. When I used to teach Decision Theory at a major university one of the most difficult concept to get across was that "doing nothing" was an alternative that needed to be considered in every decision situation and is often the "right thing" to do. The reason is that us humans seem to be preprogrammed "not" to consider "doing nothing" as a decision.
If you would pass this concept on to your friends, you would be doing a great public service. If more people understood this simple fact we would not have Obamacare and all the mess that it has created. The Republicans did not need a "better health care plan" to counter Obamacare, all they needed was to convince the voters that "doing nothing" was better than Obamacare. What Republicans did not understand is how stupid our voters are. Obama did and he was able to pull the wool over the eyes of over 50% of the voters. Simple isn't it?
PS-----Did you ever wonder why many people in the USA do "not" have health insurance? Rather than look at who does not have health insurance, we should look at those who "do" have health insurance. How are the people who have health insurance different from those who do not? It seems that we should try to get those who do not have health insurance to do the things that those who have health insurance have done. Now what are those? Complete high school, that is number one. Tax payers owe nothing to those of our citizens who did not complete our "free" high school. The next group are those who committed a felony even if they are out of jail. Those who have children out of wedlock, both the mothers and the fathers. Take care of the children, but not the parents. People who are seriously handicapped or mentally retarded. Just being blind, for example, is not enough. If we were to do some of these things, I think us tax payers wouldn't have a problem taking care of those who really need help.
The news media keeps pointing out that all the Republicans want to do is to "do nothing". That's right and it is the "right thing" to do. When I used to teach Decision Theory at a major university one of the most difficult concept to get across was that "doing nothing" was an alternative that needed to be considered in every decision situation and is often the "right thing" to do. The reason is that us humans seem to be preprogrammed "not" to consider "doing nothing" as a decision.
If you would pass this concept on to your friends, you would be doing a great public service. If more people understood this simple fact we would not have Obamacare and all the mess that it has created. The Republicans did not need a "better health care plan" to counter Obamacare, all they needed was to convince the voters that "doing nothing" was better than Obamacare. What Republicans did not understand is how stupid our voters are. Obama did and he was able to pull the wool over the eyes of over 50% of the voters. Simple isn't it?
PS-----Did you ever wonder why many people in the USA do "not" have health insurance? Rather than look at who does not have health insurance, we should look at those who "do" have health insurance. How are the people who have health insurance different from those who do not? It seems that we should try to get those who do not have health insurance to do the things that those who have health insurance have done. Now what are those? Complete high school, that is number one. Tax payers owe nothing to those of our citizens who did not complete our "free" high school. The next group are those who committed a felony even if they are out of jail. Those who have children out of wedlock, both the mothers and the fathers. Take care of the children, but not the parents. People who are seriously handicapped or mentally retarded. Just being blind, for example, is not enough. If we were to do some of these things, I think us tax payers wouldn't have a problem taking care of those who really need help.
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
Who Should Have To Pay For Obama's Lie?
Obama has gotten himself into a fix with his promise that, ".....you can keep your insurance. Period! ..." It now seems that Obama wants us tax payers to pay the bill for the calculated lie he told to the voters in order to get his Obamacare bill passed and to get himself reelected. It is clear that if he had not been able to pull off the lie that Obamacare would never have passed nor would he have been reelected. Rather that us tax payers paying the tab for his promise, it would seem to me that Obama should be the one who pays or get some "skin" in the game. As it stands now, Obama has gotten what he wants and has not put any "skin" in the game. Is that fair?
It should be clear to everyone by now that the whole purpose of Obamacare was to get the hard working responsible tax payers to "pay" for Obamacare. That means the mostly responsible people should pay for the mostly irresponsible people. Now, that is clearly "not" fair. Just who are these people who do not have comprehensive health insurance any way? For starters, 40% of our population did not graduate high school. If that is the case, how can they ever expect to hold a job or earn enough money to pay for their own health care? No way! Who else is in this group who needs health insurance so bad? How about Blacks? If the national high school drop out rate is 40%, what do you think it is in the Black community? How about 75%. There are more Black males covered with tax payer paid health care "in prisons" than would be covered by Obamacare.
Some of the people who do not have health insurance now are people who are out of work just like their mothers and fathers before them. As the skill set for modern workers have changed, these people have not made the effort to keep up. More and more, we have machines that can do the work that they once did, but who builds those machines? People who are more skilled. If you have purchased any kind of complex tool or machine, you will notice that it is not made here in the USA. Did you ever wonder why? It is not because the people in China are paid less. It is because many of our people do not have the needed skill to design or build those machines. Getting off track here, but these are the people who Obama wants to give "free" health insurance when they should be earning and paying for their own health insurance like most other people.
I think the "skin" that Obama should now put in the game are those rewards that he got as a result of his lie about Obamacare. Since he got the law passed and reelected, he should have to give up both of those before us tax payers pick up any part of the tab. Just cleaning up his mess is going to cost us, but keeping Obamacare as part of that clean up is a non starter. I know that with Obama's ego, he wants to "double down", but that will not work this time. I think that the Judas has been exposed and now we all know that he does not have any cloths. This is not a fairy tale ending, but I think it just may be------The End
It should be clear to everyone by now that the whole purpose of Obamacare was to get the hard working responsible tax payers to "pay" for Obamacare. That means the mostly responsible people should pay for the mostly irresponsible people. Now, that is clearly "not" fair. Just who are these people who do not have comprehensive health insurance any way? For starters, 40% of our population did not graduate high school. If that is the case, how can they ever expect to hold a job or earn enough money to pay for their own health care? No way! Who else is in this group who needs health insurance so bad? How about Blacks? If the national high school drop out rate is 40%, what do you think it is in the Black community? How about 75%. There are more Black males covered with tax payer paid health care "in prisons" than would be covered by Obamacare.
Some of the people who do not have health insurance now are people who are out of work just like their mothers and fathers before them. As the skill set for modern workers have changed, these people have not made the effort to keep up. More and more, we have machines that can do the work that they once did, but who builds those machines? People who are more skilled. If you have purchased any kind of complex tool or machine, you will notice that it is not made here in the USA. Did you ever wonder why? It is not because the people in China are paid less. It is because many of our people do not have the needed skill to design or build those machines. Getting off track here, but these are the people who Obama wants to give "free" health insurance when they should be earning and paying for their own health insurance like most other people.
I think the "skin" that Obama should now put in the game are those rewards that he got as a result of his lie about Obamacare. Since he got the law passed and reelected, he should have to give up both of those before us tax payers pick up any part of the tab. Just cleaning up his mess is going to cost us, but keeping Obamacare as part of that clean up is a non starter. I know that with Obama's ego, he wants to "double down", but that will not work this time. I think that the Judas has been exposed and now we all know that he does not have any cloths. This is not a fairy tale ending, but I think it just may be------The End
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
National Priorities
With all the bull shit that flows around Washington DC, isn't it interesting that we never hear any kind of debate about "National Priorities". Is seems that Obama simply ordains our "National Priorities". I only have a two things that guide me in my position on most things. You ask, "What are those?" Well, that is the point of this blog.
Point number one----Are we working on the right thing or things. If you are not working on the highest priority item, you can't be working on the right thing and that is where we are now.
Point number two---Are we getting our monies worth. If you are not getting your monies worth, there is no reason to be working on what ever you are working on. Simple isn't it?
I am going to make a short list of items to see if we can prioritize them. There are all kinds of point systems that you could use to prioritize things, but the best that I have found is just simple rank ordering. That means the most important one on top and the least important on the bottom. Here is my list of items that seem to be on the national table.
* Diversity
* Wealth Redistribution
* Global Warming
* Obamacare
* High School Drop Out Rate
* Minimum Wage
* High Cost Of College
* Immigration Policy
* Medical Cost
* Gun Control
I think that is 10 items. Anyone could make up a list and it would be different from mine, but that is not the point. My challenge to you is to rank these from most important to least important. Once you have done that make a column next to your list and rank from 1-10 the effort, money or national wealth that is being devoted to each. Now look at your list and see how things match up. Is your top item being given the most national resources? I know in advance that it is not and that is the problem.
I won't give you my numbers yet, but I will give you the top and bottom items on my list. The most important is "High School Drop Out Rate". It is 40%. That means only 60% of our kids graduate high school. This is a leading indicator of where we are going to end up as a nation and what our quality of life is going to be in the future. You know already that we are not getting out monies worth on what we are now doing in the area of education don't you? My 10th item is "Diversity" and you know what this is. We now have a lot of smart people wasting their own time and our tax money trying to do something that is not the business of any government. It is about the same as our government getting into religion and I think that you know what that would be like.
I would be very interested in where you would rank Obamacare on your list. It is on the top of Obama's list, but I am sure that when you think about it, it will not be very high on your list. My guess is that you will have a difficult time figuring if it is above or below Global Warming. That is just an example of how far off track our priorities have become. You know that we need to get our priorities straight don't you? How are we going to do that? You and me are going to have to start some place and this is as good of a place as there is......."Period" (Sorry, that one has already been used!)
Point number one----Are we working on the right thing or things. If you are not working on the highest priority item, you can't be working on the right thing and that is where we are now.
Point number two---Are we getting our monies worth. If you are not getting your monies worth, there is no reason to be working on what ever you are working on. Simple isn't it?
I am going to make a short list of items to see if we can prioritize them. There are all kinds of point systems that you could use to prioritize things, but the best that I have found is just simple rank ordering. That means the most important one on top and the least important on the bottom. Here is my list of items that seem to be on the national table.
* Diversity
* Wealth Redistribution
* Global Warming
* Obamacare
* High School Drop Out Rate
* Minimum Wage
* High Cost Of College
* Immigration Policy
* Medical Cost
* Gun Control
I think that is 10 items. Anyone could make up a list and it would be different from mine, but that is not the point. My challenge to you is to rank these from most important to least important. Once you have done that make a column next to your list and rank from 1-10 the effort, money or national wealth that is being devoted to each. Now look at your list and see how things match up. Is your top item being given the most national resources? I know in advance that it is not and that is the problem.
I won't give you my numbers yet, but I will give you the top and bottom items on my list. The most important is "High School Drop Out Rate". It is 40%. That means only 60% of our kids graduate high school. This is a leading indicator of where we are going to end up as a nation and what our quality of life is going to be in the future. You know already that we are not getting out monies worth on what we are now doing in the area of education don't you? My 10th item is "Diversity" and you know what this is. We now have a lot of smart people wasting their own time and our tax money trying to do something that is not the business of any government. It is about the same as our government getting into religion and I think that you know what that would be like.
I would be very interested in where you would rank Obamacare on your list. It is on the top of Obama's list, but I am sure that when you think about it, it will not be very high on your list. My guess is that you will have a difficult time figuring if it is above or below Global Warming. That is just an example of how far off track our priorities have become. You know that we need to get our priorities straight don't you? How are we going to do that? You and me are going to have to start some place and this is as good of a place as there is......."Period" (Sorry, that one has already been used!)
Friday, November 8, 2013
Macro-Economics Vs Micro-Economics
I guess that most of you are like most people when it comes to anything about Economics. Most people to not realize that there are at least two camps when it comes to economics. If you look at any college catalog though, you will find that 90% only deal with Macro-Economic issues. Did you ever thing about why that is? I know that you did not. First, I think that I just might need to define the two areas a little bit better.
Like the name says, Macro means big and Micro means little. How is that for clarification? Macro refers to the really big picture and Micro refers to the small picture. Buying a car or a home is Micro-Economics while being President mostly deals with Macro-Economic considerations. Does that seem a little clearer? The fact that there are two very distinct areas is not the problem. The problem is with our education system and how that affects the brains of our citizens who have the power to cast votes. It is very interesting that if you had 100 Economists in a room, most could agree on most areas of Micro-Economics. Contrast that with the fact that no more than two or three could agree on any thing significant about Macro-Economics. There is a lot more too this as you may have expected.
Why would some hot shot college professor want to teach a subject where almost everyone agreed. He would be bored doing his job and no professor wants that. It would be like teaching arithmatic to 4th graders while he has a Phd. For that reason, these people who you pay for only want to teach something that is not teachable since 90% of professor will disagree. It would be interesting to require all Economics professors to have to take the final exam of every other Economics professor. I am not sure that most could pass since most disagree with each other. Do you see where I am going with this?
What you will find in most colleges and universities is a big Economics department that only teaches Macro-Economics. I have looked thru a lot of college catalogs for Micro-Economics and have found very few classes offered. I think the reason is as I have described above. So, what's the problem? What's the problem? That is the problem.
99% of all the economic decisions that you will have to make in your life will only be Micro-Economic decisions, not Macro-Economic decisions. It would be much better if all of our high school and college graduates knew a lot more about Micro-Economics than about Macro-Economics. They would then be much better prepared for the actual decisions that life would require them to make. My question is now we got so far off the correct path in our education system. It is because use voters are so stupid and place so much trust in our teachers and professors. We need to take control rather than let them control us and tell us what is good for us.
We need to be prepared by our educational system to make the right decisions thru life and to also demand that our government also make the right decisions. Why is it that we never ask the simple question, "Is it worth it?" The reason is that we are incompetent when it comes to Micro-Economic. The problem for professors is that most Micro-Economic problems have only one correct answer. How could they justify their pay teaching something that was based on facts and numbers rather than total bull shit. They would much rather throw the BS around than to be bound by teaching a factual subject. Psychology, Political Science and Social Science is a similar form of total BS too. If you look at where our tax money is being spent, it is on this BS education where there is no correct answer and where a person can have any view that they want and still be accepted by the group. You know it and I know it. How we clean up the mess that we have allowed to fester is beyond me, but I know that eventually something has to be done. Macro and Micro Economics is just a good example of how far off the track we have gone.
Like the name says, Macro means big and Micro means little. How is that for clarification? Macro refers to the really big picture and Micro refers to the small picture. Buying a car or a home is Micro-Economics while being President mostly deals with Macro-Economic considerations. Does that seem a little clearer? The fact that there are two very distinct areas is not the problem. The problem is with our education system and how that affects the brains of our citizens who have the power to cast votes. It is very interesting that if you had 100 Economists in a room, most could agree on most areas of Micro-Economics. Contrast that with the fact that no more than two or three could agree on any thing significant about Macro-Economics. There is a lot more too this as you may have expected.
Why would some hot shot college professor want to teach a subject where almost everyone agreed. He would be bored doing his job and no professor wants that. It would be like teaching arithmatic to 4th graders while he has a Phd. For that reason, these people who you pay for only want to teach something that is not teachable since 90% of professor will disagree. It would be interesting to require all Economics professors to have to take the final exam of every other Economics professor. I am not sure that most could pass since most disagree with each other. Do you see where I am going with this?
What you will find in most colleges and universities is a big Economics department that only teaches Macro-Economics. I have looked thru a lot of college catalogs for Micro-Economics and have found very few classes offered. I think the reason is as I have described above. So, what's the problem? What's the problem? That is the problem.
99% of all the economic decisions that you will have to make in your life will only be Micro-Economic decisions, not Macro-Economic decisions. It would be much better if all of our high school and college graduates knew a lot more about Micro-Economics than about Macro-Economics. They would then be much better prepared for the actual decisions that life would require them to make. My question is now we got so far off the correct path in our education system. It is because use voters are so stupid and place so much trust in our teachers and professors. We need to take control rather than let them control us and tell us what is good for us.
We need to be prepared by our educational system to make the right decisions thru life and to also demand that our government also make the right decisions. Why is it that we never ask the simple question, "Is it worth it?" The reason is that we are incompetent when it comes to Micro-Economic. The problem for professors is that most Micro-Economic problems have only one correct answer. How could they justify their pay teaching something that was based on facts and numbers rather than total bull shit. They would much rather throw the BS around than to be bound by teaching a factual subject. Psychology, Political Science and Social Science is a similar form of total BS too. If you look at where our tax money is being spent, it is on this BS education where there is no correct answer and where a person can have any view that they want and still be accepted by the group. You know it and I know it. How we clean up the mess that we have allowed to fester is beyond me, but I know that eventually something has to be done. Macro and Micro Economics is just a good example of how far off the track we have gone.
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
The Back Door To Obamacare Cancelations
I think that we all now know that Obamacare was a very bad idea from the start and that it is going to cost much more than was promised. Further, it is going to hurt our economy and increase unemployment. I think that we could actually end up with fewer people with health insurance too. I have not read the whole law, but I think that I understand a few of its worst points. Those are that, you have to buy health insurance and that plan must cover a list of items mandated by the law. Most of the people who have had their policies canceled have been due to the fact that their policy did not meet all the mandates. Example, maturnity even if you are a single man. I think that I just might have stumbled onto a "back door" to Obamacare and here it is.
Let's say that you buy a policy that meets all the Obamacare mandates, but it has a very high deductible on the order of $100,000. A policy like that would be very cheap since the chances of it ever paying back would be almost "zero". With me so far? Now that you have satisfied the Obamacare law and are not subject to a penalty, you can look around for a "supplementary" policy. It is common to have a second supplementary health insurance policy to cover things "not" covered in your regular policy.
What the insurance companies could do is to sell "two" policies to people. One to get around the Obamacare law and the other to give the person the coverage that they really want. I don't see any problem with doing this and it would be a "back door". The problem with my plan would be that the insurance companies would not get the "wind fall" of money from selling high priced insurance polices to young people who have few health care problems. The insurance companies would not get the "wind fall" free money to subsidize health insurance for Obama's friends who voted for him like sheep. That would mean that the money to give free health care to Obama's friends would have to come by way of regular tax revenue and the Republican congress would block that. The net result is that Obamacare would fail or be canceled out.
I think it would work. The reason the insurance companies signed onto Obamacare in the first place is that they saw the chance to make some real money off young people. It would be like passing a law that everyone had to own a car and if you were too poor to buy your own car, the car dealer would charge more to those who could buy a car and then, with that extra money, give a free car to those who could not afford a car. According to the Obamacare concept, every one would own a car and the tax payers would not technically be out a dime. Obamacare may not cost the government a dime, but it would still cost the "tax payers". Obama pulled the wool over a lot of sheep's eyes when he explained how his great plan was going to work and even save the "government" money. Notice how he forgot about "you" and "me"?
PS----As explained above, our health care in the future is going to cost a lot more than the current 17% of our GNP because of Obamacare. In the case of the car dealers, they too are going to sell more cars and we will end up spending a lot more of our GNP on cars than we do now. You have to ask, "What happened to the free lunch?"
PS----Another point about a mandate by Obama to own a car. The people who used to buy the type of car that they wanted is now against the law. These new cars will have to have a special holder for the Food Stamp, Government Cell Phone, Union Card, Condoms and Green Cards.
Let's say that you buy a policy that meets all the Obamacare mandates, but it has a very high deductible on the order of $100,000. A policy like that would be very cheap since the chances of it ever paying back would be almost "zero". With me so far? Now that you have satisfied the Obamacare law and are not subject to a penalty, you can look around for a "supplementary" policy. It is common to have a second supplementary health insurance policy to cover things "not" covered in your regular policy.
What the insurance companies could do is to sell "two" policies to people. One to get around the Obamacare law and the other to give the person the coverage that they really want. I don't see any problem with doing this and it would be a "back door". The problem with my plan would be that the insurance companies would not get the "wind fall" of money from selling high priced insurance polices to young people who have few health care problems. The insurance companies would not get the "wind fall" free money to subsidize health insurance for Obama's friends who voted for him like sheep. That would mean that the money to give free health care to Obama's friends would have to come by way of regular tax revenue and the Republican congress would block that. The net result is that Obamacare would fail or be canceled out.
I think it would work. The reason the insurance companies signed onto Obamacare in the first place is that they saw the chance to make some real money off young people. It would be like passing a law that everyone had to own a car and if you were too poor to buy your own car, the car dealer would charge more to those who could buy a car and then, with that extra money, give a free car to those who could not afford a car. According to the Obamacare concept, every one would own a car and the tax payers would not technically be out a dime. Obamacare may not cost the government a dime, but it would still cost the "tax payers". Obama pulled the wool over a lot of sheep's eyes when he explained how his great plan was going to work and even save the "government" money. Notice how he forgot about "you" and "me"?
PS----As explained above, our health care in the future is going to cost a lot more than the current 17% of our GNP because of Obamacare. In the case of the car dealers, they too are going to sell more cars and we will end up spending a lot more of our GNP on cars than we do now. You have to ask, "What happened to the free lunch?"
PS----Another point about a mandate by Obama to own a car. The people who used to buy the type of car that they wanted is now against the law. These new cars will have to have a special holder for the Food Stamp, Government Cell Phone, Union Card, Condoms and Green Cards.
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Obamacare And Herding Cats
Have you ever heard someone say, "it is like herding cats"? If you know anything about cats, then you know that they are almost impossible to herd. It is not like herding sheep. Sheep would be like the people who voted for Obama and Obamacare. I think that you can see how easy it was for Obama, the Judas, to herd them which ever way that he wants. Obama's unique ability to herd sheep gave him far too much confidence that he could also herd cats. That in a nut shell is the problem that he now faces.
We all know that the roll-out of Obamacare has been a total disaster, but most people don't know why or did not see this coming. The reason is that computer programmers are a bunch of "cats" and we know that you can't herd "cats", or we should have known that. Of all the management areas that businesses face, the management of computer programmers and computer programs is the most difficut. The simple minded users of those programs have "zero" idea how difficult it was to develop the programs that even 5 year olds can operate. There is a world of difference between writing a computer program and using one. The complexity and difficulty of writing a computer program goes up as the program gets bigger, but it is not a one-for-one deal. It goes up at least at the cube or the third power. Example, if a small program has a difficulty of 10, then a program twice as big has a difficulty of 1,000. That is 10 x 10 x 10 = 1,000. If you are just a simple minded user of programs designed by some unknown expert, you have no idea about the complexity or difficulty.
Year ago, about 50 years, I became very interested in complex computer programs and was one of the very best at my university in writing them. I made almost "zero" errors in coding or logic. My professors saw my ability and recommended that I had a real future in computer systems. That may have been true, but they did not know what I knew at the time, and what was that? To write these complex programs without errors, you had to be a "cat". That's right, a "cat". No one could manage you because you could not explain to them in enough detail what you were doing and if you did, they would never understand it anyway. The only people who had a chance of understanding you had to be another "cat" and even then they could not fully understand you. See where I am coming from? I didn't think that being a cat would be a lot of fun, so I did not specialize in computer programming. End of story.
In the case of Obama and Obamacare, none of the people who were in charge were "cats". Even if they had been, with a program of this size and complexity, you would need a bunch of the best "cats" in the world to pull it off. Another rule, "the smarter the cat, the more difficult they are to herd". In this world, there are limits. and the size and complexity of computer programs have their limits too. Over the past 50 years, those limits have been pushed out from when it was just "1" and "0", but there are still limits. Human life time is just one. I don't know any "cats" that can live long enough to complete some programs. Have you been to Crazy Horse mountain in South Dakota? There is a project too large for even two or three life times. Starting to see the problem?
Anyone who is so stupid and with such a big ego that thinks that they can just "manage" smart programmers (cats) is going to fail and you know who that person is. Your President Obama. Obama can con people into voting for him or giving him money, but he is not a "cat", he is only a Judas.
We all know that the roll-out of Obamacare has been a total disaster, but most people don't know why or did not see this coming. The reason is that computer programmers are a bunch of "cats" and we know that you can't herd "cats", or we should have known that. Of all the management areas that businesses face, the management of computer programmers and computer programs is the most difficut. The simple minded users of those programs have "zero" idea how difficult it was to develop the programs that even 5 year olds can operate. There is a world of difference between writing a computer program and using one. The complexity and difficulty of writing a computer program goes up as the program gets bigger, but it is not a one-for-one deal. It goes up at least at the cube or the third power. Example, if a small program has a difficulty of 10, then a program twice as big has a difficulty of 1,000. That is 10 x 10 x 10 = 1,000. If you are just a simple minded user of programs designed by some unknown expert, you have no idea about the complexity or difficulty.
Year ago, about 50 years, I became very interested in complex computer programs and was one of the very best at my university in writing them. I made almost "zero" errors in coding or logic. My professors saw my ability and recommended that I had a real future in computer systems. That may have been true, but they did not know what I knew at the time, and what was that? To write these complex programs without errors, you had to be a "cat". That's right, a "cat". No one could manage you because you could not explain to them in enough detail what you were doing and if you did, they would never understand it anyway. The only people who had a chance of understanding you had to be another "cat" and even then they could not fully understand you. See where I am coming from? I didn't think that being a cat would be a lot of fun, so I did not specialize in computer programming. End of story.
In the case of Obama and Obamacare, none of the people who were in charge were "cats". Even if they had been, with a program of this size and complexity, you would need a bunch of the best "cats" in the world to pull it off. Another rule, "the smarter the cat, the more difficult they are to herd". In this world, there are limits. and the size and complexity of computer programs have their limits too. Over the past 50 years, those limits have been pushed out from when it was just "1" and "0", but there are still limits. Human life time is just one. I don't know any "cats" that can live long enough to complete some programs. Have you been to Crazy Horse mountain in South Dakota? There is a project too large for even two or three life times. Starting to see the problem?
Anyone who is so stupid and with such a big ego that thinks that they can just "manage" smart programmers (cats) is going to fail and you know who that person is. Your President Obama. Obama can con people into voting for him or giving him money, but he is not a "cat", he is only a Judas.
Monday, November 4, 2013
Be Ware Of Obamacare Mandates
What did you think was going to happen? Remember all the extra coverage items that were "mandated" in the Obamacare law? Were you asleep or what? The plan was simple, but the explanation by Obama was not. If Obama had been honest about his Obamacare package, it would never have passed. Remember, it only passed by a single vote!!
Now, remember, Obama is a Judas and here was his plan. There are a lot of poor stupid people in the USA who can vote and Obama knows it. Those years that he sat in Rev. Wright's church were not wasted. Obama learned his trade well from one of the masters. I have pointed out before that Obama is an even better con man than Rev. Wright, so here is the plan.
Obama wants go get as much power as he can get and wants to hold onto it for as long as he can. He does not care what he has to do to get that power. To destroy the USA will take more than just two four year terms. After Obama is out of office, he still wants to be able to pull the strings of power and to do that he needs votes and money. Notice how much of his time is spent raising campaign money? That money will be his power in the future. He will be able to hand pick his people in government with that money and voters who he has coned. With me on this? How does Obamacare fit in?
Obamacare will give free health care people who will vote at least 90% for Obama and those he will pick in the future. Obama does not care about people who never voted for him in the past or who will never vote for him in the future. For them, Obamacare will be a lot worse, but who cares. Mandates that all future insurance plans will have to cover things like birth control, drug counseling and pre-existing conditions will not be free. We all should have know that. If you are getting your Obamacare for free, that extra cost does not matter and you will vote for Obama. If you are one of those people who purchased your own insurance, only 10% of you ever voted for Obama so the extra cost is not Obama's problem.
The sticker shock of higher rates and larger deductibles are the only way that an insurance company can design a new policy that meets the Obamacare law with all its mandates. Remember that we now spend 17% of our GNP on medical. This is by far the highest of any country in the world. If Obamacare can get this number above 20%, there is no way that the USA as we have know it for the past 250 years can survive. We all know that government can not manage anything as well as it can be managed by the private sector, yet we are expanding government control in 1/5 th of our total economy. The Judas now has the USA right where he wants us at the edge of a cliff of no return.
The problem with 99% of us Americans is that we can not accept even the most remote of possibilities that we just elected a Judas and put him in the White House. Until more us can wake up and realize what we have done, I don't see anyway to save our country.
Now, remember, Obama is a Judas and here was his plan. There are a lot of poor stupid people in the USA who can vote and Obama knows it. Those years that he sat in Rev. Wright's church were not wasted. Obama learned his trade well from one of the masters. I have pointed out before that Obama is an even better con man than Rev. Wright, so here is the plan.
Obama wants go get as much power as he can get and wants to hold onto it for as long as he can. He does not care what he has to do to get that power. To destroy the USA will take more than just two four year terms. After Obama is out of office, he still wants to be able to pull the strings of power and to do that he needs votes and money. Notice how much of his time is spent raising campaign money? That money will be his power in the future. He will be able to hand pick his people in government with that money and voters who he has coned. With me on this? How does Obamacare fit in?
Obamacare will give free health care people who will vote at least 90% for Obama and those he will pick in the future. Obama does not care about people who never voted for him in the past or who will never vote for him in the future. For them, Obamacare will be a lot worse, but who cares. Mandates that all future insurance plans will have to cover things like birth control, drug counseling and pre-existing conditions will not be free. We all should have know that. If you are getting your Obamacare for free, that extra cost does not matter and you will vote for Obama. If you are one of those people who purchased your own insurance, only 10% of you ever voted for Obama so the extra cost is not Obama's problem.
The sticker shock of higher rates and larger deductibles are the only way that an insurance company can design a new policy that meets the Obamacare law with all its mandates. Remember that we now spend 17% of our GNP on medical. This is by far the highest of any country in the world. If Obamacare can get this number above 20%, there is no way that the USA as we have know it for the past 250 years can survive. We all know that government can not manage anything as well as it can be managed by the private sector, yet we are expanding government control in 1/5 th of our total economy. The Judas now has the USA right where he wants us at the edge of a cliff of no return.
The problem with 99% of us Americans is that we can not accept even the most remote of possibilities that we just elected a Judas and put him in the White House. Until more us can wake up and realize what we have done, I don't see anyway to save our country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)