LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT Editorial Board on efforts in the U.S. Senate by lobbying groups to have the 2.3% tax on medical devices- to pay for medical coverage of the uninsured in the Obama health Care law- repealed.

LyrArc Article Gist
House Democrats in the U.S. see the Republican health care plan making the same mistakes in 2017 that the Democrats made in 2008. With the passage of the bill in the House of Representatives with a vote margin on May 4, 2017, rushed through in the way the Obama bill was also rushed through, the nation remains as divided as ever on the issue of health care. The Republicans favoring limiting subsidies and cutting Medicaid, and using some of the savings for a tax cut. The Democrats favoring mandated coverage for all and large subsidies to reduce the number of uninsured Americans, with expansion of Medicaid for very low incomes. Democrats in the House say the Republican House bill will result in Republicans losing seats in the House in midterm elections.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Congressional Budget Office analysis of the Republican House health Care bill shows 24 million Americans would lose health insurance over 10 years. In terms of budget savings the bill saves $337 billion over 10 years. The increase in uninsured comes from the roll back of expansion of Medicaid under the House plan, the reduction of tax credits, plus the removing of income based credits replacing it with tax credits based on age. President Trump is promoting the bill saying it will reduce the premiums that have gone up since Affordable Care Act was passed and increase competition. House Speaker Ryan in promoting his plan says he is not in "some coverage beauty contest." The House Plan says Ryan, does not mandate that all be covered, but simply says coverage is in a free market giving people the option to buy insurance that they want, so that the numbers of insured would not be as many as under a mandate.

LyrArc Article Gist
The coverage of the Republican healthcare bill and how it affects the elderly, and people on Medicaid, people in rural areas, is likely to have changed public opinion in the U.S. about the necessity of ensuring all Americans have health coverage. The Pew survey cited here in this NYT report by Zernike and Goodnough was done in Jan 2017, and shows a shift. The shift would be much higher today after people look hard at the consequences of what were simply hypothetical positions or ideological positions taken without looking at consequences in daily living. On Medicaid that opinion by July 2017 compared to Jan 2017 has shifted 10 percentage points for Republicans to 53% who think Medicaid is important to them and their families, according to Kaiser research. There is stronger sentiment about people having benefits taken away.  [article-55059] The opinion has shifted to where people see that coverage is important and people should not have coverage denied or benefits taken away from them. Opinion remains strong in favor of changes to reduce the high premiums, but not to replace the existing health benefits and law with no law at all to replace it. That leaves 20 million more uninsured according to the Congressional Budget Office. Changes have to be constructive is the popular view today,  and this requires dialogue between Republicans and Democrats- which has not taken place. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Dec. 2013 CBS/NYT poll showed only 39% overall support the Obama health care law, a majority say it increases their health care costs. 57% of the uninsured without health coverage say it increases their costs and only 20% say it decreases their costs, for the very group it was designed to help. For the uninsured a third say they will not sign up for the law and pay the penalty. Annie Lowrey of the NYT looks at these numbers and says part of the reason for the lack of enthusiasm for the law is the sharp increase in deductible costs of insurance coverage- the percentage of Americans in health insurance plans with deductibles over $1000 has jumped to 38% in 2013 from 18% in 2008, according to a survey by the Henry Kaiser Family Foundation. During these 5 years the average deductible has increased to $1097 from $735. This is happening as incomes are stagnant or declining in inflation adjusted terms for many working Americans.

LyrArc Article Gist
With 10.3 million workers unemployed according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and this includes 2.8 million added this year so far in 2008. Most of the people who lost their jobs also lost their health benefits. This increases the urgency for the Obama administration to come up with action in the health care area as the ranks of the uninsured will grow in 2009.

LyrArc Article Gist
About the collapse of two banks- Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank Fed vice chairman for financial and banking supervision, Michael Barr, had this to say at a Congressional hearing last week- "I think anytime you have a bank failure like this, bank management clearly failed, supervisors failed, and our regulatory system failed."  The rest of this report looks at changes the Fed can on its own make stricter supervision of banks over $100 billion, action the Biden administration is thinking of taking, and action by the FDIC. The Biden administration does not want to be seen supporting wealthy depositors at Silicon Valley Bank by guaranteeing uninsured deposits as it did. It took this action solely to protect the financial system so that it would not hurt working families. For this reason alone the Biden administration will seek tighter controls of mid sized banks now that the illusion that banks below $250 billion do not pose a risk to the financial system is gone. It will also seek to recover all funds used to support these failed banks from the banks and financial sector that has lobbied for so long for less regulation leading to failure of banks not once in 2009, but again in 2023. This time under the Biden administration the damage is carefully controlled so that it does not affect the American economy and working families. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How a tightly interconnected community such as tech startups can quickly fall apart in a crisis is the subject of this WSJ report by Christopher Mims. He says on the way up this meant positive leveraging that exceeded 150% and this is also true in the other direction on the way down just as fast. Most startups depended on Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic for financing. Venture capital moved from inside to unravel the SVB bank. The US government simply wants to stabilize the economy and is not intending to make the uninsured depositors whole except in the way that it is self contained and does not spread to other parts of the banking system. Tech startups will now find it difficult to get new financing, if not impossible, says this report. About 8% of total jobs in the US economy are dependent on tech. When it comes to work that is dependent on tech the number is higher closer to 20%. Some of the tech layoffs will be offset by new kinds of tech and with government private collaboration in the new frameworks coming up, such as for EV vehicles with manufacturing in the US, and the $53 billion for the  CHIPS and Science Act of president Biden. Solar and wind have new frameworks of a similar type as the focus shifts to fighting climate change. These networks are interconnected with the EU which is creating its own parallel networks of this type. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The startling truth about health "reforms," - they won't control spending, and without that the whole system of health care will rapidly become unaffordable and unsustainable. Obama's Council of Economic Advisors points out in new report that since 1975 annual health spending per person, adjusted for inflation has grown 2.1 percentage points faster than overall economic growth per person. At this rate health spending which was 5% of the GDP in 1960, and is 18% of GDP today, would grow to 40% of GDP in 2040. Medicare and Medicaid would increase from 6% of GDP now to 15% in 2040, or equal to three fourths of federal spending. Employer paid insurance premiums for families which grew 85% in inflation adjusted terms from 1996 to $11,941 in 2006, would increase to $25,200 by 2025 and $45,000 in 2040. This would force employers to reduce take home pay. Samuelson says the uncontrolled health spending is singlehandedly determining national priorities, reducing discretionary income, raising taxes, widening budget deficits and squeezing other government programs, while it is producing large amount of waste in medical spending. See the link to Prof. Tyler Cowen of George Mason University in NYT, 6/14/ 2009, who cites the habit of doctors to write many expensive tests as one of the prime culprits in the wasteful spending. And in the process it delivers higher cost for lower overall quality of health for the American people. This at a time when many European countries provide live examples of doing it in a better way- lower cost, better health. The serious problem with the Obama health reforms says Samuelson is that it talks about restraining spending but may end up increasing spending. Its talk about controlling spending he says is good intentions, but based more on hopeful thinking, public realtions and risks becoming cosmetic reform. Because to really control spending will require coming to grips with its fundamental cause- hospitals and doctors are paid mostly on a fee-for-service basis and reimbursed by insurance, private or governmental. Such a system encourages doctors and hospitals to provide more services, expensive tests, favors heavy use of expensive medical technologies to increase profits, and for patients to expect them. Samuelson puts his finger on the root of the problem - there is no incentive and every disincentive for all the players in this game , doctors, hospitals and patients to seek reform of this system. For doctors and hospitals the hope would be that this cosmetic "reform" would leave the system basically unchanged, and patients to continue with a lifestyle and expectations that do not not acknowledge the fact that a lot of healthcare does not come from spending but from preventative care, education, good eating and exercize habits, and healthy lifestyles. And the uninsured are no exception, they would simply start consuming the expensive care for lower quality of overall health like everyone else. With this kind of situation confronting us, the views of Samuelson, and Professor Tyler Cowen of George Mason University, as welll as a growing chorus of informed public opinion on this subject, is that insuring the uninsured is a good idea, but doing it within the bounds of the present system, can only increase the costs. And too much is at risk, to rely on what Samuelson calls a scattershot of measures to control costs made up by Congress such as "evidence -based guidelines," "electronic record-keeping," "bundled payments to hospitals, to give the illusion of progress that won't make a serious difference. A sweeping restructuring of health care is needed, that would overhaul "fee-for-service" payment and reduce the fragmentation of care. It will also need what has not even be touched on adequately in the debate. This is the massive need for education in the schools about nutrition, eating, exercize, healthy lifestyles. It would also require opinion leaders in each field from sports and other fields to lead by example and with constant public presence, the media, and companies to form a partnership with private institutions to change existing eating habits and lifestyles that encourage obesity, smoking, fast food eating habits, large portions in restaurants....

LyrArc Article Gist
This Economist magazine editorial says the Republican plan for health care with its roll back of Medicaid expansion by limiting funding to states after 2020, and by scaling back subsidies especially for older Americans and not basing them on income levels, is likely to have its own problems just as the Affordable Care Act. One concern is that keeping healthy people in the market with a mandate that everyone have insurance is present but in a milder form with premiums going up by 30% in one year if they change their mind. There is concern that this may not work among insurers leading to an increase in premiums, pricing people out of the market in "a death spiral." This could lead to more people being priced out of the market as premiums rise. About 12 million people were added to Medicaid by increasing eligibility level to $16400, or 138% of poverty line- this reduced the uninsured from 16% in 2010 to 8.8% today. The Economist concludes that the Republican health care bill has its own problems, and that this bill does not clear up the problems in Obamacare by substituting Ryancare as the Republican bill is called. Peggy Noonan writing in the WSJ says this may have negative consequences for the new Republican base shift to populist support. Critics on the right like Rand Paul see even the reduced subsidies as an entitlement program, yet the Republicans can only change parts of the Affordable Care Act as they need 60 votes in the Senate where they only have a small majority.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist cites the Dartmouth Atlas Project which shows differences in cost across the country for health outcomes and spending involving Medicare. It cost $5000 per person in Salem, Oregon in 2006, $8000 in San Francisco, and more than $16,000 in Miami, with outcomes for health tending to be better in places where the costs were lower. This is one of the statistics that Peter Orszag of the Congressional Budget Office uses to come up with his estimate of 30% waste in health care spending in the United States. Prof. Skinner at Dartmouth and Prof. Garber at Stanford point out that of most health systems around the world the American system is "uniquely inefficient" and wasteful. The Economist cites information that the American system is twice as costly per person for healthcare than the Swedish system, and that it costs twice as much in Minnesota as in Miami. A poll done for the Economist shows 52% of the people in the UA are dissatified with the quality of care, 40% think the system needs fundamental change, and 29% think that it should be fundamentally rebuilt. The lack of uniform coverage is also causing turmoil in the system. About 49 million are uninsured, and a quarter or more are able to buy insurance and do not buy it because it is so costly, has exclusions and coverage is inadequate. But these people also end up in the emergency rooms along with the indigent costing the whole system tens of billion of dollars for costly late interventions that could have been avoided with preventive care early on. With the economic crisis and rise in joblessness, the dire condition of state and local budgets, the situation has probably drastically worsened, and the system near breakdown. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions raised about the government's committment to serious health care reform. New leaders of China who took power in 2002 and 2003 with concern for the poor, did not put discuss reform till 2006 and during this crisis there isn't the urgency that is needed. Recent documents, says the Economist, that were circulated secretly within the bureaucracy for 3 weeks before being made public, provide no clear target about how much people would be reimbursed for medical treatment. The other concern is that the central government provides only 40% of the 850 billion yuan allocated for additional spending on health care in the years 2009-2011. This is about $125 billion. Burt local governments may not be keen on spending on health care as officials are still judged by how much they can boost employment and GDP growth. Over three years the central government's annual share of the additional spending on health care of 850 billion yuan is 111 billion yuan, according to Caijing, a business magazine.But the 2009 budget on health care is 118 billion yuan, so its not clear that things add up. The central government's additional spending in each of the 3 years is only $16 billion. How this can provide help to the 200 million uninsured, the insured who still pay a large amount for health care, and pay for essential pharmaceuticals on a list prepared by the government, and pay a portion of the expensive diagnostic tests that hospitals like to make money from, is not clear. The whole system will have to be overhauled so that hospitals do not have the incentive to prescribe these expensive tests and pills that cost more. The government says it will be 2020 when 90% of Chinese are covered by agovernment financed health insurance system- 11 years away. This only means that domestic consumption may remain depressed for a decade or so. With export markets collapsing, this leaves China dependent on infrastructure spending for growth for a long time, and lower growth rates with higher unemployment. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Was president Biden right to get the Fed, the FDIC and Treasury to cover the uninsured deposits in Silicon Valley Bank. Is it a good use of taxpayer money? $25 billion was provided by the Treasury to the Fed to stabilize other medium sized banks. The answer from the administration is that it was necessary to protect working families from any effects on the overall economy of the ripple effect on medium sized banks that were left unregulated by former president Trump's 2018 roll back of regulation on banks with less than 250 billion in assets.The Office of the Budget has shown that the government recovered all except $31 billion from the much larger bailout of 2008. Paul Krugman in NYT says the assets of SVB are invested in long term US Treasury securities which have value and should cover most of the cost of insuring depositors. Moral hazard is covered by the management at SVB and Signature losing their jobs and by the losses in stock value and bonds which are left unprotected as a cautionary signal to investors. A much larger impact is hidden in the hearts and minds of Silicon Valley who will be expected to reflect on the nature of their self serving deal where they oppose regulation of tech monopolies and of regulatory action except where it serves their  own interests, and see a laissez faire system that works for them but not for workers and families across communities in states across America. A situation made worse by the loss of America's manufacturing base on which issue Silicon Valley neither reflected or acted. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Republican House Health Care pLan in 2017 relies on tax credits of between $2000 and $4000 based on age. Under the Affordable Health Care Act the elderly poor in high cost insurance areas received additional help. These people would lose over $2000 per person and may forgo full coverage or coverage entirely under the Republican House Health Care Plan. A report by Standard & Poor's estimates about 2 to 4 million people who are in 50's and 60's not yet qualifying for Medicare might lose their coverage they now have under ACA. The Republican plan also gives incentives through tax credits higher for older people, $4000 for a 60 year ol and $2000 for a 25 year old. Under the ACA the insurers are not allowed to charge more than three times what is charged for younger people, under the Republican plan this goes up to five times. 

LyrArc Article Gist
The basic outlines of new health care legislation takes shape as Senators Dodd and Kenedy come up with a plan that scales down subsidies to low-income people to buy insurance. Attached to their revised outline is a budget office analysis thatprojects the plan costing $611 billion over 10 years and with expected changes from the Senate Finance Committee would cover 97 percent of all Americans. And earlier plan received much criticism because the Congressional Budget Office estimated its cost at $1 trillion over 10 years and left 37 million Americans uninsured. In addition there is the revised Medicaid expansions for aid to the poor that would add a couple of humndred billion dollars to the total tab. The administration's goal is to keep the cost down to $1 trillion over 10 years. The legislation as it stands includes the public option which is designed to control insurance costs. Mr. Obama said this week that "the public option would keep insurance companies honest." Employer mandated insurance is part of the Kennedy-Dodd legislation proposal. Employers with 25 or more workerswould have to provide coverage or pay the government an annual fee of $750 for each full-time worker and $375 for each part-time worker. The government pays the startup costs for the public insurance option as a loan to be repaid, and premiums would make the option self-sufficient....

LyrArc Article Gist
Walk in clinics at drug stores like CVS and stores like Walmart now have the cooperation of hospitals. Hospitals are now affiliated with 25 Walmart clinics. THe Cleveland Clinic has lent its name and backup services to a number of CVS clinics in northeastern Ohio. And the Mayo Clinic is operaing ne Express care clinic at asupermarke in Rochester, Minnesota, and asecond one at ashopping mall. This helps clear emergency rooms of people seeking bsic medical care as for astrep throat or flu. About one thousand clincs are operating in the US at drugstores, supermarkets and big stores since the idea took root 4 years ago. Wal-Mart has partnered with hopitals like the Christus Medical Group in Texas, Aurora Health System in Wisconsin and COxHealth in Missouri to setup clinics. Mayo did so after employees and patients said they wanted more convenient treatment for minor medical problems, so there may be a need here that as not been met. The lower costs at these centers compared to primary care doctors offices or emergency rooms make it possible for them to price lower and meet the needs of the 45 million or so uninsured people in the US, numbers growing as jobless rate increases. They are typically staffed by nurse practitioers or physicians asistants. Dr Herman at Mayo Clinic, who supervises its retail store clinics, says rather than fight this trend primary care doctors should learn from it, and work with hospitals around the country to offer more convenient locations and consumer friendly office hours, including periods of walk-in care with no appointment....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Washington Post survey of 1200 readers on how the Republican healthcare plan of Speaker Ryan and the House of Representatives looks to them, how it affects them in their lives. Here Somasekhar of the Post gives the stories of 5 Americans. Some see the prospect of losing their insurance under the Republican plan even as they reach an older age, others a smaller segment says the Post, whose premiums jumped under the Affordable Care Act say they faced high premiums and high deductibles. The Post says the large majority of opinions have expressed anxiety over the proposed Republican Ryan House plan for healthcare. One of them is an uninsured poor farmer, Mr. Woosley,  income about $18000 who gained benefit from expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act,  one Mr. Smith, 32 years, a personal injury attorney who faces paying $10,000 if he did not take insurance and $10,000 if he took insurance because of high premiums so a wash either way deciding to do without it, one a tech worker Mrs. Powers, 62 years, income $22,000 on year and $4000 the next, from middle class during the tech boom but facing fewer opportunities and uncertain income from part time work, hit by the deep recession facing fewer opportunities as she gets older and now the prospect of losing insurance without government subsidies, one who is from the middle class who sees little benefit from the Affordable Care Act and is forgoing insurance because of the high premiums yet faces a penalty for not being insured under the ACA, another Mr. Blanchard, 52 years, is from the middle class, a computer programmer who lost his job in downsizing, earns $100,000 as a consultant self-employed, pays $767 in premium a month and relies on the Affordable Care Act which helps him gain freedom from working at a company that could downsize,  another is a middle class programmer Mr Riffle,age 44, and his wife, who does not qualify for a subsidy with a $71,000 family salary from working 4 jobs between himself and his wife- this person finds it too expensive for his salary to buy insurance $900 a month and $14,000 deductible under the Affordable Care Act. His views are worth listening to as they go to the crux of the problem- he says he may not be any better with the Republican plan. He sees the real problem as the high cost of health care in the U.S. and the only way this can be fixed is for members of Congress to be asked to use the insurance exchanges they create. If this sample is representative it shows that there are real problems with both the Affordable Care Act and the Republican plan, that the high cost of health care the problem lurking behind every plan that does not squarely address this, and till that happens and members of Congress experience what ordinary people face, this problem can never by fully solved.   Woosley, Smith, Powers, Blanchard, Riffle, and their personal experience is at the crux of what is right and wrong  with the Affordable Care Act, and also with the new Republican plan of Speaker Ryan and the House of Representatives. For every Woosley, Powers and Blanchard who benefit, there is a Smith and a Riffle who are indifferent or are affected by the high cost under Affordable Care Act and the current system of medical care with its high cost. The Affordable Care Act does not  tackle high cost, for that to happen the culture in America that makes it possible and acceptable to charge high prices must change. Another problem apart from bringing health care costs is that any solution needs to have the whole country behind it. If the notion that all people are entitled to basic health care is to stand, the whole country needs to believe it as they do in countries like France, Britain, Germany and Japan. If this has to be made a workable proposition health care has to be offered at a price that makes this possible to achieve, and that idea also needs the deep and broad sense of support from the culture in America similar to that in these other countries. Until that happens politicians in America will get elected and turned out of office in turns on issues such as health care, based on which side they take and which problems they choose not to face squarely and responsibly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
All sides joined the President at the White House, as part of his consensus building efforts, and to get aseat at the table in restructuring health care. The insurers and health care providers, including technology providers, all committed to cutting the cost of health care. New social insurance programs to cover 45 million uninsured Americans, and to make health care affordable for businesses and individuals, will be unworkable at currently projected rate of increase in health care costs of 6.2% a year for the next decade. The industry promised to reduce that by 1.5% through voluntary efforts, even though there is skepticism about whether they will deliver. The insurers are against a government sponsored health plan fearing it will drive them out of business. Insurers and health care providers are lobbying against the cuts in their Medicare payments, and insurers are fighting Obama's cuts to their private Medicare Advantage plans by a total of $176 billion over 10 years. Doctors are fighting a 21% cut in their Medicare fees scheduled to take place in January 2010. Pharmacuetical companies and makers of medical devices are concerned that new products will have to pass a cost-benefit test before being approved for coverage under Medicare. Its just that they all see the continued rise in costs as somehow unsustainable, especially in the current economic crisis, and share the feeling with business and the rest of the country that the system is broken. At the same time like the banks and bank executives, health care companies and their executives go on lobbying aggressively and doing things the old way, which raises questions about how well these systems that are broken can be put on the right path....

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in the NYT provides a look at the features of the Republican House Health Care Plan- Both the Affordable Health Care Act and the House Plan provide incentives for buying insurance- the ACA bases these incentives on income levels whereas the House Plan does not provide additional help for low incomes or elderly. Incomes at $20,000 would see a loss greater than  $2000 under the House Plan and as many of the elderly poor living in high cost areas may not have the resources to make up for this loss of subisidies they may forgo buying insurance or have insurance coverage that protects only in a limited way. President Trump has given assurances that all will be covered. For people with incomes of $50,000 or $75000 the loss of $2000 subisidies would also have some impact. At larger incomes or the well to do the subsidies are not handed out under either plan. Under the ACA the emphasis was on income levels and high cost insurance areas the subsidies were greater, under the House Plan the subisidies would be higher for the elderly compared to the young but very low income levels are not given additional help.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein says that for the 85% of the people who have healthcare the Obama proposals are not a good deal. The Obama proposals mean higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of healthcare for the uninsured group over 10 years. This lower income group has no coverage despite the $300 billion Medicaid program. Feldstein says there surely must be better and less costly ways of getting this lowincome group healthcare. Raising the top income tax rate to 45% from 35%- as a result of letting the Bush tax cuts expire and adding aproposed health surcharge on higher income individuals- would actually lower revenues for the government, as it would change behavior of high income individuals in ways that lower their taxable inome. The result is higher deficits and higher taxes when even without this large deficits are projected for the future. How to slow the rapid growth in healthcare spending? The Obama plan is to cut spending on Medicare. Feldstein sees the govenment's effort aimed at reducing the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reduced payments to providers. Will this result in enough of acost reduction to make the system work. And if the cost reductions are too heavily weighted towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare, even though it is structured to allow cost escalation. Feldstein offers no solutions to the problems of cost escalation except to suggest that the Obama plan does not really tackle the cost escalation issues directly with providers, and instead burdens the national finances to an extraordinary degree. And the need for apause and reflection....

LyrArc Article Gist
Obama would change the personal bankruptcy laws to protect homeowners and enable them to keep their homes during insolvency. Those who have suffered from catastrophic illness and medical bills, the elderly would benefit, which essentially would waive onerous bureaucratic steps required to file personal bankruptcy and establish a financial floor, aminimum national homestead level for homeowners, pegged to the region's median value, which would prevent creditors from attaching assets for non-payment. Under his proposal there would be a 120 day moratorium on bad credit reporting and waive requirements such as mandatory credit counseling for people who filed for bankruptcy as a result of a catastrophic illness. About half of the roughly 500,000 personal bankruptcies filed last year were the result of an uninsured, catastrophic illness. Obama opposed the last revamp of bankruptcy laws in 2005 which favored the credit card industry and the banking industry.

LyrArc Article Gist
Views of Paulson, Summers, Rubin, Murray in a discussion about the long term finances , the stimulus, tax cuts, Lehman's collapse, at the CEO Council in November organized by WSJ. Summers put it this way "we are going to need some impetus to the economy for two to three years." Summers points to demand based stimulus as key and only middle class tax cuts helpful for demand based rebounding the economy. But with all the needs, to help financial institutions, health care coverage for 50 million uninsured, education, energy, he does not see tax cuts as the biggest priority. Summers also sees the net cost of aid to financial institutions as the right number, as investments in the finance sector should be seen as assets even if one has overpaid for a house one is living in, as compared to spending on a vacation which is money thats gone.