Patrick Cox

Watching this administration pretend that refusing to raise the debt ceiling is the federal government’s real problem — rather than its spending — is simply surreal.

All the major players pushing for more debt, including the president, said exactly the opposite just a few years ago. Roughly, about the time The Daily Reckoning was filming and releasing I.O.U.S.A. Back then, the current powers-that-be were criticizing the prior administration, and rightly so, when the debt was $10 trillion.

Ha. Seems laughably trite, doesn’t it?

Now, when the debt is 60% higher, the same characters are feigning outrage that anybody would take their own prior position in support of a balanced budget.

There is upside to this behavior. Certainty.

We know certain big things will happen. Whenever you know that something big is going to happen, you can make money. And that’s, after all, why you read these pages… to learn how the government and economy actually work, then plan accordingly.

We can project what’s going to happen as a result of current and past fiscal foolishness. As Herbert Stein said, “what can’t go on, won’t.” Attempts to raise taxes further will lead to lower, not greater, revenues. The cost of borrowing will go up, curtailing debt growth and forcing spending cuts.

A primary justification used by this administration for increasing spending and debt has been the expansion of health care programs. The promise of lowering health care costs has already been exposed as a pipe dream, but it has done nothing to diminish the administration’s support of these programs.

In fact, health care costs are going to go up for several reasons, including the bureaucratic burden. Additionally, people are going to live longer while more and better therapies become available. Political pressures to reduce healthcare costs will be enormous.

We’re not speculating wildly, incidentally. Costs are already exploding in places where government established national health care systems earlier, including Canada and the U.K. Rationing, known in medical circles as triage, is reality.

Information is power. If you understand this trend, you can leverage that knowledge, reducing regulatory risk and maximizing ROI by investing in emerging biotechnologies that improve and lower the costs of current medical practices. If a biotechnology does something universally accepted as necessary but does it better and for less money, you have an almost certain blockbuster.

I’ve recommended one such technology to subscribers of my Breakthrough Technology Alert. The company behind this technology has improved continual glucose monitoring with an electronically controlled device that painlessly removes the top layer of dead skin cells, the stratum corneum.

Then, a needle-free sensor measures blood sugar levels in the capillary-rich epidermis and sends that information in real-time to whatever device you choose. Instead of paying nurses to repeatedly draw blood for testing, a constant flow of information is gathered, stored and electronically displayed, eliminating human error for any reading that for some reason is out of line with actual metabolic trends.

Several studies say that continual glucose monitoring can improve hospital outcomes, mortality and length of stay by a third. Cutting hospital stays by a third in a system that pays fixed fees for specific conditions yields huge financial benefits for hospitals. It also saves hours of nursing work every day for every patient having sugars monitored.

This looks to be a breakthrough year for this tiny company, with multiple trigger events coming up soon.

Regards,

Patrick Cox
for The Daily Reckoning

Patrick Cox

Patrick Cox has lived deep inside the world of transformative technologies for over 25 years. This expertise lead him to Mauldin Economics, where he now heads Transformational Technology Alert.

  • Robert (qslv)

    It’s a great technology, but goes completely against the agenda of the powerful pharmecutical lobby. People could stabilize their blood sugar in real time with diet and exercise, losing billions in sales for the big pharma. It would be crushed.

Recent Articles

The One Number Every Penny Stock Investor Overlooks

Jonas Elmerraji

When it comes to investing in small companies with explosive growth potential, there is one number investors tend to be fixated on: share price. But as Jonas Elmerraji explains, there is another number that is far more important when it comes to discovering quality investments on the cheap. Read on...


Winners and Losers in the Battle of Economic Stupidity

Douglas French

A lot of people are buying to a lot of bad ideas right now, based on faulty logic or blindly following a political agenda. But if you ask the right questions, you can expose these ideas, as well as the people who support them, and show how silly (and stupid) they really are. Thankfully, one man has been doing just that for decades. Doug French explains...


Smart Investments in the Mobile Revolution

Greg Guenthner

The world is obsessed with smartphones. Most people can't go ten minutes without checking their phone for status updates on Facebook or Twitter or any number of apps they happen to have. And while Facebook's stock continues to soar, it's only natural to wonder, "What's the best way to play this mobile revolution?" Greg Guenthner explains...


The US Debt Crisis that Will Never Happen

Chris Mayer

One of the most heated political battles raging across the western world is debt versus austerity. In the U.S. this debate reached it's apex in 2011 when the U.S. credit rating was downgraded by Standard and Poor's. In today's essay, however, Chris Mayer throws the debate out the window, explaining why he thinks a U.S. debt crisis will never happen...


3 Tips to Finding Small Companies With Huge Potential

Matthew Milner

Believe it or not, more capital for a company doesn't necessarily mean better returns for investors. In fact, in a recent study that dug through data from more than 200 acquisitions going back to 2006, they found a "sweet spot" for the most likely acquisition targets. And it's lower than you think. Matthew Milner explains...