Single PAYOR

I hear the President Obama has chickened out of allowing all options on the table. Speculation runs wild on what lobbyist did this to him-- oh, don't tell me it was not a lobbyist!

My guess is that the A.M.A said, "Yo, who you gonna call when the girls get sick?" and, "You want to do what to our cash cow?" Why do I say this? Because, any increase in efficiency is a decrease in their fees.

President Obama, we did not elect you to be manipulated by unseen forces. What I mean is, we'll be here for you if you tell us you can't think straight because those forces are overwhelming.

dumb down stay down

I've written here about increasing the availability of quality (top-notch)education to the masses. It occurred to me that the powers that be might not want that for who is going to support so many people with advanced degrees? Who is going to sweep the streets and pull the potatoes from the ground.

It was then that the answer came to me from the manifesto of the Zeitgeist organization. If everyone is smart, there is available that many more people to create machines for us that will do all the work. Then, we become self-supporting and there is no need for anyone to carry any burden. The rich will have no need for excessive funds because everyone can do everything they desire. Mind you, not everyone will want a yacht a penthouse suite but if everyone did, there would be enough brainpower to make it happen. How would it be possible for everyone to have a penthouse suite? Easy, you have cameras on the roof and broadcast the images to windows that are further down. How about yachts? You create much smaller boats that behave, motion wise, as if they were yachts and when a higher occupancy was needed, these smaller boats could get together and form one bigger sailing unit. They could even tow a platform where people could gather and/or swim in a pool.

The point of this exercise is that a utopia is unlimited in scope and degree of perfection if we allow for a collective brainpower. The ultimate utopia is presently a discussion for philosophers but I think most of us would be willing to accept some intermediary Utopian society. We can start by making universal education available to all. We must begin that process by eliminating the stranglehold that the rich and the educational institutions have on us. Our government must create its own Harvard and University of Chicago, and MIT, etc. Just one is all that's needed. It must then lure the professors over to that university with the promise of more money--heck, we could make millionaire of them if they were to come over. Their lectures would be recorded and made available to everyone on the face of the globe. Foreign countries would also benefit and they could either subsidize the effort or provide some of their best professors to the cause.

Hollywood could get its hands on the lectures and modify them with added features that would make the lectures more appealing to diverse groups that may learn better if say, the professor looked more like Denzel Washington or a rock star or a woman or a gay. . . you get the point.

Sad irony isn't it that we are sitting on the biggest mine of wealth and happiness--education--and we are not digging in for fear of letting the other guy get ahead.

Grab the bull

Hey, look back on all major accomplishments in this country. Washington allowed us passage onto the new road, Lincoln said unity above all (would that Eastern Europe would feel the same), Roosevelt kept us solvent and sent our sons to abolish evil, Kennedy put us on the Moon.

The message for all of our leaders is to embrace the shining star that calls out from the night. Focus on that which we, by our lonesome, pitiful selves, cannot accomplish.

I call upon the candidates to give us something to tackle with our every being. There is always something that will bend to our will if it is moral and just.

Pick something from the platform and "make it happen," but make it moral and just and worthy of the first paragraph.

Education

Tuesday, November 27, 2007
I subscribe to MIT's newsletters and one of them reported on some software they are developing that converts a spoken lecture into text that can be searched. This is great news for the student who needs to study his/her notes. But what I liked most was a mention of the university's Opencourseware initiative where anyone can obtain course materials/lectures. The university is quick to say that you can't obtain a degree by taking these "courses" and you do not have access to the professors but, hey, it's free and everyone should be taking advantage of it because it's the future of education.

I commend the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for leading the way in this endeavor. Their initiative will go down in history as the first great leveler of wealth and opportunity. May the Good Lord bless them and bring shame on the others (Harvard, Yale) who only think of their coffers.

Labels: free education., harvard, higher education, MIT, Yale

# posted by callejero : 3:04 PM
Monday, September 10, 2007
I've written about how our elementary and secondary schools are messed up but the sad truth is that, in a way, Colleges and Universities are also in need of serious revamping. Not because of the quality although some colleges have serious shortcomings; but because of the inordinate expense.

Did you know that in most European countries the cost of higher education is provided for everyone through interest-free loans? Did you know that the cost of a 4 year degree is no where near as high as it is in the U.S.? Why is this? The U.S. and European countries are all democracies; all capitalist states; all Christian/Caucasian majorities. But they subsidize the education of their citizens while the U.S. puts our citizens into debt.

The reason is that U.S. higher education is either private and we all know that private means "only afforded by the rich," or they are public but full of wasteful spending.

Please see my blog on http://newdirections4obama.blogspot.com for the solution to this dilemma. Our top universities have a stranglehold on our higher education which we must eliminate. The only reason for the stranglehold is that the rich do not want low-income people rising to their ranks for this would dilute their wealth. They must keep Yale and Harvard all to themselves; the big politicians must come from the same club; the best doctors (those you can't afford) must come from the same club; etc., etc. etc.

If the Ivy-league colleges do produce the best people, why not spread the good around? No one needs to physically be in the classroom with the Harvard professor. I would be content to have a video camera listening in on the lecture. Why don't you make your courses available on-line Harvard? Eh, Mr. outspoken University President, what say you? How about keeping the cost affordable for what does Harvard and the others want with their untold wealth? What social ills have they mended to date? I know you for what you are and through the Internet, hopefully, one day, all my fellow citizens will see the light.

Labels: harvard, higher education, rich, wealthy

# posted by callejero : 7:44 AM
Saturday, May 22, 2004
My wife took an on-line course at the University of Phoenix On-line. She had to come up with "Professional Development Credits" because of Teacher certification requirements. Although the "classroom" is not as jazzy as it could have been and it could have improved the User Interface, they did manage to rig together a course using off-the-shelf software (Outlook Express). The professor would post a lecture on a private newsgroup and the students would respond on the same. This personal interaction and readily available links to resources made the experience worth the slight drawback of a poorly constructed UI but one which I am sure is forthcoming. The cost per credit, I thought, could have been less expensive but I think they'll lower their prices once they overcome the initial overhead and streamline the delivery and other efficiency improvements.
# posted by callejero : 4:08 PM
Saturday, September 06, 2003
!The Virtual Classroom.
Online learning hits high schools and in a big way; close to 300,000 students will take online classes this year. Even teachers love it. One reason is that even shy kids contribute.

This article tells me that there is no stopping the virtual classroom--now, if I can only get backward North Bergen, New Jersey to see the light
# posted by callejero : 9:15 AM
Friday, August 08, 2003
Another big Player, Capella University, enters the arena. This one with technology, psychology, business, human services, and a school of education.

Now, if someone could come out with an online High School, I would be delighted. I think it's just around the corner.
# posted by callejero : 5:52 AM
Thursday, July 31, 2003
Med school available online - The Washington Times: United Press International

That's right online, no traditional classes; rather, an embrace of the available technology to improve education. By the way, if we doubled the number of doctors, the cost will go down because it will be a buyer's market!

First there was the University of Phoenix; now this; soon, our entire educational system will move online. What's to stop us? What's that you say? You don't want the kids home alone? Who says they have to be home. They can continue to go to an adult supervised building that is just not populated by highly paid individuals who are too burnt out to do our children any good.

Wait and see, a new education is coming.
# posted by callejero : 5:53 PM
Wednesday, July 09, 2003
My solution is simple. Via attrition (this so present teachers don't threaten to close down the government), via attrition I propose that we eliminate all but the best teachers. This will do away with 95% of the teachers now siphoning our hard-earned money.

But how do we educate our children? Well, it's easy, we set up a big screen TV in every classroom and we give them a nice set of earphones. The video will instruct them in thousands of subjects and, here's the best part, the teaching will have been created by the best educational minds in the world. That's right, Tommy will be taught Physics by a Harvard professor. If that professor has no charisma, then the subject matter is delivered by almost anyone whom the student may like: a rap star, a famous author, a fictitious idealized teacher, anyone capable of keeping their attention.

Once they view the video, they are tested by computer and given a choice of repeating the video or going for one-on-one instruction with a professional tutor (either real or computerized).

I think this is a win-win situation for everyone but the teacher's union. God, they sure showed us how valiant the early unions were (remember Compers?). Most of us have relatives that will sing the praises of their union benefits and gleefully pay their union dues. But unions, in my estimation, are a nefarious bunch. I'm waiting for a book on this but I'll bet you it will not get published because of the unions involved in publishing.

I propose that all non-union people get together and form the non-union-people union. oxymoronic, yes but you'll like it nonetheless. For minimal dues, this union will fight the inordinate and oppressive power of the other unions.

I should add that manufacturing unions are subject to market forces so they are in effect self-policing. I'm talking about the parasites on society that have a stranglehold on us and don't even allow an occasional breath of fresh air--the teacher's union comes to mind.
# posted by callejero : 9:49 AM

New Directions for Our Country

Eliminating disenfranchisement through the Web.

Peer pressure amongst politicians perpetuates the status quo. I can see it happening and I've never been to Capital Hill. But there is a way to keep them working for us instead of the special interest. The cure is for us to compete directly with the lobbyists and other movers.

Forget letters to your elected officials. Forget public opinion polls; the fat cats cannot be trusted with our future. The only way to keep them honest is to keep them on their toes every step of the way. When this site is implemented, the politician will be guided to do our will, not his own. Notice that I said guided; the politician will always be allowed to vote his conscience. This is necessary because he/she is privy to a large amount of so-called classified information that may work against our wishes. This roadblock however only affects decisions regarding national security. No other area of our society is off limits to our will.

Here’s how our web site will work:

From the very start the website must belong to all. Ordinary people place issues on the website (absolutely without constraints of any kind); issues like these: Eliminate additions to bills where the addition is not pertinent; don't let a soldier go to war without bulletproof vests; tell us everything you know about Roswell, NM in 1947; nationalize the health insurance industry. ANYTHING else you could possibly take issue with. But do keep in mind that although “anything goes,” not everything will reach general voting. This is to ensure that frivolous issues do not dilute the important issues.

Citizens offer to join a committee to discuss, elaborate, and fine-tune the issue as first proposed. No member is refused membership in a committee but only a limited number of positions will be filled.

The refined/reformulated issue is posted on the web site for first round voting. This first round of voting determines whether there is enough interest. The issue goes to general voting if the first round shows that 5% (for example) of the members are in favor of a general vote. If so, all members are notified that an issue is up for general voting and that they should vote within one week (as an example. The actual deadline may be determined by committe).

The results of the general vote are forwarded to elected officials. The officials now can either take action to give us what we want or ignore us because he has information that we don’t have or he really feels that it would be wrong for the country. This is fine. Now, you may ask, aren’t we back to where we started? The answer is a resounding NO because he/she risks losing the next election by showing utter disregard for our wishes. If we voted 5 million to one million on an issue, our elected officials better provide us with a good reason why they chose to ignore us. Their actions/inactions on our issues will be sent to all our members.

Some may argue: Aren’t politicians professionals who have our best interests at heart? Yes but, so what, nothing gets done anyway with the present system. Nothing, that is, unless big business and their lobbyists give it their blessing. But what about rule by the masses? Don’t the politicians tend to be more level-headed? Yes, but our website will, because of its success, attract the best minds in the country who will provide guidance to our committees; probably joining the committees (alas, even lobbyists will be allowed to join. In fact, I would like every single blessed resident of our great country to join us--bring the children, the infirm, the homeless).

The most important thing about the website is this: THE WAY THE WEBSITE LOOKS AND FUNCTIONS WILL BE DETERMINED BY ITS MEMBERS AND WILL NEVER BE AS HARD TO CHANGE AS THE CONSTITUTION!

Health Care

I am 56 years old and I have been to many doctors. Very few of those visits required the expertise of a highly paid medical professional.

This is the alternative: All citizens are issued a smart card with their entire medical history on it. When you have a medical problem, you will go not to your general practitioner but to a diagnostician (Initially, this person may be a medical doctor but, later, it could be a computer program run by a trained professional). The diagnostician enters all your symptoms into an A.I. program that diagnoses your problem or orders more tests when it is unsure. The software is created by a government agency that updates it with the newest information. Only when a diagnosis is not made do you visit a regular MD/OD. ,

Once a diagnoses is obtained (BTW, a degree of confidence in the diagnosis can be expressed as a percent certainty), you would go to the pharmacist if it is a common ailment like sore throat, earache, rash, High Blood Pressure, high cholesterol, etc. You go to a specialist if the diagnosis requires it: surgeon for possible tumor, psychiatrist for schizophrenia, immunologist for white blood cell abnormalities, etc. At no time will anyone be denied access to a medial professional if they have the money to pay out of their own pockets or if they petition an arbiter about their concerns.

Medical science is, more often than not, a guessing game but the more specialized and/or successful you are as a doctor, the more likely you are to guess correctly. The diagnostics program (software) ensures that the best guess is always made. Don't let doctors tell you about their so-called "clinical eye" that mysteriously allows them to come up with some inspired diagnosis. They come up with it because they know how to correctly diagnose an illness and this skill can be programmed into a computer.

Just think, your treatment will always be dictated by a consensus of opinion from hundreds, if not thousands of experts who have nothing but your best interests at heart. Your treatment will be tailored to your particular case as documented on your smart. By the way, I can't tell you how happy I would be just to know that I would not need to fill out another doctor's medical history form--it would all be on my smart card!

There are many advantages to this new medical system but what appeals to me the most is that those presently without medical insurance would be covered at minimal cost. Those with insurance would pay far less premiums because the high cost of an MD/OD would not be incurred and you would not undergo any treatments based on misdiagnosis.

Education

How the U.S. educational system can be improved.

We start by setting up a big screen TV in every classroom and we give the student headphones. These videos will instruct them in thousands of subjects and, here's the best part, the teaching will have been created by the best educational minds in the world. That's right, students will be taught Physics by a Harvard professor. If that professor has no charisma, then the subject matter is delivered by almost anyone whom the student may like: a rap star, a famous author, a fictitious idealized teacher, anyone capable of keeping their attention.

Once they view the video, they are tested by computer and given a choice of repeating the video or going for one-on-one instruction with a professional tutor (real or virtual) or even fellow students who understand the material and need a little extra cash. The professional tutors could come from the ranks of present teachers who no longer have to deliver the same material year after year.

With some slight modifications this system can be made to work for college level courses. Videos are now being sold with talented professors teaching courses like Philosophy and Literature. Let's make an entire Harvard/Yale curriculum available online. Who reads and grades the term papers? Students in their senior year are a possibility as are all the professors who now don't have to deliver the lectures in person.

This is a paradigm shift that is easier to do than you might think. Already, online courses are becoming very common. Why not have the best minds teach the material. Think how you might better understand Physics if a Richard Feynman taught the course. Or, Biology, if an E.O. Wilson taught it.

I think this is a win-win situation for everyone but the teacher's union (expect a furious lobbying effort from them). However, the number of teachers could be lowered by attrition--there need not be any massive layoffs because early on we would employ them as one-on-one tutors and graders.