Month: June 2012

Why I Support the “Individual Mandate”

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy1 Comment

Way back in 1984, columnist Art Buchwald wrote a piece on the insurance industry that has always struck with me. It began as follows (you can read the whole piece here):

I’m not a betting man by nature, but I have this bookmaker. He works for the Reluctant Insurance Company of America. This is how we bet. Every month I give him a certain amount of money, and he takes a gamble that my house won’t burn down or be broken into or damaged by a falling tree. Another bet I place with him is that my car won’t hit someone in an accident, or I won’t be hit by somebody else. Still a third one is that my family will not be stricken with an illness that will require hospitalization.

Funny enough, I was never anxious to win one of those bets. I didn’t want to collect from the bookie on any of them. He seemed to feel the same way I did. So much so that if, for some reason, I forgot to send him a check for one of our bets, he would mail me a nasty letter wanting to know where the money was. He was not, he told me, in the bookmaking business for his health.

Recently, due to an illness in my family, my bookie lost one of my bets. Since this was the first time I had won, I thought he would be happy to pay off. After all, even in Las Vegas the house expects to lose once in a while.

You can guess where the piece goes from there, with the bookie refusing to pay out, and even threatening to break his legs.

Thinking about insurance as legalized gambling is very instructive. Currently, we’re in a situation where a lot of people have employer-subsidized casinos where they can gamble. These casinos pay very well, but they are open only to the employees. They are like credit unions: they know their community, and they pay very well.

Those who aren’t so lucky to have employer-subsidized casinos have a problem. Playing at the other casinos are very expensive, and some of them are quite shady. Some of them have really bad odds: they collect in lots of money, and pay out an extremely small percentage, with the rest going to the mob bosses that control the casino. Others only allow you to gamble if they know you will lose; if you have ever won before, they do not permit you to play the game because their oddsmakers tell them that if you have won once, you’re going to win again. Further, there are a group of players that only want to go into the casino when they know they will have a winning streak. When their luck is cold, they avoid the casinos. Casinos could not stay in business very long if the house regularly lost; it depends on the balance of winners to losers.

Let’s now translate the above into the affordable care act, often called “Obamacare”. One thing Obamacare does is mandate that the house pay a certain percentage to the winner, and not to the mob bosses — in other words, that a significant portion of premiums (I think 80%) must go to medial payments, not administrative costs. Obamacare also mandates that individuals who have ever “won” can continue playing — in other words, that individuals with preexisting conditions must be able to get coverage. It also mandates that the casinos must pay out when people win — in other words, that when you get sick, the insurance companies cannot retroactively drop your insurance. It also mandates that players just learning the game can come in the casino with their parents — in other words, that children who are unlikely to get sick must be covered under their parent’s policies. All off these have the potential to cost the casino money. To counter this and balance the system, Obamacare mandates that people cannot play only when they know they will win — in other words, that people must get health insurance when they are young and healthy. This is the basis of the “individual mandate”: to provide incentives for people who do not carry insurance to carry insurance, and those premiums offset the additional coverage costs.

Now, Obamacare recognizes that not all players have the same ability to gamble. For those that have the ability, they have the choice: they can regularly gamble and lose, or they can pay a fee (lower than their gambling costs) for not playing (this is the tax that the Supreme Court just ruled as legal). For those that can’t afford to play at all, the government will provide the casino and pay for them to play — this corresponds to Medicare and similar programs. For those that can barely afford to play, the government will provide subsidies to help them play — in other words, low income people can get financial support on buying insurance. Lastly, the government will maintain a list of available casinos (the “registries”) that tell people the best places for them to play; it is the states that have the option of setting up state-run casinos for those that can’t find anyway to play.

Continuing the analogy: Does the government dictate when people can win and when they lose: in other words, are there “death squads”. In the government run casinos, yes — but this is what we have today with Medicare dictating what they will cover (in other words, this isn’t new). For private-run casinos, only partially. The government does dictate some cases where the people can win — that is, coverage that must be provided. The government, with some exceptions, does not dictate when people lose (i.e., when things aren’t covered). That’s up to the private insurers  (oops, casinos). The exception: abortion, and this restriction came not from Obama but from the Conservatives in government.

So there you have it. Insurance is legalized gambling. The individual mandate is simply a way to get more people into the casino so that the casino operators can afford to let more people play and have better payouts.

 

Share

When It Rains…

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

One of the unfortunate side effects of the recent RIF at the Circle A Ranch was that I became the operator of our vanpool (as one of the folks RIFed was the longtime operator; we also lost Nicole as a regular rider). This brought our vanpool down to 6 regulars and one regular casual (3 days a month) in an 8 passenger van. [As background, the 8-passenger van is a Ford E-150 Van, configured as 2, 2, 2, 2, with a relatively stiff truck suspension, that gets around 12-15 mpg]. This was doable.

In June, we had a confluence of bad things: two of our regular riders were off most of the month due to medical conditions, and one of the other regulars announced his retirement. We had days when we were going in with only two people. This was more of an economic problem, and so we started thinking about downsizing. There are two 7-passenger vans available: a 7-passenger Dodge Grand Caravan, and a 7-passenger Toyota Sienna. These get around 20 mpg, and cost the same to lease as the 8-passenger. Being minivans, they have a more car-like ride, in exchange for being slightly smaller with a tighter back seat. I think they are configured as 2, 2, 3.

Given the low ridership, we decided to downsize the van, whilst simultaneously looking for more riders. Guess what happened? We’re scheduled to downsize on Monday, while at the same time we have a summer intern starting as a regular rider for July and August, with two more potential riders in the wings.

So now the question is: do we still downsize? We could be at 8 regular riders in a 7 passenger van, which might work for the summer given the number of absences. It all depends on the tradeoffs between the size and seat comfort of the 8 passenger van versus the better ride and fuel mileage of the 7-passenger van. We’ll have to see what happens.

Share

Transportation News

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

A number of news items in today’s lunchtime news reading address transportation in some form:

Lastly, a PS to my post of the other day on new musicals: Work is being done on a Broadway-bound update to Rogers and Hammerstein’s Cinderella, featuring a new book by Douglas Carter Beane. Tony nominee Beane (Xanadu, Lysistrata Jones, The Little Dog Laughed), who also delivered a fresh book for the Broadway production of Sister Act, recharted the journey of the classic tale in a new way: Retaining all classic elements of the fairytale, it will now be Cinderella’s turn to rescue the Prince. Beane’s treatment will incorporate songs from the Rodgers and Hammerstein catalogue, as well as songs from the original television version, including “In My Own Little Corner,” “Impossible/It’s Possible,” “Ten Minutes Ago” and “Do I Love You Because You’re Beautiful?” The casting, which is for a workshop, also looks interesting.

 

Share

Reusing Old Things

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy1 Comment

The recent newspapers (or their electronic equivalent) have brought some interesting news about reuse about stuff that had become useless:

Share

New Musicals

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy1 Comment

While perusing my RSS feeds, my eyes lit upon the announcement of a new Spice Girls musical. Musicals have been on my mind of late, primarily because I’ve been burning off the backlog of unwatched episodes of “Smash“. So I thought I’d take a few minutes to look at new musicals discussed on the pages of Playbill the last month. Note that these are in various stages, from tweeted ideas and concepts to workshop development to regional productions, some announced for Broadway. Many will never make it there.

There Are Strange Things Done in the Midnight Sun… Perhaps the most intriguing of the new musicals — at least to me — is Wanderlust. This musical, premiering at the Stratford Shakespeare Festival,  is described as follows: “Set in Victoria, British Columbia, at the beginning of the 20th century, Wanderlust is the imagined story of one of Canada’s most beloved and most successful poets, Robert Service.  Inspired by the real circumstances of his life, this new musical presents a man eager to leave his position at a bank for the adventure of the unknown in the Yukon gold rush. Keeping him at his desk in part is his affection for his beautiful co-worker, Louise, who is engaged to another man.” Music and orchestrations are by Marek Norman, with lyrics by Robert W. Service, and additional lyrics by Morris Panych (who is also doing the book).

Read More …

Share

Questions for Mitt

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

As I was walking back from grabbing my lunch in the cafeteria, Mitt Romney was on the TV there, talking about how he will get rid of Obamacare on Day 1. That made me realize: I know what Mitt Romney is against (pretty much anything Obama), but I don’t know what he favors. For example:

  • Healthcare. I know he is against “Obamacare”, but what would he do to solve the health-care problems it was designed to address? I’ve heard no proposals.
  • Immigration. I know he is against the recent executive order, but what is his solution to the problem?
  • Jobs. I know he believes Obama’s policies do not create jobs, but I haven’t heard specific proposals of what he would do, other than a significant increase in defense spending (that he hasn’t said how he would pay for).

So, for all the various issues, from foreign policy to the economy, from immigration to the environment, what will Mitt do, other than be against what Obama has done? The one time I voted Republican was for John Anderson in 1980, because he detailed specifically what he would do, and I agree with that. Further, with the likelihood of another split congress (a Republican House and a Democratic Senate), what can Mitt get through on legislation, and how would he do it? That’s been Obama’s problem.

So, Mitt supporters. What positive actions would your man take (i.e., other than repealing Obama), and how would he get them through a Democratic senate?

Share

Digital Subchannels

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

Last night, my wife asked me to sit down and watch a program with her. This wasn’t a surprise; she actually likes to sit with me sometimes :-). Nor was it a surprise when it turned out to be “The Trouble with Tribbles”, an episode of the original Star Trek. She likes old TV program. What was a surprise was the channel: 20, ME-TV. Now we have DirecTV, and a channel under 100 is a local channel. I had never heard of ME-TV, nor did I know of any channel 20 in the Los Angeles area. So I started investigating.

Now, we do have some traditional broadcast channels that do “old” shows (where “old” is 90s and earlier, sigh). KPXN, which was UHF channel 30 but is now digital channel 38, was part of the old Paxson group, but is now broadcasting ION (“eye-on”) TV.KDOC, which was UHF channel 56 but is now digital channel 32, also broadcasts old shows. KCET, since it has dropped its PBS affiliation, occasionally does old shows. Of course, the traditional VHF independents and former-independents, KTLA, KCAL, KTTV, and KCOP broadcast syndicated old programs.

But that still leaves the question of ME-TV, and Channel 20. This led me into the whole area of digital subchannels–which I knew nothing about because we use satellite TV, not over-the-air with a digital box. It initially looked like the Me-TV we were seeing was one of the digital subchannels of KDOC (56.3, to be precise). In fact, it turned out the Me-TV was one of a number of new “networks” broadcasting old stuff: there also was Antenna TV (KTLA 5.2), and This TV (KTLA 5.3). (There’s also something called BounceTV, but that doesn’t appear to be in LA). In fact, it looks like there are loads and loads of digital subchannels, when one looks at the full list. Most of the folks who get cable (note: they are carried on some providers) or satellite know nothing about these (I didn’t); they are only available “over the air”. One of the benefits of digital TV.

So that doesn’t answer the question of why it is Channel 20, and why, of all the myriad digital subchannels, only this one is carried by DirecTV. The answer, it turns out, is that DirecTV isn’t carrying the digital subchannel. Actually, they are carrying a local station from Bishop CA, KVME-TV, which is channel 20. Both KVME-TV and KDOC’s 56.3 brand themselves as “Me-TV Hollywood”, and broadcast the same schedule.

Is it worth putting up an antenna just to get these missing digital subchannels? Probably not. I watch little enough TV as is; who needs more channels. There is always the possibility that DirecTV will carry them, but there is limited satellite channel space. I guess DirecTV makes more money carrying the “shilling” channels that live in the 60-90s.

Music: Things to Ruin: The Songs of Joe Iconis (Lance Rubin): The War Song

 

Share

A Rockin’ Jam Session

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

Last night, I went to a rockin’ jam session at one of the oddest of places: The Pantages Theatre. Perhaps I should explain. On Tuesday December 4, 1956 in the Sun Record Studios in Memphis, Tennessee there was an impromptu jam session between Elvis Presley, Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins, and Johnny Cash. This meeting was preserved only by a photograph and a session tape made by the owner of Sun Records, Sam Phillips. A few years ago, this session was turned into a Broadway musical, called “Million Dollar Quartet“, built around a fictional account of that session. Really, the show was just an excuse to bring together classics from the four artists in a jukebox musical, with the conceit that the actors were actually playing the instruments as well as singing. So this was the “jam session” I was at last night: “Million Dollar Quartet” at the Pantages–a rockin’ session with Elvis, Cash, Perkins, and Jerry Lee Lewis. It was great.

At this point, I would normally synopsize the plot. But let’s start instead with the real history, summarized by Sun Records: According to Sun, the jam session seems to have happened by pure chance. Perkins, who by this time had already met success with “Blue Suede Shoes,” had come into the studios that day, accompanied by his brothers Clayton and Jay and by drummer W.S. Holland, their aim being to cut some new material, including a revamped version of an old blues song, “Matchbox.” Sam Phillips, the owner of Sun Records, had brought in his latest acquisition, singer and piano man extraordinaire, Jerry Lee Lewis, still unknown outside Memphis, to play the piano on the Perkins session.Sometime in the early afternoon, Elvis Presley, a former Sun artist himself, but now at RCA, dropped in to pay a casual visit accompanied by a girlfriend, Marilyn Evans. He was, at the time, the biggest name in show business. After chatting with Philips in the control room, Presley listened to the playback of the Perkins’ session, which he pronounced to be good. Then he went into the studio and some time later the jam session began. Phillips left the tapes running in order to “capture the moment” as a souvenir and for posterity. At some point during the session, Sun artist Johnny Cash, who had also enjoyed a few hits on the country charts, popped in (Cash claimed he was the first to arrive at Sun Studio that day). The event was captured by well known photograph of Elvis Presley seated at the piano surrounded by Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins and Johnny Cash. The session tapes have been released on CD.

That’s what we know happened. Around this story a musical was constructed. The basic plot elements added by book writers Colin Escott and Floyd Mutrux revolved around the following: (1) At the end of 1955, Phillips sold Presley’s contract to RCA to prevent Sun Records from going bankrupt; now RCA wanted to buy Phillips and the studio to get someone who knew how to work with Elvis; (2) Cash had been increasingly absent from the studio, and Phillips wanted to lure him back by presenting him with a 3-year contract; (3) the tension between Perkins, who had written “Blue Suede Shoes”, and Elvis, who made it a hit on the Ed Sullivan Show, and (4) Perkins, who was trying to find his next hit, and the just-hired Jerry Lee Lewis, a brash young upstart trying to prove himself. The songs chosen were some (but not all) of the ones from the original session, plus a number of well-known hits that may have come a little later. This isn’t a true story.

This also isn’t an impersonator show. You want that, go to Vegas. The actors in this show have hints of the mannerisms of the original artists, but are not going for exact impersonations or impressions. They have hits of the vocal quality. What they do have is the musical skills, which combined with the hints makes you see them as the artists.  This is the contribution of the original concept and direction by Floyd Mutrix (who also did the recent “Baby It’s You” that we saw when it was at the Pasadena Playhouse), and the show direction by Eric Schaeffer (assisted by David Ruttura; tour direction was by The Booking Group).

That said, what makes this show are the artists. I was most impressed with Martin Kaye as Jerry Lee Lewis: Kaye was just great on the piano and in his performance, and he just won me over. Kaye is from the UK, and I look forward to learning more about this artist. As Perkins,  Lee Ferris played a mean electric guitar. It was also fun to watch his interactions with Kaye’s Lewis. Ferris left Freddy and Francine to join on this tour. There was a nice interview with him recently in the LA Stage Times. As Johnny Cash, Derek Keeling didn’t particularly look like Cash (he looked more like Elvis), but had the guitar, and more importantly, the voice, deep down pat. We have seen Keeling before, most recently in “Happy Days: The Musical” at Cabrillo. Lastly, as Elvis, Cody Slaughter had the voice, personality, and swagger down pat. This shouldn’t be a surprise, as he was named the Ultimate Elvis Tribute Artist of 2011.

Supporting these four artists were Christopher Ryan Grant as Sam Phillips. Grant’s Phillips provided the narrative glue for the story (such as it was), and did a good job of being his character. Kelly Lamont‘s Dyanne was the book writer’s attempt to capture the unknown girlfriend of the picture. We don’t learn anything about her character–she is mostly eye-candy… but this story does allow her to sing and participate in a song or two, and she’s having great fun doing that. Rounding out the musicians were Billy Shaffer as Fluke the drummer (the character corresponding to W.S. Holland) and Chuck Zayas as Jay Perkins, on bass.

One note about the cast: They were having fun. I think that’s what turned this from a “show” into a “jam sessions”. These musicians were just having fun playing with each other, and this infectious joy of playing and having fun with the music came across from the stage, and had the audience standing and dancing and just rocking out. This was something you didn’t see in shows like “Rock of Ages”: they were shows. This was a fun jam session, and it had the magic to make you feel like you were there. This is something you’ll never get from a projection onto a screen.

Rounding out the technical and creative team:  Music arrangements and supervision were by Chuck Mead, with additional arrangements by the original Broadway “Jerry Lee Lewis”, Levi Kreis (who it appears will be at the NoHo Arts Center in mid-July). August Eriksmoen was the associate music supervisor. Sound design was by Kai Harada and was great (and remember, this was the Pantages, so Harada is one of those folks who knows how to get it right). You really believed that the 1950s-era mics were live. Lighting was by Howell Binkley and was effective at creating the mood. The scenic design was by Derek McLane and consisted primarily of the Sun Studio, which looked appropriately period. The costumes by Jane Greenwood were appropriately period; they were supported by the hair and wig design by Tom Watson. These provided the additional hints that created the characters. David Lober was the production stage manager, and Michael Krug was the stage manager.

A Pantages/Broadway LA note: This was the second production we’ve seen at the Pantages that falls into the “perfect” category. They are starting to get things right there, and that is a good thing. I also must thank the audience services team, who were able to rearrange our seats to get Karen a seat where her shoulder wouldn’t be jostled. Guessing at who to tank, I’ll thank Steve Cisneros, the House Manager, as the leader of the team. That’s going above and beyond, and that’s a good thing. You still can’t get discount tickets over the phone (Ticketmaster and their $9/ticket surcharge), but going to the box office works well to get $25-$35 seats that are reasonably good, even if they are on the sides.

“Million Dollar Quartet” continues at the Pantages through July 1. The show was relatively empty: You should be able to go to the box office and get reasonably-priced tickets in seating area “E” ($25-$30). You could also buy online if you don’t mind the surcharge. The show is worth seeing.

Upcoming Theatre and Concerts: I should probably redo this, as I’ve just been cutting and pasting. Normally, next weekend (June 30) we would be going to the Western Corps Connection in Riverside, but is too much for Karen. Instead, we’re going to “Geeks, The Musical” in Hollywood (Goldstar). July formally starts with “The Savannah Disputation” at The Colony Theatre on July 7. July 14 brings “The Laramie Project” at REP East. The third weekend in July is open–that’s my wife’s birthday weekend, so it’s up to her where we are going. The last weekend in July brings “Meet Me In St. Louis” at Cabrillo Music Theatre. August has a bit less, as we’re going to have some vacation days and will be taking Erin to start UC Berkeley. We’ve only got one show scheduled: “Play Dates” at REP East. As an aside: we will be vacationing in Palm Springs, so if anyone knows of live theatre going on there in August, let me know. September activity resumes, beginning with “Blame It On Beckett” at the Colony Theatre on September 1 and “Sherlock Holmes: The Final Adventure” at REP East on September 29. I”m also looking into “Silence: The Musical” at the Hayworth Theatre, which starts September 8 and runs through December, and “Xanadu” at DOMA, which starts September 7 and runs for about 3 weeks. October brings some travelling for family: the Cal Parents Weekend at UCB, and the bat-mitzvah of a cousin in Fresno. It will also bring “American Fiesta” at the Colony Theatre, and “The Book of Mormon” at Broadway LA/The Pantages. Continuing the look ahead: November may bring “Seminar” at The Ahmanson Theatre (still undecided on ticketing), and will bring “Moonlight and Magnolias” at REP East. It will also bring “Day Out with Thomas” at OERM (certainly on some or all of Veterans Day weekend – November 10-11-12). November  may also see us at VPAC for Raul Esparza, especially if Erin flies in for it (he’s singing on her birthday). Lastly, to close out the year, December has nothing formally scheduled (other than ACSAC), but will likely bring “Anything Goes” at the Ahmanson, and may bring “Judy Collins” at VPAC.Lastly, what few dates we do have open may be filled by productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, or discussed in the various LA Stage Blogs I read.

Music: A Little Princess (Studio Cast) (Sierra Bogess): Another World

 

 

Share