As a result, fewer unspent CHIP funds were available for redistribution. Bystates were facing federal funding shortfalls that could not be closed with redistributed funds. The additional appropriation represented more than 14 percent of federal CHIP spending in Mississippi received funds under each of these supplemental CHIP appropriations to avert federal funding shortfalls.
Technological failures of microchips are considerable! With new technologies come new problems. Microchips can stop working and they can be expelled from the body! Implants can be expelled from the body. Not all scanners pick up all microchips!
This is the case with pets being scanned at shelters today. In the ideal world all points of scanning would use a universal scanner. That won't necessarily be the case! Failures of microchip implant, of scanners and of the insertion device are possible, as well as magnetic resonance imaging MRI incompatibility.
Medical "computer viruses" are also possiblel from the chip itself as a technological failure. If you think of the microchip as a mini computer and when the chip accesses the system, it has the potential to spread a virus. The system reads the contents and gets the virus.
Any other system that reads the information also gets the virus. This means someone who is carrying an infected medical device could feasibly infect someone else rendering a device, like a pacemaker, useless. What's more, there's no standardization in terms of frequencies -- different countries have different frequency chips: Most of Europe uses a United States uses and kilohertz chips.
Microchips have the power to kill on purpose. It may sound a bit fictional, but a microchip really can kill potentially you if you get out of line! This is not science fiction. Patents are being filed by creators of nefarious ideas, including: A Saudi inventor has created a killer microchip and filed a patent in Germany.
The sinister GPS device has a lethal dose of cyanide that would allow the person to be exterminated remotely. It's a fast, but painful death.
Killer chips can be inserted under the skin and then be enabled to send radio waves. Advanced medical devices potentially could become infected by another medical device and spread computer viruses via the microchips.
The potential here is for terrorism, Reason 8: Microchips have possible electrical hazards.
The RFID chip is by not means inert. It actually picks up and amplifies ambient electrical energy. If you have one of these chips and get in the range of a powerful electromagnetic field it can actually burn you!
Microchip technology brings questionable ethics. Microchip regulations may come from government and business: If cash is out of circulation and the only monetary system allowable by law is the microchip, then you may be prohibited from buying groceries at the supermarket because your assets are frozen, say if you don't file your income or property taxes.
You will die of sure and slow starvation except for the sympathy of friends or family. This may also come into question as they may be in violation for feeding you!
Or the microchip will not allow you to buy alcohol because of a previous violation and it will not allow you to drive,which might have implications on your employment with a further downward spiral and eventual death from starvation. There are different manufacturers. With different brands come different experiences.
Ethics come into play as some manufacturers may cross the line and impose questionable capabilities in their product that may monitor behavior or try to modify it! Questionable ethics with products may include: You fail to pay the mortgage on time and the chips lock you out of your home.
The doors and windows shut with no way inside.Argument for Chip: His house was not damaged by an earthquake; it burned down. The policy covered fire damage. If a contract is ambiguous, it must be interpreted against the drafter of the contract. May 28, · Last month, the Utah-based writer questioned whether HGTV Fixer Upper couple Joanna and Chip Gaines had the time to put family first with all their business responsibilities in .
For another analysis of why CHIP’s success is not an argument for Medicaid block grant proposals, see Jocelyn Guyer, Martha Heberlein and Joan Alker, “CHIP: Not a Model for a Medicaid Block Grant,” Georgetown Center for Children and Families, June Argument essay Chip or Not to Chip?
In , year-old William Koretsky was unconsciously taken to the hospital after he was in a serious car accident. An emergency room scanner revealed an implanted Radio Frequency Identification Device (RFID) chip in his arm. Argument: G overments want to free your wallets by offering "Biometric technolo gy," you won't have to bring anything but yourself to go shopping -- even online.
T he, Royal Canadian Mint is marketing a Mint Chip is currency in a digital form, you can use it online. Why it's dangerous: A credit card and debit card already are using the technology.
Saturday marks the twentieth anniversary of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which was signed into law on August 5 th, by President Bill Clinton as part of the Balanced Budget Act.
As readers of SayAhhh! know, CHIP and its companion Medicaid, have done an amazing job of reducing the number of uninsured children to historic lows in