Gurley reports the government has paid $29 billion total for doctors to implement electronic health record software.
“So, our government has paid $29,000,000,000 for doctors to implement software that they weren't naturally implementing on their own.”
Gurley reports the government has paid $29 billion for doctors to implement EHR software.
“So, the payments for these incentive programs, because I just looked it up to get the recent update, dollars 29,000,000,000.”
Gurley reports the government has paid $29 billion total for doctors to implement electronic health record software.
“So, the payments for these incentive programs, because I just looked it up to get the recent update, dollars 29,000,000,000. So, our government has paid $29,000,000,000 for doctors to implement software”
Gurley says the government paid doctors $44,000 to implement electronic health records in 2009.
“So in 2009, when the government passed the Reinvestment Act to try and get America going or whatever it was called, they put in place a program where a doctor is paid, believe this or not, paid $44,000 to implement EHR, electronic health records.”
Gurley says Schumer's AI proposal recommending $32 billion annually shocked him given unprecedented existing venture capital inflows.
“Certainly in my lifetime, and I think prior to my lifetime, there's never been a venture capital category that's attracted more money.”
Gurley compares proposed $32B AI spending to NIH's $40B budget and NSF's $9B.
“The National Science Foundation is nine down from 10. So 49, you're going to start the AI foundation or federation or whatever it is, institute at 32,000,000,000 a year.”
Gurley expresses shock at Senate AI document recommending $32 billion annual spending for AI.
“The big shocker for me was it recommended spending $32,000,000,000 a year. And I didn't even know that was on the table.”
Gurley notes proposed $32B AI spending would sit just below NIH's $40B and far above NSF's $9B.
“You're going put it right below the Institute of Health and Forex, the National Science Foundation, it just seems a little overkill.”
Gurley says DOGE represents departure from pre-election spending expectations for both candidates.
“prior to the election, the papers said that both candidates were gonna spend the same amount.”
Gurley criticizes rural broadband spending, contrasting $250 marginal cost with expensive fiber buildout.
“And instead of a $250 marginal cost to implement a rural broadband, we're gonna get bulldozers out and drop fiber lines to a ranch in the middle of nowhere.”