Blog

Unbreaking Healthcare Part I – How Did We Get Here?

I hear a lot of misinformation about the Affordable Care Act (ACA or Obamacare), ranging from “it is the reason insurance premiums and healthcare costs have skyrocketed” all the way to “it is paving the way for universal healthcare”.  Most of these tidbits and talking points have little basis in fact, and all they serve to do is tell this voter or that voter what they want to hear to get them to the ballot box the next election cycle.  If we are going to unbreak this system, if we are going to change the way we treat healthcare in this country we have to break away from the talking points and examine where we were, what happened, where we are now, and where we want to be.  This is the only way we can figure out what we need to do to get there.

For the first thing, we need to stop blaming Republicans or Democrats for the problems with healthcare, it is everyone’s fault, from lawmakers, to healthcare workers, to big pharmaceutical companies, to insurance companies, and everything in between.  This is not a simple problem that happened because of “Obamacare” and it won’t be fixed by selling insurance across state lines.  These are talking points, not reality.

In the 1960s, healthcare costs were significantly lower than they are today.  In fact per person healthcare spending was around $1,200 per year, when we adjust prices then to prices now.  In 2015 per person spending was around $12,000 per year, almost 10 times the amount it was in the 1960s.  Hold on though, have prices really increased that much?  The answer to that is yes and no.

In 1960 about 50% of Americans were uninsured altogether, and 65+% of elderly Americans had no insurance.  This means that a significant amount of the population had no healthcare coverage, and many of these individuals went bankrupt when they had to go to the hospital.  Many just wouldn’t go to the doctor at all because they couldn’t afford it. What happened in the 60s, the government decided they had to create programs to help these people, especially the elderly, get the care they needed.  This was the beginning of Medicare and Medicaid.  So the math in healthcare is off we are really only paying about four to five times as much per person, because we are now covering more than twice as many people.  If you need the math, comment below and I will explain it.

healthcare-expenses-per-person

Some people will point to this chart and say “see, government programs ballooned the healthcare costs out of control”.  I said it was more complicated than that, and I will get there, so bear with me.  Well when looking at causes an old adage rings true “Follow the money”.

As more people got covered, there was more money being spent in healthcare, which allowed for medical companies, especially the pharmaceutical industry, to research new drugs and treatments.  These new treatments cost a lot of money to develop and get approved, so of course they needed to cost insurers something as well.  This was where the cycle of healthcare inflation began.  More people getting help meant more money in the system. More money in the system meant more money for research and development.  More R&D means more expensive treatments, which require more money to pay for them.  More money to pay for them means more money for R&D, which means more treatments, which means more money, which means more treatments and on and on.

What is one thing we know when amounts of money get large enough?  Someone, or a lot of someones, will believe that they need a bigger piece of the pie.  This is where the real era of big money lobbyists in healthcare began as well.  These lobbyists did everything in their power (read budget) to get congress to enact laws that made the system ever more and more complicated and tilted in their favor. So who has gotten the biggest piece of this pie that has increased more than 10 times since 1960. Did it go to the people who are actually providing care?

medical-school-graduatesPhysicians in 1960 made approximately 130,000 a year in today’s dollars.  Physicians today make approximately 130,000 a year as a median salary.  I am not saying feel bad for doctors, but they make exactly the same amount of money they did in 1960, and work many more hours on average.  So they are not the beneficiaries of the increase in healthcare costs. Nurses, mental health professionals, medical assistants, and all manner of medical field jobs have even worse numbers, so where is all the money going.  In fact their percentage of total medical costs has gone down significantly.  Is it any wonder that the number of graduating physicians hasn’t gone up in years?

 

To put it in perspective, the pharmaceutical industry had about 21.8 Billion in total revenue in 1960 (adjusted to today’s dollars) in 2015 they had almost 400 Billion in total revenue in the United States.  That is almost a 20x increase.  So while physicians are making the same average income they were in 1960, drug companies are making 20 times what they were at the time.  Why bother to be a physician when you can go work for a drug company and make more money for less work. That is what we call “Big Pharma”.  They are a massive industry that has made an incredible amount of money.  They still have a lot of overhead, in fact a large majority of their money goes to research and development (not as much as it should and not always in the right areas, but that is a discussion for another time). Big Pharma CEOs median pay has increased from 750,000 (adjusted) in 1960, to 18.5 Million in 2015, so we know where a lot of that money is going that is about 25 times as much money as they were making in the 60s.  The private insurance industry is in much the same numbers category as the pharmeceuticals.

When we are talking this kind of money it is easy to lose perspective, the numbers are just too big, but let’s put it another way.  The average doctor has seen no real increase in their annual income since 1960.  In 1960 a big pharma CEO made about 5-6 times as much as a physician.  Understandable, and reasonable.  In 2015 an average big pharma CEO made over 100 times (more in some cases) than what an average physician made.  If you don’t see a problem here, then you need to look again, and check your own motives.

So we know who is making the most money out of the rising healthcare costs, and we know who is paying the bill.  CEOs make the money, and the American people pay the bill.  What about doctors?  Why are they making so little?  This is where this entire thing starts to go crazy and we find out why costs have gone up so much.  As insurance companies have gotten bigger and bigger, they have gained more and more leverage over doctors and patients.  They are able to tell doctors how much they will reimburse.  They are able to tell us how much they are willing to cover.  They choose when to raise our premiums. They dictate prices, both how much they pay, and how much we pay them to pay for us.  Does this seem a little unfair to you?

Try this yourself, walk into your doctor’s office, tell him that you are going to pay cash from now on, and you want to negotiate his fee.  Next go to a hospital and try the same thing.  Now go to your barber or hair stylist.  Lets play this the other way.  You go to your gym, you have a membership that is $30 a month.  They tell you out of the blue that your membership now costs $45 a month.  Will you just take that?  Why will you with your insurance? The reason they get to do it and you don’t is because they have all the power, both legally and because they are so big.  How about the pharmaceutical companies?  They have the drug that might save your life, but you only get it if you have the cash in hand, or you have the money to pay whatever your insurance tells you, so they can pay less to the pharmaceutical company than you would have on your own.

Now let’s get to doctor’s billing.  Did you know if you go see an in network doctor and he thinks you are healthy, he gets less than half as much money from insurance as if he send you for a lab.  He does the same amount of work, but he gets less money, because the insurance companies have decided that him keeping you healthy isn’t worth as much money as him having to write an order for lab work you may or may not really need.  He needs to do his, otherwise he makes next to nothing for the visit.  What’s even worse is that many doctor’s have been trained to do this.  They are told do the test, because if they don’t and something is missed, they will get sued.  Oh I forgot to mention, now the doctor has to carry medical malpractice insurance (guess who he pays) to practice medicine. The insurance companies get money from the doctors too.  This is just one of a hundred legitimate reasons a doctor might order tests that probably aren’t necessary, and we aren’t even touching on the shady individuals who are trying to scam as much money as they can out of the system.

A thousand page textbook can be (and has been) written about each of these topics.  I am merely illustrating a few of them to give an idea of how complicated and messy all of it is.  I am simplifying many things as I go so that I can make sense of them as well, and I work in this field.  What the biggest takeaway from all of this is simply: Healthcare was having problems before the affordable care act, and will continue to have problems until we fix the root causes, repealing the ACA and replacing it with more private sector insurance won’t fix it, there is too much money, and too many people with too many interests.

How the heck am I supposed to change any of this?  It is too much!  There is no way anyone can fix it.  You are correct, no person as an individual can fix it, but maybe all of us together can.  From my perspective there are five main things that need to change, and I will talk about them in more depth in my next article.  These five are:

  • Focus on and incentivize health instead of healing, it is cheaper to keep someone healthy than to treat them while they are sick (addendum use actual science, not pseudoscience to do this)
  • Allow doctors to do what they were trained to do, they studied for years to be able to help people
  • Get insurance out of the medical business (we need Universal Healthcare)
  • Be completely transparent about medical prices, across the board, and have everyone pay the same for the same service or drug
  • Pay doctor’s more, and administrators less, the bloated administrative costs are out of control

Thanks for reading and there will be a couple of follow ups here in the next week or so.

– Jeremy Larsen

Speaker, Author, Progressive

How Congress Was Stolen – How Gerrymandering Makes Washington Go Round

Have any of you ever heard of the term Gerrymandering?  It is a weird word, with a fairly unknown meaning.  Gerrymandering is the process by which a group in control of the legislature of a state or country, will draw voting district lines in a way that allows them to have more representatives than their percentage of the population would allow normally.  It also allows wealthy donors to find the candidates who will most likely provide the swing vote in a decision that benefits the donor, and donate less money to greater effect.  While I am going to write mostly about what has been done by Republicans over the last few decades, this is not limited to Republicans alone, they just have done it more in the last few decades.

I am going to talk about a simple example of gerrymandering, then you can extrapolate it out to see how it would work in reality.

gerrymandering-ii Now who do you think has the power to decide how the district lines are drawn?  It is usually the party in power in the state where they are redrawing the lines.  That means that after the Republican party spent the 1980s on “Operation Red State”, which was a plan to take control of as many state and local legislatures as possible so that they could redraw the lines to give them as much of an advantage as possible.  They did this because they saw the country moving more and more ideologically away from their positions.  Instead of changing their values to more accurately reflect their constituents, they used what power they could to take away the power of people who disagreed with them.

Before I go on, I want to say that this is all legal.  It is something that they were allowed to do under the law.  However, what has resulted is districts that look like this:

gerrymandered-districts

I don’t know about you, but those districts are only that shape for one reason, to take power away from one group and give it to another.  This process is one by which the Republican party has managed to control the House of Representatives for so many years, even as the country is shifting away from them.  I know you can point to a year here or there where the Democrats were in control, but in this case the exceptions prove the rule when you look at all the other factors responsible.

How does this effect people like you and me.  The answer to that is both simple and complicated.  The simple answer is this, if you live in a district that has been shaped for political advantage, then your vote counts less (or more) than it normally should.  The more complicated answer has to do with wealthy campaign contributions and what effect it has on business and tax laws.  If these lines have been drawn so that the majority of districts, even with a minority of overall individuals, all have representatives who are favorable to big business, then these businesses need to contribute less money to win control of areas that will provide them with tax breaks.  Is it any surprise that money in politics is the root of many of these problems? Who do you think donates to campaigns in close races?  Who do you think benefits the most from gerrymandering?  Hint: it isn’t you and me, this doesn’t benefit us at all.

One solution, though it may not be possible in the U.S., is to adopt a system where we take the popular vote in a state, and allow that state to send representatives based on the popular vote, instead of by district.  For example, in Texas the state (heavily gerrymandered) voted 52% Rep, 43% Dem, and 5% Ind.  However their representatives are 24 Rep, 12 Dem, and 0 Ind.  If this was split up based on popular vote, then the Rep would have 19 representatives, Dems would have 16 representatives and Independents would have 1 representative.  That seems an inherently more balanced way to adjudicate the system.

Another possible solution would be to enact laws that say a district must maintain a certain density, so that it is not sprawling out all over the place.  If we were to redraw districts so that they made geographic and population sense, instead of political sense, much of this would disappear.  There are no states that look like some of these gerrymandered districts, and amazingly enough the U.S. Senate which is two senators per state, is fairly close to the national distribution of left and right leaning individuals.  With no gerrymandering, it is possible to have fair and balanced elections.

If you are like me, you don’t just want to understand a problem, you want to know what you can do about it.  There are a few things you can do:

  1. You can write your congressperson asking for them to work hard on campaign finance reform
  2. You can also contact your congress people and ask for non-partisan redistricting in your state
  3. You can push for laws governing the drawing of districts that prevent this sort of thing from ever happening again
  4. You can educate yourself more and pass information like this along
  5. You can research which candidates actually support (and have voted to support) ending gerrymandering

 

Thanks for reading, and I know this one was dry, but it is an important lesson.
– Jeremy Larsen

Speaker, Author, Progressive

The Scariest Part About the Election – It’s Not That Trump Won, It’s How He Did It

I read an article today that actually scared me more than I have been in a while, about one of the tools that was used in this election.  I want to clarify first I am not trying to invalidate the win, there was nothing illegal (I don’t think, talk to a lawyer) about what was done, Donald Trump is the president of the United States, for better or worse.  Instead I want to talk about his use of a data analytics and marketing firm called “Cambridge Analytics”.  This probably sounds boring to you, as “Big Data” and “Analytics” are automatic buzzwords for boring and pointless.  I would have agreed with you before reading this article.  Now I am just scared. With GOOD reason.  Our election was hacked, not in the old meaning, of breaking into encrypted systems, but in the new meaning of finding a way to manipulate existing systems to provide a massive advantage to the manipulator.  PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE read more, even if it is boring.

To make a long story somewhat shorter, in the 1980s psychologists came up with a set of personality traits that were along 5 continuums: openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism.  This, while useful, was usually hampered by the data collection process, a painstaking questionnaire that no one wanted to fill out. That is until Dr. Kosinski came along.  In the 2000s a young psychological researcher named Dr. Michal Kosinski came up with some apps and measurements that allowed, using Facebook like data, him to predict with startling accuracy different personality traits and things that would likely follow from it.  If you want to know more about him and his work, check out this link http://www.michalkosinski.com/.

In 2014 a young researcher at Cambridge name dAleksandr Kogan, approached Dr. Kosinski about using his work and his MyPersonality database to benefit a company, and offered him a lot of money, but was unwilling to say any more, as he was bound by a Non Disclosure Agreement.  The company in question was part of a series of shell corporations hiding the actual owners of the companies.  Needless to say these companies had helped to influence elections through targeted marketing in countries all over the world.  One of the subsidiaries of this parent company was “Cambridge Analytics”. This subsidiary is largely responsible for much of the marketing and ads on the leave side of Brexit just a little while before.

Through painstaking effort this group had managed to reverse engineer the analytics models that Kosinski had created years before.  They could use this ability to target individuals for tailor made marketing.  They could predict beliefs and reactions of individuals to various marketing and canvassing tactics.  They could target their advertising for far cheaper than ever before, by paying Facebook minute amounts to target individuals who met certain criteria, and exclude those who would produce no benefit from the ads.  If you think this is getting creepier by the minute, keep reading it gets worse.

In 2016 Donald Trump’s campaign hired Cambridge Analytics to run their targeted data mining operation.  They would find news (real or fake) articles and target individuals who were most likely to respond to those articles.  Whether this was to activate their supporters, or spread doubts to people who may be on the fence about their opponents, they targeted individuals based on the Facebook and online behavior.  When you add this to the fake news created by alt-right “news” organizations, or the mass amount of election related propaganda pushed out by Russia, Cambridge Analytics could make these stories show up in your news feed at JUST the right time to influence your behavior.  This is still only the beginning.

In addition to their online marketing, Cambridge analytics also developed an app for their canvassers that used the same data to predict individual behaviors and allow their canvassers to ignore houses that would be unreceptive to them.  It provided scripts and talking points based on what would resonate with particular residents in said household.  Imagine this, a canvasser outside your house looks on their phone, and is able to tell what political issues are important to you, what your most likely hot buttons are, what percentage chance you are of changing your mind, and much more, simply from their analytics company analyzing your private data, all legally of course.  Did I mention Steve Bannon was a member of the Board of Directors for the parent company owning Cambridge Analytics.

EVERY single one of Trump’s talking points was scripted.  They were confusing on purpose.  They were all over the place on purpose.  This was so that his marketing team could use different words with different people.  He knew his voter base better than progressives knew ourselves.  He knew they didn’t watch the “mainstream news”.  He knew they got most of their news from Facebook articles, and websites that provided confirmation bias.  He knew how to reach them, and what words to use on EACH, INDIVIDUAL PERSON for maximum effect.

This constitutes no violations of the law that I know of.  It is a brilliant tactic that was used effectively in this campaign.  It is a simple advancement of what was already done by campaigns in more general terms, and using similar algorithms to behaviorally targeted adds made all of these tactics far more customizable.  Donald Trump won using this tactic.  He won fair and square.  He is now the president of our country.

That he won isn’t scary.  Looking back, it can almost be called inevitable with the state of the nation and the tactics that were used.  What is scary however is the fact that the methods he used are infinitely replicatable.  Now that this information is out there, Democrats will use it too.  So will large companies that can afford it.  So will “foreign actors” who want to cause our country harm.  So will every person that has an agenda and the funding to back it up.  Without going into the monotonous, minute detail, these algorithms allow the users to know about me and you than we can probably remember ourselves, and can predict our behavior with frightening accuracy.  Think about this for a minute, EVERY single like, comment, interaction on Facebook provides one more piece of data to allow people with money to manipulate me and you.

If you aren’t scared enough, just think what this means for the future, we are only in the second, almost the third of the five stages of analytics.  These stages get ever scarier.  Stage one is descriptive analytics, these allow us to analyze trends and see what happened.  We have been doing this for decades (well centuries in more minor forms).  These allow people to decide what they think will influence future events.  Stage two is predictive analytics.  Predictive analytics allows people to see what may happen in the future, it also allows people to start to predict what effect their actions will have which starts moving into stage three.  Stage three, where we are just now getting to, is prescriptive analytics.  This allows people to analyze what actions they may want to take to achieve the results they desire.  It not only predicts, but prescribes behaviors going forward.  The fourth stage is even worse, it takes prescriptive analytics to the next level, analyzing potential outcomes and prescribing behaviors to head off those outcomes, before they have even happened.  This brings us to the fifth and final stage of analytics, where, given enough data, these people can with minute actions shape events that seem completely unrelated.  This is where ideas like the butterfly effect come into play.

If you are scared enough to take some action I am going to leave you with some ideas that can possibly save us from going down the darkest roads this may offer.

  • Restrict your privacy settings on EVERY from of online interaction as much as humanly possible
  • Educate yourself about how this stuff is moving forward in our world
  • Call your congress people, local officials, asking (even begging if you have to) for better regulation of privacy
  • File lawsuits if you feel your privacy has been violated by companies collecting your data
  • Do your best to seek out sources of media off of Facebook and offline, anything where you have no idea where the content comes from
  • Fight against the invasions of privacy for convenience and refuse to let more groups than absolutely need to have your data

Thanks for reading, and feel free to comment, like, share, or even contact me personally with any questions you may have.

Jeremy Larsen
Author, Speaker, Progressive

(P.S. if you want the original article I read find it here:  https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-our-likes-helped-trump-win)

The Protests are Over…Now What?

The Protests are Over…Now What?

The protests after the inaguration of Donald Trump are over.  Millions of people across the U.S. and the world made there voices heard.  It is a week later and more than a dozen executive orders later, and he is still the president.  That energy, anger, and exuberance has cooled. This is where it becomes time to see if your passion and fire were real, or just a reaction that will fade as you go back to your life in the coming days weeks and months.  This is the hard part.  For many people, the biggest hurdle is they don’t know where to start, for others it seems like there is too much to do, and for others, dedicating themselves to actually doing the hard work after the energy is gone is too much to ask.

Let’s face facts, anyone can get swept up in the excitement of the moment, go to a rally, and make their voices heard, that is the easy part.  Some people got arrested, most protested peacefully and nothing really changed in their life.  The protests, while an important part of making voices heard and showing that people believe in something, don’t equate to making the change.  The protests were a starting point, but what comes next is more important.

How many of you out there are feeling lost, afraid, and have no idea what to do?  That is ok, because there are dozens of things you can do.  The first few are really easy, require only a few minutes of time a day, and can have a huge impact when done in numbers.

Calling, Writing, Contacting Elected Officials

Every single one of us has elected officials that directly represent us, we also have elected officials that indirectly represent us, and we have elected officials that don’t represent us but still make decisions that affect us.  That is the nature of our democracy.

Wherever you live you have local officials, city, county, state, etc.  These are the people directly responsible for the actions that affect your day to day lives.  They directly represent your interests, and usually are the most responsive to contact, both in their policies and in their actual responses.  This is because they need many fewer votes to either win or lose an election.  If enough of their constituents contact them, they will respond, because they don’t want to lose the next election.

We also have national officials we elect, our representatives in the house are elected district by district, and our senators are elected by state.  These individuals indirectly affect our every day lives by making national level decisions that effect the states.  You can not only speak to these officials representing your district or state, you can also contact officials from other states to let them know that what your beliefs are.

While an individual phone call may not make much of a difference, when an official receives hundreds, maybe even thousands of phone calls, emails, and letters a day, their opinions begin to change.  Here are some contacts for the big players if you live in California.

Join a PAC or a Nonprofit:

Often times people want a more intimate way to make a difference, or have a specific cause that they want to take up.  There are thousands of political action committees and non profits out there that need help.  If you really have a passion for something, contact one of these organizations and see if you can volunteer to help.  They often know more about the particular issue that you are passionate about than anyone else.  For example, how many people who protested spent hours on the phone during the primaries making phone calls for Bernie or Hillary?  How many did that during the general election?  Those are the kinds of things that can help change policy on a direct front.  Often times the work is not glamorous, collecting signatures and phone banking is tough, but again, in volume it can help enormously. Some lists of examples of well known PACS and non profits can be found at:

Do your research, find ones that you agree with, and support them.  Whether it is a donation to these organizations, volunteer work, or even becoming a paid employee, there are hundreds of ways to support and help these organizations do work you believe in.

Finding Your Own Voice in the World

This might be the most important one of the bunch.  Every single one of us has our own story, our own talents, and our ways of being effective to make change in the world.  Whether it is creating a blog, talking to crowds, or consistently discussing and educating about our chosen passions, finding your voice and using it successfully is a way to maximize the impact that you have.  Sometimes doing this can help you refine your ideas even more, and provide opportunities for larger and larger ways of making yourself an agent of change.

There is no limit to what an individual person can accomplish, if they are willing to do the little things day in and day out to make the world a better place. If every person who wants to make change does something about it, then these special snowflakes that people keep talking about will turn into an avalanche of change.  Don’t be scared to look around you, don’t be scared to do something about it, any one person can be the one who makes a difference, whether at the small scale of your community, or at the bigger scale of the country as a whole.  Let’s all get off of our metaphorical couches, use the momentum we created at the protests, and turn into an unstoppable force for equality, justice, freedom, and love.  Let’s turn that anger into focus and make the next four years our years to be ready for Nov 3, 2020.  Here is a countdown of how long until that day:
https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?msg=2020%20US%20Presidential%20Election&p0=263&year=2020&month=11&day=3&hour=0&min=0&sec=0&fromtheme=election

Thanks for reading, and feel free to comment, like, share, or even contact me personally with any questions you may have.

Jeremy Larsen
Author, Speaker, Progressive