are you incentivized to do more stents?> i'm on a samurai. >> so it doesn't matter. >> it doesn't matter if i do one, five or ten stents. my job is to provide the right care for the right patient at the right time. >> so you're salaried. >> yes, sir. >> i'm salaried too as a physician. >> and you're salaried as well. >> yes. >> how big a problem is this then? >> we're not saying that people are doing these procedures for profit, we're saying that the system has created incentives in subtle and not so subtle ways drives more procedures. if you get a bump on your head as a friend of mine had, you go into the e.r., in america, you get a cat scan. if you have that happen in germany or england. they say, here's a list of instructions, if you have problems come back and see us. we just spent $1,000. >> sometimes the patients demand this stuff. >> yeah, but we have to ed indicate patients. >> i want to point out something. when people watch the film, they're left with the impression that yvonne finally came to the cleveland clinic

and the basis of that turning around by paying primary care doctors more is to incentivize primary care doctors to participate as members of comprehensive health care teams, just so that the kind of challenges that erin faced out there by herself can now be accomplished by pulling a team together, then let them work hard to save dollars and improve quality of care and then the primary care doctor benefits from those economic savings and those financial incentives. >> why not just pay them more money? >> primary care doctors are paid more. they're paid for fee for service and then a bonus if they've decorated they can improve the quality of care. >> erin, do you want to respond to that? >> i bill $214 for a 45-minute face-to-face patient. the check i get from the insurance company is $40. >> united health care makes a lot of money. there's nothing that people get more antsy about than this idea of people profiting off other people's misery, not just a little bit here. a lot of money. talking $5 billion last year, united health. what do you say to people when they say, pay erin martin a l

and the basis of paying primary care doctors more is to incentivize them to participate as members of comprehensive health care teams just so that the kind of challenges that erin faced out there by herself can now be accomplished by pulling a team together and then let them work hard to save tlars adollar improve benefit, and benefit from the savings of money. >> why not pay them more? >> primary care doctors are being paid more. they are being paid for fee service, and then coordination fee, and then a bonus if they can demonstrate that they have improved the quality of care. >> and erin, do you want to comment? >> if i bill say $240 for a face-to-face with a patient, and the insurance company check back after it was billed is $40. >> there is not enough money and the idea is that people get antsy off of profiting over somebody else's misery, but it is $500 million last year for united health, and what do you say to people, payerr erin mart more money. >> it is not worth it to be distracted, because you need to deliver value. if insurance companies don't deliver value, they won't be

we can incentivize per mention -- prevention and health promotion. we can do a better job in our homes and communities. our pledge is to continue to work with some of the most difficult communities in this country and to try to incentivize prevention and healthy behavior's but also to promote leadership in those environments. on thent to build beautiful work you are doing. this often pervasive idea that changing lifestyle is for affluent, educated people only, and yet you and others have shown that when the incentives are line, that can change. one of the things i forgot to mention is that it took us 16 years, but we were able to get medicare to cover our program, in part with president clinton's help along the way, and i want to publicly thank you for that. i thought it was just the medical science that would change medical practice, and i was wrong. because medicare is now covering our program, most other companies are doing so as well, and it creates a new paradigm between health care and not just sit care by allowing the doctor to give me enchant

i would like to see evidence that taking someone's home will incentivize them to help them lock their son up. it might. but it my be incentivize detectives to be defenders but not to tie assets to it. >> i want to address the financial taking of someone's property and that's the norm of the bail industry. that is not, i have been in the system for 41 years and never taken one home. we do rely on our detective skills and our bounty hunter skills to get the defendant and get them back in custody. that's what we are good at. the involvement of friends and workers and co-workers, all that is used. our risk assessment tool has been very effective. i don't think that creating an atmosphere that will do away with corporate bail is the answer. it's not. we have to work with the pretrial system and law enforcement and judicial system, we are a part of it and i see we will be a part of it for years. >> we got a second question, i am going to ask it. if someone qualifies for release isn't inherently unfair that this person remains incarcerated because of the inability to post bail. i guess if so

specifically incentivizing the drivers to do -- to want to drive these cars and to do a great job. we have tried to submit proposals to [speaker not understood] several times that outline how we can provide all the drivers with health care. i think that would be a really nice deal for drivers who have families who need to get some kind of security and deserve to have it. and we've never received any kind of response from her whatsoever. so, i like the proposal. i think it needs to be fleshed out. and also it has to do -- i want to touch on the issue of investment from the companies that have currently controlled the medallionses. we already have a loyal clientele at arrow checker. we have invested money for advertising, we invested money in the cars, we invested money in the drivers. and to all of a sudden have all of the rent medallions we have jeopardized, it's very difficult to continue to make plans, continue to operate as a business when we have very little security as at any time we can lose [speaker not understood]. i think before this kind of thing is voted on we need to ha

some facilitated and incentivized by regulation. regulation which we think is sensible. and some simply driven by the public's desire to continue to improve in this area. >> speak of global warming, how are you different than lee raymond, your pred seser who had outspoken views about global warming? >>. >> well, i think in terms of my view of where we find ourselves on our understanding of global warming, we have continued to study this issue for decades. i think we probably as a corporation were one of the first companies to identify this as a potential issue because we are a fossil fuels based company. and lee and others before him had undertaken studies. they had funded studies at mit and other universities to inform our understanding of the issue. as time has gone by those studies have continued, more data has been gathered, more sophistication in our ability and scientist's ability to create models that are better, more competent in their analysis. with all of that, though, the facts remain there are uncertainties around the climate, climate change, why it's changin

. >> cenk: you would think but usually you need that $12 million to incentivize the politicians. that's what is wrong with our democracy. wayne lapierre, the lead of the nra of course is vivid over this and counterattacks. >> he can't spend enough of his $27 billion to try to impose his will on the american public. they don't want him in their restaurants, homes and telling them what food to eat, they sure don't tell them what self-defense fire arms to own, and he can't buy america. he is so reckless in terms of his comments on this whole gun issue. >> cenk: what i love is when political people tell us american people want this or that. let's look at the polls. 88% support background checks so wayne lapierre, you are totally wrong. american people want background checks. among gun owners 85% support background checks. they are not with you, they are against you, wayne lapierre. all right. now it's of course not just bloomberg who is opposed to wayne lapierre, there is now other groups that are also targeting this issue if you will, and there's a new ad out by ultraviolet and they

what is the primary purpose of the federal government incentivizing marriage in the first place for anyone? if same-sex couples can show they're able to fulfill the purpose, what a special or unique about same-sex relationships that should preclude the federal government from incentivizing any and every other relationship that could fill the purpose such as brothers and sisters that want to live together and file a joint tax return? >> commentators have compared this to decisions such as plessy and brown and their significant to the african- american community. how do you think the court will weigh the legacy of those cases in their decision? three great questions. the panelists all answer however they want. >> the ugly anti laws were recognized as to the traditional understanding of marriage. they were phrased that way. they were in positions and a restriction on top of what marriages. by contrast this has adhered into what marriage always has been. it involves a radical redefinition to say it is not a male/female union. >> the questions involved the idea that the federal government has a

states to adopt this program and incentivize them by providing them with additional resources. but you're right, it's a great program, we need to do more of it. >> we support -- california has some of the best gun prevention, gun violence prevention laws in the country. we still have to do more and it still has to be funded but it has led the way and will continue to do so. we can learn more but, yes, we would encourage our legislators to do more. >> the majority of the mayors in the state of california have joined too. we all signed the same letters and we're sending them back to sacramento and washington, dc we are talking about additional strategies we can use to join up because it isn't -- again, if we don't talk about it, if we don't join, this is why we formed mayors against illegal guns as a national effort. >> i want to jupbld underscore the costs associated. in california for every gun they take out each year there's 33 guns that should be taken out. it will not succeed unless more money is put into it. we would need to spend i think it's $50 million to deal with that

that or at least require it if not incentivize it and keep track of it like that's how you would think would be if the government was running the program but that's not what they did they gave us the facts no shrinks attached no conditions no requirements no incentives no transparency when i said hey hey guys why don't we make the banks tell us what they're doing with the money so we can own report. have a says whether following these goals you know i was told that i was stupid that i was playing politics that if i did it myself i was going to destroy the banking system this led to tim geithner himself cursing me out of the meeting when i suggest that he was a thing less than the most transparent secretary of the treasury in the country's history and this is all part of that incredible deference that they show to the bank so it was give the money to the bags and trust them and of course what happened the banks in use the money from and they make they hoarded it they lied to back to the government they invested it they did whatever they could to maximize their profits they did almost ev

we are better off incentivizing them. hut is the whole thing with mana, it is a behavioral modification tool -- >> behavioral modification that has a monetary component to it of it. that is part finding ways to get people to change their behavior and have it be sustainable. we lost programs are all over and they tend to work that people tend to revert back when you stop them so you don't get permanent change. the key is finding sustainable behavior change and using any number of techniques and tools to do that. we are all motivated diet whether we want to admit it or not. i was smiling and thinking about what is really motivated the culture of health that ge is embracing. it has to do with a number of things, and that it is not just dated-driven. if you are going to consent a certain behavior, you have to provide the tool sets, you have to provide -- we all know this -- health is local. why is it that weight watchers has worked so well? number one, it is local. your social environment, it is social, so you have local and

don't have the single payer government provide a system giving it incentivize people to use -- incentivizepeople to use the private market. that is what happens. it's a modest tax incentives. it is to be a remarkable that was upheld, and some of remarkable that there were four people that were hysterical about it being upheld. five accounting ten. >> seek, walter takes the somewhat more seriously than i do. but you have the 2.5% what are the odds that that will ever go up? i rest my case. [laughter] >> that is designed to which there are many people having the court make -- this court is getting more enmeshed in order decisions on the public policy. and that is a policy choice. at some point, if you said if it became so onerous but no one would pay the penalty and you're forced to buy insurance, then you have an argument that you are being coerced out of the inactivity which is maintaining the out insurance coverage and you have a constitutional argument as long as it is a genuine choice. it's perfectly rational to pay the 2.5% for most people 2.5% of their income and a discount for the re

they're not subsidizing or incentivizing that. hecht: every individual citizen is part of the problem and therefore every citizen has to be part of the solution. those are the street trees we want people to be planting. we do a lot of tree plantings. all of you must intuitively go, "of course it's good to plant trees," of course, i want to put a rain barrel on my house." but is there a measurable environmental impact? trees are going to take up a lot of stormwater over time and are kind of a long-term green investment. we've had more than 200 volunteers come out planting street trees. we need people to make active changes on their property. and to reduce the amount of flow that's going into the combined sewer lines, we're trying to install 4,000 rain barrels. narrator: homeowners can disconnect roof gutter downspouts from the sewer system and divert the stormwater into a rain barrel. schombert: the rain water then can be used to water lawns and gardens and infiltrate back in the ground slowly, rather than being piped to a creek wh

and of course incentivize fat. >> i think it's been difficult politically to take the next step. i think a person who raised the question is absolutely right. from the standpoint of a position today, you're worried those who are wonderfully trained, but don't feel they are owed gb lan tao. you can go right down the specialty level and latter and i think we need to confront that sooner rather than later. if we want to have a safe system that practice is best practice, we have to align the incentives to achieve that. >> in some ways to give the governor is a list of things to do in addition to whether they put the exchanges on other things, they've got to see this is a larger strategy. >> tremendous position to bring stakeholders together as hard to walk away from governors. >> to talk to governors at all? to the implement -- you've been talking to people thinking i'm going to let the feds come in with the exchanges. what are you saying to them? >> this is a setup because their government is trying to figure out whether he's going to do the legislature. >> in terms of what the stat

but it has to change further, as companies need to be free to educate, and incentivize people to buye better products, if government says, you have to eat that not that, that will cause problems, and companies are not able to advertise they are selling healthier food, that is a problem right now with all sorts of dictates from the federal trade commission, and other bodies they are restricted in what they can say, these have to go to enable the companies to sell them. neil: we have to go, i would love to talk to you more we have a lay's potato chip commercial to get to, i am kidding, remember what when everyone wanted to be like mike, that is basketball, whether michael jordan of the fit and thin, but now he is in real estate, and michael jordan is buying low. do you think this sees nothing but net? let's say, not a slamdunk. neil: enough to make you go through the roof. we're getting blit blitzkrieg b. today, we learned that foreclosures are down by 18%. but housing starts they are down by 8.5%. then this week, new home sales are skyrocketing, prices are up, great. but homebuilder c

. >> yes, it is incentivizing. >> bill: and why do you agree with this, dr. forest, i think that money is a motivator and specifically for younger people. if you bribe your kids, give them allowance or whatever they're more likely to do what you ask them to do as far as chores are concerned. >> short-term. >> yes, short-term, bill, you're absolutely right. it is a short-term motivator, but the first study in 1973, last year journal of american medical association shows that once you take the reward away, long-term, weight comes back or more importantly, i see it in my practice with kids. yes, if i have a child with special needs and i'm trying it motivate him, i might use short-term rewards, but longer term studies show it's more about the intrinsic reward. if i do something because it makes me feel better about myself or i feel like i'm a better human being, those are the rewards that lost for a lifetime and helps you keep the weight off. >> bill: are you guys surprised that 70% of americans, you know, are overweight to some degree? that's a big number. >> i

go back to the question that marty posed earlier, which is in effect this idea that in order to incentivize people making the decision to seek treatment that the fear of a felony conviction or possible state prison sentence could play a positive role. you talk to a lot of people charged with crimes who are trying to make the decision of what decision to make, what is the primary motivation you see coming from them. how do they decision make on dispositions related to drug possession as a felony? >> i think that for a lot of people it does have to be a personal decision and they have to come to it themselves. i don't think they necessarily are thinking about whether whether or not they'd be convicted of a felony or misdemeanor. i will also say that sometimes you'll meet someone in county jail and they're ready to get treatment, they're ready to get help and because of the lack of resources, they have to sit in county jail and wait for a bed to open up or wait for there to be an opportunity for them to access treatment. and one of the things that this bill would do ideally would be to divert

there are plenty of ways you ca incentivize health. ways to reward, but the idea of penalizing, that's wt they're doing, they're penalizing and under the idea that the 600 bucks, 600 bucks means a lot to people working at cvs. the fact that they're shipping out to a third party, wrong way, wrong time. >> jonas, we talk about carrots and sticks, this is a stick, but lots of carrots, gym memberships or you know, more healthy food in the cafeteria. >> free food-- >> and we're way beyond carrots for the health care country. time for sticks. they can avoid this by standing on the scale. it's not like you have to be under a certain weight to avoid making the payment and they would argue that's the future and necessary. there are a lot of reasons, but one of the reasons our country spends twice as much as most other countries, we are in some cases twice as unhealthy and heavier and we have to address the issues as part of an entire comprehensive way to lower health care costs and cvs is starting down that path and i would expect and hope othe

what you do is you incentivize your producers to go overseas. >> no!hat point it is cheaper -- to build a factory in singapore than detroit and we don't want that. >> no, no, no! it allow them to stay here. they won't have to go overseas for that. but they have to go overseas -- i've got to talk to you -- do you understand that these businesses are global enterprises. >> yes, i do. >> they have sales to overseas, they have assembly lines overseas, then they bring it back to the united states. you have to go where the growth -- >> great. >> would you explain this, senator? he doesn't understand why this is a global, integrated economy. please help. >> yes, i do. >> more important than that, the fear that he's presenting, which is that companies will create jobs overseas if they are allowed to have a territorial system is exactly what's happening today. what do you think that 1.3 or $2.2 trillion is being invested? it's not being brought back here to expand in new hampshire, it's being used to buy a plant in switzerland, because they can't bring it back.

that or at least require it if not incentivize it and keep track of it like that's how you would thinkwould be if the government was running the program but that's not what they did they gave us the facts no shrinks attached no conditions no requirements no incentives no transparency when i said hey hey guys why don't we make the banks tell us what they're doing with the money so we can know. reporting have a sense whether following these goals you know i was told that i was stupid that i was playing politics that if i did it myself i was going to destroy the banking system this led to tim geithner himself cursing me out of the meeting when i suggest that he was a thing less than the most transparent secretary of the treasury in the country's history and this is all part of that incredible deference that they show to the bank so it was give the money to the bags and trust them and of course what happened the banks in use the money from and they make they hoarded it they lied to back to the government they invested it they did whatever they could to maximize their profits they did almos

about a two-way folsom street, which i know the community has been waiting for a long time and incentiving affordable housing and industry use and office space while embracing the entertainment corridor on 11th street which you will be hear more about with plan's presentation. i am very interested in a conversation that came out of long-term negotiations -- not long-term, the yearlong negotiation s around prop c with inclusionary housing in exchange for reduction of overall impact fees elsewhere. i just wanted to know this is completely voluntary. i do know that within the community, one of the top priorities is building more affordable housing. it's not to say that they would like to do that at the expense of transportation or the expense of open space, but i know that we have certain needs that are a bit of a priority over others. an example i will give in other policy we made an exception over surplus property, where we decided to potentially pause or suspend the sale of that parcel, because the neighborhood decided that open space was a greater priority over giving to the affordable ho

. >> this is how we incentivize people to build in areas that are going to get wiped out. >> thank you for being here. i apologize for being absent during the testimony. i want to make a few comments. we have had investigators up there. it has been bipartisan in terms of what we look at. the initial response has been very positive. was whenhe criticisms he changed the people there is not a good chance for handoff of what was done. m answersto be too to questions that cannot be answered. is most of them are having to hire consultants to access funds. .e made it did the kristin's are impacted. it is real and justifiable. they areove -- impacted. if israel and justifiable. why did not give answers to the questions? historically, whenever have the luxury of being able to report people for a long time. we use a lot of our permanent work force to do the initial stat. as you're able to bring in our reservists we were able to bring its. this has never been a good changeup. we continue to work on that. oure is the complexity of programs. they have reached the point where part of what we were lo

we incentivize creation of more affordable housing through higher impact fees and inclusionary requirements on sites that are a half acre or larger while maintaining the residential impact fee, the conversation we had at land use committee. we also provide an opportunity for arts organizations and light industrial to locate adjacent to one another in the use alley zoning promote preservation of historic building by offering less restrictive zoning and embracing the entertainment corridor on 11th street from harrison to the next block on folsom. this plan is really a powerful tool to promote balance, preventing further displacement of the existing community of residents and small businesses while also integrating new uses with minimum impact to the existing community. this also testament to community based planning where collaboration really helped to highlight a common interest. diverse land use can coexist and not just conflict even on the same lot and where residents are partners in the process rather than just constituents. of course no plan comes especially of this size comes without an

and as i indicated around incentivizing small businesses, 0-25, but offering them tax credits to make the cost of coverage from the employer's perspective more affordable. >> okay, great, thank you. >> commissioner o'brien. >> would you say in your opinion, that there is a lot of overlap between the two programs? i mean i'm trying to see if the health care act is left in case, which is obviously going to be the place and the other option was taken out, the health security, would that leave a wide slot or section of people that are vulnerable and not covered that wouldn't fall under the umbrella of the affordable care act? i'm trying to -- it's extremely complicated and we're finding out it's going to take a lot of work to research how these programs work on their own first, and then between each other. and i was wondering would it be easier to amend one of them to sort of just be adjusted to fill in the gaps of the care act that doesn't cover it? so that it would be easish to manage the whole thing? would time be sent better trying to engineer it that way, then trying to evolve both o

. > > the bonds are often part of economic development programs where localities are trying to incentivize a company to expand and create more jobs. the problem is, for a lot of these bonds, there isn't tracking of whether there are jobs, and a lot of analysts we talked with said that a lot of these companies would have done these projects even without the bonds. so therefore, that is how they came to say that it's really more like a subsidy. > what kinds of companies are taking advantage of these bonds? > > we did an analysis looking bond-by-bond, and we could see which companies the money was for. and in fact, we found the company that has received the most of these federally tax- exempt bonds is chevron. so, chevron, they made $26 billion in profits last year. so it is not a struggling company. we think of these taxes-exempt bonds really as being something to help out cities and states meet their public needs. but the companies we found were chevron, exxon mobile is a big recipient, shell, goldman sachs here in new york city, bank of america. all of these big major companies have benefi

are you incentivized to do more stents?> well, me personally, i'm on a salary. >> it doesn't matter. >> it doesn't matter if i do one stent or five stents or ten stents. my job oh is to provide the right care for the right patient at the right time. >> so you're salaried. >> yes, sir. >> i'm salaried too as a physician. and doctor, you're salaried, as well. how big a problem is it, then, these perverse incentives. >> we're not saying people are doing these procedures for profit. we're saying that the system has created incentives that in subtle and maybe not so subtle ways drives more procedures. if you get a bump on your head, as a friend of mine had, and you go into the emergency department in america, you get a cat scan. if you have that happen in germany or in england, they say here's a list of instructions. if you have problems, come back and see us. we just spent $1,000. >> sometimes the patients demand this stuff. >> yes. but we have to educate patients. >> i want to point out something. i think this is important. be

increasingly done and the city policy makers encouraged the department of building inspection not to incentivize, where the permits are not clear by reducing the number of units on a three-hour report. instead the department of building inspection referred the owner to the planning department to make the mergers the official way when the records are not 100 percent clear. this is not surprising given that the building is zoned for two units and when mr. hyman rented his unit the building consisted of three rental units all being rented to tenants. >> i would like to ask mr. hyman to give a statement about how this merger will effect him. >> hello. my name is ralph hyman and i have been hiv positive for over 20 years and i have lived at 227 douglass since june of 2007 i have the flexibility in my job because of my condition and the side effects of other health conditions resulting from that forces me to work at home and i go home when i need to due to fatigue. moving two effect my life, with an increased financial burden it would be hard for me financially to find a similar living situation espec

the intent of this active service provision was to incentivize the people in the ground floor with a business to create a lot of windows to create an active use and the incentive was that they could avoid a conditional use permit. by doing so. as mr. sanchez will probably tell you he sees no reason that this use needs a conditional use permit, except for the fact that code seems to say and he admits that it is unclear, that there is a conditional use for a active frontage which is not present by virtue of the name of the use. mr. sanchez and his department advised the board of supervisors the language was unclear. unfortunately they did adopt it the way that it is. and we are stuck with a very unclear interpretation. but i ask you to look at the intent of why there is a conditional use permit if you don't have active windows allowing and encouraging the public? as to some of the statements made by mr. williams, first of all, vocal point offers services to the general public and so it can't be administrative services as he alleges in his brief because administratives services by defin