Good guns vs bad guns. Wha....what?

I wonder if anyone has the cojones to weigh in on this one:

For years now one of the questions that has bedeviled us is what, if anything, can or should we do to curb guns and the violence that accompanies them.  The idealists want to simply outlaw guns.  Just pass a law and....pfffft....problem solved.  The Bubba's want to arm us all with Gatling guns and assault rifles....commence firing! 

Being consistent with my philosophy of avoiding the extremes, I agree with those who say guns aren't the problem, but the intent of the person using it is.  Consider this:

"A psychiatric outpatient opened fire Thursday inside a psychiatrist's office at a hospital near Philadelphia, killing his caseworker and slightly wounding the doctor, who shot the gunman with his personal firearm, authorities said."  USA Today

So in this instance was the gun the villain or the good guy?  Laws that prevent the sale to/possession of guns by those who shouldn't have them don't work.  If they did, this psychiatric patient (with a criminal background no less) wouldn't have had one in the first place.  

Yet the pacifists amongst us want to disarm us, or at the very least make it extremely difficult for us to buy personal defensive firearms.  If they had their way the good doctor in the story above would probably be a victim, too, and the gunman might have kept on killing others until someone stopped him.

Here's where it gets convoluted:  The hospital had a policy that prevented everyone but on-duty law enforcement from having guns on campus.  The authorities say that the doctor had a legal right to possess his gun, so criminally he's safe, but from a civil standpoint he's in deep doodoo.

The hospital might take action against him, possibly revoking his privileges there, and the original gunman can now sue him in civil court (he survived his wounds).  The bad guy is quite likely to settle in to a very comfortable retirement, courtesy of the doctor.

Where is the justice in that?  (See my post of several days ago bemoaning "too many lawyers, and too many laws for them to manipulate".)

Sure, we need to enforce the laws we already have.  Enough "background checkers" aided by a state-of-the-art computer system could possibly have prevented this wacko from getting his hands on a gun.  

With 300M (?) guns already on the streets, there is no ironclad guarantee he couldn't have obtained one clandestinely, but surely we can keep guns away from some of these nuts. 

IMO, good people should be allowed to protect themselves with defensive firearms as the police are almost always REactive*.  They don't show up until the damage is already done.  YOU are primarily responsible for your safety.

*In case you're wondering, assault rifles are by definition primarily offensive weapons*

What was it the lady interviewed at the scene of the hospital shooting said?  "I never thought it would happen here."

Yeah, famous last words.

S

* Some facts:  In the average shooting less than 4 shots are fired, at a range of 7 yds, in less than 10 seconds.  In my city the average police response time is 4.5 minutes.  In some rural areas and in some crime plagued, underfunded cities the response time can be up to an hour. 

Producers vs "hangers-on"

How many people do you see here actually working?

Have you ever stopped to think about all the jobs there are in this country, around the world even, that don't directly produce anything?

For example, there are people who mine the raw materials that go into making the steel and rubber and plastic that will eventually become a car.  Engineers add their smarts, some make the parts, and finally others screw it all together.

Eventually, waa laa....CAR!  All those people DIRECTLY add to the economy.  They PRODUCE something of value.  Same with the geeks at Apple.  They dream up things....they're part of the process....that eventually PRODUCES iPhones and iPads and such.

But along the way there exists a huge workforce comprised of what I call the "hangers-on".  They don't DO anything except watch the people who do the work.  

For example, the Human Resources folks don't produce anything, they just make sure you comply with all the rules imposed on you by other people who likewise don't produce anything.  (Full disclosure:  K works in HR.)  

I can understand a "safety officer", but why a "safety inspector" AND a "safety manager", too?  Why do we need layer upon layer of hangers-on watching workers work?  

Consultants are everywhere, many because they're just unemployed producers themselves.  Don't even get me started on the bean counters and their "generally accepted accounting pricnciples", which is code for "What do you want it to say?"  They can obfuscate anything.  

Yes, I know there is societal value in making sure polluters don't mess up our air or water, and to putting out fires and locking up criminals, even though you can't put a price on how much those jobs add to the economy.  But IMO too much time is spent making sure the file cabinets are full of cover-your-ass paperwork in case a lawyer (another large group of non-producers) comes along and wants to extort a few mil.  

By and large most hangers-on are simply necessary liabilities, not assets.  They take their paychecks and buy those cars and computers and TV's produced by others, and that's a good thing, but really they're just the "filler" in the economic smorgasbord, not the "entree".

Now don't get your knickers in a knot.  Before anyone gets their feelings hurt, know that I consider much of what I did for nearly 40 years was of the "filler" variety, too.  I'm just calling 'em as I see 'em.

Did you know my city has a guy whose job, one of them at least, is to go around and make sure all the construction site porta-potties are properly staked down per ordinance?  

In France there are laws that dictate how large the signs painted on store windows can be.  And field inspectors who go from store to store with tape measures to make sure all are in compliance.  How is that adding anything of value to the economy?

Remember the book Future Shock?  It mentions a time in the future when more and more of the work will be done by fewer and fewer of the people.  I think we've found that time is here right now.

S

"I didn't do it, it wasn't my fault, I can fix it...."

So everybody is asking, "Why can't the government put together a health care website that works?"  Well, here's one little fact that I'll bet you haven't heard before:

When the government awards a contract to develop something like the HealthCare.gov website they must follow a code called the Federal Acquisition Regulation, which is more than 1,800 pages of legalese.  It all but assures the companies that win the contracts are the ones that can navigate the REGULATIONS the best, NOT the ones who can necessarily do the best job.  In other words, the winning companies have the best lawyers, not necessarily the best techies.

Consider this:  94% of Federal information technology projects in the past 10 years have been delayed, over budget, or performed below expectations....41.4% FAILED COMPLETELY!

IMO bureaucrats rarely do anything well, unless you consider writing endless reams of regulations that do little more than give themselves job security.  At that they're friggin' World Champions!  Nothing that can't be fixed, however.  :)

The men are excited about getting to shoot a bureaucrat. You wouldn't happen to be a lawyer, too, would you?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I will have to give a reprieve, however, to the Justice Department team that nailed JP Morgan Chase with a $13 BILLION settlement relating to their fraudulent mortgage bundling scam.  And Chase was told they might still be liable for CRIMINAL prosecution, too.  Looks like the pressure being put on the DoJ to not let these formerly "too big to jail" white-collar smug thugs get away with their crime is gaining traction.

Now I understand Bank of America is next in the Fed's gunsight.  I'd love to be a fly on the interrogation room wall as the bankers line up to squeal on each other and try to get themselves a deal.  

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Looks like a fun weekend ahead:  A big Northampton / Saracen rugby match tomorrow am, Texas Tech vs Oklahoma pm, and some sort of food / music / car show event in downtown Plano in between.  And maybe some rain over the weekend, too, which would be welcome.

Hope y'all have a fun weekend planned, too.  ;)

S

The End Is Near!

Yep, it's almost here.  October 1st is tomorrow, the date Obamacare goes into effect.  Some are dancing in the streets, some are jumping out of windows.  So where does 'ol Lowandslow stand on this, you're asking?

I think it's gonna be an absolute mess.  Here's why:  Anything that comes with a 2,700 page users manual, written hastily by a bunch of bureaucrats (who probably have a government job only because they were too inept to get a job in the private sector) and industry lobbyists (who you know are making damn sure their clients are protected one way or another), is doomed to fail.  This is going to be a cluster f__k of epic proportions!

So then I'm for the status quo, right?  Nope, not at all.  The status quo is a runaway train carrying us all in slow motion straight over a 1,000' cliff.  I firmly believe we need some sort of, for lack of a better term, "universal health care".  Consider this:

Only 51% of US businesses (pre-Obamacare) offer health care coverage to their employees.  That is down roughly 10% in a decade.  And of those who do have employer paid / subsidized coverage, more and more are seeing higher deductibles / cash-out-of-pocket maximums ($5K-$10K is not uncommon) and co-pays.

Private insurance?  Fuggetaboutit.  One middle aged friend of mine, for example, who has had two back surgeries and a wife who is a breast cancer survivor, is paying $1,500 per month for just himself and his spouse.  And that's with a $10,000 deductible.  Another friend (with insurance) told me if his wife has any more issues, their only recourse will be bankruptcy.

Speaking of:  There are 1.7 million personal bankruptcies +/- filed in the US each year.  Medical bills and lost income due to illness are responsible for 62% (or roughly 1 million) of those.  That's more than due to crushing credit card debt or unaffordable mortgages.  And of those 1 million filings, 78% HAD HEALTH INSURANCE.

When the average working / insured American has an income of about $50K and gets a medical bill for $5-10K, they're screwed.  Unless it's for use to cover a catastrophic accident or illness, do they really even have insurance?  If they can't afford to use it, is it really there?

And talk about inefficient....somebody explain to me why there are 50 state insurance commissions with 50 different sets of rules and 50 different insurance company and state bureaucracies?  Why aren't insurance companies organized around one giant nationwide group policy with one set of standards? 

Pharmaceutical costs are out of control, too.  Consider this:  In all countries I'm aware of with some form of national insurance, the government determines how much drug makers can charge, and it's always just enough to cover the cost to manufacture the drug.  

All the costs to cover R&D, which can run up towards a billion dollars, are charged to AMERICAN consumers.  That's because our "free market" allows Big Pharma to charge anything they want here.  This is true.  I've had it confirmed to me by a friend in the pharma bidness.  *you're welcome world*

And how about all those not-so-visible costs we pay to cover the uninsured?  Several years ago I heard a spokesman for the Baylor Hospital System admit they charge 150% of cost to INSURED patients in order to cover the write-offs for those who couldn't / wouldn't pay.

Just last week I heard the Dallas County Judge say the County spends more supporting their county (charity) hospital than it does on ALL other county functions combined.  This would include running the jail system, the sheriff's office, the courts, the road and bridge districts, etc.  (I haven't researched that, but I take him at his word.)

So then doctors make too much, right?  IMO, no.  Consider this:  Docs go through 10 or more years of college, med school, internship, residency, etc, and usually accrue $250K or more in school debts, before they can enter practice.  For our best and brightest, I don't think their income is unreasonable.  (Compare this to a Wall Street banker who might make 10-times as much selling fraudulent securities.)

Oh, here's a thought....how about getting all the blood-sucking trial lawyers out of the game?  Bad docs need to be removed, no doubt.  But in waaaaay too many malpractice cases it's just a money grab.  The legal profession has become a parasite on the medical profession.  Why are they allowed to do that?  (Because trial lawyers as a group are among the largest political campaign contributors, that's why.)

I could go on and on, and maybe I will at a later time, but suffice it to say the status quo is becoming less and less workable, even for those of us who are fortunate to have insurance and can afford to cover high deductibles and co-pays.  Long term the status quo is simply unsustainable.

Let's review:  The health care crisis is becoming more and more acute and is swirling down the toilet.  Obamacare will probably be a mess.  The status quo will someday eventually fail us.

So what do we do?  Beats me.  It's going to take someone smarter than me to figure it out.  BUT WE MUST FIGURE IT OUT.  Removing the spectre of instant family bankruptcy due to whopping medical bills from the national conscience is bound to be good for the country.  

We need to be concentrating on becoming more competitive, stronger, and more resilient in the new world economy, not losing sleep worrying about how we're going to pay for grandma's festering sore.

S

Football and lawyers...talk about a hodge-podge post!

For one weekend a year my brother and I do our impersonation of the Hatfield's and McCoys.  That would be this weekend, when Texas Tech plays Texas.  I'm an alumnus of Texas Tech, while he is a graduate of the University of Texas....sort of.  Not the University of Texas at Austin, the Longhorns (it's a tough, stringy-meated cow), but the University of Texas AT DALLAS, the Fighting Insurance Salesmen. *Zing*

I usually can't get too "in your face" with him because more often than not UT beats us, but this year we're actually favored to win.  He jumped the gun yesterday and showed up wearing his Longhorn ball cap, but I've dusted my "Double T" cap off and will come armed today.

Would it be improper to ask God to let me kick his ass this year?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tell me again why we need lawyers?  I recently read several articles that made me wonder.

One was talking about how the bankers have 3,000-5,000 lawyers and lobbyists working full-time to thwart the implementation of new banking regulations that would curb their ability to roll the dice like they did a few years ago.  That drunken binge ultimately required the taxpayers spend several trillion dollars to bail them out.  

Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act which sought to reign in the banks, but the banks have fought every word, every paragraph, every attempt to implement it, and they're winning the battle.  Dodd-Frank is still pretty much an empty shell at this point.  That would make it Lawyers, 1; The People, 0.

The other article told of how Bronco Bama and Mittens Romney both have thousands of lawyers fanned out all across the country looking for the slightest excuse to file a lawsuit in order to thwart the will of The People in next week's election.  Make that Lawyers, 2; The People, still 0.

The US today has over 1.1M lawyers.  I say we keep a few hundred and then send the rest to the Northeast to help clear debris and haul trash.  In other words, to DO SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE!

That, or it's off with their heads!  (Hey, I'm trying to be fair about this, 'cause, you know, I'm a compassionate kinda guy.)  *wink*

S

So where does all the money go?

With the general inflation rate in the low single digits, how come health insurance premiums are up 9% just this year?  In anticipation of O'bama Care?  

Must be nice!  I can't price in now the ill effects of the inflation I know is coming in a few years on building materials.  Competition won't allow me to.  Wages and salaries surely haven't gone up much as people are scared of getting a pink slip for even thinking of asking for a pay raise.

So why have health care costs gone up so much?  The doctors and nurses and insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies and hospitals and malpractice sharks, etc all point somewhere else.  "Not me!" they proclaim.  

All I know is I'm getting royally screwed and I'm still waiting for my kiss.  I've long since given up on the dinner and the movie.  ;)

S

I stay away for a few days and THIS is what I come back to...

Whew!  This has been a busy but productive week.  I've been at work early every day doing a time-sensitive remodel for a customer.  Fortunately all my guys have shown up on time and worked hard, and my customers say they have been awesomely impressed.  Today will actually be relaxed as all I have to do is sit and wait for the various inspectors to visit and give me their blessing.


I did manage to spend a long lunch hour on Wednesday with two of my daughters and three of my grandsons.  I left with a serious twitch and a grotesquely stretched-out shirt due to all the boys pulling on it wanting me to watch/play with them.  But I love 'em.  *blink...twitch...jerk*


I see the world's economies are imploding....AGAIN.  And of course we can trace it all back to the scheming bankers and their sleaze lawyers who have them just barely inside "legal", never mind "ethical".  This time it seems it's in Europe (whose bankers must be about 3 years better than ours at covering their feces).  When will we get smart and just round them all up, confiscate all their ill-gotten wealth, and banish them to some razor-wire-ringed desolate island?  


Hope you're all dodging the Wall Street bullet.  Enjoy your upcoming weekend.  :)


S