Here in the US, the Affordable Care Act is finally going into effect, with accompanying drama. I managed to get signed up today at healthcare.gov. After not having health insurance since 2000, I will finally be covered starting January 1 2014.
Since my income is mosty publically known anyway, I thought it might be helpful to blog about some details.
I was uninsured for 14 years due to a combination of three factors:
- Initially, youthful stupidity and/or a perfectly resonable cost/benefit analysis. (Take your pick.)
- Due to the US health insurance system being obviously broken, and my preference to avoid things that are broken. Especially when the breakage involved insurers refusing to cover me at any sane level due to a minor and easily controlled pre-existing condition.
- Since I'm not much motivated by income levels, and am very motivated to have time to work on things that are important to me, my income has been on average pretty low, and perhaps more importantly, I have intentionally avoided being a full-time employee of anyone at any point in the past 14 years (have rejected job offers), and so was not eligible for any employee plans which were the only reasonable way to be covered in the US. (See point #2.)
So, if you're stuck waiting in line on healthcare.gov (is this an entirely new online experience brought to us by the US government?), or have seen any of the dozen or so failure modes that I saw just trying to register for a login to the site, yeah, it's massively overloaded right now, and it's also quite broken on a number of technical levels. But you can eventually get though it.
Based on some of the bugs I saw, it may help to have an large number of email addresses and use a different one for each application attempt. It also wouldn't hurt to write some programs to automate the attempts, because otherwise you may have to fill out the same form dozens of times. And no, you can't use "you+foo@bar.com" for your email; despite funding the development of RFC-822 in the 80's, the US government is clueless about what consititutes a valid email address.
But my "favorite" misfeature of the site is that it refuses to let you enter any accented characters, or characters not in the latin alphabet when signing up. Even if they're, you know, part of your name. (Welcome back to Ellis Island..) I want to check the git repository to see if I can find the backstory for these and other interesting technical decisions, but they have forgotten to push anything to it for over 3 months.
The good news is that once you get past the initial signup process, and assuming you get the confirmation mail before the really short expiration period of apparently less than 1 hour (another interesting technical choice, given things like greylisting), the actual exchange is not badly overloaded, and nor is it very buggy (comparatively). I was able to complete an application in about an hour.
The irony is that after all that, I was only able to choose from one health insurer covering my area on the so-called "exchange". (Blue Cross/Blue Shield) I also signed up for dental insurance (it was a welcome surprise that the site offers this at all) and had a choice of two insurers for that.
The application process was made more uncertian for me since I have no idea what I'll end up doing for money once my current crowdsourced year of work is done. The site wants you to know how much income you'll have in 2014, and my guess is anywhere between $6000 (from a rental property) and about what I made this year (approx $25000 before taxes). Or up, if I say, answered the Google pings. The best choice seemed to be to answer what I made this year, which is also close to what I made last year.
So, I'll be paying around $200/month for a combination of not very good health insurance, and not very good dental insurance. There is around $750/year of financial aid to people at my guesstimated 2014 income level, which would drop that to $140/month, but I will let them refund me whatever that turns out to be in a lump sum later instead.
For comparison, I am lucky to spend rather less renting a three bedroom house situated in 25 acres of woods..
It's strange to think that all of this is an improvement to the system here in the US, especially given all the better options that could have been passed instead, but it seems that it probably is. Especially when I consider the many people around me who are less fortunate than myself. If you'd like a broader perspective on this, see Tobias Buckell's "American healthcare was already socialized by Reagan, we’re just fighting about how to pay for it".
This could have been a blog post about toothbrushes for monkeys, which I seem to have dreamed about this morning. But then I was vaguely listening to the FAIFCast in the car, and I came up with something even more esoteric to write about!
License monads would allow separating parts of code that are under different licenses, in a rigorous fashion. For example, we might have two functions in different license monads:
foo :: String -> GPL String
bar :: Char -> BSD Char
Perhaps foo needs to use bar to calculate its value. It can only do so
if there's a way to lift code in the BSD monad into the GPL monad. Which
we can legally write, since the BSD license is upwards-compatable with the GPL:
liftGPL :: BSD a -> GPL a
On the other hand, there should be no way provided
to lift the GPL monad into the BSD monad. So bar cannot be written using
code from foo, which would violate foo's GPL license.
Perhaps the reason I am thinking about this is that the other day I found myself refactoring some code out of the git-annex webapp (which is AGPL licensed) and into the git-annex assistant (which is GPL licensed). Which meant I had to relicense that code.
Luckily that was easy to do legally speaking, since I am the only author of the git-annex webapp so far, and own the whole license of it. (Actually, it's only around 3 thousand lines of code, and another thousand of html.)
It also turned out to be easy to do the refactoring, technically speaking because looking at the code, I realized I had accidentially written it in the wrong monad; all the functions were in the webapp's Handler monad, but all of them used liftAnnex to actually do their work in the Annex monad. If that had not been the case, I would not have been able to refactor the code, at least not without entirely rewriting it.
It's as if I had accidentially written:
foo :: String -> GPL String
foo = mapM (liftGPL . bar)
Which can be generalized to:
foo :: String -> BSD String
foo = mapM bar
I don't think that license monads can be realistically used in the current world, because lawyers and math often don't mix well. Lawyers have, after all, in the past written laws re-defining pi to be 3. Still, license monads are an interesting way to think about things for myself. They capture how my code and licenses are structured and allow me to reason about it on a more granular level than the licences of individual files.
(I have a vague feeling someone else may have written about this idea before? Perhaps I should have been blogging about monkey toothbrushes after all...)