Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Grift

The Rabid Right Wingnuts have been foaming at the mouth since at least the advent of Medicare: "we're living so much longer and We can't afford to provide Communist healthcare to geezers!!!". Well, they mostly don't admit that the We is rich folk, who are oppressed by the graduated income tax (which they mostly manage to avoid, anyway). So, is it true in the first place? That we are living so much longer? Well... not really. As is extensively documented among the demographers and epidemiologists, almost all of the increase in life expectancy at birth isn't that geezers are living a lot longer. They aren't.

But, even some mostly educated folk buy the myth. So, let's do a bit of a thought experiment, a la Einstein. If it was good enough for him, it's good enough for me. And you.

What if... Grifter In Chief gets his mail balloting ban gift from The Gang of Six^©, so keeping both the House and Senate in 2026. Next, he claims national security in 2028 to suspend the election, and The Gang of Six^© goes along, as one would expect. Either he, if he's still kinda alive, or DJT Jr. takes the throne. With Grifter In Chief demonstrating that the Constitution is no impediment to dictatorship by election, just like 30s Germany, and present day Turkey and Hungary, Grifter In Chief names hisself President for life ("we shouldn't even have an election") and RFK HHS Secretary for life. Along with the rest of the cocksucking Cabinet, naturally.

Whichever Grifter In Chief is on the throne orders that RFK implement that So Much Better Than Obamacare right away. And, miracle, it happens; life expectancy shoots up like a rocket. There is a catch. There always is. It's really just a kinder, gentler "Logan's Run" scenario. Everybody manages to get to 50, say, alive and kicking. Last Day with the black crystal doesn't happen until 65 and it doesn't mean you get zapped. You just don't get any more healthcare. But how does that meet Grifter In Chief's demand for better healthcare? It doesn't, of course; but it can be made to look sorta, kinda like it.

The answer is simple arithmetic: by eliminating the remaining early death causes (a major miracle, btw), the mean/median of the life curve shifts bigly to the right. However much results from use of chronic disease drugs, or the growing advent of gene therapies (at eye watering fee, of course), getting to 65 in very good health will be the result. Geezers don't live longer as a cohort, some fraction will die earlier than when Medicare existed since they no longer get chronic medicines or hip replacements or those nifty gene therapies (what's the point of a life long cure if your life is 5 or so years) and such. But So Much Better Than Obamacare is ruled a rousing success, and the innumerate rejoice. "Life expectancy at 65 went up by 5 years!!!" Thanks, actually, to all those therapies they got before entering the Land of the Geezer, not because So Much Better Than Obamacare lifted a finger for the geezers.

And, the fact is, we're not all that far from such now. There doesn't appear to be much geezer specific healthcare in existence; life extenstion in your Medicare years appears to be mostly the residue of better health/death avoidance garnered until then; esp. with continuance of all those chronic disease meds that got you to your Medicare years.

Here's one report on the "residue" effect of statins and heart disease. It's paywalled, alas, but here's the lede:

Not long after guidelines shifted to considering statin therapy as early as age 30, new research from France suggests there may be no harm in stopping the cholesterol-lowering drugs at age 75 in people with no history of cardiovascular disease. The lessons, however, may not translate elsewhere.

And, of course, here's one for BP

The mean survival benefits — estimated using differences in areas under the curve — associated with the use of intensive vs standard BP control ranged from 0.5 to 3 years. At age 50 years, estimated residual survival was 37.3 and 34.4 years with intensive and standard treatments, respectively (difference, 2.9 years; 95% CI, 0.9-5.0 years; P =.008). At 65 years, residual survival was 24.5 and 23.3 years with intensive and standard BP control treatments, respectively (difference 1.1; 95% CI, 0.1-2.1 years; P =.029)

Middle-age, at-risk patients were found to benefit the most from intensive BP control treatment.

Now, it wouldn't be quite fair to infer that BP medicines in your Medicare years don't mean much compared to having them since decades earlier. But almost.

IOW, once again: the under 65 crowd have been slurping these meds for some decades before they reach their Medicare years. Many/some would have croaked well before then, but because they didn't, the life expectancy curve shifts (bigly, mayhaps?) to the right. Whether any of them lasts longer in their Medicare years than the unmedicated. It's just the arithmetic of mean/median and (quasi) normal distribution.

Gimme Shelter

So, if any in the audience thinks that AI, as currently implemented, may be regulated by Kim Don-Felon and his Merry Band of Fascists (so says this Tesla investor), think again. Real hard. Having the Fascists in control the goal, as described here. That's the NYT review of what happened, and it surely caused every manjack of the Kim Don-Felon and his Merry Band of Fascists (so says this Tesla investor) to get an instant hardon.

Just think of how simple and easy it will be for Kim Don-Felon and his Merry Band of Fascists (so says this Tesla investor) to totally control The United States of Alabama. Putin and Hitler would be proud. For as long as it lasts, since Batshit J. Fucking Moron^©Tillerson will drive the economy over a cliff. And he'll depart to Moscow with his Bongo Bucks safely in Switzerland.

This time, the A.I. collective didn't seize a military network, hack a hospital or shut down an electrical grid. This time, humans regained control.

Next time, we might not be so lucky.

Next time, we won't be so lucky. Kim Don-Felon and his Merry Band of Fascists (so says this Tesla investor) will be the humans in control. Only for themselves.

Cruelty is the point.

That's Entertainment

A few times in the course of these missives, I've mentioned that measures of "economic impact" of various consumer-optional entertainment are basically bogus. Here's a long piece from the NYT on the economics of the US Open tennis program. It does make the case, but only indirectly, that value of such activity matters only if measured spending is from consumers outside of the locale in question. One might be picky and assert that the appropriate venue is the USofA in toto. Why? Because of what we in the econ space call substitution effect. Or, as one skeptic put it (near the bottom of the piece, of course)

Some are skeptical of these kinds of projections. Andrew Zimbalist, a professor emeritus of economics at Smith College and an expert on the economics of sports, has not seen the study. But he cautioned that there are ways to make data fit a narrative.

"It's quite possible that there is some positive impact," he said, adding that money spent by New Yorkers at the tournament is money that most likely would have been spent elsewhere in the city — on Broadway, at a Yankees game, at a restaurant — and now won't be. "In that sense it's a net negative," he said.

A spokescritter for a restaurant org went on to say that benefit outside of the immediate area around the center doesn't amount to much. Duh.

Exactly how much Damn Gimmint Bongo Bucks were used to create the current facility, I haven't found. But it was built, apparently for free, on city land. There is an audit from 2019, which shows that USTA isn't exactly being taken to the cleaners by NYC on an annual basis. The report says the US Open is worth $1,200,000,000 to NYC each year. The City Gummint doesn't get but a few pennies. Sweet heart, I luv you so!

One can site casinos and data centers as boons to the local economy. Which never seem to work out that way; Atlantic City, I'm talking to you. And how many uneducated shitkickers are going to work in those centers in fly-over country? Yeah, right.

TAM

For those not knee deep in bidnezz, that's total addressable market. If you're not some scammer or grifter (hard to find such, given these days of Grifter In Chief ), then the first thing you do when you want to move some new (or importantly updated) widget into Mr. Market is figure out how many end users (aka, buyers) you expect exist. In the pharma world these days, drug companies are actually looking for a TAM that's tiny thanks to Uncle Sugar, who passes on some substantial benefit to them if FDA approves a drug for very limited number (200,000 ... well sorta, kinda) of patients. Although gaming continues as ever. This is one segment of the economy where the TAM is sorta, kinda explicit. And being 'small' is good.

For AI, as currently implemented, it's a bit different. And that difference has been recited here a bit. And it matters, given that Big Tech is spending some non-trivial Billions of Bongo Bucks on hardware (data centres) alone. Who are the patients to be served? Do they have, taken as a whole, enough Bongo Bucks to recoup all those trillions of Bongo Bucks, plus a bit of profit? Here's a recent assessment. As predicted in these missives, the arithmetic looks awful. And, some of the tech bros are worried.

At one point this year, Meta internally projected that it could spend as much as $10 billion annually on Anthropic's A.I. models, said two of the people, who declined to be identified discussing private information. That would have formed a major chunk of Anthropic's yearly revenue, which the start-up estimated in July would pass $65 billion.

Now, that cash flow is wonderful for Anthropic and all of the AI vendors out there. But Meta, and Google, and Microsoft, and the like are buying what we econ types call 'producers' goods'; IOW, stuff that the buyer turns around and uses to make some finished good which Americans on Main Street, Anytown, USofA actually pay for. Well, Meta et al, ain't selling any new thing to Americans on Main Street. Remember, so far as Meta goes, the user is the actual product, sold to advertisers. Microsoft, is more or less, the exception (no one uses Bing).

As of April 2024, Bing holds the position of the second-largest search engine worldwide, with a market share of 3.64%, behind Google's 90.91%.

So, where is the flood of Bongo Bucks to make it all worthwhile? It's a verity that Real Producers always bitch and moan about the Bean Counters ruining the party. I suspect the Real Producers will lickety split concoct some tale to blame the Bean Counters when it all goes Pop.

Mr. Zuckerberg has described Hatch as Meta's next breakthrough, a personal "agent" that works "24/7 on your behalf to help achieve your goals and improve your life, your health, your relationships, your finances."

(By the way, what was the last New Product that Meta made that was a Bigly Win? Just asking for a friend.)

OK. A semblance of recognizing that somewhere, somehow a real live Human (American or otherwise) will use an AI derived service/product. But will such a Human pay a user's fee for the privilege? And, if so, how much? Or does The Zuck assume that Hatch will somehow, some way entice his real customers, advertisers, to pay more and more often? In either case will end users or advert makers generate enough new revenue to make it all make sense? How would you bet on Kalshi?

It's been mentioned here and there that, given existing accounting rules, all this data centre spending is hidden in corporate capital budgets. IOW, very little of it hits their current financials. There will be a reckoning and there will be blood.

Thought For The Day - 28 August 2026

The hits keep coming. More like attack drones than top 10 songs, though. Latest grift

Companies Can Tell Investors Less Under Proposed S.E.C. Rules

Insiders can make an even bigly boodle. Won't take long for Grifter In Chief to trade ever more eagerly. And, of course, his best billionaire buddies. The USofA is looking more and more like any Eastern Europe -stan.

I Told You So - 27 August 2026

Well... you've heard it before: people vote with their feet. I heard it from Dr. McElhone in an earlier, less nasty, shrinking of the Damn Gummint. Here's a longish piece on the ongoing exodus.

"I used to live in the country that I thought was the most enthusiastic about the prospects for science improving the human condition, of any country in the world," said Phillip Zamore, the chair of RNA Therapeutics Institute at the University of Massachusetts. "And I woke up one day and that wasn't true anymore."

Not quite Jewish brainiacs fleeing Germany in the 30s, but just you wait. If the The Gang of Six^© stall long enough to let Kim Don-Felon and his Merry Band of Fascists (so says this Tesla investor) let only Rednecks vote, there won't be a educated person left here. That your average Redneck has neither birth certificate (and likely no idea who his Baby Daddy is) nor passport won't forestall the local vote folks from letting Billy Joe Bob from making his X on the registration card.

Thought For The Day - 25 August 2026

While I've not seen or heard from any of the usual Lamestream Pundits opining what Kim Don-Felon and his Merry Band of Fascists (so says this Tesla investor) might be up to with the escalating tariff war with Canada. For myself, it's self evident. Bone Spur Samurai^© is taking the next step to annexing Canada. And to be careful: just one huge state, not one per province, of course. Alberta is just dumb enough to go full MAGA, but not the rest. And let's not touch the language issue. Spanglish all over here, and now French? This is really a white belly English place, as everybody knows.

Here's his deal: we'll tariff Canada into bankruptcy. Or they can become the 51^st state. Take it or leave it. Can Batshit J. Fucking Moron^©Tillerson pull it off while he's still alive, kicking, and El Jefe? May be, or may be not. But it doesn't matter. Jared will carry on the dynasty and git er done.