12/1/2010

REAGAN OR ME?

Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 2:03 pm

Another?

Others?

I haven’t had time to study such, time kept moving on too quickly.

But - now with the "community organizer" as President and to as the "un-community" president?

But - now with the "internet sav campaigner" now President and to missed new tech opportunities?

I do not know how much I put of my thinking as Reagan’s or from Reagan Revolution that may have been more of my own considerations to maximizing opportunities in furtherences from such especially if new orders became present with a becoming by America into a "sole superpower" role.

With so much now attempted as new better directions in policies and politics I have had to consider fewer were of my thinking than I once was of pondering.

So now we have Debt Commission "findings" concluded and voting approaching.

What have we forgotten to consider?  Where have we forgotten to look back to?  How have we forgotten to synthesis and reconsider what may be right in front of our eyes anew?

Simpson and Bowles?   Have we forgotten a sociological considering of our communities as per?

Simpson and Bowles?   Have we ignored how much of welfare and medicare are of a pre-internet era where technology wasn’t available to "enforce" or "police" cheaters in a local healthcare providing?

Have we forgotten to look at Healthcare as a national issue as now an unecessary consideration because of the internet and even the welfare and care for the elderly once with "national" arranging a fair alternative to prevent unbalanced providing by localities, and with over-burdening on any "locality" that dared attempt an improving on their own first?

Is it not true that we started providing welfare and healthcare at national level simply because too many could cheat any other method without much fear and that now local solutions in new "internet world" of interconnectivity could allow a more local construct?

Do we just bring about devastation upon our community structures in natural sociological and economic sense by now attempting to add "healthcare coverage for all" to national jurisdiction instead of now considering at least for a reasonable period that even welfare and medicare (national caring for young and elderly) could too now exist soundly at mere county levels?

So we did become the world only SUPERPOWER, and after I had considered for at least a decade how such transitioning could be used to max towards renewal around federalism issues and discussions and common sense, American style.

Yes the problem used to be that a city, county or state didn’t dare make first moves to "better care" for young or elderly for fear that mass migrations would happen into their jurisdictions so presenting a unmanageable burden beyond the "fit and able" ability to provide.   Such is now a manageable concern not needing continued "nationalization" maybe to quite really so, and much due to computers and internet.

A nation wide solution may still be needed but now with a "national solution" not necessary.  A competitive county based system would keep a working within "sense of community" necessary for communities to still be "communities".

We couldn’t have reached this point without the reaching in old federalism debates around the 90s moves in community policing "decentralization" and so also with then "liveable cities initiatives"  and we couldn’t have taken such far enough for such without computers and the internet such that what was once a rediculous proposition now to quite plausible and doable.

Will President Obama become the "un-community" President?   Can he avoid such "tag" but with a considering of how many "national solutions" once the "only solution" now have new more local and community centric posibilities?

Yes, it once in the days before computers and community policing was an idea with a near impossible considering, but one now quite advanced past - too many would have been able to cheat a local improvement too easily and too many other towns would see a "benefit" in not improving so that their "needy" would move out instead, and to an area "providing."

Will President Obama become the "un-internet" President?   Will he miss completely all the opportunities of and from such just for an ideology towards centralized nationalism, to socialism? 

How have we gotten so far from healthcare as a community based socio-economic of integral to sense of community and sense of survival for and of community once more of either raising its own to become future doctors for others of their own community or just thinking about what is needed to have a doctor want to be in their community as an integral member of such community and its fight and competitions to be better or at least as good as most other communities around the globe?

It just is dangerous to think that because we have cared for likely to be forgotten youths and elderly at a national level we should then move to covering all healthy and able, and especially after members of our societies have invented and created, and studied and perfected to new ways such that what was once our nations only option as "nationalizing" is now maybe the less good alternative moving forward. 

A loose federation of county-wide community centric independent but united and maybe county/state based, partly, care and coverage centers seems a simpler and more equitable "modern" governance opportunity.

And, where such also relates to "healthcare coverage" history as designed still from a enticement to "employee retention" and as a employer based insurance product construct many questions still remain as to how to work such metrics and quantitative and qualitative analysis of underwriting within "market" system would be maybe better to a county-based not strictly employer-based competitive considering where employers maybe to be of "options" for employees different within different counties but with a motivation to participate in their communities general economic comparative advantages in healthcare providing.

So we have systems now of designs of such from a time when such was the best or only option.

So now we have computers and the internet and don’t need to usurp to national socialism or for regional fairness, and so don’t have to deal a blow to our nation’s vast differences in "sense of community" across our lands.

Really!  Right?

A SIMPLE LIFE?

Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 10:05 am

To skin a chicken you first must catch it.

To save healthcare in America you should have first looked at what wasn’t really being looked at, our communities as communities?

To get to Carnegie Hall "PRACTICE, PRACTICE, PRACTICE" like?

Ok, it is odd that Presidents Clintons (Clinton two-fer in the original) in their first moves past boot from White House was to attempting to get Bill nearest the Penthouse suite in new Carnegie Hall Towers in New York City and so as an attempt to get tax payers to cover near a million per year rent - before build-out just for President Bill Clinton.

Ok, it wasn’t to such a "simple life" that Clintons were to trying to get tax payers to cover for them an annual rent for President Clinton that was in just first year to amount to more than had been paid for all past Presidents of the United States combined in our brief history.

Ok, it was to they didn’t get their first choice and its desired elite austerity and royal spledor and that even what he got dragged into near tears uptown in Harlem was even then more than tax dollars should have been released for.

What was "appropriate" for a new Senator? 

What was "appropriate" as well for a new Senator and especially a carpetbagging Senator around healthcare reform?

What would have been better for all New Yorkers but for Senator Clinton and such just President Clinton to have turned their energies to helping all New Yorkers get "coverage" at least as Massachusetts had worked for all?

How was it Senator Clinton isn’t googleable for years of hard work to get all New Yorkers covered by all New Yorkers and is almost entirely searchable for "universal" coverage just for elite Americans as her reaching for centralized big government solution inseparable from tag as "socialism"?

Where was the "community service" in Washington DC Democrats manuevering? 

Where was the sensibility to look at greatest costs that may have been the easiest to fix and fix locally?

Where was the focus on local and community level change where about healthcare by a neighbor for a neighbor in a neighborhood or near neighborhood healthcare facility run by mostly other neighbors for other neighbors mostly was still a healthcare system about neighbors and community? 

How did we get to neighbors needing WASHINGTON to give care to a neighbor? 

How did we get to neighbors and communities thinking around health fears that it wasn’t just still a neighbor or other member of their community that they really were only needing to consider?

How did we get to a healthcare cost system inflated and confused just because WASHINGTON seemed to want to be in our "community" decisions?

Isn’t the greatest "cost" issue thought easiest to fix that of how emergency rooms and their higher costs from higher over-head are providing healthcare services like at five dollars per case when only one dollar per case needed otherwise?

Isn’t it only because WASHINGTON wants in that communities have been not fixing such system on their own and maybe with a new focus at county wide not country wide levels?

Isn’t it only because we stopped looking at such practice around urbanity and counties and inequalities of burdens for a regional model of life and created a new healthcare model to first match the existing regional model of life?

Even as early as early 90s the United States was with a new technological level of interconnectivity such to adjust healthcare systems and "groups" towards "county based" and more in lieu of "employer based" coverage.

Even as early as early 90s were we with though a new interconnectivity that could prevent much of the feared abuses thought to come then with attempts to fix healthcare with one small step at a time community and county based reforms.

Even as early as early 90s and before Clintons got elected a great extra cost in healthcare was that emergency rooms providing at five time or more the costs to their community care for others in their community that could be covered at on unit instead of a multiple of such to five.

To fix healthcare don’t we first have to stop looking at it the way and ways the Clintons both have long encouraged?

To skin a chicken you must catch it first, and isn’t it actually worse than all the above as per our current economics that President Clinton did seem to approach his "banking pals" thinking they would dish out his "rent" for near penthouse suite in new Carnegie Hall Towers and for them like "owing" him for not just helping them create an entire new market in "derivitive" but actually for encouraging them into such when he wanted to try running unfunded and underfunded classic federal social programs?

{I would mention such more about President Obama, but see in early 90s, he and his being four years older than me to the day, still had him as a fresh law school grad, and seeming focused other ways.}