Women lost her right to personal assistance due to Youtube video

In Sweden all handicapped people have the right to get money to hire assisted aid by the state, LSS. A women that made a music video lost that right, according to Aftonbladet.se. Försäkringskassan (state institution in Sweden that handles LSS money amongst other things).

This women has a so called connective tissue disease that breaks down her body. The disease also gives movement in limbs that the person cannot help, according to a statement by her doctor, according to Aftonbladet.se.

Even though Aftonbladet had power of attorney in the case, Försäkringskassan refused to answer any questions regarding the women in question, according to Aftonbladet.

The women lost her right to assisted aid du to someone anonymously reporting her to Försäkringskassan and giving them tips about the video on YouTube. After they saw the clip she lost the assisted aid given by the state, according to Aftonbladet.se.

I looked at the video and I think the video is no proof of her having or not having a disability needed assisted aid. Försäkringskassan are just going by the rules provided by Fredrik Reinfeldts government. So really they are the bad guys behind all these stupid decisions of inhumanity.

Instead she is now locked into her apartment, not being able to go anywhere until volounteers and her husband comes home to help her, according to the article.

Bad world. Bad Sweden. Bad government. Overall – bad. Underneath is the video.

Source 20130227:

http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article16326123.ab

Source: youtu.be/l4Uo16npKJM

Increased control makes people more sick

Increased control of the workers leads to less effectivity according to an article in SVD.se. This is, according to the article, especially true when we have high expectations. Despite that, the article says, the politicians are caught in the belief that increased control of the citizens would solve important social problems. They really do not explain social problems in the article, but perhaps increased health issues and exclusion are some social problems.

The control and the possibility to affect once job has decreased since the 1990′s. There has been a belief that “maximal effect” can be achived by cutbacks and reorganizations, the SVD article also writes. One control mechanism has been to have written student development plans and health care plans for students and patients.

Well, I happen to agree this far that an increased work load and not being able to effect your own work tasks is an increased stress level on people (work force). However as a patient I would like my doctor to have a plan for my treatment written down and not just in the head. Also in school I would like the teacher to have some kind of yearly plan for teaching, so I as a student may have some kind of quality on my lessons. What will be tought? How will it be taught? When will it be taught? With no plan there is no control of that the students will learn everything within a non planned year. However perhaps the student thing has gone over the board on documentation, however a plan must be made I happen to think. The problem is more how the plan is formed. I think every teacher should plan and construct their own plan. It should however be a plan that anyone should be able to understand. In case the teacher is sick someone else may easily follow the plan and the students wouldn’t miss out. However an individual plan I happen to think is too much, considering what the school looks like.

And regarding health plans for patients I am saying that the focus most be the treatment plan, how long that should be is one question that must be evaluated for each patient. Sicknesses are most likely personal more than a student plan has to be. However sometimes there might be research that has shown that there is a certain outcome if a certain plan is followed, in those cases maybe it is even possible to follow a pre-written plan. In health care I would very much enjoy “support”-systems. In such a system a patient can answer a lot of questions by themselves. These are then integrated with the patient records. These systems already exist to some extent, however they must be further developed. I happen to think that you need to document your plans. But what is documented should be up to the parties involved, but an external party should be able to follow and understand the plan. I am not asking the system to remove quality assurance. I think that is necessary.

Without QA everything is fucked. However I think the workers must work them out so some extent. However an external party can do it also. By having a common documentation system and flow it is better for all parties. However such a system must be modularized so that people can “work as usual”, but adapt it to their way. By forcing people to do things a certain way you do get more effective, even if people might “think” they lose control. In fact they are not. There are ways to do it so they very much feel in control. They will complain but in the end they will be happier and this is what I am good at.

Therefor I do not happen to agree on all the things said in the SVD article. However there is a way to get increased quality (which can be seen as control) without letting go of the peoples “freedom”. I usually do it by giving modules which the work force can choose from. However the “control” lays in that they can only chose from given modules, if they want to add things, they must ask for it and then a person (i.e. the responsible one) looks through the system in use and comes up with a solution that they can use something already available and if no such thing exist they can get the current system adapted to also work for their new perspective. This can be done without losing control and with people still being able to it almost as they have been able to do it before, but with more “control”. However my way leads to people not “loosing” freedom and still maintaining control.

There is a way to do it both ways so to speak. However in my world view we should be giving and taking some from both parties. No documentation leads to less effectivity to.  He is also saying there are ways to give the users “control” over the control. You need some kind of control, but for me there are different kinds of control, to even know you are doing the right thing. I think the negative control is when you i.e. think something is stupid and you have no way of affecting the work tasks and remove the stupid ones. In those cases the control is just bad. I believe that such type of control is just to push the worker down. However, some kind of control is needed, otherwise you will not have any measurement points to even know if you have done it better next time or not. That is just plain stupid.

Source 20130218:

http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/okad-kontroll-gor-arbetstagare-sjukare_7922506.svd

Vad tycker du? What do you think?

Opinions are measured by asking the same questions over time. This way public opinion can be measured and changes in the public opinion can be viewed.

However the public opinion only measures the questions asked and no other questions. If you do not know which questions to ask, do you know enough? However that is the problem with trying to analyze something. If you do not know about it, how can you think of the questions to ask? That is my critic to all types of measurments trying to understand the public opinion.

You must really be a person “thinking out of the box” and have a vivid imagination to be able to find new ways to think about measurements. That isn’t something everyone has. You have to have a imagination that can take you to a new frontier. That is how you can see something before others can.

I think that is what Facebook and Google and such companies are trying to do. Trying to understand you with analysis before you do it, by tracking you. This way I am thinking what they really want is to predict the future.

Who might want to predict the future? Perhaps a person that wants to prepare actions, earn money and such. So that can be both companies and states. And who doesn’t want to predict the future? Imagine you having the answers about the market before the market changes. Doesn’t that give you an advantage?

If we compare the gaming systems, that is exactly how they work. So by predicting what horse will win the race you might win money. Do you agree? If you predict right the horse wins. If you predict wrong the horse make you lose money.

Well, in a world were money rules people will always try to make money. I think that in the end people, animals and nature suffer. We need nature in order for our planets eco-system to work. Everything is very much connected. Inbalance leads to some animals dying out and so on. Poisioning the Earth makes people being able to use less piece of land. That means less space for growing food. I hope these few examples are enough to make you understand. Oki?

Well, what I am saying is that you are giving away to much information for the world, to the Internet, to the state, to everything really! And you are doing it freely. I think we should legislate so that you may be anonymous for real. Even to the state. But this is not how our society of Sweden or many other countries work.

In Sweden we have statistics on everything, so the Swedish government can make a lot of measurements about people. I look at statistics to, to prove my point. However I think that statistics are bad. Even though I always run into it, I always think of statistics as bad, even though I use it.

By knowing your every move, i.e. the latest function from a Facebook application, they can predict were you will be at certain points. If you always do things the same, then they will be able to predict it pretty good. This is how it is. Do you want them to know what you do before even you know it? They know it because humans are people of habits. We like to do things the same way. Do you want the world to know what your future moves are? Do you really? If you do not, start anonymizing yourself online. Stop giving away information that you are not really willing to share. Still need to be online? Share what you think is useless, even if dots are connected. Do not share everything. Just saying. Have a nice evening.

Imagine, I lose money on working

If I cannot stamp up, which I am applying for, then I have earned exactly as much as if I would have been unemployed this week. That is for working part-time and being unemployed the rest of the time. The difference, if I am allowed to stamp up, gives me just a small profit on working. If my application to stamp up is rejected, then I have actually lost money on working this week. I have had expenses for travelling to and from work.

If I would work full-time I wouldn’t have to stamp up. I would also make more than I get on a-kassa. I am working for a temp agency. According to previous rules you are not allowed to stamp up working for a temp agency. However a prejudicate gave one man in Sweden right. Since I am working on demand I only get to work part-time. I have accepted to work each day. If I got paid a full day each day I wouldn’t have to stamp up. I would also make more money. If I am not allowed to stamp up… then I cannot continue working since I am loosing money then on the additional expenses for travelling and copying time reports and such. Everything costs money.

I also realised I won’t get paid for part of last week due to A-kassan paying for each half hour and my employer paying per minute. A-kassan only accepts half hours in the time reports. And my company counts minutes. I won’t get any money for the minutes lost because of those strange rules. Also I couldn’t report right amount of time each day, I had to count up or down to the closest half hour. Strange indeed. I think that A-kassan should have the same rules are the employers have. Flexibility is however not the politicians piece of cake. It is not fair, people want to be paid for each hour.

The Death of sites on the Internet

There are sites that die on the Internet. One is Hotmail, just to mention something that is going to die in the near future. In todays DN.se there is an article about sites dying on the Internet. The article writes about the fact that you should have a function of downloading your post’s in example the blog if the possibility of you not being able the use the site comes up. With such a function you at least have your information still intact. Some do not have backups on information and images other the ones on the blog. Most likely you have the photo’s on your own backup, but perhaps not the texts you have written. The article really speaks about the fact that you should not just totally rely on the sites. Free sites can get economic problems and disappear, in fact die.  So keep that in mind.

Source 20121231:

http://www.dn.se/blogg/teknikbloggen/2012/12/31/doende-webbtjanster-och-natets-gratiserbjudanden/

Mining is bad for everything

Mining is an irreparable damage to its surroundings. I think metal or any other mineral from mining should be very restricted. Oil will disappear, but not just oil, even minerals. Therefor the usage of non renewable materials must be restricted in law, restricted in export. A country can be left without money, jobs and even a good environment when the mining production is gone. Unlivable areas with risk for eruptions. Mining is just overall bad and we need to take steps away from non renewable materials. We need to understand that we cannot continue using non renewable products anymore. They have to be used in recycling systems, therefor products must be “clean” and easily removable when put together in electronics. For each invention made people have to figure out a 100% recycling method otherwise the product shouldn’t be allowed to exist. Legislation would make companies comply.

• Modulate everything
• Put everything into recycling
• Have a method for recycling for each produced unit
• Make same recycling systems for all products all over the world
• Use renewable materials in all products as much as possible
• Restrict export of non renewable energy resources
• Forbid export of minerals and mining products if the production of the products is not made in their home country (why? since there is a limit to how much jobs mining can offer, there is a limit in time, therefor the products should be produced also inside the country that mines, so that more jobs are produced)
• Legislate in each country, companies must comply – if not – no business

All of the above is easy, just do it. Today!

Read about that mining causes environmental damage in SVD.se.

Source 20121230:

http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/gruvdriften-ger-en-oaterkallelig-paverkan_7785172.svd