BOARD CERTIFICATION EXAM STUDY GUIDES Lower Extremity Trauma
[Click on Image to Enlarge]
ME-P Free Advertising Consultation
The “Medical Executive-Post” is about connecting doctors, health care executives and modern consulting advisors. It’s about free-enterprise, business, practice, policy, personal financial planning and wealth building capitalism. We have an attitude that’s independent, outspoken, intelligent and so Next-Gen; often edgy, usually controversial. And, our consultants “got fly”, just like U. Read it! Write it! Post it! “Medical Executive-Post”. Call or email us for your FREE advertising and sales consultation TODAY [678.779.8597] Email: MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com
Medical & Surgical e-Consent Forms
ePodiatryConsentForms.com
iMBA Inc., OFFICES
Suite #5901 Wilbanks Drive, Norcross, Georgia, 30092 USA [1.678.779.8597]. Our location is real and we are now virtually enabled to assist new long distance clients and out-of-town colleagues.
ME-P Publishing
SEEKING INDUSTRY INFO PARTNERS?
If you want the opportunity to work with leading health care industry insiders, innovators and watchers, the “ME-P” may be right for you? We are unbiased and operate at the nexus of theoretical and applied R&D. Collaborate with us and you’ll put your brand in front of a smart & tightly focused demographic; one at the forefront of our emerging healthcare free marketplace of informed and professional “movers and shakers.” Our Ad Rate Card is available upon request [678-779-8597].
The U.S. faces a heightened risk of recession in 2026, with economic indicators, expert forecasts, and global instability contributing to widespread concern. While some analysts remain cautiously optimistic, the probability of a downturn is significant.
The potential for a U.S. recession in 2026 is a topic of growing concern among economists, policymakers, and investors. According to UBS, the probability of a recession has surged to 93% based on hard data analysis, including employment trends, industrial production, and credit market signals. This alarming figure reflects a convergence of economic stressors that could culminate in a downturn by the end of 2026.
One of the most prominent warning signs is the inverted yield curve, a historically reliable predictor of recessions. When short-term interest rates exceed long-term rates, it suggests that investors expect weaker growth ahead. This inversion, coupled with elevated federal debt and persistent inflationary pressures, has led many analysts to forecast a slowdown in consumer spending and business investment.
Despite these concerns, some sectors—particularly artificial intelligence (AI)—are providing temporary buoyancy. The AI infrastructure boom has fueled GDP growth and market optimism, with global AI investment projected to reach $500 billion by 2026.
However, experts warn that this surge may be masking underlying economic fragility. If AI-driven investment slows, the economy could quickly lose momentum, revealing vulnerabilities in other sectors such as manufacturing and retail.
Global factors also play a critical role. Trade tensions, geopolitical instability, and fluctuating oil prices have created an unpredictable environment. The lingering effects of tariff pass-throughs and policy uncertainty are expected to intensify in 2026, further straining the U.S. economy. Additionally, speculative forecasts—like those from mystic Baba Vanga—have captured public imagination by predicting a “cash crush” that could disrupt both virtual and physical currency systems, although such claims lack empirical support. Not all forecasts are dire. Oxford Economics suggests that while growth will moderate, the U.S. may avoid a full-blown recession thanks to continued investment incentives and robust AI-related spending. Their above-consensus GDP forecast hinges on the assumption that business confidence remains stable and that fiscal policy supports non-AI sectors effectively.
Nevertheless, the risks are real and multifaceted. The Polymarket prediction platform currently estimates a 43% chance of a U.S. recession by the end of 2026, based on criteria such as two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth or an official declaration by the National Bureau of Economic Research.
In conclusion, while the U.S. economy may continue to navigate “choppy waters,” the potential for a recession in 2026 is substantial. Policymakers must remain vigilant, balancing stimulus with fiscal discipline, and addressing structural weaknesses before temporary growth drivers fade.
The coming year will be pivotal in determining whether the U.S. can steer clear of recession or succumb to the mounting pressures.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Posted on November 15, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd
***
***
For centuries, doctors have occupied one of the highest earning and most respected positions in society. Their extensive education, specialized knowledge, and critical role in preserving human life have traditionally guaranteed them financial security and social prestige. Yet in recent years, a growing conversation has emerged: could skilled tradesmen—electricians, plumbers, welders, carpenters, and other hands‑on professionals—eventually out‑earn doctors in the future? While the answer is complex, shifting economic dynamics suggest that the gap between these professions may narrow, and in certain contexts, tradesmen could indeed surpass doctors in earnings.
One of the most significant factors driving this possibility is supply and demand. The medical profession requires years of schooling, residency, and licensing, which creates a steady pipeline of doctors but also limits entry. By contrast, skilled trades have suffered from declining interest among younger generations, many of whom were encouraged to pursue college degrees instead of vocational training. As a result, there is now a shortage of tradesmen in many regions. When demand for services like plumbing or electrical work rises but supply remains low, wages naturally increase. Already, some master tradesmen charge hourly rates that rival or exceed those of general practitioners.
Another consideration is student debt and overhead costs. Doctors often graduate with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, and many must work in hospital systems or private practices with high administrative expenses. Tradesmen, on the other hand, typically face lower educational costs and can enter the workforce much earlier. Many start their own businesses with relatively modest investments, allowing them to keep a larger share of their earnings. In an era where entrepreneurship and independence are highly valued, tradesmen may find themselves financially freer than doctors burdened by debt and bureaucracy.
***
***
The changing economy also plays a role. Automation and artificial intelligence are beginning to reshape medicine, with diagnostic tools, telehealth, and robotic surgery reducing the need for certain human tasks. While doctors will always be essential, parts of their work may become less lucrative as technology takes over. Skilled trades, however, are far harder to automate. Repairing a leaking pipe, rewiring a house, or welding a custom structure requires physical presence, adaptability, and problem‑solving in unpredictable environments—skills machines struggle to replicate. This resilience against automation could make tradesmen’s work increasingly valuable.
That said, doctors will likely continue to command high salaries in specialized fields such as surgery, cardiology, or oncology. The prestige and necessity of medical expertise ensure that society will always reward them. Yet the notion that tradesmen are “lesser” careers is fading. In fact, many tradesmen already earn six‑figure incomes, particularly those who own successful businesses or operate in regions with acute labor shortages.
Ultimately, whether tradesmen will out‑earn doctors depends on how society values different forms of expertise. If current trends continue—rising demand for trades, shortages of skilled labor, resistance to automation, and lower educational barriers—it is plausible that many tradesmen will match or surpass doctors in income. The future may not be defined by one profession dominating the other, but by a more balanced recognition that both healers and builders are indispensable to modern life. In that sense, the financial gap may close, reflecting a broader cultural shift toward valuing practical skills as highly as academic ones.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Posted on November 12, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd
***
***
Say’s Law, named after the French economist Jean‑Baptiste Say, is a foundational idea in classical economics. Often summarized as “supply creates its own demand,” the law suggests that the act of producing goods and services inherently generates the income necessary to purchase them. This principle shaped economic thought throughout the 19th century and continues to influence debates about markets, government intervention, and the causes of economic crises.
Origins and Meaning Jean‑Baptiste Say introduced his law in the early 1800s in his Treatise on Political Economy. He argued that production is the source of demand: when producers create goods, they pay wages, rents, and profits, which in turn become purchasing power. In this view, general overproduction is impossible because every supply of goods corresponds to an equivalent demand. If imbalances occur, they are temporary and limited to specific sectors, not the economy as a whole.
Core Principles Say’s Law rests on several assumptions:
Markets are self‑correcting: Any surplus in one area leads to adjustments in prices and production.
Money is neutral: It serves only as a medium of exchange, not as a driver of demand.
Production drives prosperity: Economic growth depends on increasing output, not stimulating consumption.
No long‑term unemployment: Since supply creates demand, workers displaced in one industry will eventually find employment elsewhere.
These ideas aligned with classical economists’ belief in minimal government intervention and the efficiency of free markets.
Influence on Classical Economics Say’s Law became a cornerstone of classical economics, reinforcing the belief that recessions or depressions were temporary and self‑correcting. Economists like David Ricardo and John Stuart Mill adopted versions of the law, using it to argue against policies aimed at stimulating demand. The law supported laissez‑faire approaches, suggesting that governments should avoid interfering with markets, as production itself would ensure economic balance.
Criticism and Keynesian Revolution Say’s Law faced its greatest challenge during the Great Depression of the 1930s. Widespread unemployment and idle factories contradicted the idea that supply automatically generates demand. John Maynard Keynes famously rejected Say’s Law in his General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (1936). Keynes argued that demand, not supply, drives economic activity. He showed that insufficient aggregate demand could lead to prolonged recessions, requiring government intervention through fiscal and monetary policies.
Keynes’s critique marked a turning point in economics. While Say’s Law emphasized production, Keynesian economics highlighted consumption and demand management. This shift reshaped economic policy, leading to active government roles in stabilizing economies.
Modern Perspectives Today, Say’s Law is not accepted in its original form, but elements of it remain relevant. Supply‑side economists, for example, argue that policies encouraging production—such as tax cuts and deregulation—can stimulate growth. In contrast, Keynesians stress the importance of demand management. The debate reflects a broader tension in economics: whether prosperity depends more on producing goods or ensuring people have the means and willingness to buy them.
Conclusion: Say’s Law was a bold attempt to explain the self‑sustaining nature of markets. While its claim that “supply creates its own demand” proved too simplistic in the face of modern economic realities, it remains a vital part of the history of economic thought. The controversy surrounding Say’s Law highlights the evolving nature of economics, where theories are tested against real‑world crises and adapted to new circumstances. Even today, discussions of supply‑side versus demand‑side policies echo the enduring influence of Say’s original insight.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
The Series 63 exam — the Uniform Securities State Law Examination — is a North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) exam administered by FINRA.
The exam consists of 60 scored questions and 5 unscored questions. Candidates have 75 minutes to complete the exam. In order for a candidate to pass the Series 63 exam, they must correctly answer at least 43 of the 60 scored questions.
Money is a powerful tool. It can provide security, open opportunities, and help build a fulfilling life. Yet, when mismanaged, it can quickly become a source of stress and regret. Understanding the worst ways to use money is essential for anyone who wants to avoid financial pitfalls and build lasting stability.
1. Impulse Spending
One of the most damaging habits is spending without thought. Buying items on impulse—whether it’s clothes, gadgets, or luxury goods—often leads to regret and wasted resources. These purchases rarely align with long‑term goals and can drain savings meant for emergencies or investments.
2. High‑Interest Debt
Credit cards and payday loans can trap people in cycles of debt. Paying 20% or more in interest means that even small purchases balloon into massive financial burdens. Using debt irresponsibly is one of the fastest ways to erode wealth.
3. Ignoring Savings and Investments
Failing to save for the future is another critical mistake. Without an emergency fund, unexpected expenses like medical bills or car repairs can derail financial stability. Similarly, neglecting investments means missing out on compound growth that builds wealth over time.
4. Chasing Get‑Rich‑Quick Schemes
From pyramid schemes to speculative “hot tips,” chasing unrealistic returns is a recipe for disaster. These schemes prey on greed and impatience, often leaving participants with nothing but losses. Sustainable wealth comes from patience and discipline, not shortcuts.
5. Overspending on Status
Many people waste money trying to impress others—buying luxury cars, designer clothes, or extravagant experiences they cannot afford. This pursuit of status often leads to debt and financial insecurity, while providing only fleeting satisfaction.
6. Neglecting Insurance
Skipping health, auto, or home insurance to save money may seem smart in the short term, but it can be catastrophic when disaster strikes. Without protection, one accident or emergency can wipe out years of savings.
7. Failing to Budget
Living without a plan is like sailing without a map. Without a budget, it’s easy to overspend, miss bills, or fail to allocate money toward goals. Budgeting is not restrictive—it’s empowering, because it ensures money is used intentionally.
8. Ignoring Education and Skills
Spending money without investing in personal growth is another hidden mistake. Education, training, and skill development often yield lifelong returns. Neglecting these opportunities can limit earning potential and financial independence.
Conclusion
The worst things to do with money often stem from short‑term thinking, lack of discipline, or the desire for instant gratification. Impulse spending, high‑interest debt, chasing schemes, and neglecting savings all undermine financial health. By avoiding these traps and focusing on budgeting, investing wisely, and protecting against risks, money can serve as a foundation for security and freedom rather than a source of stress.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Posted on November 10, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd
***
***
Ricardian economics, rooted in the theories of 19th-century economist David Ricardo, emphasizes comparative advantage, free trade, and the neutrality of government debt—most notably through the concept of Ricardian equivalence. While these ideas have shaped macroeconomic thought, their relevance to medicine and healthcare policy is less direct. Still, exploring Ricardian principles offers a provocative lens through which to examine the fiscal sustainability and efficiency of modern healthcare systems.
At the heart of Ricardian equivalence is the idea that consumers are forward-looking and internalize government budget constraints. If a government finances healthcare through debt rather than taxes, rational agents will anticipate future tax burdens and adjust their behavior accordingly. In theory, this undermines the effectiveness of deficit-financed healthcare spending as a stimulus. Applied to medicine, this suggests that long-term fiscal responsibility is crucial: expanding healthcare access through borrowing may not yield the intended economic or health benefits if citizens expect future costs to rise.
This insight could inform debates on healthcare reform, especially in countries grappling with ballooning medical expenditures. Ricardian economics warns against short-term fixes that ignore long-term fiscal implications. For example, expanding public insurance programs without sustainable funding mechanisms could lead to intergenerational inequities and economic distortions. Policymakers might instead focus on reforms that align incentives, reduce waste, and promote cost-effective care—principles that resonate with Ricardo’s emphasis on efficiency and comparative advantage.
***
***
However, Ricardian economics offers limited guidance on the unique moral and practical dimensions of medicine. Healthcare is not a typical market good. Patients often lack the information or autonomy to make rational choices, especially in emergencies. Moreover, the sector is rife with externalities: one person’s vaccination benefits the broader community, and untreated illness can strain public resources. These complexities challenge the assumption of rational, forward-looking behavior central to Ricardian equivalence.
Additionally, Ricardo’s theory of comparative advantage—where nations benefit by specializing in goods they produce most efficiently—has implications for global health. It supports international collaboration in pharmaceutical production, medical research, and telemedicine. Yet, over-reliance on global supply chains can expose vulnerabilities, as seen during the COVID-19 pandemic when countries faced shortages of critical medical supplies.
In conclusion, Ricardian economics provides valuable fiscal insights that can inform healthcare policy, particularly regarding debt sustainability and efficient resource allocation. Its emphasis on long-term planning and comparative advantage can guide reforms that make medicine more resilient and cost-effective. However, the theory’s assumptions about rational behavior and market dynamics limit its applicability to the nuanced realities of healthcare. Medicine requires not just economic efficiency but ethical considerations, equity, and compassion—areas where Ricardian economics falls short. Thus, while it can contribute to the conversation, it cannot “save” medicine alone.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com
The NASDAQ, short for the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations, is one of the largest and most influential stock exchanges in the world. Founded in 1971, it was the first electronic stock market, revolutionizing how securities were traded by replacing traditional floor-based systems with computerized trading platforms. This innovation made transactions faster, more transparent, and accessible to a broader range of investors.
Unlike the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), which historically operated through physical trading floors, the NASDAQ is entirely virtual. It connects buyers and sellers through a sophisticated network of computers, allowing for rapid execution of trades. This digital-first approach has made it particularly attractive to technology companies and growth-oriented firms, earning it a reputation as the go-to exchange for innovative and high-tech businesses.
Companies Listed on the NASDAQ The NASDAQ is home to some of the most prominent and influential companies in the world. Giants like Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google (Alphabet), Meta (formerly Facebook), and Tesla all trade on the NASDAQ. These companies are part of the NASDAQ-100, an index that tracks the performance of the 100 largest non-financial companies listed on the exchange. The NASDAQ Composite Index, which includes over 3,000 stocks, provides a broader snapshot of the market’s overall health and direction.
How It Works The NASDAQ operates as a dealer’s market, meaning transactions are facilitated by market makers—firms that stand ready to buy or sell securities at publicly quoted prices. These market makers help maintain liquidity and ensure that trades can be executed efficiently. Prices are determined by supply and demand, and the electronic nature of the exchange allows for real-time updates and high-speed trading.
Significance in the Global Economy The NASDAQ plays a vital role in the global financial system. It provides companies with access to capital by allowing them to issue shares to the public, and it offers investors a platform to buy and sell those shares. The performance of the NASDAQ is often seen as a barometer for the health of the technology sector and, more broadly, the innovation economy. When the NASDAQ rises, it typically signals investor confidence in growth and future earnings; when it falls, it may reflect concerns about economic stability or company performance.
Global Reach and Influence Though based in the United States, the NASDAQ’s influence extends worldwide. Many international companies choose to list on the NASDAQ to gain exposure to U.S. investors and benefit from the prestige associated with being part of a leading global exchange. Its technological infrastructure and regulatory standards make it a model for other exchanges around the world.
In summary, the NASDAQ is more than just a stock exchange—it’s a symbol of innovation, speed, and global connectivity. Its pioneering approach to electronic trading has reshaped the financial landscape, and its roster of companies continues to drive technological progress and economic growth across the globe.
Posted on November 5, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd
***
***
The Sraffa–Hayek debate stands as a pivotal moment in the history of economic thought, highlighting deep philosophical and methodological differences between two influential schools: the Austrian School, represented by Friedrich Hayek, and the neo-Ricardian or Cambridge School, represented by Piero Sraffa. Taking place primarily in the 1930s, this intellectual exchange centered on the nature of capital, the role of equilibrium, and the validity of marginalist theory.
Friedrich Hayek, a staunch advocate of Austrian economics, had developed a theory of business cycles rooted in the mis allocation of capital due to artificially low interest rates. In his framework, interest rates serve as signals that coordinate inter temporal production decisions. When central banks distort these signals, they cause over investment in capital-intensive industries, leading to unsustainable booms followed by inevitable busts. Hayek’s theory was grounded in a time-structured view of capital, emphasizing the importance of temporal coordination in production.
Piero Sraffa, a Cambridge economist and close associate of John Maynard Keynes, challenged Hayek’s assumptions in a 1932 review of Hayek’s book Prices and Production. Sraffa’s critique was both technical and philosophical. He questioned the coherence of Hayek’s notion of a uniform natural rate of interest in a complex economy with heterogeneous capital goods. Sraffa argued that in such an economy, there could be multiple natural rates of interest, making it impossible to define a single rate that equilibrates savings and investment across all sectors.
Moreover, Sraffa criticized the Austrian reliance on equilibrium analysis in a world characterized by uncertainty and institutional complexity. He contended that Hayek’s model was overly abstract and detached from real-world dynamics. This critique foreshadowed Sraffa’s later work, Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities (1960), which laid the foundation for the neo-Ricardian critique of marginalist economics. In that work, Sraffa demonstrated that prices and distribution could be determined without recourse to subjective utility or marginal productivity, challenging the core of neoclassical theory.
The debate had far-reaching implications. For the Austrian School, it exposed vulnerabilities in their capital theory and prompted refinements in their approach to intertemporal coordination. For the broader economics profession, Sraffa’s critique contributed to a growing skepticism about the internal consistency of marginalist value theory, influencing the Cambridge capital controversies of the 1950s and 1960s.
While the Sraffa–Hayek debate did not produce a definitive victor, it underscored the importance of foundational assumptions in economic modeling. It also highlighted the tension between abstract theoretical elegance and empirical relevance—a tension that continues to shape economic discourse today. Ultimately, the debate enriched the intellectual landscape by forcing economists to confront the limitations of their models and to grapple with the complex realities of capital, time, and uncertainty.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com
Posted on November 4, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd
***
***
The term “K-shaped economy” emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic to describe a recovery marked by stark divergence—where some sectors and social groups rebound rapidly while others continue to decline. Unlike traditional V-shaped or U-shaped recoveries, which imply uniform economic improvement, the K-shaped model reflects a split trajectory: the upward arm of the “K” represents those who thrive, while the downward arm captures those left behind. This phenomenon has profound implications for economic policy, social equity, and long-term stability.
At the heart of the K-shaped economy is inequality. High-income individuals, white-collar professionals, and large corporations often benefit from technological advances, remote work flexibility, and access to capital. For example, tech giants like Apple, Microsoft, and Alphabet saw record profits during the pandemic, fueled by digital transformation and cloud services. Meanwhile, lower-income workers—especially in hospitality, retail, and service industries—faced job losses, reduced hours, and limited access to healthcare or financial safety nets. This divergence widened existing income and wealth gaps, exacerbating social tensions.
Sectoral performance also illustrates the K-shaped divide. Industries such as e-commerce, software, and logistics surged, while travel, entertainment, and small businesses struggled. The rise of automation and artificial intelligence further tilted the scales, favoring companies that could invest in innovation while displacing low-skilled labor. In education, students from affluent families adapted to online learning with ease, while those from disadvantaged backgrounds faced digital barriers and learning loss. These disparities underscore how economic recovery is not just uneven—it’s structurally imbalanced.
Geography plays a role too. Urban centers with diversified economies and strong tech sectors rebounded faster than rural or manufacturing-heavy regions. Housing markets in affluent areas soared, driven by low interest rates and remote work migration, while renters and first-time buyers faced affordability crises. Even within cities, neighborhoods with better infrastructure and public services recovered more quickly, deepening the urban-suburban divide.
Policymakers face a daunting challenge in addressing the K-shaped recovery. Traditional stimulus measures may not reach the most vulnerable populations without targeted interventions. Expanding access to education, healthcare, and digital infrastructure is essential to leveling the playing field. Progressive taxation, wage support, and small business aid can help bridge the gap, but require political will and fiscal discipline. Central banks must balance inflation control with inclusive growth, avoiding policies that disproportionately benefit asset holders.
The long-term consequences of a K-shaped economy are significant. Persistent inequality can erode trust in institutions, fuel populism, and hinder social mobility. Economic growth may slow if large segments of the population remain underemployed or financially insecure. To build a resilient and inclusive future, governments, businesses, and civil society must collaborate to ensure that recovery lifts all boats—not just the yachts.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
The Life Cycle Hypothesis (LCH) is a foundational theory in economics and personal finance that explains how individuals plan their consumption and savings behavior over the course of their lives. Developed in the 1950s by economists Franco Modigliani and Richard Brumberg, the LCH posits that people aim to smooth their consumption throughout their lifetime, regardless of fluctuations in income. This theory has had a profound impact on how economists, financial planners, and policymakers understand saving patterns, retirement planning, and fiscal policy.
At its core, the LCH assumes that individuals are forward-looking and rational. They anticipate changes in income—such as those caused by retirement, unemployment, or career progression—and adjust their saving and spending accordingly. During high-income periods, typically in mid-career, individuals save more to prepare for low-income phases, such as retirement. Conversely, in early adulthood and old age, when income is lower, individuals are expected to dissave, or spend from their accumulated savings.
One of the key insights of the LCH is that consumption is not directly tied to current income but rather to expected lifetime income. This means that temporary changes in income should not significantly affect consumption patterns, as individuals base their spending decisions on long-term expectations. For example, a young professional may take out a loan to buy a car, anticipating higher future earnings that will allow them to repay the debt without drastically altering their lifestyle.
The LCH also provides a framework for understanding the role of pensions, social security, and other retirement savings mechanisms. By recognizing that individuals need to save during their working years to maintain consumption levels in retirement, the theory supports the development of policies that encourage long-term savings and financial literacy. It also helps explain why some people may under-save or over-consume if they misjudge their future income or lack access to financial planning resources.
Despite its elegance, the Life Cycle Hypothesis has faced criticism and refinement. Behavioral economists argue that individuals are not always rational and may struggle with self-control, procrastination, or lack of financial knowledge. These limitations have led to the development of the Behavioral Life Cycle Hypothesis, which incorporates psychological factors such as mental accounting and framing effects. Moreover, empirical studies have shown that many people do not smooth consumption as predicted, often due to liquidity constraints, uncertainty, or cultural influences.
Nevertheless, the LCH remains a powerful tool for analyzing financial behavior across different stages of life. It has influenced retirement planning strategies, tax policy, and the design of financial products. By emphasizing the importance of long-term planning and the intertemporal nature of financial decisions, the Life Cycle Hypothesis continues to shape how individuals and institutions approach economic well-being.
In conclusion, the Life Cycle Hypothesis offers a compelling lens through which to view personal finance. While it may not capture every nuance of human behavior, its emphasis on lifetime income and consumption smoothing provides a valuable foundation for understanding and improving financial decision-making.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
The global healthcare sector faces mounting challenges: rising costs, inefficiencies, limited access, and bureaucratic entanglements. In response, some economists and policymakers have turned to Austrian Economics for answers. Rooted in the works of Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, Austrian Economics emphasizes individual choice, market-driven solutions, and skepticism toward centralized planning. But can this school of thought truly “save” healthcare?
At its core, Austrian Economics champions the idea that decentralized decision-making and free-market mechanisms lead to more efficient and responsive systems. In healthcare, this would mean reducing government control and allowing competition to drive innovation, lower costs, and improve quality. Proponents argue that when patients act as consumers and providers compete for their business, the system becomes more accountable and efficient. For example, direct primary care models—where patients pay physicians directly without insurance intermediaries—reflect Austrian principles and have shown promise in improving care and reducing administrative overhead.
Austrian theorists also critique the price distortions caused by third-party payers like insurance companies and government programs. According to them, when consumers are insulated from the true cost of care, demand becomes artificially inflated, leading to overutilization and waste. By restoring price signals—where patients see and respond to the actual cost of services—Austrian economists believe the market can better allocate resources and curb unnecessary spending.
However, critics argue that healthcare is not a typical market. Patients often lack the information, time, or capacity to make rational choices, especially in emergencies. Moreover, healthcare involves significant externalities and moral considerations that pure market logic may overlook. For instance, should access to life-saving treatment depend solely on one’s ability to pay? Austrian Economics offers little guidance on equity or universal access, which are central concerns in modern healthcare debates.
Austria itself provides an interesting case study. Despite the name, Austrian Economics is not the guiding philosophy behind Austria’s healthcare system. Instead, Austria operates a social insurance model with near-universal coverage, funded through mandatory contributions and managed by a mix of public and private actors. While recent reforms have aimed to streamline administration and reduce fragmentation he system remains largely collectivist—contrary to Austrian ideals.
In conclusion, Austrian Economics offers valuable insights into the inefficiencies of centralized healthcare systems and the potential benefits of market-based reforms. Its emphasis on individual choice, price transparency, and entrepreneurial innovation can inspire meaningful improvements. However, its limitations in addressing equity, access, and the unique nature of healthcare suggest that it cannot “save” the system on its own. A hybrid approach—blending market mechanisms with safeguards for universal access—may offer a more balanced path forward.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com
President Donald Trump signed a pardon on Wednesday for convicted crypto executive Changpeng Zhao, who founded the Binance crypto exchange, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. “President Trump exercised his constitutional authority by issuing a pardon for Mr. Zhao, who was prosecuted by the Biden Administration in their war on cryptocurrency,” Leavitt said. “In their desire to punish the cryptocurrency industry, the Biden Administration pursued Mr. Zhao despite no allegations of fraud or identifiable victims.”
Zhao was sentenced to four months in prison after reaching a deal with the Justice Dept. to plead guilty to charges of enabling money laundering at Binance, which he ran at the time. The U.S. also ordered Binance to pay more than $4 billion in fines and forfeiture, while Zhao agreed to pay $50 million in fines. A spokesperson for Binance did not immediately respond to a request for comment yesterday.
***
The History of Cryptocurrency: From Concept to Revolution
Cryptocurrency has transformed the global financial landscape, offering a decentralized alternative to traditional banking systems. Its history is rooted in decades of technological innovation, philosophical ideals, and economic experimentation.
🌐 Early Foundations
The concept of digital currency predates Bitcoin by several decades. In 1982, cryptographer David Chaum published a groundbreaking paper on secure digital transactions, laying the foundation for future developments in electronic money. Chaum later founded DigiCash in the 1990s, which introduced the idea of anonymous digital payments using cryptographic protocols. Although DigiCash eventually failed, it was a crucial stepping stone in the evolution of cryptocurrency.
The Birth of Bitcoin
The true revolution began in 2008 when an anonymous figure—or group—known as Satoshi Nakamoto released the Bitcoin whitepaper titled “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.” This document proposed a decentralized digital currency that used blockchain technology to record transactions transparently and securely without the need for a central authority.
On January 3, 2009, Nakamoto mined the first block of the Bitcoin blockchain, known as the Genesis Block. The first real-world Bitcoin transaction occurred in May 2010, when programmer Laszlo Hanyecz paid 10,000 BTC for two pizzas—an event now celebrated annually as Bitcoin Pizza Day.
Blockchain and Beyond
Bitcoin’s success inspired the development of other cryptocurrencies and blockchain platforms. Ethereum, launched in 2015 by Vitalik Buterin, introduced smart contracts—self-executing agreements coded directly into the blockchain. This innovation expanded the use of cryptocurrency beyond simple transactions to decentralized applications (dApps), finance (DeFi), and even digital art (NFTs).
Other notable cryptocurrencies include Litecoin, Ripple (XRP), and Cardano, each offering unique features such as faster transaction speeds, improved scalability, or enhanced privacy.
***
***
⚖️ Challenges and Controversies
Despite its promise, cryptocurrency has faced significant hurdles. Regulatory uncertainty, security breaches, and market volatility have raised concerns among governments and investors. High-profile hacks, such as the Mt. Gox exchange collapse in 2014, highlighted the risks associated with digital assets.
Governments around the world have responded differently—some embracing crypto innovation, others imposing strict regulations or outright bans. The rise of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) reflects an effort to merge the benefits of crypto with the stability of fiat systems.
🚀 The Future of Crypto
Today, cryptocurrency is more than a niche technology—it’s a global phenomenon. Major companies accept Bitcoin, institutional investors hold crypto assets, and blockchain is being integrated into industries from healthcare to supply chain management.
As the technology matures, the focus is shifting toward scalability, sustainability, and interoperability. Whether it becomes a mainstream financial tool or remains a disruptive alternative, cryptocurrency has undeniably reshaped how we think about money, trust, and digital ownership.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Posted on October 23, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd
***
***
NFTs, or Non-Fungible Tokens, are unique digital assets stored on a blockchain that represent ownership of a specific item or piece of content. Unlike cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum, which are fungible and interchangeable, NFTs are one-of-a-kind and cannot be exchanged on a one-to-one basis.
In recent years, Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) have emerged as a groundbreaking innovation in the digital world, revolutionizing how we perceive ownership, art, and value online. At their core, NFTs are cryptographic tokens that represent a unique digital item or asset. These tokens are stored on a blockchain—a decentralized digital ledger—which ensures that each NFT is verifiable, traceable, and immutable.
The term “non-fungible” means that each token is distinct and cannot be replaced with another token of equal value. This contrasts with fungible assets like dollars or cryptocurrencies, where each unit is identical and interchangeable. For example, one Bitcoin is always equal to another Bitcoin. However, each NFT has its own metadata, ownership history, and attributes, making it unique and often valuable.
NFTs can represent a wide range of digital content, including artwork, music, videos, virtual real estate, gaming items, and even tweets. Artists and creators have embraced NFTs as a new way to monetize their work, bypassing traditional gatekeepers like galleries and record labels. By minting their creations as NFTs, they can sell them directly to collectors and fans, often earning royalties from future resales thanks to smart contracts embedded in the blockchain.
One of the most popular blockchains for NFTs is Ethereum, which supports smart contracts and has a robust ecosystem for digital assets. Platforms like OpenSea, Rarible, and Foundation have become marketplaces where users can buy, sell, and trade NFTs. These platforms often require users to have a digital wallet and use cryptocurrency to complete transactions.
The rise of NFTs has sparked debates about their environmental impact, speculative nature, and long-term value. Critics argue that the energy consumption of blockchain networks can be significant, especially those using proof-of-work mechanisms. Others worry that the NFT market is driven by hype and may not sustain its current levels of interest and investment. Nonetheless, proponents believe that NFTs offer a new paradigm for digital ownership and creativity, empowering artists and reshaping industries from gaming to fashion.
In conclusion, NFTs represent a fusion of technology, art, and commerce, offering a novel way to own and trade digital assets. As the technology matures and adoption grows, NFTs may become a standard part of our digital lives, influencing how we interact with content, creators, and each other in the virtual world.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com
Population health and public health are two interrelated disciplines that strive to enhance the health outcomes of communities. While they share a common mission—to reduce health disparities and promote wellness—their approaches, target populations, and operational frameworks differ significantly.
***
***
Public health is traditionally defined as the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life, and promoting health through organized efforts and informed choices of society, organizations, public and private sectors, communities, and individuals. It focuses on the health of the general population and emphasizes broad interventions such as vaccination programs, sanitation, health education, and policy advocacy. Public health professionals often work in government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and academic institutions to implement community-wide initiatives that prevent disease and promote healthy behaviors.
***
***
In contrast, population health takes a more targeted approach. It refers to the health outcomes of a specific group of individuals, including the distribution of such outcomes within the group. This field is particularly concerned with the social determinants of health—factors like income, education, environment, and access to care—that influence health disparities. Population health strategies often involve data-driven interventions tailored to the needs of defined groups, such as rural communities, ethnic minorities, or patients with chronic conditions.
One key distinction lies in scope and granularity. Public health initiatives are typically designed for the entire population, aiming to create systemic change. For example, anti-smoking campaigns or water fluoridation programs benefit everyone regardless of individual risk. Population health, however, might focus on reducing diabetes rates among Hispanic adults in a specific urban area, using targeted outreach and culturally sensitive care models.
Another difference is in data utilization. Population health relies heavily on health informatics and analytics to identify trends, allocate resources, and evaluate outcomes. This evidence-based approach supports precision in addressing health inequities. Public health also uses data, but often at a broader level to guide policy and monitor general health indicators like life expectancy or disease prevalence.
Despite these differences, the two fields are complementary. Public health lays the foundation for healthy societies through preventive infrastructure, while population health builds on this by addressing nuanced needs within subgroups. Together, they form a holistic framework for improving health outcomes across diverse communities.
In today’s healthcare landscape, the integration of public and population health is increasingly vital. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the importance of both approaches: public health measures like mask mandates and vaccination campaigns were essential, while population health efforts ensured vulnerable groups received targeted support.
In conclusion, while public health and population health differ in focus and methodology, they are united by a shared goal: to foster healthier communities. Understanding their distinctions enables more effective collaboration and innovation in health policy, care delivery, and community engagement.
SPEAKING: ME-P Editor Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Posted on October 20, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd
***
***
Understanding the Differences Between Microeconomics and Macroeconomics
Economics is the study of how societies allocate scarce resources to meet the needs and wants of individuals. It is broadly divided into two main branches: microeconomics and macroeconomics. While both aim to understand economic behavior and decision-making, they differ significantly in scope, focus, and application. Understanding these differences is essential for grasping how economies function at both individual and national levels.
Microeconomics focuses on the behavior of individual economic agents—such as consumers, firms, and households—and how they make decisions regarding resource allocation. It examines how these entities interact in specific markets, how prices are determined, and how supply and demand influence economic outcomes.
Key concepts in microeconomics include:
Demand and Supply: Microeconomics analyzes how the quantity of goods demanded by consumers and the quantity supplied by producers interact to determine market prices.
Elasticity: This measures how responsive demand or supply is to changes in price or income.
Consumer Behavior: Microeconomics studies how individuals make choices based on preferences, budget constraints, and utility maximization.
Production and Costs: It explores how firms decide on the optimal level of output and the costs associated with production.
Market Structures: Microeconomics categorizes markets into perfect competition, monopolistic competition, oligopoly, and monopoly, each with distinct characteristics and implications for pricing and output.
Microeconomic analysis is crucial for understanding how specific sectors operate, how businesses strategize, and how consumers respond to changes in prices or income. For example, a company might use microeconomic principles to determine the price point that maximizes profit or to assess the impact of a new competitor entering the market.
Macroeconomics: The Study of the Economy as a Whole
Macroeconomics, on the other hand, deals with the performance, structure, and behavior of an entire economy. It looks at aggregate indicators and phenomena, such as national income, unemployment, inflation, and economic growth. Macroeconomics seeks to understand how the economy functions at a broad level and how government policies can influence economic outcomes.
Key areas of macroeconomics include:
Gross Domestic Product (GDP): This measures the total value of goods and services produced within a country and serves as a key indicator of economic health.
Unemployment: Macroeconomics examines the causes and consequences of unemployment and the effectiveness of policies aimed at reducing it.
Inflation and Deflation: It studies changes in the general price level and their impact on purchasing power and economic stability.
Fiscal and Monetary Policy: Macroeconomics evaluates how government spending, taxation, and central bank actions influence economic activity.
International Trade and Finance: It explores exchange rates, trade balances, and the impact of globalization on national economies.
Macroeconomic analysis is essential for policymakers, economists, and financial institutions. For instance, central banks use macroeconomic data to set interest rates, while governments design fiscal policies to stimulate growth or curb inflation.
Despite their differences, microeconomics and macroeconomics are deeply interconnected. Micro-level decisions collectively shape macroeconomic outcomes. For example, widespread consumer spending boosts aggregate demand, influencing GDP and employment levels. Conversely, macroeconomic conditions—such as inflation or interest rates—affect individual behavior. A rise in interest rates may discourage borrowing and reduce consumer spending, impacting businesses at the micro level.
Economists often use insights from both branches to develop comprehensive models and forecasts. For instance, understanding consumer behavior (micro) helps predict changes in aggregate consumption (macro), which in turn informs policy decisions.
Microeconomics and macroeconomics offer distinct yet complementary perspectives on economic activity. Microeconomics provides a granular view of individual decision-making and market dynamics, while macroeconomics offers a broader understanding of national and global economic trends. Together, they form the foundation of economic theory and practice, guiding businesses, governments, and individuals in making informed decisions.
A well-rounded grasp of both branches is essential for anyone seeking to understand how economies function and evolve in an increasingly complex world.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Posted on October 16, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Staff Reporters and A.I.
***
***
Stocks: Stock Market Indexes recovered yesterday from their losses, though the Dow remained in the red.
Commodities: Gold is rising above $4,200 to another new all-time high. Meanwhile, oil dropped to nearly a five-month low as trade tensions raised the specter of slowing economic growth.
Crypto: Bitcoin, ethereum, and altcoins of all shapes and sizes remain repressed after a massive selloff last weekend erased billions in crypto positions.
The S&P 500, short for the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, is one of the most widely followed stock market indices in the world. It tracks the performance of 500 of the largest publicly traded companies in the United States, offering a broad snapshot of the overall health and direction of the U.S. economy. Created in 1957 by the financial services company Standard & Poor’s, the index has become a benchmark for investors, analysts, and economists alike.
Composition and Criteria The S&P 500 includes companies from a wide range of industries, such as technology, healthcare, finance, energy, and consumer goods. To be included in the index, a company must meet specific criteria: it must be based in the U.S., have a market capitalization of at least $14.5 billion (as of 2025), be highly liquid, and have a public float of at least 50% of its shares. Additionally, the company must have positive earnings in the most recent quarter and over the sum of its most recent four quarters.
Some of the most recognizable names in the S&P 500 include Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Johnson & Johnson, JPMorgan Chase, and ExxonMobil. These companies are selected by a committee that reviews eligibility and ensures the index remains representative of the broader market.
How It Works The S&P 500 is a market-capitalization-weighted index, meaning that companies with larger market values have a greater influence on the index’s performance. For example, a significant movement in Apple’s stock price will affect the index more than a similar movement in a smaller company’s stock. This weighting system helps reflect the real impact of large corporations on the economy.
The index is updated in real time during trading hours and is used by investors to gauge market trends. It also serves as the basis for many investment products, such as mutual funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which aim to replicate its performance.
Why It Matters The S&P 500 is considered a leading indicator of U.S. equity markets and the economy as a whole. When the index rises, it often signals investor confidence and economic growth. Conversely, a decline may indicate uncertainty or economic slowdown. Because it includes companies from diverse sectors, the S&P 500 provides a more balanced view than narrower indices like the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which only tracks 30 companies.
Investment and Strategy Many investors use the S&P 500 as a benchmark to measure the performance of their portfolios. Passive investment strategies, such as index funds, aim to match the returns of the S&P 500 rather than beat it. This approach has gained popularity due to its low fees and consistent long-term performance.
In summary, the S&P 500 is more than just a number—it’s a powerful tool that reflects the pulse of the American economy. By tracking the performance of 500 major companies, it offers insights into market trends, investor sentiment, and economic health. Whether you’re a seasoned investor or just starting out, understanding the S&P 500 is essential to navigating the world of finance.
Posted on October 14, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Staff Reporters
***
***
STOCKHOLM (AP) — Three researchers who probed the process of business innovation won the Nobel memorial prize in economics Monday for explaining how new products and inventions promote economic growth and human welfare, even as they leave older companies in the dust.
Their work was credited with helping economists better understand how ideas and technology succeed by disrupting established ways — a process as old as steam locomotives replacing horse-drawn wagons and as contemporary as e-commerce shuttering shopping malls.
The award was shared by Dutch-born Joel Mokyr, 79, who is at Northwestern University; Philippe Aghion, 69, who works at the Collège de France and the London School of Economics; and Canadian-born Peter Howitt, 79, who is at Brown University.
The October 2025 Stock Market Crash: A Perfect Storm of Geopolitics and Investor Panic
The weekend of October 10–12, 2025, marked one of the most dramatic downturns in global financial markets in recent memory. What began as a series of unsettling headlines quickly snowballed into a full-blown market crash, sending shockwaves through economies and portfolios worldwide. This event was not the result of a single catalyst but rather a convergence of geopolitical tensions, speculative excess, and investor psychology.
At the heart of the crisis was a sudden escalation in U.S.–China trade relations. President Donald Trump abruptly canceled a scheduled diplomatic meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping and announced a sweeping 100% tariff on all Chinese imports. This move reignited fears of a prolonged trade war, reminiscent of the economic standoff that rattled markets in the late 2010s. Investors, already jittery from months of uncertainty, interpreted the announcement as a signal of deteriorating global cooperation and retaliatory economic measures to come.
The impact was immediate and severe. Major U.S. indices plummeted: the S&P 500 dropped 2.7%, the Nasdaq fell 3.6%, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 1.9%. These declines marked the worst single-day performance since April and triggered automatic trading halts in several sectors. The selloff was not confined to the United States; European and Asian markets mirrored the panic, with steep losses across the board.
Compounding the crisis was a massive liquidation in the cryptocurrency market. As traditional assets tumbled, investors rushed to offload digital holdings, leading to the largest crypto wipeout in history. Trillions of dollars in value evaporated within hours, further destabilizing investor confidence and draining liquidity from the broader financial system.
Another underlying factor was growing concern over the valuation of artificial intelligence (AI) stocks. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) had recently issued a warning that the AI sector was exhibiting signs of a speculative bubble, drawing parallels to the dot-com era. With many AI companies trading at astronomical price-to-earnings ratios, the crash exposed the fragility of investor sentiment and the dangers of overexuberance in emerging technologies.
Perhaps most telling was the psychological shift among investors. The weekend saw widespread capitulation, with many choosing to exit the market entirely rather than weather further volatility. This behavior—marked by fear-driven decision-making and herd mentality—is often a hallmark of deeper financial crises. It underscores the importance of trust and stability in maintaining market equilibrium.
In conclusion, the October 2025 stock market crash was a multifaceted event driven by geopolitical shocks, speculative risk, and emotional contagion. It serves as a stark reminder of how interconnected and fragile global markets have become. As policymakers and investors assess the damage, the focus must shift toward restoring confidence, recalibrating risk, and ensuring that future growth is built on sustainable foundations rather than speculative fervor.
COMMENTS APPRECIATED
SPEAKING: ME-P Editor Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), often referred to simply as “the Dow,” is one of the oldest and most well-known stock market indices in the world. It was created in 1896 by Charles Dow, the co-founder of The Wall Street Journal, and is designed to represent the performance of the broader U.S. stock market, specifically focusing on 30 large, publicly traded companies. These companies are considered leaders in their respective industries and serve as a barometer for the overall health of the U.S. economy.
The Composition of the DJIA
The DJIA includes 30 companies, which are selected by the editors of The Wall Street Journal based on various factors such as market influence, reputation, and the stability of the company. These companies represent a wide array of sectors, including technology, finance, healthcare, consumer goods, and energy. Notably, the companies chosen for the DJIA are not necessarily the largest companies in the U.S. by market capitalization, but rather those that are most indicative of the broader economy. Some of the prominent companies listed in the DJIA include names like Apple, Microsoft, Coca-Cola, and Johnson & Johnson.
However, the list of 30 companies is not static. Over time, companies may be added or removed to reflect changes in the economic landscape. For example, if a company experiences significant decline or no longer represents a leading sector, it might be replaced with another company that better reflects modern economic trends. This periodic reshuffling ensures that the DJIA continues to be a relevant measure of economic activity.
How the DJIA is Calculated
The DJIA is a price-weighted index, which means that the value of the index is determined by the share price of the component companies, rather than their market capitalization. To calculate the DJIA, the sum of the stock prices of all 30 companies is divided by a special divisor. This divisor adjusts for stock splits, dividends, and other corporate actions to maintain the integrity of the index over time. The price-weighted method means that higher-priced stocks have a greater impact on the movement of the index, regardless of the overall size or economic weight of the company.
For instance, if a company with a higher stock price like Apple experiences a significant change in value, it will influence the DJIA more than a company with a lower stock price, even if the latter has a larger market capitalization. This makes the DJIA somewhat different from other indices, like the S&P 500, which is weighted by market cap and gives more weight to larger companies in terms of their economic impact.
Significance of the DJIA
The DJIA is widely regarded as a barometer of the U.S. stock market’s performance. Investors and analysts closely monitor the movements of the Dow to gauge the overall health of the economy. When the DJIA rises, it generally suggests that investors are optimistic about the economic outlook and that large companies are performing well. Conversely, when the DJIA falls, it often signals economic uncertainty or a downturn in market conditions.
Despite being a narrow index, with only 30 companies, the DJIA holds substantial sway in financial markets. It is widely covered in the media and is often cited in discussions about the state of the economy. In fact, the performance of the DJIA is considered a key indicator of investor sentiment and economic confidence.
However, the DJIA has its limitations. Since it only includes 30 companies, it does not necessarily represent the broader market or capture the performance of smaller companies. Other indices, like the S&P 500, which includes 500 companies, offer a more comprehensive view of the market’s performance.
Conclusion
The Dow Jones Industrial Average is a key metric for understanding the state of the U.S. economy and the stock market. Although it has evolved over the years, it continues to provide valuable insights into the performance of large, influential companies. While it is not a perfect reflection of the market as a whole, the DJIA remains one of the most important and widely recognized indices in global finance. Through its historical significance and its role in shaping market sentiment, the Dow has cemented its place as a cornerstone of financial analysis.
Artificial Intelligence and Investing: A Transformative Partnership
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing the world of investing, reshaping how decisions are made, risks are assessed, and portfolios are managed. As financial markets grow increasingly complex and data-driven, AI offers powerful tools to navigate this landscape with greater precision, speed, and insight.
At its core, AI refers to systems that can perform tasks typically requiring human intelligence—such as learning, reasoning, and problem-solving. In investing, this translates into algorithms that can analyze vast amounts of financial data, detect patterns, and make predictions with remarkable accuracy. Machine learning, a subset of AI, enables these systems to improve over time by learning from new data, making them especially valuable in dynamic markets.
One of the most significant applications of AI in investing is algorithmic trading. These systems can execute trades at lightning speed, responding to market fluctuations in milliseconds. By analyzing historical data and real-time market conditions, AI-driven trading platforms can identify optimal entry and exit points, often outperforming human traders. High-frequency trading firms have long relied on such technologies to gain competitive advantages.
AI also enhances portfolio management through robo-advisors—digital platforms that use algorithms to provide personalized investment advice. These tools assess an investor’s goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon, then construct and manage a diversified portfolio accordingly. Robo-advisors democratize access to financial planning, offering low-cost, automated solutions to individuals who might not afford traditional advisory services.
Risk assessment is another area where AI shines. By processing alternative data sources—such as social media sentiment, news articles, and satellite imagery—AI can uncover hidden risks and opportunities. For instance, a sudden spike in negative sentiment around a company on Twitter might signal reputational issues, prompting investors to reevaluate their positions. AI models can also forecast macroeconomic trends, helping investors anticipate shifts in interest rates, inflation, or geopolitical events.
Moreover, AI is transforming fundamental analysis. Natural language processing (NLP) allows machines to read and interpret earnings reports, SEC filings, and analyst commentary. This enables investors to extract insights from unstructured data that would be time-consuming to analyze manually. AI can even detect subtle linguistic cues that may indicate a company’s future performance or management’s confidence.
Despite its advantages, AI in investing is not without challenges. Models can be opaque, making it difficult to understand how decisions are made—a phenomenon known as the “black box” problem. There’s also the risk of overfitting, where algorithms perform well on historical data but fail in real-world scenarios. Ethical concerns, such as bias in data and the potential for market manipulation, must also be addressed.
In conclusion, AI is reshaping the investing landscape, offering tools that enhance efficiency, accuracy, and accessibility. While it’s not a panacea, its integration into financial markets marks a profound shift in how capital is allocated and wealth is managed. As technology continues to evolve, investors who embrace AI will be better positioned to thrive in an increasingly data-driven world.
Economy: Headline PCE rose from 2.6% on an annual basis in July to 2.7% in August, while core PCE stayed flat at 2.9%—all in line with analyst expectations.
Stocks: Solid inflation numbers helped equities arrest their recent selloff and offset the latest batch of tariffs. However, all three major indexes still ended the week lower than where they started.
Commodities: Oil climbed as Ukrainian drones continue to strike Russian energy infrastructure. Meanwhile, gold hit another all-time high, and rose above $3,800 for the first time ever at one point today.
Posted on September 26, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By A.I. and Staff Reporters
***
***
Bonds: The 10-year Treasury yield popped on solid economic data yesterday, including weekly jobless claims falling to their lowest since mid-July and Q2 GDP rising unexpectedly.
Stocks: But good news for the labor market and economy is bad news for anyone hoping the Federal Reserve cuts interest rates next month, and the major indexes sank for a third day in a row yesterday. All eyes now turn to today’s key PCE reading.
Crypto: Digital assets continued to tumble yesterday with ether falling below $4,000 for the first time in months. There may be more pain ahead: $22 billion in crypto options expire today.
The study of behavioral economics has revealed much about how different biases can affect our finances—often for the worse.
Take loss aversion: Because we feel a financial setback more acutely than a commensurate gain, we often cling to failed investments to avoid realizing the loss. Another potential hazard is present bias, or the tendency to prefer instant gratification over long-term reward, even if the latter gain is greater.
When it comes to money, sometimes it’s difficult to make rational decisions. Here, are three behavioral financial biases that could be impeding financial goals.
ANCHORING BIAS
Anchoring Bias happens when we place too much emphasis on the first piece of information we receive regarding a given subject. Anchoring is the mental trick your brain plays when it latches onto the first piece of information it gets, no matter how irrelevant. You might know this as a ‘first impression’ when someone relies on their own first idea of a person or situation.
Example: When shopping for a wedding ring a salesman might tell us to spend three months’ salary. After hearing this, we may feel like we are doing something wrong if we stray from this financial advice, even though the guideline provided may cause us to spend more than we can afford.
Example: Imagine you’re buying a car, and the salesperson starts with a high price. That number sticks in your mind and influences all your subsequent negotiations. Anchoring can skew our decisions and perceptions, making us think the first offer is more important than it is. Or, subsequent offers lower than they really are.
Example: Imagine an investor named Jane who purchased 100 shares of XYZ Corporation at $100 per share several years ago. Over time, the stock price declined to $60 per share. Jane is anchored to her initial price of $100 and is reluctant to sell at a loss because she keeps hoping the stock will return to her original purchase price. She continues to hold onto the stock, even as it declines, due to her anchoring bias. Eventually, the stock price drops to $40 per share, resulting in significant losses for Jane.
In this example, Jane’s nchoring bias to the original purchase price of $100 prevents her from rationalizing to sell the stock and cut her losses, even though market conditions have changed. So, the next time you’re haggling for your self, a potential customer or client, or making another big financial decision, be aware of that initial anchor dragging you down.
HERD MENTALITY BIAS
Herd Mentality Bias makes it very hard for humans to not take action when everyone around us does.
Example: We may hear stories of people making significant monetary profits buying, fixing up, and flipping homes and have the desire to get in on the action, even though we have no experience in real estate.
Example: During the dotcom bubble of the late 1990’s many investors exhibited a herd mentality. As technology stocks soared to astronomical valuations, investors rushed to buy these stocks driven by the fear of missing out on the gains others were enjoying. Even though some of these stocks had questionable fundamentals, the herd mentality led investors to follow the crowd.
In this example, the herd mentality contributed to the overvaluation of technology stocks. Eventually, it led to the dot-com bubble’s burst, causing significant losses for those who had unthinkingly followed the crowd without conducting proper research or analysis.
OVERCONFIDENT INVESTING BIAS
Overconfident Investing Bias happens when we believe we can out-smart other investors via market timing or through quick, frequent trading. This causes the results of a study to be unreliable and hard to reproduce in other research settings.
Example: Data convincingly shows that people and financial planners/advisors and wealth managers who trade most often under-perform the market by a significant margin over time. Active traders lose money.
Example: Overconfidence Investing Bias moreover leads to: (1) excessive trading (which in turn results in lower returns due to costs incurred), (2) underestimation of risk (portfolios of decreasing risk were found for single men, married men, married women, and single women), (3) illusion of knowledge (you can get a lot more data nowadays on the internet) and (4) illusion of control (on-line trading).
ASSESSMENT
Finally, questions remain after consuming this cognitive bias review.
Question: Can behavioral cognitive biases be eliminated by financial advisors in prospecting and client sales endeavors?
A: Indeed they can significantly reduce their impact by appreciating and understanding the above and following a disciplined and rational decision-making sales process.
Question: What is the role of financial advisors in helping clients and prospects address behavioral biases?
A: Financial advisors can provide an objective perspective and help investors recognize and address their biases. They can assist in creating well-structured investment and financial plans, setting realistic goals, and offering guidance to ensure investment decisions align with long-term objectives.
Question:How important is self-discipline in overcoming behavioral biases?
A; Self-discipline is crucial in overcoming behavioral biases. It helps investors and advisors adhere to their investment plans, avoid impulsive decisions, and stay focused on long-term goals reducing the influence of emotional and cognitive biases.
CONCLUSION
Remember, it is far more useful to listen to client beliefs, fears and goals, and to suggest options and offer encouragement to help them discover their own path toward financial well-being. Then, incentivize them with knowledge of the above psychological biases to your mutual success!
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com
REFERENCES:
Marcinko, DE; Dictionary of Health Insurance and Managed Care. Springer Publishing Company, New York, 2007.
Marcinko, DE: Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™. Productivity Press, NY, 2016.
Marcinko, DE: Risk Management, Liability and Insurance Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™. Productivity Press, NY, 2017.
Nofsinger, JR: The Psychology of Investing. Rutledge Publishing, 2022
Winters, Scott: The 10X Financial Advisor: Your Blueprint for Massive and Sustainable Growth. Absolute Author Publishing House, 2020.
Despite their high salaries, not all doctors are wealthy, and some live paycheck to paycheck. Here are 5 reasons why many doctors today are broke, according to https://medschoolinsiders.com
1 | Believing They Are Universally Smart
The first reason so many doctors are broke is that many doctors believe they are universally smart. While most doctors have deep specialized knowledge, there’s a big difference between being smart in your profession and being smart with money. A physician’s schooling is quite thorough when it comes to the human body, but med school doesn’t include a prerequisite class on how to handle finances.
Graduating medical school is a major feat and certainly demonstrates superior work ethic and cognitive abilities. But many new doctors believe these accomplishments transcend all aspects of life. If you’re smart enough to earn an MD, you’re certainly smart enough to handle your finances, but only once you properly and intentionally educate yourself.
The truth is doctors, especially traditional graduates, haven’t had an opportunity to manage large sums of money until they become fully trained attending physicians and start pulling in low to mid six figures in income. Prior to that, there was very little of it to manage.
Far too many aspiring doctors, and students in general, don’t take the time to learn financial basics, in part because it’s uncomfortable and seems like something they can figure out “later”, whenever that may be. Their poor spending habits and lack of investment knowledge carry over into their careers, causing many to make irresponsible decisions.
The second factor is overspending too soon, and this comes up at two points in training.
First, it’s natural to want to start spending more as soon as you get into residency and start making a little more money. After all, you’ve been a broke student for 8 or more years, and now you’re finally making a reasonable and reliable wage. But that’s where young doctors get into trouble. Residency pays, but not nearly as much as you will be making once you become an attending physician. The average resident makes about $60K a year, and if you begin spending all of that money right away, thinking you’ll handle your loans once you become an attending, you delay paying off your medical school debt, which means the compounding effect through your student loan interest rate works against you.
Now that $250,000 in student loans has ballooned to over $350,000 by the time you finish residency. The compounding effect, which can be one of your greatest allies in your financial life, becomes an equally powerful enemy when working against you through debt. But of course, pinching pennies is easier said than done, especially when you’re in residency and are surrounded by peers in different professions. They’ve been earning good money much longer than you have, and they can afford more luxurious lifestyles.
They may not be worried about indulging in fine dining or how much a hotel costs when traveling. Students in college and medical school are often confident they will resist the temptations, but the desire to keep up with your friends and family can be difficult to ignore, which causes many to overspend before they technically have the money to do so.
The same is true of attending physicians. As soon as those six-figure salaries come rolling in, many physicians go overboard with spending, trying to make up for lost time and to treat yourself.
Now, we are not suggesting you shouldn’t reward yourself for completing residency, but that reward shouldn’t be a Lamborghini. It’s best to continue living like a resident in your first few years after becoming an attending to pay off loans, put a down payment on a home, and get your financial foundation built before loosening the purse strings.
3 | Decreasing Salaries
Third, doctors continue to make less money than they did before. And this includes nearly all 44 medical specialties. For example, while physician compensation technically rose from $343k to $391k between 2017 and 2022, this rise does not keep up with inflation. The real average compensation in 2022 was less than $325k—a $20k decrease in purchasing power in only six years.
For doctors who are already spending to the limits of their salaries with huge mortgages, car payments, business costs, and other luxuries, a decreased salary can have a huge impact. You might be able to cut back by going on fewer vacations or eating out less frequently, but many accrued costs are locked in, such as a mortgage payment, car loan, or leased rental space for your practice.
4 | Increasing Costs of Private Practice
In the past, running a private practice was much simpler, but recent stricter guidelines and regulations have made it difficult for solo practices to keep up. While regulations like the Health Insurance Privacy and Portability Act, or HIPAA, and mandatory Electronic Medical Records, or EMRs, are necessary to protect patients, they make costs higher for physicians who run their own private practice. These physicians need to spend their own money to set up and maintain EMRs as well as invest in security to ensure patient data is protected.
With the steep rise of inflation we’ve seen over the past couple of years, everything is more expensive, which means costs, such as business space, equipment, and even office supplies, have gone up for private practice physicians while salaries have not. 2013 to 2020 saw an annual inflation rate of anywhere from 0.7% to 2.3%. This skyrocketed to an annual inflation rate of 7.0% in 2021 and another 6.5% in 2022. In fact, the cost of running a private practice has increased by almost 40% between 2001 and 2021.
These increased costs are exacerbated by another problem plaguing private practices; decreased reimbursement. While costs increased by almost 40%, Medicare reimbursement only increased by 11%. When doctors see patients who are insured, the insurance companies pay the physicians for their time. For Medicare, the new proposed rules for 2023 would cut reimbursement by around 5%. When adjusting for inflation, Medicare reimbursement decreased by 20% in the last 20 years.
These costs add up, making it extremely difficult for physicians to thrive financially while running a private practice.
5 | Tuition Debt
Lastly, we can’t talk about a doctor’s finances without mentioning the exorbitant debt so many graduating physicians are left with. It won’t shock you to hear that med school is expensive. Extremely expensive. The average cost of tuition for a single year is nearly $60k, with significant variance from school to school, and that’s before accounting for living expenses.
In-state applicants pay less than out-of-state applicants, and students at private schools typically pay more than students at public medical schools. The astronomical costs mean the vast majority of students can’t pay for medical school out of their own pockets. And unless your family is part of the 1%, even with your parents footing the bill, it’s difficult to cover tuition, let alone rent, groceries, transportation, tech, social activities, exam fees, and application costs.
The average total student debt after college and med school is over $250k. But keep in mind that’s the average, which includes 27% of students who graduate with no debt at all. This means the vast majority of students leave medical school owing much more than $250k.
For some perspective, in 1978, the average debt for graduating MDs was $13,500, which, when adjusted for inflation, is a little over $60,000. There are multiple ways to eventually repay these loans, but time and discipline are essential to ensure this money is paid off as quickly as possible.
According to financial advisor Dr. David Edward Marcinko MEd MBA CMP™; consider the following:
Place a portion of your salary (15-20% or more) into a savings account, and another portion (10-20% or more) into wise investments [stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and/or ETFs].
Pay off your bills each month, and then use leftover spending money to purchase fun things like vacations and fancy dinners, within your means. Shop sales, buy used clothes, and use credit card points for travel.
Hire an excellent tax professional and meet with an investment advisor once or twice a year about your investment status and strategy. http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Capitation is a type of healthcare payment system in which a physician or hospital is paid a fixed amount of money per patient for a prescribed period by an insurer or physician association. The cost is based on the expected healthcare utilization costs for a group of patients for that year.
With capitation, the physician—otherwise known as the primary care physician— is paid a set amount for each enrolled patient whether a patient seeks care or not. The PCP is usually contracted with an HMO whose role it is to recruit patients.
According to Richard Eskow, CEO of Health Knowledge Systems of Los Angeles, capitated medical reimbursement has been used in one form or another, in every attempt at healthcare reform since the Norman Conquest. Some even say an earlier variant existed in ancient China [personal communication].
Initially, when Henry I assumed the throne of the newly combined kingdoms of England and Normandy, he initiated a sweeping set of healthcare reforms. Historical documents, though muddled, indicate that soon thereafter at least one “physician,” John of Essex, received a flat payment honorarium of one penny per day for his efforts. Historian Edward J. Kealey opined that sum was roughly equal to that paid to a foot-soldier or a blind person. Clearer historical evidence suggests that American doctors in the mid-19th century were receiving capitation-like payments. No less an authoritative figure than Mark Twain, in fact, is on record as saying that during his boyhood in Hannibal, MO his parents paid the local doctor $25/year for taking care of the entire family regardless of their state of health.
Later, Sidney Garfield MD [1905-1984] is noted as one of the great under-appreciated geniuses of 20th century American medicine stood in the shadow cast by his more celebrated partner, Henry J. Kaiser. Garfield was not the first physician to embrace the notion of prepayment capitation, nor was he the first to understand that physicians working together in multi-specialty groups could, through collaboration and continuity of care, outperform their solo practice colleagues in almost every measure of quality and efficiency. The Mayo brothers, of course, had prior claim to that distinction. What Garfield did, was marry prepayment to group practice, providing aligned financial incentives across every physician and specialty in his medical group, as well as a culture of group accountability for the care of every member of the affiliated health plan. He called it “the new economics of medicine,” and at its heart was a fundamentally new paradigm of care that emphasized – prevention before treatment – and health before sickness. Under his model: the fewer the sick – the greater the remuneration. And: the less serious the illness, the better off the patient and the doctors.
Such ideas were heresy to the reigning fee-for-service, solo practice, ideologues of the mainstream medical establishment of the 1940s and ‘50s, of course. Throughout the period, Garfield and his group physicians were routinely castigated by leaders of the AMA and county medical associations as socialistic and unethical. The local medical associations in Garfield’s expanding service areas – the San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, and Portland, Oregon – blocked group practice physicians from association membership, effectively shutting them out of local hospitals, denying them patient referrals or specialty society accreditation. Twice in the 1940s, formal medical association charges were brought against Garfield personally, at one time temporarily succeeding in suspending his license to practice medicine.
Of course, capitation payments made a comeback in the first cost-cutting managed care era of the 1980-90s because fee-for-service medicine created perverse incentives for physicians by paying more for treating illnesses and injuries than it does for preventing them — or even for diagnosing them early and reducing the need for intensive treatment later. Nevertheless, the modern managed care industry’s experience with capitation wasn’t initially a good one. The 1980-90s saw a number of HMOs attempt to put independent physicians, especially primary care doctors, into a capitation reimbursement model. The result was often negative for patients, who found that their doctors were far less willing to see them — and saw them for briefer visits — when they were receiving no additional income for their effort. Attempts were also made to aggregate various types of health providers — including hospitals and physicians in multiple specialties — into “capitation groups” that were collectively responsible for delivering care to a defined patient group. These included healthcare facilities and medical providers of all types: physicians, osteopaths, podiatrists, dentists, optometrists, pharmacies, physical therapists, hospitals and skilled nursing homes, etc.
However, the healthcare industry isn’t collective by nature, and these efforts tended to be too complicated to succeed. One lesson that these experiments taught is that provider behavior is difficult to change unless the relationship between that behavior and its consequences is fairly direct and easy to understand.
Today, the concept of prepayment and medical capitation is to uncouple compensation from the actual number of patients seen, or treatments and interventions performed. This is akin to a fixed price restaurant menu, as opposed to an àla carte eatery.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Posted on September 12, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By A.I. and Staff Reporters
***
***
BIAS
Bias is a prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.
MYOPIA
Myopia (nearsightedness) is a common condition that’s usually diagnosed before age 20. It affects your distance vision — you can see objects that are near, but you have trouble viewing objects that are farther away like grocery store aisle markers or road signs. Myopia treatments include glasses, contact lenses or surgery.
MYOPIA BIAS
Myopia Bias makes it hard for us to imagine what our lives might be like in the future.
FinancialExample: When we are young, healthy and in our prime economic earning years it may be hard for us to picture what life will be like when our health depletes and we no longer have the earnings necessary to support our standard of living.
Irony: This short-sightedness makes it hard to save adequately when we are young … when saving does the most good.
Posted on September 10, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
DEFINITIONS
By Staff Reporters
***
***
Rate Review & the 80/20 Rule
The health care law provides 2 ways to hold insurance companies accountable and help keep your costs down: Rate Review and the 80/20 rule.
Rate Review
Rate Review helps protect you from unreasonable rate increases. Insurance companies must now publicly explain any rate increase of 15% or more before raising your premium. This does not apply to grandfathered plans.
The 80/20 Rule generally requires insurance companies to spend at least 80% of the money they take in from premiums on health care costs and quality improvement activities. The other 20% can go to administrative, overhead, and marketing costs.
The 80/20 rule is sometimes known as Medical Loss Ratio, or MLR. If an insurance company uses 80 cents out of every premium dollar to pay for your medical claims and activities that improve the quality of care, the company has a Medical Loss Ratio of 80%.
Insurance companies selling to large groups (usually more than 50 employees) must spend at least 85% of premiums on care and quality improvement.
If your insurance company doesn’t meet these requirements, you’ll get a rebate on part of the premium that you paid.
Will I get a rebate check from my insurance company?
If your insurance company doesn’t meet its 80/20 targets for the year, you’ll get back some of the premium that you paid.
You may see the rebate in a number of ways:
A rebate check in the mail
A lump-sum deposit into the same account that was used to pay the premium, if you paid by credit card or debit card
A direct reduction in your future premium
Your employer may also use one of the above rebate methods, or apply the rebate in a way that benefits employees
If you or your employer will get a rebate, your insurance company must notify you by August 1.
If you have an individual insurance policy, you’ll get the rebate directly from your insurance company.
For small group and large group plans, the rebate is usually paid to the employer. It may use one of the above rebate methods, or apply the rebate in a way that benefits employees.
FYI: The 80/20 rebate rules don’t apply when an insurance company has fewer than 1000 enrollees in a particular state or market.
For Rate Review: These requirements don’t apply to grandfathered plans. Check your plan’s materials or ask your employer or your benefits administrator to find out if your health plan is grandfathered.
For the 80/20 Rule: These rights apply to all individual, small group, and large group health plans, whether your plan is grandfathered or not.
According to Medical Economics, there were 10 clinic and physician practices filing bankruptcy in 2024, making it the highest level of the last six years, according to a new analysis of cases with liabilities of at least $10 million.
Meanwhile, the Steward Health Care System bankruptcy, which was based in Massachusetts but making headlines across the nation, has become “the largest hospital sector bankruptcy by far in the last 30 years,” according to a new analysis by Gibbins Advisors, based in Nashville, Tennessee.
Health care bankruptcy filings totaled 57 last year, down from 79 in 2023, said “Healthcare Restructuring: Trends and Outlook.” The report analyzed Chapter 11 health care bankruptcy cases with liabilities of at least $10 million, since 2019.
Last year’s total was down 28% from 2023’s peak, but greater than the 2019 to 2022 average of 42 filings a year, the report said.
Bankruptcy, often considered a last financial resort, is a legal process that can help alleviate outstanding debts for individuals and businesses. Reasons to file for bankruptcy can include divorce, job loss, exorbitant medical bills or credit card debt.
There are several types of bankruptcy — six, as a matter of fact. The two most common types of bankruptcy for individuals are Chapter 7 and Chapter 13.
But there are four other types as well: Chapter 9, Chapter 11, Chapter 12 and Chapter 15. And, the type of bankruptcy filed depends on the situation.
Regardless of which type, the process is typically the same: You’ll usually retain an attorney and make your case before a judge, who will then erase some debts or set up a repayment plan.
Also note that an eligibility requirement — for all bankruptcy chapters — is that you must undergo credit counseling within the 180 days before filing.
Posted on September 7, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Health Capital Consultants, LLC
***
***
A recent study of hospital physician acquisition and employment found that such acquisitions decrease competition and raise prices. A National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) working paper, released in July 2025, “empirically analyze[d] the effects of mergers between complementary firms on competition and pricing,” and found hospital prices increased by an average of 3.3%, while physician prices increased by an average of 15.1%.
This Health Capital Topics article reviews the study’s findings and implications for the healthcare industry. (Read more…)
Posted on September 4, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By A.I. and Staff Reporters
***
***
Stocks: Markets slowed along yesterday with the S&P 500 and NASDAQ buoyed after a pivotal antitrust ruling for Alphabet pushed big tech stocks higher across the board.
Bonds: The 30-year Treasury pushed 5% yesterday as traders fret about the Fed’s independence and the odds of interest rate cuts.
Commodities: Oil sank on reports that OPEC+ is contemplating increasing its crude output next month, while gold reached yet another new record high as uncertainty swirling around the future of tariffs continued to rise. JPMorgan analysts now think the precious metal could climb as high as $4,250 by the end of next year.
Posted on August 27, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By A.I.
***
***
Bonds: Long-term Treasury yields rose and short-term yields fell after President Trump fired Fed Governor Lisa Cook opening the gap between 5-year and 30-year yields to its widest point in three years.
Stocks: Equities barely budged on the latest FOMC drama with investors’ attention fully focused on Nvidia earnings tomorrow afternoon.
Trade Craft: President Trump vowed retaliation against countries that apply a digital services tax against US tech companies. He may also slap a 200% tariff on China if that country restricts trade on rare earth magnets.
The so-called money factor (abbreviated as MF on invoices) is a number in a decimal form that dealers use to calculate the APR of a car lease. It’s a major part of your monthly payment and dealers are known to jack up the money factor to pad their profits.
Most doctors don’t ask to see it because they’re not aware of it or don’t know how to calculate it. Ask to see the money factor, then multiply it by 2,400.
For example, if the money factor is .00150, you multiply it by 2,400 to get 3.6%. If that’s higher than the prevailing rate, you have room to talk them down.
How to reduce it
So how do you get a good interest rate when you lease a vehicle? The same way you do when borrowing for any other reason, whether it’s buying a home or applying for a personal loan: by having good credit. This may reduce your interest rate because you’ll represent a lower risk to a lender.
A high residual value on the car could also help you get a better interest rate. A higher residual value means you’d have lower monthly payments because there would be less depreciation on the vehicle. Since interest is applied to your monthly payment, a lower monthly payment would equate to reduced interest charges.
The money factor is one of the many numbers you may want to learn about when leasing a car. It’s one of the transactional costs that come with leasing, and allows dealers and finance companies to make a profit on every lease they execute. As a consumer, it’s a smart idea to learn the financial implications of this number and how it’ll affect your overall costs over the course of a multi-year lease.
***
***
If the interest rate is too high, you may need to shop around for a better rate, negotiate with the dealer or lender to lower the money factor, or consider leasing another vehicle that’s more in line with your budget. Either way, make sure you explore all your financial options before taking a car off the lot.
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Posted on August 12, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By A.I.
***
***
Stocks: Markets struggled to pick a direction as investors took a wait-and-see approach ahead of today’s CPI reading—even as Wall Street worries about the data’s reliability.
Trade: President Trump asked China, the world’s largest soybean buyer, to quadruple its soybean purchases from the US. He also extended the trade war truce with China by 90 days
Commodities: Gold had its worst day in three months as traders waited for the White House to clarify its new tariffs on the key commodity—only for Trump to announce that it won’t be tariffed at all. Meanwhile, Chinese battery giant CATL halted operations at a mine that produces 4% of the world’s lithium, sending prices of the precious metal soaring.
Trade: President Trump signed an executive order late yesterday unleashing a wave of new tariffs on 69 US trading partners that will go into effect on August 7th. Here’s a handy list of tariffs and their economic effects for anyone else having trouble keeping track of all these new numbers.
Markets: Stocks opened lower and kept falling thanks to a double whammy of new tariff rates and a shocking slowdown in the labor market, while bond yields tumbled.
Commodities: Goldjumped as the likelihood of a rate cut rose due to the latest jobs report, while oil sank on reports that OPEC+ may announce a crude production boost as soon as this weekend.
Posted on July 31, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
***
On July 14, 2025, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released its proposed Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) for calendar year (CY) 2026.
In addition to the agency’s suggested increase to physician payments, the proposed rule also announces a new payment model and more tele-health flexibilities.
According to CMS, the “proposed rule is one of several proposed rules that reflect a broader Administration-wide strategy to create a health care system that results in better quality, efficiency, empowerment, and innovation for all Medicare beneficiaries.” (Read more…)
SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR-http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com
Classic Definition: Research from Ernst-Young [Nikhil Lele and Yang Shim] uncovered a chasm between how consumer patients think they’re doing financially, and the actual state of their finances. Even more striking, their study suggested that improving consumers’ financial health will become one of the top imperatives in reframing consumer financial services.
Modern Circumstance: For example, the study asked consumers to rate their own financial health, and 83 percent rated themselves “good,” “very good” or “excellent.” Now, contrast this figure with what is known about their actual situation:
60 percent of Americans say they are financially stressed.
56 percent of Americans have less than $10,000 saved for retirement.
40 million American families have no retirement savings at all.
40 percent of Americans are not prepared to meet a $400 short-term emergency.
Paradox Example: Fortunately, even though the vast majority of consumers rate themselves as financially healthy, the study found that most still want to improve. Importantly for health economists, the attractive 25-34 and 35-49 year-old age groups were most likely to be extremely or very interested in improving their financial and economic health.
Paradox Example: Massively affluent consumer patients are even more interested in improving this paradox than their mass market counterparts.
Posted on July 26, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Health Capital Consultants, LLC
***
***
On July 15, 2025, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the proposed rule for the Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) and Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) Payment System for calendar year (CY) 2026.
Among other items, the agency proposes increasing payments to all outpatient providers, eliminating the Inpatient Only (IPO) List, and changing quality reporting programs.
This Health Capital Topics article reviews the proposed updates and changes to outpatient reimbursement. (Read more…)
Posted on July 25, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By A.I.
***
***
Stocks: President Trump said there’s a “50/50 chance” of a deal with the EU ahead of next week’s deadline. Investors decided they like those odds, and pushed the NASDAQ and S&P 500 to yet another new closing record high—in fact, the S&P 500 set a new record every day this week. Meanwhile, trade deal talks with Brazil have reportedly stalled.
Commodities: Oil fell to a three-week low today as Iran signaled a willingness to come to the negotiating table with European powers for nuclear talks.
Hopes of trade deals and less need for a safe haven investment pushed gold prices lower.
Posted on July 21, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By Rick Kahler MSFP CFP™
***
***
When Maria needed $400,000 for a down payment on a new home, her broker at a large Wall Street firm offered a solution: “Don’t sell investments and trigger capital gains. Just take out a margin loan.”
A margin loan is a line of credit from a brokerage firm, secured by the client’s investment portfolio. It offers quick access to cash with no immediate tax consequences and minimal paperwork. But the convenience comes at a cost. As of mid-2025, margin loan interest rates range from 6.25% to over 11%.
Margin loan recommendations are often presented by brokers as tax-savvy strategies that allow clients to access “tax-free” cash while keeping their portfolios intact. In many cases, however, the math benefits the advisor more than the investor. The cost of borrowing often exceeds what an investor is likely to earn by holding on.
For example, let’s assume an interest rate of 7.5% on Maria’s $400,000 margin loan. While borrowing delayed the payment of $20,000 in capital gains tax, she will eventually have to pay that tax anyway unless she holds the investments until her death. Two years later, with portfolio returns of 4% annually, she had earned around $32,000 from the $400,000 in investments she might have sold. Meanwhile, she had paid $60,000 in interest—leaving her some $28,000 worse off. That’s without factoring in ongoing interest payments, or the risks of a margin call if the investments securing the loan drop in value.
Why do advisors keep recommending margin loans? Because selling investments reduces the portfolio size and the advisor’s fee. Borrowing keeps the portfolio intact and the compensation unchanged—while the firm receives additional income from interest on the loan. In some cases, advisors suggest using margin loans to buy more investments, increasing both the portfolio and the fee they collect.
None of this is illegal. But when the borrowing cost is higher than expected returns and the advisor benefits financially, the ethics are questionable. The client takes the risk, while the advisor keeps the revenue.
This kind of conflict appears more often in portfolios where compensation is tied to asset volume and the company’s primary culture rewards gathering assets over delivering unbiased advice. By contrast, fee-only financial planning and investment advisors typically operate on simpler hourly, flat, or tiered fee structures. Their compensation doesn’t depend on whether a client borrows, sells, or holds. The culture of the firm focuses on conflict-free advice aligned with the client’s best interest.
Wall Street brokers are often held to a fiduciary standard, but structure still matters. In 2024 the SEC reported their examinations of brokers would continue to focus on advisor recommendations unduly influenced by the company’s compensation and incentives.
There are rare situations where a margin loan may be appropriate. A client with large unrealized gains might use a short-term margin loan to minimize taxes. An elderly investor might borrow tax-free rather than sell assets that will receive a step-up in basis at their death. Even in those cases, the math must be exact and the client must clearly understand the risks, including the possibility of a margin call.
If your advisor recommends a margin loan, especially to buy more investments, ask strong questions. What’s the interest rate? What return is realistic? What are the tax consequences of selling? How does this affect the advisor’s income?
In a high-rate, low-return environment, margin loans rarely favor the client. The exceptions are narrow. The risks are significant. And the conflict of interest is measurable.
Sometimes the smartest move is the simplest: sell what you need, pay the tax, and leave leverage out of your plan.
Posted on July 18, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
MEDICAL EXECUTIVE-POST–TODAY’SNEWSLETTERBRIEFING
***
Essays, Opinions and Curated News in Health Economics, Investing, Business, Management and Financial Planning for Physician Entrepreneurs and their Savvy Advisors and Consultants
“Serving Almost One Million Doctors, Financial Advisors and Medical Management Consultants Daily“
A Partner of the Institute of Medical Business Advisors , Inc.
Lucid exploded 36.24% higher on the news that the EV maker is partnering with Uber to roll out the ridesharing company’s new robotaxis.
PepsiCo popped 7.45% thanks to a strong quarter for the snack and soda giant, while shareholders cheered the details of its turnaround plan.
UnitedAirlines may have missed Wall Street’s revenue forecast, but its profits were enough to impress investors. Shares rose 3.11%.
Reports that Union Pacific is thinking about acquiring a rival sent shares of fellow train operators CSX and NorfolkSouthern up 3.73% and 3.65%, respectively.
Sarepta Therapeutics soared 19.53% after the biotech announced it will lay off 500 employees and restructure its entire business.
Quantumscape continued its hot streak, rising yet another 19.82% thanks to its recent battery breakthrough.
Speaking of hot streaks, OpenDoorTechnologies rose another 10.74% as retail traders pour into what is quickly becoming the next big meme stock.
Stocks down
GE Aerospace crushed earnings expectations and raised its fiscal guidance, but it still wasn’t enough to impress investors, who pushed shares of the engine maker down 2.10%.
USBancorp sank 1.03% after revenue and net interest income missed forecasts last quarter.
AbbottLaboratories beat on both top and bottom line guidance, but still fell 8.53% after the pharma company narrowed its fiscal forecasts.
President Trump is expected to sign an executive order in the coming days designed to help make private-market investments more available to U.S. retirement plans, according to people familiar with the matter. The order would instruct the Labor Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission to provide guidance to employers and plan administrators on including investments like private assets in 401(k) plans.
The Fed Drama: A White House official said President Trump will likely fire Jerome Powell soon. Stockssank at the thought of the Fed head being shown the door, offsetting the pleasant surprise of a flat wholesale inflation reading.
Markets: Stocks managed to recoup their losses after Trump said it’s “highly unlikely” that he will fire Powell, but bonds remained shaken.
Crypto: Bitcoin bounced higher after the crypto bills currently under consideration in the House of Representatives cleared a key hurdle.
Overconfident Investing Bias happens when we believe we can out-smart other investors via market timing or through quick, frequent trading. This causes the results of a study to be unreliable and hard to reproduce in other research settings.
Example: Data convincingly shows that people and financial planners/advisors and wealth managers who trade most often under-perform the market by a significant margin over time. Active traders lose money.
Example: Overconfidence Investing Bias moreover leads to: (1) excessive trading (which in turn results in lower returns due to costs incurred), (2) underestimation of risk (portfolios of decreasing risk were found for single men, married men, married women, and single women), (3) illusion of knowledge (you can get a lot more data nowadays on the internet) and (4) illusion of control (on-line trading).
Posted on July 2, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
MEDICAL EXECUTIVE-POST–TODAY’SNEWSLETTERBRIEFING
***
Essays, Opinions and Curated News in Health Economics, Investing, Business, Management and Financial Planning for Physician Entrepreneurs and their Savvy Advisors and Consultants
“Serving Almost One Million Doctors, Financial Advisors and Medical Management Consultants Daily“
A Partner of the Institute of Medical Business Advisors , Inc.
Power station: Crude oil prices reversed as tensions in the Middle East cooled, but AI likely raises electricity demand over the longer term, creating investment opportunities and risks.
Oil supplies now exceed demand, noted Michelle Gibley, director of international research at the Schwab Center for Financial Research, in her latest analysis, though “AI is transforming the energy sector,” raising power shortage concerns.
Solar stocks got a reprieve today after the Senate dropped the excise tax on clean energy projects. Sunrun soared 10.51%, EnphaseEnergy rose 3.18%, SolarEdgeTechnologies popped 7.16%, and ArrayTechnologies climbed 12.54%.
Apple tumbled this summer after investors were disappointed by its AI rollout, but rose 1.29% on the news that the company may pivot to using Anthropic or OpenAI in iPhones instead of building something in-house.
Wolfspeed, the best name for a company that makes computer chips, exploded 98.09% after the company officially filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
Hasbro got a nice 4.29% bump thanks to Goldman Sachs analysts, who are big old nerds who think Magic: The Gathering will boost the toymaker’s sales.
Ford popped 4.61% after the automaker reported an impressive 14% increase in sales last quarter.
Casino stocks soared on the news that gaming revenue in Macau rose 19% in June. WynnResorts climbed 8.85%, Las Vegas Sands added 8.95%, and MGMResorts gained 7.24%.
What’s down
AMC Entertainment tumbled 9.03% after the one-time meme stock announced its new debt restructuring plan.
ProgressSoftware sank 13.03% after the business application software company reported mixed results last quarter, beating on profit but missing on revenue.
JobyAviation fell 7.01% after traders took profits following the air taxi company’s big pop yesterday.
AeroVironment dropped 11.42% after defense contractor announced it’s offering $750 million in common stock and $600 million in convertible senior notes to pay off its debt.
Diabetes device makers tumbled on the news that the government may change the reimbursement rate for glucose monitors and insulin pumps. Insulet lost 4.52%, Dexcom fell 4.25%, and BetaBionics sank 4.26%.
Posted on June 29, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By A.I.
***
***
Markets: That feeling when you have a $10 trillion rally. To wit:
The S&P 500 closed at a record high this week despite a brief dip as trade tensions with Canada ratcheted up. That puts the index about 20% up from its April low, when the broad tariff announcement sent it spiraling, and up ~5% for the year.
NVIDIA also hit an all-time high, and it keeps edging closer to becoming the first company to hit a $4 trillion valuation.
Posted on June 24, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™
By A.I.
***
***
Markets: Stocks climbed yesterday as oil prices fell, with investors reacting positively to what appeared to be limited retaliation from Iran in response to the US bombing its nuclear facilities over the weekend.
Meanwhile, Tesla had its biggest jump in two months following the successful, albeit limited, rollout of its robotaxi service in Austin.