Monday, March 22, 2010

What if heating guys worked like doctors?

I originally posted a draft of this on Jessiex's Facebook page in response to one of her posts, and she suggested I repost it as a blog for fun and non-profit. I was thinking of what hiring a heating contractor would be like if they worked the way the medical profession does.
Imagine you call a heating and air conditioning contractor because you wake up in the morning and your furnace isn't working- and they take you through the following process:
1. The technician shows up at your house, and before they even touch your furnace they have you fill out a form:
-do you have furnace insurance?
-how will you be paying for your furnace repair?
-please give the phone number of someone to call in case they blow up your house while working on your furnace...
2. Have you sit alone in a room (naked?) for 20 minutes while they look at someone else's furnce during your turn
3. have the helper turn on your furnace, ask you questions about how you use it, and then turn it back off again
4. finally the master HVAC mechanic comes in, turns your furnace back on, taps on the ductwork, and then schedules you with another HVAC contractor "specialist" to determine through testing that it is in fact the furnace. (your mechanic is a furnace repair guy- but not this particular model.)
5. schedule you for a procedure based on the specialist's recommendation, where they tear out furnace, send to lab for testing, tell you to come back in a month.
6. meet with you for a paid consult to talk about the results of the test for your broken furnace
7. schedule replacement (1-2 months out)
8. charge you for the furnace, the 4-5 people who help me load it, ship it, install it, and turn it on (each segment of the process requires a specialist.)
9. sequester your house for 2-3 days for observation.
10. release your house and place it on "light duty" for 3-6 weeks
11. schedule you for a follow-up consultation
12. be sure to let you know that this isn't going to fix everything, you still can only use your furnace 50% of the time- so you have to decide whether to be cold at night or during the day.
10.On a future visit, realize that it wasn't the furnace in the first place, and place you on a routine schedule for tests, "furnace therapy" and "maintenance" You may never have 100% use of your furnace ever again.
13. schedule more testing of all of your electrical systems, plumbing, and other appliances just in case...
I know this is obviously ridiculous, but it points out how lax doctors have gotten about ordering tests and referring specialists at a thousand dollars a clip. My wife recently tried to turn down a bank of tests during a prenatal visit and they told her she had to do it. I just think medical costs would go down if more people questioned the validity and the actual need for some of the procedures and charges they incur- and I wonder if universal healthcare will just make it easier for doctors to be lazy with diagnosis and specialist referrals.
I mean, we have a popular TV show with a rather formulaic premise- the doctor orders a bank of expensive tests, and then we're expected to believe he's a genius when he has an epiphany while jogging...

I obviously don't think that fixing a furnace is anywhere near what it takes to perform open heart surgery- but I do believe that basic troubleshooting procedures are universal. The only thing that changes is the complexity of the flow chart. It's just that every once in a while, I perform service on a highly complicated piece of equipment, and sometimes I have a difficult time figuring out what is wrong. I get this look on my face when I'm not sure what I'm doing.It amazes me how often doctors get the same look on their face when I see them at work.
I've actually had to give back money, or not charge for services when I find that my original diagnosis was wrong. My conscience always bugs me- I picture myself on Dateline, or on some other hidden camera show. "This contractor told us that x part needed to be replaced, and then tried to charge us additional money when he discovered that it was actually y part that needed to be replaced."

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Bailout tracking

So, the bailout better known as The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 originally projected to dump 700 billion dollars of virtual cash into the auto industry, banking, and mortgage industry to keep the depression at bay has "only" had to pay out roughly 109 billion so far.
Although many banks and businesses have realized that they don't want the FED on their board, and don't want the scrutiny that comes with owing uncle sam (tom?) money- AIG still wants more. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/geithner-paulson-defend-182-bln-aig-bailout-2010-01-27


Apparently, we're showing signs of economic growth, and many companies are paying back the money loaned to them. I guess I just wanna know why foreclosures are still a problem if everything is ok?
I mean, since everything is fine then we should be done with foreclosures for a while, right? 
Someone has to know the "number." someone's got to know exactly what it would take to keep another forclosure from happening (say-over the next 2 years?) . What I think is that since big biz has been bailed out, and it is becoming unpopular on the hill to incur more debt- we're just going to forget about all those overpriced loans and let more people lose their homes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of gov handouts, and I don't think our government should go any further into debt than it needs to- but I just want to know where the money went- and why we feel like everything is ok now.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2010/03/fed-bailout-details-banks-bloomberg-court.html

Friday, March 12, 2010

NASA, budget cuts and stuff

Dear Mr. President.

You suck. Allow me to explain why.

I have been hesitant to openly criticize you and your administration publicly- because I prefer not to fit the stereotype of the typical Obamahater. I have tried to accept the fact that our country is spiraling into a debt upon which my great grandchildren will be paying interest, and I've tried to stay silent about your crummy healthcare package- but this is the last straw. You wanna cut the constellation program out of NASA.

Last year, my son and I attended space camp at the US Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama. We visited the museum, where there is a massive mockup and display for a plan to put humans back on the moon. I know that robotic exploration is sexier, cheaper, and more "realistic" but there's something to be said for MANNED  (or WOMANNED) spaceflight. I realized wafter spending a weekend with a bunch of 9 year-olds that there is real power in nationalism and pride when 300 nine-year-old kids say the pledge of allegience after a weekend of simulated zero G. I just kind of picture the stars and bars fading into the background if future space flight is to be funded by Google.

I mean, here we are- capable of leaving our planet and we're sending souped-up RC cars into space. It's like we're in Spain in the late 1400s and no one wants to sail the ocean blue. It's like we're living in the 1700s on the east coast of the US, and no one is bothering to actually go west. It's like Marco Polo has decided to send a runner to draw pictures of China.

Out of all the things our federal government should be doing, the space program is one of the important ones. I don't believe that governments should be the only ones going to space, but I do think that our government should be continually investing in researching, funding, and continuing programs to put it's citizens into space. Why?
1. Because it is there, and it is expensive. national governments are the only ones that can afford to invest in the research and exploration of space. Because it is a frontier that we should be exploring as a nation, and until we learn to put humans into space on a regular basis- we haven't arrived yet.
2. Because there is an historical precedent for government-funded exploration. Since humanity invented government, governments have been funding exploration- and exploration leads to expansion, and expansion leads to private capital investment, private capital investment leads to growth... Without the initial investment of government into exploration, privatization is a pipe-dream.
3. Because other governments are catching up to our technology. We can send all the robots JPL can build into space- and so can Japan, India, China and a slew of other countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_agencies

I don't think corporations should own space. I don't think "outsourcing" is the way to do the space program. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for Virgin Galactic and the xprize and all that good stuff- we've got to keep NASA on their toes, but I've been to Goddard, and I've been a "space buff" for a long time- and nobody does mil spec, design and space manufacturing like the good 'ol USA. It is a myth that outsourcing is a new concept anyway- Boeing, Lockheed, APL, JPL and a slew of other universities and corporations have been working with NASA every step of the way.

The Apollo program used computers that weren't as smart as our phones are now. early moon astronauts used pencil and paper navigation at times, and somehow over 40 years later it's too dangerous and costly? Seriously?

C'mon Obama don't be a douchebag and fund the constellation program. http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/CxEMM_SITE/index.html