I spent the morning working on Black Friday Ads. This month I've had sales from Vann's Electronic in Missoula, and Love Lettering in Logan.
If sales go well, I might hit the road after the holidays in search of a free market group interested in health care reform.
My poll on the Medical Savings and Loan ended. I had two votes expressing interest in the idea.
I had been thinking about self-publishing the work. Publishing a printed work would cost $400 to $1000. If I had a product to sell, I might have more success getting heard.
My real hang up in publishing a book is that I strongly believe in the process of peer review. Writing a book before I have sufficient input is wrong.
Unfortunately, it is nigh impossible to get pier review when one has been driven from the local community as a pariah. Of course, this is what the progressive professors at the University of Utah intended when they falsified my test scores to keep me from obtaining the degrees of my choice.
I flunked three class one quarter for including the line "Workers of the world untie" in a criticism of Marx.
Anyway, Although I derived the Medical Savings and Loan by studying actuarial data, I don't have that information on hand anymore. I feel the work is too theoretic. I want more hard data. For example, I would like data showing the exact figures people pay out in health care to compare to premiums. This would prove that people can pay for the same care if they were allowed to keep their health care dollars.
The book includes too many unverified suppositions.
For example, I state that, for an insurance company to remain solvent, premiums must be greater than claims. But even an intuitive statement such as P > C must be backed up by data.
I need data to show that insurance companies that spent more than they took in went bankrupt!
IMHO, there is value in stating a theory, then testing it. This how the scientific method works. A person develops a theory, then tests it.
(I should say, this is how it used to work. Progressives control the University, and are busily working to change scientific theory more to their liking.)
This type of experiment is what I want to do. I want to prove that if a person put the $500,000 that they will spend on insurance over their life time into a savings account, that the person could buy a half million dollars in medical care.
I want to prove that if one put money in a grant program (as opposed to reinsurance) that the money could be spent on medical care in a more cost effective manner.
I don't like writing without data to back up wild claims like P > C, but an imperfect self published work stating the theory could be followed up by peer reviewed works with substance.
Anyway, I've been working on ads today. Even a tiny bit of cash would open up opportunities.