@@Lesbian-j3w She has now passed.

@Z50569 what impression did it leave you with?

Thank you for your time, interest and effort. There are 3 Pprimar Factors you have not accounted for. We actually a dozen more besides these 3, but here are those 3 for now. The 1st is the Time Value of Money, the 2nd: Supplmentals and the 3rd is Membership vs retail biz model. For the Time Value of Money, we have the example of that $100k home mortgage that cost you $300k by the time you pay it off 30 years later. The same here. The 2nd Primary factor is Supplementals. That covers most all other service related to auto-care. Our findings is that there is about 3 to 5 times more $ in serices then there is in the price of the car, as such, our program converts the car into a platfrom wherein the money is in selling the services rather then the car. Apple of course is the best example wherein the 'real money' is selling the music, videos, etc. In this case, the primary $ will be in Up-grades. The advanage Elon Musk offers is that Tesla now covers all such Supplemental services and so this offers both tremendous savings to his buyers, but also offers Tesla about 3 to 5 times more $ over and above the sale fo the cart as well. The 3rd is introducting a true Membership model in place of today's retail sales. Far more $ in a membership program as welll as far more stable and consistan long term cash flow. Once these 3 plus the dozen or so other such added 'Supplementsl' are included, it should provide between 5 x to as much as 10 x times more revenue then the cars present price tag. More later. Thank you again for your time and interest. Raghu G

Kind of oyou as always. lol. Rg

The insurance industry is a multi-trillion-a-year profession in which trillions worth of other business base their entire operations upon and so it seems a fair starting point for such a discussion. Again, these other businesses are based on the accuracy of such numbers and more so for things like obesity that has remained relatively consistent and growing and carefully followed incrementally for over a half-century. Their numbers decide the cost of premiums etc so must remain within a relatively narrow measure of accuracy in order to justify the bill to providers, investors and customers alike.

@@raghunomics yes but how many businesses and agencies profit on misleading data, or in other words,how many profit on people being UNhealthy? I'd argue lack of public health is overall more profitable for the big businesses and agencies than actually helping to improve the general health of the public. And so much of the science that has been done by or for these agencies and companies is far from being objectively accurate.

@@raghunomics kzbin.info/www/bejne/m6fGf4Ocj9GlkNU

@@raghunomics also you didn't address all the points I made...

:/

Generally, such studies work from the overview of a decade versus a single year for several reasons. You are correct, the cost is $200 billion a year and as we clarify in the video in the large camption on the point; that equals '$2 trillion a decade.' These gov't reports work from a decade's worth of review to account for year-to-year variance as well as to better plan and account for the cumulative impacts with the more comprehensive insight otherwise missed when isolated to those of a single year. Our LIfestyle Insurance demonstrates the value and point of this decades overview demonstrates quite dramatically and in fact is the very punchline of our entire proposal. That point unfortunately was not included in this particular edit for this teaser video, but it's a relatively simple conclusion. Of this massive $2 trillion (a decade) cost of obesity, gov't (programs) cover at least 50% of it. Gov't covers $1 trillion a decade. (The remaining $1 trillion is covered by the private sector.) Our recommendation is rather obvious. The gov't should consolidate obesity around as its own stand-alone budget - program. Now that the gov't has this total cost composite, they have a far greater bargaining position. They can send out a request to the insurance industry to provide double the service at about half the cost: $600 billion a year. Today, obesity services are divvied up between dozens of gov't agencies and programs from VA, to Social Security, Medicaid, Medi-care, school programs, and a host of others. Consolidating the budget and services of this area of lifestyle would create a far greater level of interest and offers of cost savings from providers hungry for this new half trillion dollar contract. The gov't is offering a $600 billion contract with the request for double service. That is a 4 fold improvement. Coincidentally, this 'double the service for half the cost' aligns with the pricing we see of other industrial nations' healthcare services. We don't have a logistical issue with healthcare so much as we do a managerial and political one. Again

@@raghunomics ah yes. My mistake.

lol. Sorry the graphics distracted you from the message. Defeats the whole purpose of them. grrr. lol. Message: we could retire $10 to $15 trillion in US deficits in about 6 months using this program.

Thank you for the encouragement. Big aloha to you.

Thank you for this kind support. Just saw the grain ceremony for your dear daughter and Indradumna Sw. How beautiful.

We need him as Senate majority leadership