From The desk of: Rosemarie Dundon
Date: November 15, 2010
ON The issues regarding climate change, pollution and industry:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
My suggestion is to change the processes with which we dispose of wastes; this is of course not a new idea in principle...
Question: How else will we dispose of the toxins and emitions that are hazardous to our well
being? Namely, emitions should be filtered, captured and disposed of.
WHAT? I believe that we are not about to stop the ways we manufacture,but we can change the way we dispose of wastes. I write to directly introduce a starting point idea. Our manufacturing does not necessarily have the change today; how we pollute the environment does need to be adaptable.
Simple is best? Since our world economy is dependent on manufacturing and it's processes,'
we need to move toward conservation, responsible disposal of emitions and address the effects on our environment.
Filtration and disposal are more likely to be accepted as modes of operations; these would not interfere with the manufacturing, instead, what is being offered: a new process which is seeking a responsible manufacturing that contributes to clean air and less harmful emitions.
Let's shelve the idea in principle that we are going to STOP emitions completely for now. Instead, let's circumvent the processes' that make emitions, pollution and bio-hazards.
Let's make filtration systems, what comes immediately to mind is filtering the toxins and wastes. Let's capture the pollutants, and dispose of these filtration filters that would “hold” the toxins.
i.e.Automobiles:
Idea: Trap and dispose of emitions as solid waste.
Just make a “Sock” which would cover the tailpipe, filter the emitions and change the filter often.
The word “Sock” is used deliberately, because you take your socks on and off. You change them when their dirty, right?
WHAT?
Other ancillary ideas:
Next Question:
If each factory, eliminated their emitions of toxins, or lowered them with filtration, how much better off would the world be?
Simple is best, is it not?
The first idea is: How much easier it would be if we created either an antidote for or a filtration system for, (or optimally for both), to trap these emitions /toxins and chemicals?
WHAT? I hope I have the facts correct. Is it not true that EVERY item on the Periodic Table of Elements has an anti-dote?
This is the First idea or first phase:
On that principle,why have we not “cured” pollution by using chemical antidotes to each element?
Why, if the former is not possible, why cant
we “TRAP” THE EMITIONS, WITH A SPECIFICALLY FORMULATED “ANTI-DOTE” DEVELOPED AND IMPLEMENTED, OR DEVELOP A FILTRATION SYSTEM THAT RENDERS THE TOXINS CAPTURED AND DISPOSABLE.
Next Question:
Why, if we cannot find the antidote, why cant we
simply develop a filter that will trap the toxins and figure out how to dispose of these dirty filters as a
solid waste management feature?
WHAT? Ideas in sum:
1)Develop a antidote, and reverse the chemical makeup of each particular toxin, emition or hazard.
2)Develop a filtration system to trap air toxins,
and dispose of same as a solid waste an easier thing to dispose of?
3)Develop a filtration system for each toxin,
create the antidote to the toxin; dispose of the filter as solid waste.
Again, further, on the principle on the Periodic Table of Elements, I understand that each element has an antidote. Therefore, I submit the following ideas.
Other applicable General Concepts on Pollution:
Pollution, can we not add vitamins to our water supply? I understand that fluoride, in large dosages is a cancer causing agent. We use it to help keep our water clean now.
We need clean safe and healthy water. Why not introduce vitamins into our water supply for general health advocacy?
Basic Concept Extrapolations:
Can we not reverse or “Cure” polluted water with the same idea discussed earlier ? ~ Reverse pollution by reversing the elements in the water that are harmful.
WHAT? Make our water supply clean and healthy.
Or not.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Friday, November 12, 2010
Campaigne finance reform
From the desk of: Rosemarie C. Dundon
November 11, 2010
Page 1 of 3 ~
A WORD ON CAMPAIGNE FINANCE REFORM
In fairness to all who aspire to elected office, let no one be disadvantaged by finances, instead let he/she be disadvantaged by their issues, ideas and basic philosophy.
Let those who best understand American Values win!
HOW? Remember FDR rode into city by city, making his platform and rhetoric known? He pulled up on the train route, made his speeches and went onto the next town. The key item in an election is exposure.
Well,ok, but today we have media and a lot of money invested in each candidate. So? How do we level the playing field, make everyone running for office (be) heard, and how do we make sure it is fair to each candidate, their constituents and society as whole?
Campaigne Finance Reform:
Cooperation is needed from all involved; the candidate, the constituents and media.
Page 2 of 3 ~.
What? Make no further personal campaigne finance contributions. Instead, initially as the race begins, make all contributions equally shared by all who are running for office. At the end you would make the bulk of money go back to the winning party-candidate. Make no mistake, each candidate will be heard, the general party platform will be be established for the coming election,and no one will lose because he/she could not finance their campaigne.
Instead of a candidate running for office, it should be that he/she best represents the party, the people and country.
HOW? All donations are to pay for air time/media/press for all candidates; until such time as the party candidate is chosen.
At that end of the campaigne cycle we will have heard from everyone, we will have made our decision, and we will have a party-candidate we totally support.
For example: the democratic party would fund all ads for the party;the candidates will get equal time providing a few loose ends are eliminated.
Page 3 of 3 ~
How then will begin traveling town to town is: Everyone will be heard! Point two: the approach to any election should be based on party-variables.
Town to Town debates can take place and be distributed worldwide candidate by candidate. The entire approach toward elected office would be: A narrowing down of our idea of a candidate for elected office.Our basic value system will be established.
Debates can naturally take place and take on a process of elimination; in other words: Each candidate will debate with all the others, because the party-itself will pay the expenses.
That is not to say that media should not have to front some of the costs. Politics is news.
Air time for a debate is prime time for advertising. Therefore, media should be mandated to fund telecasts to some extent.
WHAT? Just the latest from a girl from Queens.
November 11, 2010
Page 1 of 3 ~
A WORD ON CAMPAIGNE FINANCE REFORM
In fairness to all who aspire to elected office, let no one be disadvantaged by finances, instead let he/she be disadvantaged by their issues, ideas and basic philosophy.
Let those who best understand American Values win!
HOW? Remember FDR rode into city by city, making his platform and rhetoric known? He pulled up on the train route, made his speeches and went onto the next town. The key item in an election is exposure.
Well,ok, but today we have media and a lot of money invested in each candidate. So? How do we level the playing field, make everyone running for office (be) heard, and how do we make sure it is fair to each candidate, their constituents and society as whole?
Campaigne Finance Reform:
Cooperation is needed from all involved; the candidate, the constituents and media.
Page 2 of 3 ~.
What? Make no further personal campaigne finance contributions. Instead, initially as the race begins, make all contributions equally shared by all who are running for office. At the end you would make the bulk of money go back to the winning party-candidate. Make no mistake, each candidate will be heard, the general party platform will be be established for the coming election,and no one will lose because he/she could not finance their campaigne.
Instead of a candidate running for office, it should be that he/she best represents the party, the people and country.
HOW? All donations are to pay for air time/media/press for all candidates; until such time as the party candidate is chosen.
At that end of the campaigne cycle we will have heard from everyone, we will have made our decision, and we will have a party-candidate we totally support.
For example: the democratic party would fund all ads for the party;the candidates will get equal time providing a few loose ends are eliminated.
Page 3 of 3 ~
How then will begin traveling town to town is: Everyone will be heard! Point two: the approach to any election should be based on party-variables.
Town to Town debates can take place and be distributed worldwide candidate by candidate. The entire approach toward elected office would be: A narrowing down of our idea of a candidate for elected office.Our basic value system will be established.
Debates can naturally take place and take on a process of elimination; in other words: Each candidate will debate with all the others, because the party-itself will pay the expenses.
That is not to say that media should not have to front some of the costs. Politics is news.
Air time for a debate is prime time for advertising. Therefore, media should be mandated to fund telecasts to some extent.
WHAT? Just the latest from a girl from Queens.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Health care reform for USA-N-YOU!
Dear Mr.President and Staff et al:
Re: Healthcare and RX Reform:
Previous to this I’ve submitted humbly I hope the reforms for healthcare that are possible, in the very least to be considered, and can function as a starting point.
Mr. President, healthcare in America, sustains me personally, since I am disABLED and working and doing my part. The myriad of medical expenses to just maintain me, stabilize me and allow me to function are tremendous. Roughly, six months of "AOT" assisted outpatient treatment with an "Assertive Community Treatment team" has made living in the community a fact, a right and a possibility. Were it not for new science, medications and intensive treatment, I would live the life of an uncle of mine: live in an institution, die in an institution.
For this and other reasons, I approach you for a solution to our out of control expenses for treatments of any and all kinds. Hence, my new proposal is:
PROVIDE THE SAME CARE, DON’T MAKE A SINGLE PAYER AND MAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY BE SHARED BY PATIENT, DOCTOR AND COMMUNITY.
Make coverage a guarantee to all workers. Make those who cannot work keep up with wellness programs, visit the what I call : “Medi Vac” portable hospitals free.
What is a Medi Vac? A floating hospital which is more likely to stop illness or injury from serious harm, it appears to be less expensive because is has to have Doctors, Medics and Nursing staff, who are still in training radio into the hospital and treat people on the spot for free.
Those who are working pay into coverage, the coverage is matched, much like a savings account, however, there is no personal account for individual care. That’s not fair and doesn’t allow for poor people to be healthy. However, working should insure coverage for all. Large premiums are chasing people away, and poor folks suffer the brunt of it.
What we call a premium would be designed and revisited as a tax, fixed to a certain amount per year. The idea being that we are not all sick all the time, those who need more coverage can get it. If they go into catastrophic care, where they would have to purchase some coverage, they have to leave the network just described.
Take healthcare apart: Full coverage for ordinary care, Medicaid as it is until further notice and catastrophic care when needed.
In other words: contribute 10% from the wages of the employee as and with a tax exemption. Take 10% from the employer to insure the employee and require a 10% match from US govt.
Over time, the need for this tax will diminish, as persons are well cared for, not over taxed and maintain their health instead of letting it go and ending up in the emergency room later.
In short, under this plan, their employment is the reassurance of good healthcare. That’s 20% of their income as a subsidy toward raining days and a 10% contribution from US Gov. Wellness programs should be free, payments for coverage should be tax deductible and readily available. In fact, everyone should have a contingency wellness plan with their personal doctor, the development of such a plan is imperative as the coverage itself, and everyone should have a doctor who knows and treats and cares for them.
If use is lower, due to wellness, over time, they would not usually use the fund.
This is not a personal healthcare savings account, instead it is a tax like Medicare to prevent the financial ruin of persons who are unhealthy or unlucky...
The "premiums" are essentially illiminated, except for those who opt in to catastrophic care coverage and choose to pay for that as well.
I know the SSDI system is in mayhem but, the fact remains that coverage is possible in the short term, until we come up with a better set of solutions.This is a preliminary plan, a contingency plan, for inital organization and summation of reforms that could take years and already take up much of our economy as you know already.
Hypothetical situation...
So, if ten people are paying the expenses for the community that has illness, and they are not using coverage so much, the coverage will not consume itself. If we create a fund for all users, and we continue to collect, there will be coverage for all, conceivably.
I have said previous to this that medications and pharmacy needs can be made into "a coop" (cooperative measure): make groups of Rx supplier’s approach the manufacturers collectively, pay less and pass off savings.This will reduce the cost of care overall. To be sure Rx companies do not suffer they can specialize in certain types of Rx: I.E CVS can specialize in Rx care and expenses for cancer, Rite Aid can focus on care to pregnancy? Just make them buy in more volume, specialize and make a profit whilst not draining the public.
That’s all on Rx.
Health Care reform involves making everyone see the tremendous expense which is a significant portion of our economy.
My plan for doctor's care, delivery of service and excellence maintained would have Doctors and clinicians can make a hierarchy of needs and delivery of services. NO SACRIFICE OF CARE, JUST A SENSIBLE USE OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES. Training years at servicing those of the poverty level, AT THIS POINT DOCTORS ARE IN TRAINING AND COLLECTIVELY DELIVER CARE UNDER EXPERT AND PROFICIENT SENIOR CLINICIANS.. Assisting other doctors in a collective as teaching continues. Not reducing the amount of their fees, just reducing their expense:take away to "non value added tasks" that doctors are now performing, making the medical team only work on medicine and not record keeping, and any other tasks.
On to the poverty level: They have no job to pay into a subsidy.
They would continue to get Medicaid and Medicare at current levels until a better plan is made. That large pool of users needs to be readdressed further. I'll think on it more once we solve the organizations of the healthcare delivery system.
However, make an immediate effort to alieviate the burden on the poor, the hospital system and make an effort to contain costs this way for now.
A preliminary, perhaps temporary relief on the expenses related to unisured, underinsured or poor folks..'IDEA!
Make the "Medi vac public transport clincs" treat people at the street level, free of charge, paid for by absorbing the fee of a :floating hospital. Make the doctors come to them, the poor who have little or no access to doctors and adequate care, treat them with those who are in training and can do the most good.
That’s it really, you have to deliver the care so that they can be well and not be treated as a burden. Make healthcare a priority for all those who are in need. It's a vicious cycle: no insurance, no health, no wealth...plainly, being healthy should not be just a privelge it is a personal responsibility of the individual, the community and our sense of humanity, dignity and respect.
Poor folks don't need to be sick, or untreated, just because
they are poor.
However, there should be no detriment to care: Intervention is key to maintain health and wellness and to reduce emergency room visits. Health and wellness visits can still be covered fully under this plan and others like it. I don't pretend I have the best idea, the only idea, nor do I think the best.
This is my suggestion. I hope to help out, and I'm glad you've read thus far. It is a privilege to be an American and I'll never loose sight of that, I hope.
Sincerely, I hope you receive this in the spirit in which it was written.
You are in my prayers.
Sincerely,
Rosemarie Dundon
rosemariedundon2003@yahoo.com
Re: Healthcare and RX Reform:
Previous to this I’ve submitted humbly I hope the reforms for healthcare that are possible, in the very least to be considered, and can function as a starting point.
Mr. President, healthcare in America, sustains me personally, since I am disABLED and working and doing my part. The myriad of medical expenses to just maintain me, stabilize me and allow me to function are tremendous. Roughly, six months of "AOT" assisted outpatient treatment with an "Assertive Community Treatment team" has made living in the community a fact, a right and a possibility. Were it not for new science, medications and intensive treatment, I would live the life of an uncle of mine: live in an institution, die in an institution.
For this and other reasons, I approach you for a solution to our out of control expenses for treatments of any and all kinds. Hence, my new proposal is:
PROVIDE THE SAME CARE, DON’T MAKE A SINGLE PAYER AND MAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY BE SHARED BY PATIENT, DOCTOR AND COMMUNITY.
Make coverage a guarantee to all workers. Make those who cannot work keep up with wellness programs, visit the what I call : “Medi Vac” portable hospitals free.
What is a Medi Vac? A floating hospital which is more likely to stop illness or injury from serious harm, it appears to be less expensive because is has to have Doctors, Medics and Nursing staff, who are still in training radio into the hospital and treat people on the spot for free.
Those who are working pay into coverage, the coverage is matched, much like a savings account, however, there is no personal account for individual care. That’s not fair and doesn’t allow for poor people to be healthy. However, working should insure coverage for all. Large premiums are chasing people away, and poor folks suffer the brunt of it.
What we call a premium would be designed and revisited as a tax, fixed to a certain amount per year. The idea being that we are not all sick all the time, those who need more coverage can get it. If they go into catastrophic care, where they would have to purchase some coverage, they have to leave the network just described.
Take healthcare apart: Full coverage for ordinary care, Medicaid as it is until further notice and catastrophic care when needed.
In other words: contribute 10% from the wages of the employee as and with a tax exemption. Take 10% from the employer to insure the employee and require a 10% match from US govt.
Over time, the need for this tax will diminish, as persons are well cared for, not over taxed and maintain their health instead of letting it go and ending up in the emergency room later.
In short, under this plan, their employment is the reassurance of good healthcare. That’s 20% of their income as a subsidy toward raining days and a 10% contribution from US Gov. Wellness programs should be free, payments for coverage should be tax deductible and readily available. In fact, everyone should have a contingency wellness plan with their personal doctor, the development of such a plan is imperative as the coverage itself, and everyone should have a doctor who knows and treats and cares for them.
If use is lower, due to wellness, over time, they would not usually use the fund.
This is not a personal healthcare savings account, instead it is a tax like Medicare to prevent the financial ruin of persons who are unhealthy or unlucky...
The "premiums" are essentially illiminated, except for those who opt in to catastrophic care coverage and choose to pay for that as well.
I know the SSDI system is in mayhem but, the fact remains that coverage is possible in the short term, until we come up with a better set of solutions.This is a preliminary plan, a contingency plan, for inital organization and summation of reforms that could take years and already take up much of our economy as you know already.
Hypothetical situation...
So, if ten people are paying the expenses for the community that has illness, and they are not using coverage so much, the coverage will not consume itself. If we create a fund for all users, and we continue to collect, there will be coverage for all, conceivably.
I have said previous to this that medications and pharmacy needs can be made into "a coop" (cooperative measure): make groups of Rx supplier’s approach the manufacturers collectively, pay less and pass off savings.This will reduce the cost of care overall. To be sure Rx companies do not suffer they can specialize in certain types of Rx: I.E CVS can specialize in Rx care and expenses for cancer, Rite Aid can focus on care to pregnancy? Just make them buy in more volume, specialize and make a profit whilst not draining the public.
That’s all on Rx.
Health Care reform involves making everyone see the tremendous expense which is a significant portion of our economy.
My plan for doctor's care, delivery of service and excellence maintained would have Doctors and clinicians can make a hierarchy of needs and delivery of services. NO SACRIFICE OF CARE, JUST A SENSIBLE USE OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES. Training years at servicing those of the poverty level, AT THIS POINT DOCTORS ARE IN TRAINING AND COLLECTIVELY DELIVER CARE UNDER EXPERT AND PROFICIENT SENIOR CLINICIANS.. Assisting other doctors in a collective as teaching continues. Not reducing the amount of their fees, just reducing their expense:take away to "non value added tasks" that doctors are now performing, making the medical team only work on medicine and not record keeping, and any other tasks.
On to the poverty level: They have no job to pay into a subsidy.
They would continue to get Medicaid and Medicare at current levels until a better plan is made. That large pool of users needs to be readdressed further. I'll think on it more once we solve the organizations of the healthcare delivery system.
However, make an immediate effort to alieviate the burden on the poor, the hospital system and make an effort to contain costs this way for now.
A preliminary, perhaps temporary relief on the expenses related to unisured, underinsured or poor folks..'IDEA!
Make the "Medi vac public transport clincs" treat people at the street level, free of charge, paid for by absorbing the fee of a :floating hospital. Make the doctors come to them, the poor who have little or no access to doctors and adequate care, treat them with those who are in training and can do the most good.
That’s it really, you have to deliver the care so that they can be well and not be treated as a burden. Make healthcare a priority for all those who are in need. It's a vicious cycle: no insurance, no health, no wealth...plainly, being healthy should not be just a privelge it is a personal responsibility of the individual, the community and our sense of humanity, dignity and respect.
Poor folks don't need to be sick, or untreated, just because
they are poor.
However, there should be no detriment to care: Intervention is key to maintain health and wellness and to reduce emergency room visits. Health and wellness visits can still be covered fully under this plan and others like it. I don't pretend I have the best idea, the only idea, nor do I think the best.
This is my suggestion. I hope to help out, and I'm glad you've read thus far. It is a privilege to be an American and I'll never loose sight of that, I hope.
Sincerely, I hope you receive this in the spirit in which it was written.
You are in my prayers.
Sincerely,
Rosemarie Dundon
rosemariedundon2003@yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)