How to deliver health care? In a perfect delivery universe there would be local clinics and small hospitals and regional major specialized hospitals. In addition there would be visiting nurses, paramedical specialists and doctors. All of these persons would be connected to the community in need of health care by ultra modern computerized systems for routine and emergency care, for medical histories, for pharmacist support, for direct payment of all personnel as contract employees (paid by the year, in installments -- and not paid for any particular patient or procedure).

If such a system were built, it would have to staffed with well trained and talented people whose own economic security was never in doubt. Therefore, it would be a part of an overall system for a civilization that was rich in education and training, remarkable in its avoidance of formalities that contribute too little to the health of people.

So will we have to live in Heaven above to receive this care? Or can an ordinary civilian community provide the care we could count on when we lived in a wealthy town where care givers were abundant and money was never an constraint on the system responsible for human health? Remember, it was this kind of super-care that was almost equaled when we served in the military establishment and were well cared for whenever we were sick, wounded or dead.

I like William Greider--as do great numbers of his fans. His 8 points above ask for better banks and a better central bank. OK., but our global 20 industrial nations all have banks and central banks. Not all are dominated by crony-capitalism, here or in those 20 nations. But all are dominated by the fundamental business equations that fail to match demand to supply and supply to priority need. Hence we own the deficit in demand that Keynes emphasized and the deficit in supply that creates poverty and defines economies based on scarcity (and debt-based money).

Greider is well aware of these systemic deficits, but he looks to political science more than to logistics to find answers to our problems. Regrettably, there is daylight between our visions of what might improve out lot. Greider writes in the Washington Post, "Timely intervention by the people could save the country from some truly bad ideas now circulating in Washington and on Wall Street. Ideas that could lead to the creation of a corporate state, legitimized by government and financed by everyone else. Once people understand the concept, expect a lot more outrage."

Greider, above, sees a USA Inc. in need of sufficient resistance by the poor to end poverty. He has a point. If every poor person did all within his power to resist the system, the system would end poverty fast. But such resistance borders on recommending masses of people to try to earn a "bad conduct" medal.

It is an option, but not the best. The best option is for people like Greider and myself to explain again to Obama that direct payment to the needy (perhaps via a gov't credit card) of enough money to prevent deficits in demand and deficits in supply, is the better answer.

An economic intelligence agency with data analysis capabilities of the NSA, could compute the necessary monthly subsidy loans to needy consumers and monthly subsidy investment loans to suppliers of necessities.

When people say, "there is no free lunch" what they mean is there is no way to SUPPLY all needs and create DEMAND for all supply, without labor, material, component parts, etc., to make a monetary system of production work for the nation that boasts it owns one.

The current state of technology, especially information technology. for the first time in history, makes near Utopian outcomes an expected norm.

I wish Greider would emphasize this.

Asking for bad conduct by the poor is really unnecessary. It can be met with worse conduct by the rich.

Rich and poor alike need to make money work to enhance the economic security of the stinking rich AND those who enjoy a minimum standard of living that is extremely high--and enough for me and you.

The notion that such a high standard, as a minimum, would rob living people of the motivation to excel at what they try and possess a lot of stuff is a cockeyed notion.

Notice how the more money people have the better they can behave. Notice among real people: real poverty ruins everything it touches. The rich cannot afford to fear it or to cause it.

Let us kill it now, along with the deficit in global demand. And let us follow Warren Buffet's advice on limiting imports to exports, as presented in Fortune magazine a couple of years ago.

Beyond mending. even improving, current credit systems, we urgently need to create a direct safety-net fool-proof ID credit system (or card) for individuals with a permanent address. The purpose of the system is to protect aggregate demand from demand-deficits too large for the global economy to stand. The universe of debtors owing the system money they have spent to eat and keep a roof over their head, etc., will be limited to identifiable people in need who can be accounted for at least cost. The limit to monthly new credit will be high enough for the system to protect against the aggregate demand deficit and low enough to avoid reasonable fear of accelerating inflation. Simultaneously, we must support current plans for Obama-nomic sustainability, i.e., education, health, energy, infrastructure, economic-political-homeland/global security, etc.

Fundamental change in economic belief must be advance to equate the "things that money must buy" with the "money to buy them". Only then will ordinary people see that the money to pay to support their parents (Medicare, SS, etc. ) will never be too high--because it will equal the cost of the things they need. Such cost is the same as the high earnings from the then plentiful jobs younger people will hold. If actual output of food, housing, medicine, etc., is short, automation will cure that shortage.

If there is a future shortage of money, as there is today, it will be the fault of the monetary system of production. That is, the system will need more managed money than debt-based systems supply. Computer information systems can correct effective demand to raise demand to equal supply and raise supply (via automation, know-how, freedom of enterprise, and simplicity ) to meet need.

http://virtual-recovery.wikispaces.com/Way+Forwar...