The other wall

Just about the same time the Berlin wall was torn down, many new walls were created making the over-all global picture less proud to celebrate. It was the fall of the then super power, the Soviet Union whose staggering communist foundation stumbled without little or no preparation for the sudden change. There goes the ever increasing list of the not-so happy allies looking for new directions to follow. Some made their way to a more sustainable system of government by creating adoptive mechanisms to cope with the new world order. Many other countries though, found themselves facing a more challenging giant made over night from pre-existing little internal problems that were considered manageable at first sight. After the end of the cold war, the little internal problems got more than what they bargained for. It has become the major factor for the separation of the otherwise fairly well intentioned regional integrations whose fate was regrettably self destructive.

The seemingly positive turn of events that characterized the opening up of a new era where countries that were under the self made prison of the Soviet communist ideology, known as the Iron Curtain, happened to be the beginning of a long journey whose final destination has been ambiguous for quite a while. The last twenty years have been preoccupied with a show of muscle to those who wanted to test the existence of super powers as we knew them. It has been a hell of new developments from corners that were least expected. The end of the cold war had to fill the vacuum that the Soviet communist power house had left behind. It is not yet replaced but while the emergence of regional and ethnic conflicts has been playing the major role, the expansion of religious fundamentalism is pulling the current civilization back to the 16th century. It is like reminding us that the history we passed centuries ago may need a thorough revision to get the future prospect of the impending civilization straight. It is becoming ever evident many of us will not be ready for this increasingly strange looking world of ours.

What needs to be done? This is a question that has never been as hard to answer as it ever had been in the past. Why the rest of the world is in turmoil and under unwarranted separations is being related to the demise of the Soviet Union which was one of the pillars of world super power supports that was keeping the balance of world stability. The cold war had to be resolved by a winner, but the long awaited outcome came at the expense of the smaller countries scrambling in search of their belonging. It is not yet clear if we are finally approaching a settling planet of ours. Until then, the dilemma about where we are directed is a question that poses itself every day.

I like him/her

Have you come across at a job fair or at a work place phrases like "I like him", "I like her" flying by your ears? Well, one may not pay attention to such common conversations but do you know that it can be a major decision making gesture, specially if those the phrases are coming from are the powerful people in that organization or a group? Yes, one's likability has become a matter of hire or fire just like a love affair is a good example of that. Those who got lucky usually like to proudly claim, "Oh, the boss likes me" or "I am very liked in the work place". So, the easy conclusion to be made is that there is probably 99.9% weight given to a person's likability to make a hiring decision. Because of those facts, I may be tempted to conclude that likability can be a very crucial component for working with people. It is not an easy comment to swallow if your coworker has gathered his/her composure to openly say, "you are hard to work with". Does that mean indirectly, "I don't like you?". Of course, but it depends on who says it. It is good to be liked and it is even better to be fun to work with too. There is nothing wrong with that. If one encounters such challenges, self improvement techniques are a good way to go. The problem though lies on how to define likability. How about being hard or easy to work with? Is it a natural phenomena based on instincts or is it as limited as the size of a typical company? I wish there are thorough researches made on such a broad subject whose outcome affects all of us in many ways. Recommend any book?

The unemployment level: What does it reveal?

The most recent unemployment data was looked at as an improvement compared to 700 plus thousand jobs lost in one month about eight months ago. It is an improvement in the sense that the unemployment index for the most recent month was only about 200 plus thousand lost jobs. What this tells is there are still many people being driven out of jobs(who knows why) but not as many as it has been. Well, the wise leaders have concluded they don't see this as an improvement.

If we look at things in depth, the fact of the matter is not always associated with the economic decline or growth. It has been evident that employees can sometimes lose their jobs for a totally unrelated reasons. The realities on the ground are witnessing another historic development that is being ignored because of the potential for a negative outcome. The economy of any country has its own limits as to how many of its citizens can successfully participate in a job market. It is becoming a period of decision making. There is unavoidable sector of the population that is not fit for average typical job requirements put forward by companies. So 10, 12, 15, even 20% unemployment figures may have to be acceptable to get the economy going smooth again. The question is, what is to be done with those who, for some reason, are not capable of getting jobs that they think they are fit for. Whatever the government's hopes are to predict the positive growth of the economy, the job data may not necessary reflect the growth. The companies will not sway from their strict internal policies whatever the government says.

A moving speech

President Barak Obama once again proved he means business by delivering a touching speech countering the health care controversy. This is when I realized a strong stature like today's was necessary for the timely awakening of those who, for some unsubstantiated rumors grew skeptic. While the increasingly critical republicans still haven't inched from their belief that the health care reform plan is against their national pride and value, at least they didn't want to go against the wave of supporters favoring the president as a great speaker. "The president can talk", one commentator said. The issue as I see is not that the health care system doesn't require a serious reform, but the skeptics fear there will be problems related to spending and corruption, not to mention the business and employment sectors that may be affected by it. But something important they forget is whether the way the current health care system is running is sustainable? With all the spending and the budget that is the major source of national deficit, and the insecurity of the financial burden even for those who think they are adequately insured, creating an affordable care for all should bring a win win situation. The president has stated in his historic speech a visionary thought that all his well-wishers have anticipated. The more I hear his vision, the more I am convinced it will work.

Parents have concerns....?

Well, today the president of the United States, the most powerful country in the world made a speech to students all over the country. Almost the whole week before the speech, there was a controversial report about parents being concerned their children may watch the speech . The reason behind it is surprising. I started to question myself, if the strange feeling I am having is because I have little knowledge about America and Americans. I have never heard any previous presidents being opposed for their duty bound encounter with the students. Most of the time the event was not even given attention. The last time we heard president Bush went to speak to students was when the media had to explain where he was during the 911 attack. The reason behind the concern is nothing other than protecting children from socialist and communist indoctrination by the president of the United States. I don't get it; am I missing something? Are American children not made aware of what socialism and communism are? Knowing about historic events and sharing the pros and cons of the experiences will enrich the students' ability to analyze ideological facts and myths. There was no profound fact to back all the allegations. By the way, since when is Barak Obama a communist? Which part of his campaigns were socialist or communist oriented? Was he elected by the majority of Americans only to be awarded the title of a communist or socialist? I don't know what happened in the last eight months, but the choice of words by the critics of the bailout, the stimulus plan, the health care reform and the over all effort to cut deficit and save spending sounds way out of context and strange. Is it not why he was elected to begin with? To curb a working plan to save the country from the emerging catastrophic situations? Let me ask every soul that sharpens his or her tongue to throw words that are uncalled for. What would you do if you were the president who took over an ailing economy not only domestic but also globally?

What do we mean by Insurance in general.

This auto and home insurance company that I choose not to mention the name, has increased my auto insurance by 15%. I was surprised because I couldn't tell why. I couldn't control my impulse so I made a call for further explanation. The way he explained why they raised the premium wasn't satisfactory to me. He pointed to the hurricanes in 2008 as the major reason because they had to pay for claims that required backing up from the members. This really didn't make sense to me. I asked what happens to the overwhelming monthly premiums collected from the insured and what is the point of insuring people if the insurance company is not prepared for major events such as hurricanes. The point I am trying to make is, insurance companies collect premiums all year round while major incidents do not happen all year round. By default, in such cases there should be resources that the insurance company has to consult for such emergencies. Then, it can pay off any incurred loans in a long run. This is what I know by an insurance company. It came to my recollection immediately when I thought about what could cause this kind of disparity from the traditional meaning of insurance. The companies in general may be overspending the accumulated premiums for something that may have nothing to do with paying claimants other than required skilled man power. It is probably what may be known as a corporate welfare. I am not one of them but I wished I were when such a jump to my premium comes as a surprise. At least I could have some dependable income to pay the insurance company. Sometimes I wonder when things that never sounded right in the old days are becoming acceptable to the extent of the insurance agent telling me without guilt, the unsubstantiated reasons why they increased my premium. Or Am I wrong?

Health and the business of health care.

Canadian health officials would like to say their business is taking care of the public health in contrast to the American system of running health care primarily as a business. This is actually a famous metaphor Canadians would like to be proud of. In both instances, it is easier said than done.

While both systems of running health care have their pros and cons, there is an urgent need to take the issue very seriously to resolve the health care inefficiencies in he US once and for all. The United States is obviously a more complex society compared to the 30 or so million population of Canada. As such, it needs to resolve its health care problems in its own unique way. That said, it should be underscored that emulating the Canadian system shouldn't necessarily be incoherent to the American way of life. In most cases it would have a positive outcome in a long run. This can be easily proven by the fact that other diverse nations like Brazil transformed health care to their advantage while at the same time applying a universal health service for the whole population.

Things have dramatically changed in the contemporary world as concerns like, "socialized medicine slowing down the advancement of medical technology" seem to have retired with the collapse of the Soviet style communism. Most countries are capable of running medical innovations because of the profitable outlook of free universal health care in the long run. The profits mainly come from savings from the excesses by revolutionizing the systems of keeping medical records and improving the early interventions on chronic diseases. Medical innovation can be kept at least at the same pace by putting aside a separate budget for it. NASA is a good example in this regard.

The other concern about the so called socialized medicine is the longer waiting period for patients that need transplants and costly operations. In a recent successful civil suit against the Canadian government, this issue became a public debate which persuaded the system to allow running private clinics where needed to meet the needs for those who can afford and willing to pay their way out. Here in the US there is a full fledged well functioning private health care that will not be tampered for those who can afford and are satisfied with it(President Obama assured in his various speeches in the health care debates).

Health care as we know it encompasses a smaller affinity than it used to be thanks to the growing fields of alternative medicines. Alternative medicine may be the choice that will definitely fill the gap which is being left out by the conventional health care due to its chemical and gadget oriented ways of healing patients. The alternative choice of health care as we know it focuses on the natural ways of maintaining health and fitness with little or no side effects. This field has grown tremendously in the last decades due to the fact that more people are inquiring into second opinions and alternative approaches to cure chronic illnesses. In some ways the price tag on health care has encouraged increased consultations to look into the effectiveness of the historic Oriental and African cultures and practices. Just as America is a bastion of ethnic foods from all over the world, medical practices can also transform into ethnic and traditional varieties. This is of course how the system practically works. While the exhausted and in many ways increasingly expensive health care system is doing the same thing over and over again, it is far from transforming itself into all inclusive health service.

Americans pay more for health care each year but get less coverage and fewer services for the premiums they pay. Health insurance premiums have nearly doubled since 2000, a rate three times faster than wages, yet rising premiums are only one of the ways families shoulder the burden of rising health care costs.

www.healthreform.gov

The way the American health care has been running helped in some ways in an unexpected direction to encourage people to look into the natural option. The good thing about this evolving feature is that the stubborn treatment of its patients by the conventional method of health care through its phony and exhausted system of health insurance business has helped create a new competition that may eventually help people have a freedom of choice. So, is the system going to get a knee jerk reaction to save itself from the inevitable doom? Is this why there is more talk about insuring the uninsured? Why is there then all of a sudden the question about who will pay for it? Who has been paying for the overwhelming majority of the population that is in the position to afford to pay without losing its mortgage? Now why is it difficult to pay for the estimated 45 million who are not insured at this moment? They do not add up to even a fifth of the population. They are actually the ones that drain the health care budget by showing up to the hospitals only when it is an emergency situation. This is when it winds up costing the most to treat. The intention here is not to be against the majority of Americans who are happy with their insurance plan; nor is it intended to persuade those who do not want to involve themselves with visiting a doctor unless they are terribly sick. It is about giving the inalienable right for people who want the health care option open for all unless there is an officially accepted categorization of those who deserve a health care plan and those who do not; in which case there is a flagrant violation of the fundamental human right to stay healthy. In my opinion, health care needs to cover the wider scope of prevention and treatment by extending its capacity with researches that include the alternative methods of health maintenance.