Google Custom Search

Saturday, September 29, 2007

commentary for America's healthcare for children

My commentary and ideas for children’s healthcare reform

When it comes to the nation’s healthcare system trying to provide for the poor children of this nation, there has to be some degree of socialization to standardize the care of the children. The country by nature is capitalistic which causes a disparity between social classes based on the level of income which is growing larger with time. Like any other part of our society, each social class has its own ideas of what is affordable and treat others like they can which poses a dilemma for the people who cannot live up to a higher social classes ideas of affordability on anything.

Health care especially for our nation’s children should not be subject to the social distortions of what is considered affordable and therefore has to be standardized in the care itself. What we as a society have done is put a price on a person’s overall health based on what type of medical serviced that can be rendered given the money that they can pay out for it whether it be out of pocket or through an insurance company. Even with going through an insurance company which provided health insurance the insurance company still dictates what services can be rendered based on the health insurance plan you can afford.

We need to do a few different things to bring all health care for children up to a minimum standard regardless of whether or not the child’s family can afford the care and have a safety net of some sort for those who cannot afford the medical costs.

Here is what I think should be done:

Create a minimum standard that must be adhered to by all medical personnel regardless of whether or not the patients family can afford the medical treatment or not, letting the doctors have a direct say in the minimum standards.

Research what those standards would cost families and the government for when the families cannot afford the costs, then set up the needed measures to pay for the medical costs rather than blindly funding anything that can be misconstrued into something that it is not.

Find ways of getting people to utilize preventative care when ever possible to ease the costs and waits of emergency room visits, which eat up a lot of both government and private insurance money. Do this even if it means setting up and/or expanding clinics in neighborhoods where the people can go to if it isn’t an emergency situation, where they can have a primary care doctor and possibly a triage unit to determine whether or not they should be seen in an emergency room or by their doctor there.

Rather than looking at a person’s or families income as the only deciding factor in affordability for health insurance especially for children we need to look at each region of the country and factor in the cost of living in that specific region to gain a better understanding of what is affordable rather than a blanket set of rules for the country as a whole since each region has its own unique pay scales and costs of living.

When determining what is affordable with minimum standards of medical care we have to would need to look at the price of the healthcare itself, the pay scale of the region and the cost of living for that region to see what is affordable in that area and set the requirements for government assistance accordingly.

A family in Louisiana has a far different cost of living than that of a family in New York, and just because the family In New York does make more doesn’t mean that they will be able to afford more than the one in Louisiana this is due to the fact that the costs of living are different in each region. If you look at the medical costs in each individual region the costs are reflective of the cost of living for that individual region which in turn will scale up the pay to meet the costs and therefore medical costs should not be subject to the social distortions based on income that are common through out our country.

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

transportation infrastructure

With regards to the transportation infrastructure, it is imperative that the federal government fund it. The very fact that it is the primary way that we move everything through the transportation infrastructure should make it on of the top priorities that our nation should have. Without the needed infrastructure we would not be able to travel effectively or move the needed goods and supplies from place to place. It should be a priority in part due to the fact that if there is ever an emergency where an area has to be evacuated the transportation infrastructure would bottleneck if it were not properly maintained by our government.
At the same time even though the government should be responsible for funding it we need to fund it ourselves at the same time in the form of the needed upgrades. Anytime we upgrade the subterranean infrastructure which would include but not be limited to the utilities that put their lines underground, these companies if unwilling to do more than a patch job for the street level work done then there should be a standardized fee that would be pooled into a fund specifically earmarked for the needed work to the transportation infrastructure so that the government doesn't have to divert money from other areas to maintain the system.
Overall it should be a shared responsibility but the primary funding if not the primary controlling party for maintaining the transportation infrastructure should be the government to standardize a maintenance program which would be responsible for the oversight of the infrastructure and to direct the needed upgrades to it.

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

my ideas on possible casino's in Massachusetts

Ideas for casino-resorts
(Ideas stemming from Governor Patrick’s desire to fund transportation projects)
Written by Sean Davis

It is my opinion that casino-resorts are a good idea if you are looking to provide jobs and attract people to the state. Since gamblers will seek ways of gambling regardless of whether they have to travel for their preferred type of gambling, it would appear to make since to keep those gamblers in state. Since Massachusetts Governor Patrick is looking to fund transportation shortfalls with the projected windfall from the casino’s I would suggest that there be more than the proposed casino’s that the governor wants and in areas that would help with bringing that infrastructure back to life.

Here are some ideas that I would like to put on the table but whether anyone will listen to them is a different story.

Instead of only having one casino-resort in Boston, have a minimum of three one of which would be where Boston’s Mayor Menino wants it which is at Suffolk Downs, one – two casino-resort’s on the Boston waterfront in South Boston in or near the Marine Industrial Park that would be right on the harbor that once built would include increased Massport cruise terminal traffic and would be forced to utilize the MBTA. There should be at least one other in Boston and it should be in an area or areas of the city that could use the upgraded infrastructure and jobs the most.
To fund the expansion of the MBTA’s commuter rail, in the areas that Governor Patrick is looking to expand too, there should be a minimum of one maybe two casino’s built in the city that is proposed to be the termination point for the line provided that the city would welcome that type of atmosphere there and the influx of jobs. Allow the casino-resorts to be built there with the stipulation that they must help with funding the expansions since they would benefit from the expansion with the possibility of the terminal being right there at the casino-resort.
When it comes to the state highways, allow casino-resorts to be built over and around the highways provided that they take over the maintenance of the highway they span to a specific point especially since they would have to find ways of getting people from the highway itself to the facility.

Where Governor Patrick wants to allow casino-resorts in the state, the state needs to look at under what conditions they should be allowed and what stipulations should be given for the introduction of casino-resorts into the state. The above ideas should be treated as a starting point in how to approach the whole subject even if these specific ideas are not used, but since the governor wants to fund the transportation infrastructure this way he must allow for people to come up with ideas to offset the costs that the state would have to pick up.

Saturday, September 15, 2007

commentary and questions on the Iraq war

I have no disrespect intended by thinking and writing this but I feel that if President Bush really believes that the war with Iraq is justifiable in the war on terrorism, then he must show the evidence he has to showing that Iraq has been a direct part of the terror network that he claims that the country was part of. We all know that Saddam was blatantly going against the U.N. Sanctions but in the mainstream media most of the things he was doing to hurt others pertained to hurting the citizens Iraq and not the western world so in my opinion it is required that Bush what show the evidence that convinced him to invade Iraq in such haste and without an exit strategy.

To honor the people who died as a result of the 9/11 attacks and to respect the military, President Bush must share his reasoning and not just asking to stay the course with the expectation of following blindly through it all. Even if they are kept confidential some questions should be asked and given to the people who deserve the answers to them.

the questions should be these or something along the lines of these:

what are the expectations for Iraq and Iraq's people?

Why is it that the Iraqi government isn't living up to some of the benchmarks?

What is the exit strategy for our military to leave regardless of timetable and is it defined clearly enough for the Iraqi government and our allies to understand?

Is it possible that we are going about the political process all wrong in Iraq given the Middle East in general having a different concept of what government should be?

Why is it that the country is being asked to blindly follow President Bush's agenda on the war on terror?

There is a big difference between protecting our country and being told we have to give up constitutionally given rights in order to fight an invisible enemy.

Sunday, September 9, 2007

memorial for the 6th anniversary of the wtc coming down

At the sixth anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center in New York, we cannot lose sight of the pain we shared on that day, not just as a nation but the world as a whole when the towers came down. The whole world mourned that day as every country lost people who had sought a better life for themselves and for their families back home and for many people they are still in mourning due to many of their loved ones never being able to be found which doesn’t allow for closure.

We can never forget what happened that day otherwise we will forget the pain we felt and who we are as individuals and who we are as a nation. We can never lose sight of the fact that the people working in the world trade center towers died because they believed in the dream that this country offered to anyone who wanted it, for if we forget we become the very thing that we have always tried not to become.

We can not allow ourselves to forget the sacrifices that hundreds of firefighters and cops made that day in an attempt to protect both the property and the lives of countless people that day with some of them making the ultimate sacrifice trying to do what they felt was right. On that day and on the days that followed those of the firefighters and cops who were still capable of being on active duty along with many hundreds of volunteers sacrificed their time and their very lives trying to look for survivors and to give closure to those who needed it.

As my then seven year old niece asked on her birthday “why did the bad people have to kill all those people on my birthday?”

Saturday, September 1, 2007

a political question

given all of the talk about family and religious values that American politicians are suppose to have, why is it that the republicans are the ones that get caught with their britches down?

just wondering due to the sexual scandals that have rocked the Republican Party the past few years even though I know it happens in both parties.

copyright and privacy policy

Copyright and Privacy policy

This website contains all original writings by Sean Davis, and no part of this website can be reproduced or used elsewhere without written permission from the owner of this site along with proper acknowledgements accompanying the usage of theReproduced material.The owner of this website makes no attempt to gain any personal or private information from any individual, business or group and any business you do with the merchants with advertisements on my sites is between you and the merchant.

Please refrain from providing any personal information that could be considered personal and private due to the fact that anything you post can be viewed by individuals visiting this site.

Thank you for taking the time to view my blog sites©Sean Davis 2010