With Democrats in power doing what we all know they are doing to financially and morally ruin the country, I could just give up. Then the Republicans vote for the pork-filled budget when we have no money to support it.
Perhaps I'm just a pessimistic dinosaur, but it seems the USA is going the way of so many other proud civilizations. Permissiveness, laziness and greed are killing us. Too bad, once we had a great country.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Friday, December 11, 2009
Health Care Reform - A Fraud!
CONGRESS IS COMMITTING FRAUD! Read below to understand how.
How can Congress pass health care reform when no one knows exactly what the plan is? Really folks, most of Congress has not read the legislation or even a detailed explanation of the legislation written in standard English. And there have been through many variations and rewrites. There is a House plan. The Senate is working a different one. The White House has not helped to explain any of this.
Basically, the people are in the dark concerning health care. YET THIS SO-CALLED REFORM WILL AFFECT ALL OF US EITHER BY RAISING COSTS OR RESTRICTING CARE!
Another problem is that the reform plan will be subject to interpretation by the courts. Since the bills run 2000 pages, there is a lot of language that is open to challenge and therefore court interpretation. So when the Congress or President says that non citizens will not be covered or subsidized, do we really know that? Don't bet on it. That's just one aspect. Who knows what possibilities exist for mischief. I would not foreclose the notion that some in Congress have put some hidden bombs in the plan that will lead to complete federal control of health care.
Yet another problem is that you and I will begin paying for this reform starting when the legislation becomes law, but the actual plan doesn't start for several years. What does that mean? It means that the reform does not break even. Honest budgeting (and I bet that I have more years of experience managing major budgets than anyone in Congress) requires that you MATCH income with expenditures, year by year.
Let's explore the budget with a hypothetical that is similar to what Congress is doing. I am simplifying this analysis mostly because neither I or anyone else can know what Congress has kept secret. Assume the following based on the news we have.
How can Congress pass health care reform when no one knows exactly what the plan is? Really folks, most of Congress has not read the legislation or even a detailed explanation of the legislation written in standard English. And there have been through many variations and rewrites. There is a House plan. The Senate is working a different one. The White House has not helped to explain any of this.
Basically, the people are in the dark concerning health care. YET THIS SO-CALLED REFORM WILL AFFECT ALL OF US EITHER BY RAISING COSTS OR RESTRICTING CARE!
Another problem is that the reform plan will be subject to interpretation by the courts. Since the bills run 2000 pages, there is a lot of language that is open to challenge and therefore court interpretation. So when the Congress or President says that non citizens will not be covered or subsidized, do we really know that? Don't bet on it. That's just one aspect. Who knows what possibilities exist for mischief. I would not foreclose the notion that some in Congress have put some hidden bombs in the plan that will lead to complete federal control of health care.
Yet another problem is that you and I will begin paying for this reform starting when the legislation becomes law, but the actual plan doesn't start for several years. What does that mean? It means that the reform does not break even. Honest budgeting (and I bet that I have more years of experience managing major budgets than anyone in Congress) requires that you MATCH income with expenditures, year by year.
Let's explore the budget with a hypothetical that is similar to what Congress is doing. I am simplifying this analysis mostly because neither I or anyone else can know what Congress has kept secret. Assume the following based on the news we have.
- This is a 10 year program.
- The program is $800 billion.
- The services start in 3 years, so they are in effect for 7 years.
- Payment for the services (taxes and Medicare cuts) starts immediately; that is, cuts and taxes are in effect for 10 years.
- The program breaks even over the first 10 years.
What is the math?
- We need $800 billion of income over 10 years. It starts immediately with passage. Assuming that it is spread equally of over 10 years, that's $80 billion per year on average.
- We will spend $800 billion over 7 years. That's approximately $114 billion per year on average.
So we have a program that costs annually (on average) $114 billion but have only $80 billion to pay for it. It does not pay for itself! The only reason the proponents can say it does is because they are fudging the numbers, counting 10 years of income (cuts and taxes) but only 7 years of costs.
THAT IS FRAUD!
How can Congress and the President change all of our lives but not inform us before doing so? Inconscionable!
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Obama: Incompetent, Nation-Destroyer or Just Nuts?
I'm sorry to use a pejorative term like "nuts" but look what the President is doing to this country with MASSIVE spending and MASSIVE control of our lives and our economy. He either has no sense, is incompetent or just plain wants to destroy this country. In any case it is impossible for me to respect the "I, Me, My" man who is not big enough to be President.
Are Americans asleep, or have we become lazy? Are we just too busy having fun bashing traditional values? Have we become immobile because of the assault on almost every tradition. Horrid, mind-numbing, foul language music, salacious entertainment, reality shows that display our worst sides, obsessive attention to our looks - covering ourselves in tattoos and having relentless surgery, etc. Where are our minds?
Greed and dishonesty are so prevalent. Where are the values of "the greatest generation" which endured the depression and fought a world war and then built our economy. Are we squandering that heritage? We even trash our history, and more and more our schools are accomplices.
Ignorance is colossal. How many people cannot name their congressional representative, senator, governor or even the vice president. Many know Obama simple because for them he is cool, kind of a rock star. How sad. I would prefer not to offend, but the time has come for unvarnished truth.
We certainly know that Obama keeps company or is associated with a collection of weirdos, kooks, radicals and revolutionaries. We know that he lies regularly. In his recent speech to the Brookings Institute, he mangled the truth and contradicted himself. And if you look back at the way he campaigned, you can see the bait and switch that has occurred. It's just mind boggling.
He campaigned on "change." But seriously is what we have in the way of "change" what any responsible American envisioned. Apparently we bought the Brooklyn Bridge.
You only have to look at economy-destroying actions:
Or have we just got the Manchurian Candidate? Remember the theme of that movie? I have no idea whose "candidate" Obama is, but he sure doesn't seem to be the U.S. candidate.
You need only see and hear our congressional leaders to throw up your hands in despair. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are disgusting and at times they say things or have looks on their faces that makes you think they are crazed. See for yourself. If you haven't done this you are not paying attention to what is happening in your country.
And how about the promise of more open and transparent government? Is that how anyone sees what what has been done behind closed doors to control our health care as transparent or open?
Again apologies for the seeming hysteria on my part. but this President is a destroyer of our way of life. Coupled with the madness in the Congress, the nation is imperilled.
We need to coalesce behind the opposition and throw out the members of Congress who aid and abet this madness. Stop thinking about your congressman as a nice guy or gal who brings home the bacon. Instead look at the way he or she votes on these big, America-killing matters. That is what is important and why the federal government exists.
Are Americans asleep, or have we become lazy? Are we just too busy having fun bashing traditional values? Have we become immobile because of the assault on almost every tradition. Horrid, mind-numbing, foul language music, salacious entertainment, reality shows that display our worst sides, obsessive attention to our looks - covering ourselves in tattoos and having relentless surgery, etc. Where are our minds?
Greed and dishonesty are so prevalent. Where are the values of "the greatest generation" which endured the depression and fought a world war and then built our economy. Are we squandering that heritage? We even trash our history, and more and more our schools are accomplices.
Ignorance is colossal. How many people cannot name their congressional representative, senator, governor or even the vice president. Many know Obama simple because for them he is cool, kind of a rock star. How sad. I would prefer not to offend, but the time has come for unvarnished truth.
We certainly know that Obama keeps company or is associated with a collection of weirdos, kooks, radicals and revolutionaries. We know that he lies regularly. In his recent speech to the Brookings Institute, he mangled the truth and contradicted himself. And if you look back at the way he campaigned, you can see the bait and switch that has occurred. It's just mind boggling.
He campaigned on "change." But seriously is what we have in the way of "change" what any responsible American envisioned. Apparently we bought the Brooklyn Bridge.
You only have to look at economy-destroying actions:
- health care reform with attendant new taxes, dumping unfunded mandates on states and rationing,
- cap and trade tax increases,
- inheritance tax increases,
- income tax increases,
- wrecking the value U.S. dollar (inflation is coming),
- trying terrorists in U.S. courts,
- the recent EPA ruling (massive new job-killing regulation in the offing),
- "clunker" trade-in and other such incentive programs (they cost!),
- diversion of TARP funds,
- take-over of major industries and financial institutions,
- the nearly $800 billion economic stimulus program (mostly pork barrel spending),
- leftist judicial appointments,
- closing Guantanamo,
- card check (talk about antidemocratic),
and so on and so forth. I know I am forgetting many things, and that is the problem. He has the entire government at his disposal to keep us jumping from issue to issue, dividing people and blurring their focus. This is purposeful.
Orwell, you just got the date a little wrong. 1984 is here in 2009. Our leader is a constant presence spouting his line of propaganda.Or have we just got the Manchurian Candidate? Remember the theme of that movie? I have no idea whose "candidate" Obama is, but he sure doesn't seem to be the U.S. candidate.
You need only see and hear our congressional leaders to throw up your hands in despair. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are disgusting and at times they say things or have looks on their faces that makes you think they are crazed. See for yourself. If you haven't done this you are not paying attention to what is happening in your country.
And how about the promise of more open and transparent government? Is that how anyone sees what what has been done behind closed doors to control our health care as transparent or open?
Again apologies for the seeming hysteria on my part. but this President is a destroyer of our way of life. Coupled with the madness in the Congress, the nation is imperilled.
We need to coalesce behind the opposition and throw out the members of Congress who aid and abet this madness. Stop thinking about your congressman as a nice guy or gal who brings home the bacon. Instead look at the way he or she votes on these big, America-killing matters. That is what is important and why the federal government exists.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
The Economy - Where Is Serious Debate?
With respect to the economy, I see people using statistics for their political objectives at a time when we can ill afford such nonsense. We should understand what has happened to our economy. It's complicated but needs understanding and action.
First, we face competition on a global basis. We lead in innovation, but our labor and environmental protection costs are much higher than are found in most of the world. Others are quickly using our technology, but have lower costs of production.
Second, we are spending (printing) too much money. This devalues the dollar and will lead to inflation and a reduction in our standard of living.
Third, we need to have perspective on this terrible recession. We must remember that these happen every so often. This recession can pass unless we do things to prolong it. No president or congress (past or present) deserves much credit for getting us out of a recession. The private enterprise activities of people are what saves us. Leave more money in the hands of the people to use or invest as they determine.
Fourth, the government basically stole the funds which should have been invested to pay for entitlement programs and infrastructure. The politicians spent these funds on projects that people in local communities would not have undertaken if they had to tax themselves. This competition for federal dollars by states and local communities has reached a level that threatens our entire society. Really this would be a zero sum endeavor if the federal government wasn't able to print money and steal from the social trust funds.
Fifth, the root of the current recession lies in actions by the Democrats in Congress and failure by Republicans to stop them. Anyone who has been an adult for more than a decade should know what happened. Democrats and activist groups intimidated banks into lending money to people who could not repay the loans. These new entrants also increased demand and ultimately prices. Enter the speculators, small and large who further drove up prices creating a kind of Ponzy scheme. The banks, being savvy, learned to profit from this growth in borrowing. They packaged loans like securities which were then traded without regard for their underlying value. Greedy Democrats buying votes, and greedy banks taking advantage of the situation have hurt us badly.
Sixth, we should know better than to involve ourselves in foreign wars unless we are attacked, and we know who the enemy is. It is not our job to police the world. It is our government's job to protect us nor roam the world looking for problems. We can't afford these adventures. Our best young men and women are asked to police the world, and they do it willingly. We owe it to these patriots to engage in war only when absolutely necessary and by act of Congress. And we owe it to our economy to use our money carefully.
Seventh, the job of the federal government is specified in the Constitution of the United States. It has far exceeded the authority granted to it. Until the federal authority is curbed, we are at great risk as a nation. We can't afford its largess.
Finally, Obama will exacerbate the problems of this country. He is inexperienced and clearly a leftist, the latter never having run a successful economy. He and an insanely liberal Democrat-controlled Congress are on a spending spree that is going to ruin us. These people need to go. We need to get them out of Congress. They are rushing pell-mell to ruin us.
First, we face competition on a global basis. We lead in innovation, but our labor and environmental protection costs are much higher than are found in most of the world. Others are quickly using our technology, but have lower costs of production.
Second, we are spending (printing) too much money. This devalues the dollar and will lead to inflation and a reduction in our standard of living.
Third, we need to have perspective on this terrible recession. We must remember that these happen every so often. This recession can pass unless we do things to prolong it. No president or congress (past or present) deserves much credit for getting us out of a recession. The private enterprise activities of people are what saves us. Leave more money in the hands of the people to use or invest as they determine.
Fourth, the government basically stole the funds which should have been invested to pay for entitlement programs and infrastructure. The politicians spent these funds on projects that people in local communities would not have undertaken if they had to tax themselves. This competition for federal dollars by states and local communities has reached a level that threatens our entire society. Really this would be a zero sum endeavor if the federal government wasn't able to print money and steal from the social trust funds.
Fifth, the root of the current recession lies in actions by the Democrats in Congress and failure by Republicans to stop them. Anyone who has been an adult for more than a decade should know what happened. Democrats and activist groups intimidated banks into lending money to people who could not repay the loans. These new entrants also increased demand and ultimately prices. Enter the speculators, small and large who further drove up prices creating a kind of Ponzy scheme. The banks, being savvy, learned to profit from this growth in borrowing. They packaged loans like securities which were then traded without regard for their underlying value. Greedy Democrats buying votes, and greedy banks taking advantage of the situation have hurt us badly.
Sixth, we should know better than to involve ourselves in foreign wars unless we are attacked, and we know who the enemy is. It is not our job to police the world. It is our government's job to protect us nor roam the world looking for problems. We can't afford these adventures. Our best young men and women are asked to police the world, and they do it willingly. We owe it to these patriots to engage in war only when absolutely necessary and by act of Congress. And we owe it to our economy to use our money carefully.
Seventh, the job of the federal government is specified in the Constitution of the United States. It has far exceeded the authority granted to it. Until the federal authority is curbed, we are at great risk as a nation. We can't afford its largess.
Finally, Obama will exacerbate the problems of this country. He is inexperienced and clearly a leftist, the latter never having run a successful economy. He and an insanely liberal Democrat-controlled Congress are on a spending spree that is going to ruin us. These people need to go. We need to get them out of Congress. They are rushing pell-mell to ruin us.
Global Warming Hypocracy
Help me out, please. How is it that these climate change people are descending on Copenhagen in private jets and using limousines. Can it be that there are special rules for them (some sort of elite), and the rest of us can take the bus?
Reminds me of communism in the former Soviet Union. Remember how the people lined up for food and clothing while the old Soviet leaders had their limos and dachaus? Isn't this a kind of communism. We have the elite leaders: the environmental millionaires (they've got theirs), movie stars, leftist politicians, scientists who feed at the government trough, bureaucrats who will have great job security, and an assortment of kooks. Yes, there are some very serious people who worry about man's impact on this planet, but unfortunately this is more of a leftist political movement than a real quest for truth. It is more of a "let's get the United States" movement that a serious world effort to improve conditions on the planet.
The observable truth is that this planet is being poluted by waste from human activities. It's resources are being consumed without regard for their import to the planet. We do need to change. Earth is changing as it always has, but we humans are now a part of the change, mostly through exess individual consumption and a geometric increase in human poplulation. With respect to the individual what is needed is personal restraint. But as long as the population increases so rapidly, hardly anything will arrest global polution and overconsumption of scarce resourses.
Anyone who doesn't understand the problem of population needs to think long and hard. Use your imagination. Take a look at a population growth curve. Think about this - doubling one hundred thousand (or a million or a ten million) people in a quarter century is nothing for the Earth. But we are doubling billions! If we have 6 billion now; imagine 12 billion in another 20 or 25 years. How about 24 billion in less than half a century. For some reason, I began worrying about this problem when I was a child. I have never gotten over it and am now more convinced than ever that the astronomical increase in population is a disaster in the making.
I am not advocating for any government policy or for abortion. I am simply saying that the problem of popultation growth is at the bottom of our environmental problems. If we want to preserve and enjoy this fantastically beautiful planet, we need to show restraint on all fronts. We don't need elites to tell us what to do.
Reminds me of communism in the former Soviet Union. Remember how the people lined up for food and clothing while the old Soviet leaders had their limos and dachaus? Isn't this a kind of communism. We have the elite leaders: the environmental millionaires (they've got theirs), movie stars, leftist politicians, scientists who feed at the government trough, bureaucrats who will have great job security, and an assortment of kooks. Yes, there are some very serious people who worry about man's impact on this planet, but unfortunately this is more of a leftist political movement than a real quest for truth. It is more of a "let's get the United States" movement that a serious world effort to improve conditions on the planet.
The observable truth is that this planet is being poluted by waste from human activities. It's resources are being consumed without regard for their import to the planet. We do need to change. Earth is changing as it always has, but we humans are now a part of the change, mostly through exess individual consumption and a geometric increase in human poplulation. With respect to the individual what is needed is personal restraint. But as long as the population increases so rapidly, hardly anything will arrest global polution and overconsumption of scarce resourses.
Anyone who doesn't understand the problem of population needs to think long and hard. Use your imagination. Take a look at a population growth curve. Think about this - doubling one hundred thousand (or a million or a ten million) people in a quarter century is nothing for the Earth. But we are doubling billions! If we have 6 billion now; imagine 12 billion in another 20 or 25 years. How about 24 billion in less than half a century. For some reason, I began worrying about this problem when I was a child. I have never gotten over it and am now more convinced than ever that the astronomical increase in population is a disaster in the making.
I am not advocating for any government policy or for abortion. I am simply saying that the problem of popultation growth is at the bottom of our environmental problems. If we want to preserve and enjoy this fantastically beautiful planet, we need to show restraint on all fronts. We don't need elites to tell us what to do.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Taxes - Who is not paying them!
Tens of millions of Americans are not paying income taxes because the tax code excludes them and even pays them at tax time. This is very, very dangerous. Why?
As more and more people are excluded from the income tax, they become beneficiaries of the government, ward of the state if you will. When people receive money from the government at tax time, then they have every incentive to vote for the elected officials who give them this gift. If the number of people in this category becomes a majority, we will have created a monster. We are almost there. Once these people become the majority, they will vote to take money from those in the minority.
If we don't stop this trend and reverse it, the republic is finished. Wake up while you can! Elect people who will reverse this trend.
As more and more people are excluded from the income tax, they become beneficiaries of the government, ward of the state if you will. When people receive money from the government at tax time, then they have every incentive to vote for the elected officials who give them this gift. If the number of people in this category becomes a majority, we will have created a monster. We are almost there. Once these people become the majority, they will vote to take money from those in the minority.
If we don't stop this trend and reverse it, the republic is finished. Wake up while you can! Elect people who will reverse this trend.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Jobs Summit?
President Obama is having a jobs summit without the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Now there is a leader and a very knowledgeable president - NOT.
I can't believe this guy. What a mess, and the amazing thing is that he was elected knowing that this train wreck would occur. Face it the people elects a man clearly without experience, clearly a fringe lefty, and clearly associated with a lot of strange and down right odious characters. Now we see what we have in the White House, a real disaster.
Oh, and we are going to have union leaders at the summit, not the Chamber, a business organization but unions. Perhaps Obama is going to persuade the unions to put jobs ahead of wage increases during this crisis. If that is so, GREAT. But who will take that bet? After all, how many jobs do unions create? We know the answer to that - they destroy them. And I can speak on that one from years of experience.
One last thought. We are going to have parallel, mini jobs summits around the country. We even have a script and templates. We can do our work, and send it to the chief. Why I can see those white boards and easels going up all over the country. And what will come of that? The answer - NOTHING. Mr. President jobs are created by people who produce things that others want. Cut taxes, regulate only when absolutely needed, curtail unnecessary government spending, stop the class warfare and get out of the way. There you have it. No charge for the advice.
I can't believe this guy. What a mess, and the amazing thing is that he was elected knowing that this train wreck would occur. Face it the people elects a man clearly without experience, clearly a fringe lefty, and clearly associated with a lot of strange and down right odious characters. Now we see what we have in the White House, a real disaster.
Oh, and we are going to have union leaders at the summit, not the Chamber, a business organization but unions. Perhaps Obama is going to persuade the unions to put jobs ahead of wage increases during this crisis. If that is so, GREAT. But who will take that bet? After all, how many jobs do unions create? We know the answer to that - they destroy them. And I can speak on that one from years of experience.
One last thought. We are going to have parallel, mini jobs summits around the country. We even have a script and templates. We can do our work, and send it to the chief. Why I can see those white boards and easels going up all over the country. And what will come of that? The answer - NOTHING. Mr. President jobs are created by people who produce things that others want. Cut taxes, regulate only when absolutely needed, curtail unnecessary government spending, stop the class warfare and get out of the way. There you have it. No charge for the advice.
Democrats Love Taxes
I guess if you are a Democrat, you must love taxes because you are represented by the all-time tax kings and queens. Let's see what is proposed.
- End of the Bush tax cuts
- Permanent estate tax
- Taxes on health insurance plans
- Taxes on medical equipment
- War tax
- New taxes on families with incomes over $250,000
- Payroll tax increases
- Possible value added tax
I'm sure I missed some proposals. But the conclusion I draw is that Democrats view all the money as theirs to distribute as they see fit. I don't think this was the principle upon which this republic was founded. But then I am old fashioned.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Obama Bombs
I feel like cheering after watching - not President Obama - but the cadets of West Point. Let me gush a bit because I feel like it tonight!
My respect (already unbounded) for the military, and tonight especially for the cadets of West Point, soared. Here was a group of young patriotic Americans displaying dignity and respect for the President and yet not going overboard because he is anything but a leader, competent, convincing or inspiring. The cadets showed respect for the office, but they know that we have a novice in the office of the presidency, someone who has never led anything beyond a campaign for public office. Watching them you could see that they saw through Obama, saw who he really is and were not impressed with the child president. What insight and how well they handled themselves! They inspire me.
Contrast this with some of my generation, represented by some generals, like the sad sack General Casey. Responding to the Fort Hood tragedy, I couldn't believe that he babbled about concern for diversity in the military. Incredible! Add generals like Wesley Clark to the this mix, and you can see the confusion that reigns in our society. We need more forceful, less PC generals. Thank God for Generals Patreaus and McChrystal. These are our leaders. These are the people we need to celebrate. If it hadn't been for their toughness and forthrightness, we would not have seen this troop increase. We are in this fight and we need to pursue it with all or might or stop alltogether.
The bottom line is that the United States should stay out of foreign wars - don't start them or join them unless they are to protect our country or countries that are clearly allies and only upon a declaration of war by Congress. But once we commit our marines, soldiers, sailors and airmen, we have a duty to wage war ruthlessly until the enemy is defeated. If we don't have the stomach to do what it takes to win, we shouldn't engage in war.
My respect (already unbounded) for the military, and tonight especially for the cadets of West Point, soared. Here was a group of young patriotic Americans displaying dignity and respect for the President and yet not going overboard because he is anything but a leader, competent, convincing or inspiring. The cadets showed respect for the office, but they know that we have a novice in the office of the presidency, someone who has never led anything beyond a campaign for public office. Watching them you could see that they saw through Obama, saw who he really is and were not impressed with the child president. What insight and how well they handled themselves! They inspire me.
Contrast this with some of my generation, represented by some generals, like the sad sack General Casey. Responding to the Fort Hood tragedy, I couldn't believe that he babbled about concern for diversity in the military. Incredible! Add generals like Wesley Clark to the this mix, and you can see the confusion that reigns in our society. We need more forceful, less PC generals. Thank God for Generals Patreaus and McChrystal. These are our leaders. These are the people we need to celebrate. If it hadn't been for their toughness and forthrightness, we would not have seen this troop increase. We are in this fight and we need to pursue it with all or might or stop alltogether.
The bottom line is that the United States should stay out of foreign wars - don't start them or join them unless they are to protect our country or countries that are clearly allies and only upon a declaration of war by Congress. But once we commit our marines, soldiers, sailors and airmen, we have a duty to wage war ruthlessly until the enemy is defeated. If we don't have the stomach to do what it takes to win, we shouldn't engage in war.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Alan Grayson, Who is this nut?
I am sorry to write this way, but I can think of no other way to describe this fool of a congressman. He makes outrageous statements on the floor of the House, and now he is trying to run the Senate. Who voted for this guy? It's a good argument against universal suffrage. Chuckle.
Friday, November 27, 2009
AARP & AMA Misinformation
Imagine it! The AARP and the AMA are disseminating massive disinformation about health care reform. Actually it's easy to imagine. Neither represents its constituency. Please see this link http://action.aarp.org/site/PageNavigator/Myths_vs_Facts. Sounds convincing, but it's just cleaver misinformation and not what we will have if this terrible legislation becomes law.
In this propaganda, the AARP and AMA quote statements by opponents of current health care reform legislation and then label them myths. I will debunk one of these here.
They label assertions by opponents that health care will result in rationing as follows: "Myth: Health care reform means rationed care." However, the AARP/AMA response to this so-called myth never touches on the real reason why rationing will occur, namely that there are not enough doctors to absorb the patient load added by infusing tens of millions of new patients in the insured health care system. (Note: the uninsured receive emergency medical care by law and compassion, a far different service level than they would have under an insured program.) Imagine the number of new patients in your doctor's waiting room, which may already be overflowing, if the current reform bill is enacted. This automatically means that you will not be seen as long or as often as you need. That is a form of rationing.
If congress, the president, AARP and AMA really wanted to address this question other than by misdirection, they would first set up a program to find outstanding young people and then begin the process of helping them to choose and finance a medical education. Simply infusing the uninsured into the current system will result in rationing of medical care.
I urge you to read the other so-called myths and see what the AARP and AMA say. You will find that they do not have good and honest answers. Both groups see a big profit in health care reform and will sell you out for those profits - just what they say about the insurance companies. It's just a question of who profits.
I tore up my AARP card and quit them.
This country is broke and U.S. dollar is failing. Soon inflation will be headed our way unless we mend our ways. Our job as Americans is to fix our economy starting with our government. Adding a huge new social program is not the answer. We need to pay for the programs and services that we currently have and want, reduce some, and eliminate others. These are the hard choices before us.
We can open up health care to more people starting right now. The logical things include:
In this propaganda, the AARP and AMA quote statements by opponents of current health care reform legislation and then label them myths. I will debunk one of these here.
They label assertions by opponents that health care will result in rationing as follows: "Myth: Health care reform means rationed care." However, the AARP/AMA response to this so-called myth never touches on the real reason why rationing will occur, namely that there are not enough doctors to absorb the patient load added by infusing tens of millions of new patients in the insured health care system. (Note: the uninsured receive emergency medical care by law and compassion, a far different service level than they would have under an insured program.) Imagine the number of new patients in your doctor's waiting room, which may already be overflowing, if the current reform bill is enacted. This automatically means that you will not be seen as long or as often as you need. That is a form of rationing.
If congress, the president, AARP and AMA really wanted to address this question other than by misdirection, they would first set up a program to find outstanding young people and then begin the process of helping them to choose and finance a medical education. Simply infusing the uninsured into the current system will result in rationing of medical care.
I urge you to read the other so-called myths and see what the AARP and AMA say. You will find that they do not have good and honest answers. Both groups see a big profit in health care reform and will sell you out for those profits - just what they say about the insurance companies. It's just a question of who profits.
I tore up my AARP card and quit them.
This country is broke and U.S. dollar is failing. Soon inflation will be headed our way unless we mend our ways. Our job as Americans is to fix our economy starting with our government. Adding a huge new social program is not the answer. We need to pay for the programs and services that we currently have and want, reduce some, and eliminate others. These are the hard choices before us.
We can open up health care to more people starting right now. The logical things include:
- Give everyone the tax credit that those who have employer sponsored insurance have.
- Offset the cost of tax credits with a combination of improved auditing of heath care charges, reductions to non essential government programs and an attack on excessive litigation in the system. (The latter should go far beyond health care. Too much money is spent on frivolous litigation.) I might also add that juries need to be educated that no matter how egregious an injury is that awarding huge settlements results in all of us paying more for goods and services. Litigation should not be viewed as the lottery.
- Increase competition among insurance companies by permitting individuals to select insurance plans that they want and for which they can pay. That is to say, make sure that there are a variety of policies some of which are for basic health services that cover true illnesses, especially life-threatening ones. We should not mandate that people buy policies that cover all manner of elective procedures.
- Increase competition by permitting people to purchase insurance across state boundaries.
- Increase spending on technology and practices that help to detect the onset of major illnesses before they reach critical stages.
- Expand access to health savings accounts. People should have the option to set aside money in a tax exempt fund to use for health care. They could use these funds to pay premiums, deductibles and co payments. Let us manage our lives, PLEASE!
- We must be hard nosed with people who do not purchase insurance when they have that ability; i.e., they have incomes. Don't buy insurance; you get emergency services only and just for life threatening situations. We should not pay for irresponsible behavior. Start doing this, and people will fall in line.
- We must assist the unemployed to purchase insurance for limited periods of time. just as we do unemployment compensation.
- Finally, there is too much emphasis on supporting or opposing the "government option" for health insurance. This in my judgment is a red herring argument. We don't need a government option, but if it is the judgment of the congress that we have one, then it should compete fairly with the private insurers. This could be done by designing a government option with premiums set at cost plus an allocated portion of total government debt. It would be unfair competition to have a government health plan that did not have to charge its full cost including overhead. After all the government does not have to balance its budget.
One last thing. I am tired of constant criticism of the government, criticism that centers on the false assertion it cannot do anything right. It does a lot of things right. We have a fine military, a state department to handle foreign relations, an air traffic control system that keeps us safe, police and fire services, a system of national parks, interstate highways, and much more. The government does many things right.
Even the much maligned post office is better than it is portrayed - remember that FEDX, UPS, and other private companies are not mandated to deliver mail to all business and residences every day no matter how remote they may or how few pieces of mail they receive. The decision to do this was made long ago, and if that decision is to stand, there are inefficiencies for which the costs must be born by someone. If you don't want this universal service then say so and change the law.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
1984
Do you ever feel that you are living in Orwell's 1984? Seriously, so much does not make sense.
- Trying confessed terrorists captured in foreign lands in a U.S. court?
- Perpetual investigations of our military, CIA and officials who have protected us from terrorists for years?
- Government running auto companies, banks and other private businesses?
- Government trying to take over our personal health care?
- Government condemning and taking private property for private use?
Go ahead, add responsibly to my list. I'll post it.
Obama Overexposure
Is anyone else tired of the constant presidential addresses? I just turn them off.
Obama - Stop The Partying
I think our President needs to give Air Force One a rest. We are struggling with serious economic problems. It's time for Obama to stay home, and do some work. Set the old ego aside, Obama.
The Mary Landrieu $300 Million Payoff
Senator Mary Landrieu (LA) took $300 million in aid for her state in exchange for her vote to bring so-called heath care reform to the Senate floor. She is proud of this.
She is wrong! Health care reform is not a penny ante issue. It is an attempt to change our entire health care system in order to fix some of its defects. It is a major encroachment of government to our personal lives, a serious threat to freedom and a threat to the economy of the United States. It is a fraud if for no other reason than its cost is so hugely understated that it defies logic as to why even its most ardent supporter would support it.
Basically, the budget for this plan includes ten years of revenue and savings but only about six years of costs. This would be like an individual who received a small inheritance adding this to his annual income and committing himself to a very large mortgage based on an income that will not be continued into the future. The rule is that you cannot use one-time money to support ongoing costs. Everyone knows this.
Back to Mary Landrieu. She traded her vote to support a further discussion of bill that is completely irresponsible and threatens the entire United States economy. This was not some small matter that was negotiated among senators to allocate funds in an ordinary budget. This was a matter of principle, and she has failed.
One caveat with one corollary: If she intends, in the end, to vote against health care reform (which only she knows), then I, for one, withdraw this criticism. The corollary is that there is not some undisclosed deal that Landrieu will ultimately vote against the reform bill (vindicating her vote sale), but other senators (who have not received a similar payoff) are not now planning to vote for the bill in exchange for a similar payoff.
Compicated isn't it. Sadly we have to entertain these suspicions because the Congress is engaged in dirty business.
She is wrong! Health care reform is not a penny ante issue. It is an attempt to change our entire health care system in order to fix some of its defects. It is a major encroachment of government to our personal lives, a serious threat to freedom and a threat to the economy of the United States. It is a fraud if for no other reason than its cost is so hugely understated that it defies logic as to why even its most ardent supporter would support it.
Basically, the budget for this plan includes ten years of revenue and savings but only about six years of costs. This would be like an individual who received a small inheritance adding this to his annual income and committing himself to a very large mortgage based on an income that will not be continued into the future. The rule is that you cannot use one-time money to support ongoing costs. Everyone knows this.
Back to Mary Landrieu. She traded her vote to support a further discussion of bill that is completely irresponsible and threatens the entire United States economy. This was not some small matter that was negotiated among senators to allocate funds in an ordinary budget. This was a matter of principle, and she has failed.
One caveat with one corollary: If she intends, in the end, to vote against health care reform (which only she knows), then I, for one, withdraw this criticism. The corollary is that there is not some undisclosed deal that Landrieu will ultimately vote against the reform bill (vindicating her vote sale), but other senators (who have not received a similar payoff) are not now planning to vote for the bill in exchange for a similar payoff.
Compicated isn't it. Sadly we have to entertain these suspicions because the Congress is engaged in dirty business.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Back At It & Questions Part I
I have become a bit discouraged of late. The problem is: I don't see a lot of intelligence and almost no wisdom in our country. I know it's there, but watching the news depresses me. To get started again I am going to list some questions and try to answer them in future posts. If anyone reads this blog, feel free to give me some counsel.
My questions - big and small:
My questions - big and small:
- Why does Congress think only of providing health care to the uninsured and not of the other side? Doesn't it think by raising taxes and by rationing that it is depriving the payers of these taxes of opportunities to use their hard-earned money for their needs and that by taxing these people they are depriving them of something?
- Why should the United States tax its business and industry (what's left of them) to reduce carbon emissions when other carbon emitting nations will not do so? Are we suicidal? Do we think we can maintain our standard of living while handicapping ourselves?
- Why do our governments waste so much time on issues that are really not the province of government or are eclipsed by greater matters? Do we really need government to tell us what to eat, what cars to drive, what our health insurance plans should look like, etc.?
- Why do we say we are a "nation of laws, not men" and then selectively ignore some of them notably immigration laws?
- Why don't we profile to protect ourselves when it is obvious where the central threat to the United States lies?
- Why was a president elected who has so little experience, such questionable associations, and a philosophy so alien to our free market, liberty loving people?
- Do we really have a press that is balanced in its investigation of powerful people/interest groups and its reporting of the news?
- Why can the president fly a very expensive airplane almost daily and not be criticized for excess when business executives with important work are condemned for the same thing?
- Why can Congress pass laws that do not apply to it?
- How can Congress pass huge spending bills or government control of health care without letting the people see a plain English version of the legislation long before it votes?
- How can we go to war without a declaration of war?
- What is difference between torture and threatening actions that do not result in physical harm?
- Why would we try terrorists captured outside of the United States or illegally in the United States in our courts especially when they may gain access to information about sources and methods of intelligence that has led to their capture?
- Why do some in Congress defame our military and our intelligence agencies both of which have people whose sole duty is to protect us?
- Why would we close Guantanamo Bay and recreate its conditions here in the United States at great cost?
- Why don't we reform the tax system?
- Why have a corporate income tax when all taxes are really paid by people? Or do some of us believe that corporations don't pass taxes on to us?
- Why is about a third of my telephone/Internet/cable bill composed of taxes?
- Why would a congressman shed principle (how to vote on health care, cap & trade, etc.) for increased government spending in his or her district?
I will augment this list as I think about the issues and with the help of wise people who contribute to them. Thanks for thinking about my questions?
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Obama - Unfair Criticism
I am anything but an Obama fan. But something that irks me, and that I believe discredits his critics, is this penchant for slamming him for a simple act that they imagine to be something else.
One instance. In Italy, at the recent summit, he was shown apparently staring at the derriere of a woman passing in front of him. If one views the clip, it appear very obvious that he is preparing to assist a person to descend the steps in front of him and therfore looking down. That a woman passed in front of him at this moment appears to be a mere coincidence.
It is crude and rather stupid to imply that he has committed some lewd or lascivious act. It diminishes these critics at least in this writer's opinion.
One instance. In Italy, at the recent summit, he was shown apparently staring at the derriere of a woman passing in front of him. If one views the clip, it appear very obvious that he is preparing to assist a person to descend the steps in front of him and therfore looking down. That a woman passed in front of him at this moment appears to be a mere coincidence.
It is crude and rather stupid to imply that he has committed some lewd or lascivious act. It diminishes these critics at least in this writer's opinion.
Sotomayor "Wise Latina" Quote - Not Very Wise
Here is the controversial quote from Judge Sotomayor: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
What strikes me is that the discussion is always something like: Is this or is this not racist? I don't really know. I do know that if a non Latino white male made this statement it would be said to be so. It would result in rejection of the candidate for the Supreme Court.
The quote is very telling. Sotomayor believes the Latina opinion to be superior to that of a white male. That is her opinion and not a fact. We simply don't know whether a wise Latina or wise white man would make a better decision. Each of us is a product of our experiences and the thoughtful often torturous process that must precede wisdom. So I would say that some Latinas are wiser and better equipped to reach good conclusions than some white men. The reverse is also true. The problem is she says that the Latina would "more often" do this. And that is where I have a problem with what she said.
The statement is one of ignorance, stupidity or prejudice or all of these. She cannot possibly know who would make the better decision. While their personal opinions and biases are always with them, judges must strive to make decisions based on the facts in the context of law and precedent, primarily the former.
Obama can nominate whom he pleases to the Court. I would hope that he and all other presidents would simply look for the wisest persons that they can find in the light of their (the presidents) personal views about the powers and limitations of government.
I do not think that Sotomayor is the best Obama could do. I think that their are wiser Latinas than she. And who knows maybe an Asian man, black woman or heaven forbid a white male however impoverished his life experience.
P.S. By her unwise conclusion, Judge Sotomayor appears not to be the "wise Latina woman" that she posits.
What strikes me is that the discussion is always something like: Is this or is this not racist? I don't really know. I do know that if a non Latino white male made this statement it would be said to be so. It would result in rejection of the candidate for the Supreme Court.
The quote is very telling. Sotomayor believes the Latina opinion to be superior to that of a white male. That is her opinion and not a fact. We simply don't know whether a wise Latina or wise white man would make a better decision. Each of us is a product of our experiences and the thoughtful often torturous process that must precede wisdom. So I would say that some Latinas are wiser and better equipped to reach good conclusions than some white men. The reverse is also true. The problem is she says that the Latina would "more often" do this. And that is where I have a problem with what she said.
The statement is one of ignorance, stupidity or prejudice or all of these. She cannot possibly know who would make the better decision. While their personal opinions and biases are always with them, judges must strive to make decisions based on the facts in the context of law and precedent, primarily the former.
Obama can nominate whom he pleases to the Court. I would hope that he and all other presidents would simply look for the wisest persons that they can find in the light of their (the presidents) personal views about the powers and limitations of government.
I do not think that Sotomayor is the best Obama could do. I think that their are wiser Latinas than she. And who knows maybe an Asian man, black woman or heaven forbid a white male however impoverished his life experience.
P.S. By her unwise conclusion, Judge Sotomayor appears not to be the "wise Latina woman" that she posits.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Obama Care - Reduced Care for Many
Obama has to find a way to finance his heath care plan, and short of taxing us into oblivion, he has to sacrifice someone. For him the elderly will do. They are not his biggest constituency. Mark my words.
You have already heard that savings on Medicare are part of his plan. What do you think these savings are? They are reduced levels of diagnosis and treatment which he doesn't talk about except vaguely as excessive defensive medicine to avoid lawsuits. Don't believe it.
Also, you will note that he continues to protect trial lawyers who are responsible for much unnecessary spending on health care.
Really, there are no solutions to the problem of health care costs other than 1) cutting benefits, 2) cutting litigation effects, 3) raising taxes, 4) reducing non health care costs such as excessive paperwork, and 5) permitting free market practices (that is, individuals have tax credits and buy their own insurance individually or through associations). That's pretty much it. Numbers 2, 4, and 5 in combination are the only good solutions.
For sure Obama will not want to support any plan that reduces government control, so number 5 is out immediately. He will do number 4, but the cost of his new government bureaucracy will wipe out any savings. He will not do number 2 because the lawyers are his supporters.
Look out people. The future is bleak for freedom in America.
You have already heard that savings on Medicare are part of his plan. What do you think these savings are? They are reduced levels of diagnosis and treatment which he doesn't talk about except vaguely as excessive defensive medicine to avoid lawsuits. Don't believe it.
Also, you will note that he continues to protect trial lawyers who are responsible for much unnecessary spending on health care.
Really, there are no solutions to the problem of health care costs other than 1) cutting benefits, 2) cutting litigation effects, 3) raising taxes, 4) reducing non health care costs such as excessive paperwork, and 5) permitting free market practices (that is, individuals have tax credits and buy their own insurance individually or through associations). That's pretty much it. Numbers 2, 4, and 5 in combination are the only good solutions.
For sure Obama will not want to support any plan that reduces government control, so number 5 is out immediately. He will do number 4, but the cost of his new government bureaucracy will wipe out any savings. He will not do number 2 because the lawyers are his supporters.
Look out people. The future is bleak for freedom in America.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Obama?
With respect to spending our money (I know he thinks it's his.), Obama is a either a fool, bent on destroying America as we know (knew?) it, or just so ignorant that he doesn't understand basic fiscal discipline?
First he spends unprecidented amount of money. Then he says we need to pay as we go - be fiscally disciplined.
We are going to pay for this man's incompentence and his ego.
Quite frankly he frightens me.
First he spends unprecidented amount of money. Then he says we need to pay as we go - be fiscally disciplined.
We are going to pay for this man's incompentence and his ego.
Quite frankly he frightens me.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Non Citizen Voting? Time for National Identity Card
So I hear that a judge has told us that we cannot challenge people to determine if they are citizens before they vote. I cannot quibble with idea that we should not be challenging people if we are doing it selectively based on our personal perceptions. But to launch into a discussion based on this premise is to miss the whole point. Everyone should be challenged!
America, wake up! We need a national identity card. We can no longer hold to this long dead notion that somehow we are freer without one.
If we had a national identity card, it could be required for all important transactions such as voting, registering for school, opening a bank account, buying or renting property.... You get the idea. This would solve a lot of problems.
Please don't try to tell me all of the reasons this would not work. Identity cards are used all over the world. I have had to obtain them to live in other countries. And please don't start with the foolish argument that it can be counterfeited. Almost anything including currency can. But we don't stop using currency. It's so simple; start now before it's too late.
The only real reason we don't have the national identity card is that powerful people don't want it. Why? Because: 1) it would cut into potential votes for one political party, 2) some want to change our national culture/identity to one more familiar to them, and 3) many want to exploit people who are here illegally. For my part, I want to have an orderly process for citizenship, for using services, and some assurance that people are who they say they are.
For me the point is that ever since I was a child the phrase "we are a nation of laws, not men" has been drummed into my head. To me it seems that we have laws about who can vote and who can be a resident or citizen of the country. But in this instance we seem to be a nation of men not laws.
I am tired of hypocrisy.
P.S. I hear that some states are resisting this on 10th Amendment grounds - rights reserved to the states, etc. These are presumably conservative states that want less federal interference. Here is an example of where conservatives shoot themselves in the foot, so to speak. Protecting our freedoms depends on knowing who is a citizen, who is a resident alien, etc. Unless these very same states are willing to provide a state identity card that is the equivalent of a federal card; i.e., establishes the true identity of the persons who are voting and accessing services, they are acting foolishly. I believe a country must have rules for entry whether liberal or restrictive, and these must control the growth in its population at sustainable levels.
America, wake up! We need a national identity card. We can no longer hold to this long dead notion that somehow we are freer without one.
If we had a national identity card, it could be required for all important transactions such as voting, registering for school, opening a bank account, buying or renting property.... You get the idea. This would solve a lot of problems.
Please don't try to tell me all of the reasons this would not work. Identity cards are used all over the world. I have had to obtain them to live in other countries. And please don't start with the foolish argument that it can be counterfeited. Almost anything including currency can. But we don't stop using currency. It's so simple; start now before it's too late.
The only real reason we don't have the national identity card is that powerful people don't want it. Why? Because: 1) it would cut into potential votes for one political party, 2) some want to change our national culture/identity to one more familiar to them, and 3) many want to exploit people who are here illegally. For my part, I want to have an orderly process for citizenship, for using services, and some assurance that people are who they say they are.
For me the point is that ever since I was a child the phrase "we are a nation of laws, not men" has been drummed into my head. To me it seems that we have laws about who can vote and who can be a resident or citizen of the country. But in this instance we seem to be a nation of men not laws.
I am tired of hypocrisy.
P.S. I hear that some states are resisting this on 10th Amendment grounds - rights reserved to the states, etc. These are presumably conservative states that want less federal interference. Here is an example of where conservatives shoot themselves in the foot, so to speak. Protecting our freedoms depends on knowing who is a citizen, who is a resident alien, etc. Unless these very same states are willing to provide a state identity card that is the equivalent of a federal card; i.e., establishes the true identity of the persons who are voting and accessing services, they are acting foolishly. I believe a country must have rules for entry whether liberal or restrictive, and these must control the growth in its population at sustainable levels.
So Obama Does Not Want to Run GM?
How much foolishness will Americans believe? Obama goes on television and says he does not want to run a car company. And we are supposed to believe this.
For anyone whose mind is sleeping. Let me inform you. The government (Obama) is appointing the directors of GM because it is the majority stockholder. So to whom do you think the directors are beholding, you the citizen and taxpayer? No. Sorry. They are beholding to Obama, the fellow who has never run anything but now is running the most complex and powerful country in the world!
Oh well, and I have a bridge to Brooklyn that I'll sell you....
For anyone whose mind is sleeping. Let me inform you. The government (Obama) is appointing the directors of GM because it is the majority stockholder. So to whom do you think the directors are beholding, you the citizen and taxpayer? No. Sorry. They are beholding to Obama, the fellow who has never run anything but now is running the most complex and powerful country in the world!
Oh well, and I have a bridge to Brooklyn that I'll sell you....
Monday, June 1, 2009
Sotomayor & Wisdom
I have heard so many apologists speak concerning Judge Sonia Sotomayor's comment: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." These apologists aver that those who criticize this statement are taking it out of context. It is comical to watch them twist themselves into pretzels trying to put a good face on the statement.
As aspirations, she may hope for a lot of things, but I would hope that she would wish that all of us would reach the wisest conclusions when making judgments. But what she is saying is that somehow the experiences of a Latina are usually more valuable than those of a white man because the former has some superior life experiences. That is just plain balderdash, sheer ignorance on her part and is sexist or racist or both. It is extremely arrogant.
Some wise white fellows wrote an amazing constitution for the United States, and many others of their ilk worked tirelessly to improve it through amendments. The result is the opportunity that Sotomayor and the rest of us have to realize our dreams.
Had women had the rights of men at the time of the country's founding, I am sure equally wise contributions would have been forthcoming from them. Perhaps the same ones.
Our personal experiences contribute to our character and wisdom. Neither Latinas nor white men have cornered the market on good character or great wisdom.
Wise up Judge Sotomayor. Let's have the apology.
As aspirations, she may hope for a lot of things, but I would hope that she would wish that all of us would reach the wisest conclusions when making judgments. But what she is saying is that somehow the experiences of a Latina are usually more valuable than those of a white man because the former has some superior life experiences. That is just plain balderdash, sheer ignorance on her part and is sexist or racist or both. It is extremely arrogant.
Some wise white fellows wrote an amazing constitution for the United States, and many others of their ilk worked tirelessly to improve it through amendments. The result is the opportunity that Sotomayor and the rest of us have to realize our dreams.
Had women had the rights of men at the time of the country's founding, I am sure equally wise contributions would have been forthcoming from them. Perhaps the same ones.
Our personal experiences contribute to our character and wisdom. Neither Latinas nor white men have cornered the market on good character or great wisdom.
Wise up Judge Sotomayor. Let's have the apology.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Popularity Trumps Hypocricy!
Here we have Obama flying to New York for a date at heaven only knows what cost, surely hundreds of thousands of dollars. Obama has probably destroyed the country with untold debt. He is adored. Auto executive fly in private jets to Congress for business. They are roundly excoriated. Hypocrisy!
Friday, May 29, 2009
Is It 1984?
Has anyone noticed that we hear from our president every day, some little sermon or perhaps an announcement of another appointment (yet one more czar?) or initiative. We hear at once that we are are spending (who is we?) too much, but immediately we have another spending spree on a new project to the effect that we save a penny and spend a dollar. Words, words followed by more words. I can't begrudge President Obama using the teleprompter. How could he possibly talk so much without some aid?
I also notice that Mr. Obama uses 'I', 'me' and 'my' very frequently as he makes his pronouncements. I suppose this is to get away from the royal 'we' and 'our' that is customary with leaders. Ah, the common touch. No, it is really the display of a gargantuan ego and most unbecoming of a president.
Taken all together, we seem to be in the early stages of an Orwellian world with Obama as Big Brother giving us our continuous stream of propaganda or dictums. I fear for the republic.
I also notice that Mr. Obama uses 'I', 'me' and 'my' very frequently as he makes his pronouncements. I suppose this is to get away from the royal 'we' and 'our' that is customary with leaders. Ah, the common touch. No, it is really the display of a gargantuan ego and most unbecoming of a president.
Taken all together, we seem to be in the early stages of an Orwellian world with Obama as Big Brother giving us our continuous stream of propaganda or dictums. I fear for the republic.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Obama, Pelosi - You Are Not Dad & Mom
Real short. Who elected Barak Obama or Nancy Pelosi to tell us how we should live our lives. These two seem to think that they were elected to direct our lives or coerce us into changing how we live. The famous "share the wealth" pronouncement by Obama and recently Pelosi's "Every aspect of our lives must be subject to an inventory..." are not what I, for just one person, want from these two. Barak never held down a real job and Nancy, I think, would have us scale down while she commandeers military jets and ... well you get the idea.
These two and their comrads need to get about the business of bolstering our defenses, controlling government's appetite for gobbling up our freedoms and our money. They need to "share the wealth" by cutting taxes and subject government programs to "an inventory" and then cut them back to reasonable levels. We don't need these two for parents.
For some reason, this country is perceived by our 'leaders' to be at the root of all evil, or at least most of it. It's not. Don't believe that for a moment. Try living in other countries. Leave your priveleged status behind and see how wonderfully responsible and fairminded is life in them. Your eyes will be opened.
We are a good and decent country by any standards. We have been successful not because of government, rather because we controlled it. Don't 'change' that success formula because an inexperienced young man or a priveleged woman say so.
These two and their comrads need to get about the business of bolstering our defenses, controlling government's appetite for gobbling up our freedoms and our money. They need to "share the wealth" by cutting taxes and subject government programs to "an inventory" and then cut them back to reasonable levels. We don't need these two for parents.
For some reason, this country is perceived by our 'leaders' to be at the root of all evil, or at least most of it. It's not. Don't believe that for a moment. Try living in other countries. Leave your priveleged status behind and see how wonderfully responsible and fairminded is life in them. Your eyes will be opened.
We are a good and decent country by any standards. We have been successful not because of government, rather because we controlled it. Don't 'change' that success formula because an inexperienced young man or a priveleged woman say so.
Guilt - Tactic to Put You on Defense
I am going to write more about this later but just have to get it off my chest.
I was listening to a proponent of national health care or universal health care or single payer health care or whatever. Their basic point is that tens of millions of Americans do not have health insurance, and if we just brought the system under federal control, all would be better. Of course, this is not true. People do have access to health care through various programs and certain rights to obtain care.
What annoys me is that the "tens of millions of uninsured" line is designed to make us feel guilty. Somehow we are responsible to provide what others don't have. I agree that we should help, and we do now through taxes and through charities. It is our responsibility to help our fellow human beings, but our help should be tailored to the situation and to our ability to pay. A government program will not do that.
A government run system will grant equal benefits to irresponsible people. Should we have to pay for equal care for persons who take illegal drugs, who have more children than they can support, who choose not to work, who are criminals, who behave recklessly, etc.? Why?
What is the purpose of taking responsibility for your life - planning, working, sacrificing...? The point is that unless we believe that we are responsible for the decisions of others or the just plain bad luck of others, we should not be taxed to support them. What is the point of working? Probably the liberal response would be something like self actualization or some similar platitude. But most of us work because it is our responsibility to take care of ourselves.
Think about it. What if the United Nations said that the United States, a rich country, is responsible to provide health care equal to our own to the peoples of other countries and was going to tax us to do that. How many would agree that we should pay that tax? Are we responsible for the situations in these countries that make living in them so tenuous? Can you imagine how paying for their health care would affect your pocketbook? What we do is provide help when a catastrophe strikes; we provide aid to countries but within limits. We are compasionate but don't take full responsibility. We don't tax ourselves to provide the same services in those countries as we have here. There are limits.
Perhaps if we could be certain that our payments for health care through taxes would only benefit those who worked hard and sacrificed but who were hurt by circumstances truly out of their control, most of us would support the idea of coverage for them at our collective expense. But that is not the case. A government run program will never do that. It will dole out care with little control over cost. We will pay dearly for that.
And furthermore, should the level of care be the same for all? Should one not be able to choose a higher level or faster access by paying for it himself? Why not?
We saw what happened when congressmen pushed for home loans for people who did not have the means to pay. The system collapsed and tens of millions of people saw their savings go up in smoke. Taxing for universal health care is a similar bad idea and will further erode the financial health of responsible people. How would we like to pay 20% to 25% more for all of our purchases on top of the income, property, sales, use, and other taxes that we pay now?
The secret to a vital health care system is for us to pay for routine care and insure for catastrophes. When people have to pay for their decisions they will take responsibility for them.
I was listening to a proponent of national health care or universal health care or single payer health care or whatever. Their basic point is that tens of millions of Americans do not have health insurance, and if we just brought the system under federal control, all would be better. Of course, this is not true. People do have access to health care through various programs and certain rights to obtain care.
What annoys me is that the "tens of millions of uninsured" line is designed to make us feel guilty. Somehow we are responsible to provide what others don't have. I agree that we should help, and we do now through taxes and through charities. It is our responsibility to help our fellow human beings, but our help should be tailored to the situation and to our ability to pay. A government program will not do that.
A government run system will grant equal benefits to irresponsible people. Should we have to pay for equal care for persons who take illegal drugs, who have more children than they can support, who choose not to work, who are criminals, who behave recklessly, etc.? Why?
What is the purpose of taking responsibility for your life - planning, working, sacrificing...? The point is that unless we believe that we are responsible for the decisions of others or the just plain bad luck of others, we should not be taxed to support them. What is the point of working? Probably the liberal response would be something like self actualization or some similar platitude. But most of us work because it is our responsibility to take care of ourselves.
Think about it. What if the United Nations said that the United States, a rich country, is responsible to provide health care equal to our own to the peoples of other countries and was going to tax us to do that. How many would agree that we should pay that tax? Are we responsible for the situations in these countries that make living in them so tenuous? Can you imagine how paying for their health care would affect your pocketbook? What we do is provide help when a catastrophe strikes; we provide aid to countries but within limits. We are compasionate but don't take full responsibility. We don't tax ourselves to provide the same services in those countries as we have here. There are limits.
Perhaps if we could be certain that our payments for health care through taxes would only benefit those who worked hard and sacrificed but who were hurt by circumstances truly out of their control, most of us would support the idea of coverage for them at our collective expense. But that is not the case. A government run program will never do that. It will dole out care with little control over cost. We will pay dearly for that.
And furthermore, should the level of care be the same for all? Should one not be able to choose a higher level or faster access by paying for it himself? Why not?
We saw what happened when congressmen pushed for home loans for people who did not have the means to pay. The system collapsed and tens of millions of people saw their savings go up in smoke. Taxing for universal health care is a similar bad idea and will further erode the financial health of responsible people. How would we like to pay 20% to 25% more for all of our purchases on top of the income, property, sales, use, and other taxes that we pay now?
The secret to a vital health care system is for us to pay for routine care and insure for catastrophes. When people have to pay for their decisions they will take responsibility for them.
Problems, Problems - Things Are Changing
Can you believe that we have reached the stage in our country where the government, run by an inexperienced politico, is the owner and manager of major industries? This is something we could not have believed not so long ago. But here it is, a reality!
You can see the effect. Our 'captains of industry' are signing on to the Obama agenda. Why? Because he has shown that the U.S. government can own their companies. The government can hire and fire the executives. It can subordinate bondholders to other interests which is a clear contravention of the legal structure of corporations. This is incredible.
And can you believe that we have organizations like ACORN playing any role in the census of the United States? ACORN is under investigation in many states for its activities. Therefore, in an abundance of caution, the magnitude of the investigation should be sufficient to bar it from participation in the census. Remember that the census is used to determine representation in Congress and the distribution of many federal dollars. To permit ACORN to participate is just plain wrong or worse.
You can see the effect. Our 'captains of industry' are signing on to the Obama agenda. Why? Because he has shown that the U.S. government can own their companies. The government can hire and fire the executives. It can subordinate bondholders to other interests which is a clear contravention of the legal structure of corporations. This is incredible.
And can you believe that we have organizations like ACORN playing any role in the census of the United States? ACORN is under investigation in many states for its activities. Therefore, in an abundance of caution, the magnitude of the investigation should be sufficient to bar it from participation in the census. Remember that the census is used to determine representation in Congress and the distribution of many federal dollars. To permit ACORN to participate is just plain wrong or worse.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Obama taxes - Here they come!
I have little patience for writing a piece about what should have been obvious to Americans during the elections - Obama coupled with a Democrat majority in Congress would spell unprecedented destruction of the American way of life through government intervention in our lives, our businesses, our culture, our place in the world order, and I believe our very freedom to pursue happiness as we see it. Where was our common sense? Did we think that 'change' automatically meant 'good change' or 'healthy change' or what?
Barak Obama was for many people an antidote to George Bush. People were weary of the war and felt deceived about the decision to attack Iraq. (Okay, that's understandable. I don't mean to discuss Bush here. He is not the threat to our future as a people and as a nation; Barak Obama is.) On top of the tensions over Iraq, the business cycle kicked-in, abetted by massive fraud and incompetence in the financial world, and the economy tanked. But all of this was not a reason to suspend reality and vote for 'change' - without understanding what that 'change' would be.
To make matters worse, we had John McCain as the Republican candidate - the alternative to Barak Obama. Was he ever a non-starter! He just didn't get it! He was a myopic, boring, somewhat hysterical candidate - not the right man for the job - not inspiring. But he was the lesser of two evils. He would have been less interventionist with respect to the economy and strong on defense (the latter being the real mission of a national government). Both of these would have been good. In short, McCain would have been the better choice. As uninspiring as he is, he would not have damaged us.
To the point. Obama said he would cut taxes for 95% of Americans. Most people thought that this meant a reduction in income taxes for 95% of Americans. But 95% of us do not pay income tax. (Mr. Obama would probably say that he meant income and payroll taxes.) Many of us are paid (get money) at income tax time - get it? - not taxed but given money. (And I am not talking about a refund of excess taxes paid.) So that means we are using the tax code more and more to spend money - that is, give money to people who do not pay taxes, people who did not earn that money. (An aside, how can people who only receive money from the government ever be expected to understand the responsibilities of paying for that government? Answer: They cannot!)
Then Mr. Obama began a spending spree that has no peace-time precedent. Understand, no peace-time precedent. You see: a war ends, and we can pay the debt. Perhaps the 'stimulus' spending will end and we can pay that debt, but what about the costs of health care reform and other social programs that will only expand? In the future we will have to pay for the war, and the continuing war and now hugely expensive new initiatives such as universal health care.
How will we pay for these? The answer is taxes and more taxes, overt and hidden. Watch your wallet; watch your bank account; watch.... Remember that $250,000 threshold? It has been lowered, and it will go lower. Middle class people will begin paying through income taxes and in other ways. Wake up, you are hearing it now - Cap and Trade, Value Added Tax (VAT), and more to come. These taxes will hit people hard, very hard. People of all incomes will pay these taxes. Of course, Obama and colleagues will try to buy the some of us by increasing payoffs through the 'earned income credit' in the income tax code. What do higher earned income credits mean to people who don't receive this give away? More taxes! We are in for it.
What can we do about this? Simple, ORGANIZE, FIGHT BACK! Let's kick the spenders out. The so-called tea parties were a start. The people who organized these (our real, responsible leaders) must use their precious time to create a vast network of responsible people who in turn must devote themselves to defeating the policies of tax and spend. If this does not happen, this nation will be forever changed, forever a nation strange to those who new it in its greatness. The burden will fall the hardest on those who are working the hardest, those who are shouldering the real responsibility for American success. That is a tough proposition, but it is necessary for these competent people to take the lead.
We must set aside the issues that divide us and work for a responsible government. Maybe it's not too late?
Barak Obama was for many people an antidote to George Bush. People were weary of the war and felt deceived about the decision to attack Iraq. (Okay, that's understandable. I don't mean to discuss Bush here. He is not the threat to our future as a people and as a nation; Barak Obama is.) On top of the tensions over Iraq, the business cycle kicked-in, abetted by massive fraud and incompetence in the financial world, and the economy tanked. But all of this was not a reason to suspend reality and vote for 'change' - without understanding what that 'change' would be.
To make matters worse, we had John McCain as the Republican candidate - the alternative to Barak Obama. Was he ever a non-starter! He just didn't get it! He was a myopic, boring, somewhat hysterical candidate - not the right man for the job - not inspiring. But he was the lesser of two evils. He would have been less interventionist with respect to the economy and strong on defense (the latter being the real mission of a national government). Both of these would have been good. In short, McCain would have been the better choice. As uninspiring as he is, he would not have damaged us.
To the point. Obama said he would cut taxes for 95% of Americans. Most people thought that this meant a reduction in income taxes for 95% of Americans. But 95% of us do not pay income tax. (Mr. Obama would probably say that he meant income and payroll taxes.) Many of us are paid (get money) at income tax time - get it? - not taxed but given money. (And I am not talking about a refund of excess taxes paid.) So that means we are using the tax code more and more to spend money - that is, give money to people who do not pay taxes, people who did not earn that money. (An aside, how can people who only receive money from the government ever be expected to understand the responsibilities of paying for that government? Answer: They cannot!)
Then Mr. Obama began a spending spree that has no peace-time precedent. Understand, no peace-time precedent. You see: a war ends, and we can pay the debt. Perhaps the 'stimulus' spending will end and we can pay that debt, but what about the costs of health care reform and other social programs that will only expand? In the future we will have to pay for the war, and the continuing war and now hugely expensive new initiatives such as universal health care.
How will we pay for these? The answer is taxes and more taxes, overt and hidden. Watch your wallet; watch your bank account; watch.... Remember that $250,000 threshold? It has been lowered, and it will go lower. Middle class people will begin paying through income taxes and in other ways. Wake up, you are hearing it now - Cap and Trade, Value Added Tax (VAT), and more to come. These taxes will hit people hard, very hard. People of all incomes will pay these taxes. Of course, Obama and colleagues will try to buy the some of us by increasing payoffs through the 'earned income credit' in the income tax code. What do higher earned income credits mean to people who don't receive this give away? More taxes! We are in for it.
What can we do about this? Simple, ORGANIZE, FIGHT BACK! Let's kick the spenders out. The so-called tea parties were a start. The people who organized these (our real, responsible leaders) must use their precious time to create a vast network of responsible people who in turn must devote themselves to defeating the policies of tax and spend. If this does not happen, this nation will be forever changed, forever a nation strange to those who new it in its greatness. The burden will fall the hardest on those who are working the hardest, those who are shouldering the real responsibility for American success. That is a tough proposition, but it is necessary for these competent people to take the lead.
We must set aside the issues that divide us and work for a responsible government. Maybe it's not too late?
Pelosi & the CIA Briefing
We have Nancy Pelosi accusing the CIA of not informing her about enhanced interrogation techniques including water boarding. The CIA says it informed the appropriate members of Congress - at the time Congresswoman Pelosi among them. What is the conclusion? Who has lied? We should know.
Why has this disappeared from the news? Answer: The Democrat-friendly press bought the Democrat's argument (smoke screen) that there are more important matters to occupy the government, the press and the people. Basically, they say this matter is a distraction.
Sorry, it can hardly be a distraction when the Speaker of the House, number three in the presidential line of succession and leader of one branch of Congress says that a vital governmental agency has deceived the Congress. If she is correct, we have a major problem in the agency. If she lied, we have a major political figure who is not worthy of her job and is playing with national security.
A thorough investigation is warranted. But this is not likely to happen with a Democrat-controlled Congress, a Democrat in the White House in command of the CIA, and a largely lapdog press. This country is in trouble.
Why has this disappeared from the news? Answer: The Democrat-friendly press bought the Democrat's argument (smoke screen) that there are more important matters to occupy the government, the press and the people. Basically, they say this matter is a distraction.
Sorry, it can hardly be a distraction when the Speaker of the House, number three in the presidential line of succession and leader of one branch of Congress says that a vital governmental agency has deceived the Congress. If she is correct, we have a major problem in the agency. If she lied, we have a major political figure who is not worthy of her job and is playing with national security.
A thorough investigation is warranted. But this is not likely to happen with a Democrat-controlled Congress, a Democrat in the White House in command of the CIA, and a largely lapdog press. This country is in trouble.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Where To Begin - Heath Care Reform?
This is my maiden voyage blogging. And already I have probably managed to either offend someone ('maiden' = sexist?) or lost a bunch of people ('maiden voyage' = archaic?). Too bad. The first 'offense' is commonsensically nothing more than nonsensical political correctness, and the second is ignorance which all of us share at some point (and can be remedied?).
My intention here is to challenge or oppose policies and proposals and even ways of thinking that I (one person) believe are illogical, detrimental or downright destructive and to ask questions that do not seem to attract the attention of the venerable fourth estate. Or is the press purposefully silent?
Enough! Let's get something done.
In the news lately is the Obama health care proposal. Aside from the questionable value of nationalizing private businesses, I am struck by how the proposal is promoted; i.e., we are going to realize a $2 billion savings (cost avoidance?) over ten years. Are we thinking; is our smell test working? Savings over 10 Years. Whenever the government or a politician tells us that something is going to cost less over pick-a-number years, we are probably being had. Why? Read on.
What are the politicos doing or not doing?
My intention here is to challenge or oppose policies and proposals and even ways of thinking that I (one person) believe are illogical, detrimental or downright destructive and to ask questions that do not seem to attract the attention of the venerable fourth estate. Or is the press purposefully silent?
Enough! Let's get something done.
In the news lately is the Obama health care proposal. Aside from the questionable value of nationalizing private businesses, I am struck by how the proposal is promoted; i.e., we are going to realize a $2 billion savings (cost avoidance?) over ten years. Are we thinking; is our smell test working? Savings over 10 Years. Whenever the government or a politician tells us that something is going to cost less over pick-a-number years, we are probably being had. Why? Read on.
What are the politicos doing or not doing?
- They are not telling you that the savings, here and now while you are listening and watching, is virtually nothing. If the savings were significant, they would be touting that. And don't buy the line: This is the start-up year and savings will, of course, be lower. Think: Yes, Mr. Politician, you give me a dollar now, later you'll give me millions. Right!
- They know there are so many variables that an easy explanation as to why the savings was not realized will be easily had. The story goes: If the price of oil just had not risen, our savings would have been had. Sometimes the excuses are valid, but over the years the multiplicity of them will only confound the analysis and cover the rascality. Ten years is along time, and some excuse will surely happen along to cover the inconvenient truth.
- When the period needed to realize the savings exceeds the proponents' terms of office, they are, of course, not accountable and their successors will say it didn't happen on my watch (wasn't my program). Heads I win; tails you lose.
- Oh, and the $2 trillion, is it in today's dollars or inflated dollars?
Any anyway what is $2 trillion over ten years? $200 billion per year, tidy sums, but against what base? We need to know that also. In other words, what percentage of spending is being avoided? In the instance of Mr. Obama's health care proposal, there may be good answers to some or all of these questions. The problem is that we may be buying (or being force-fed) a pig in a poke.
Without knowing more, how can we possibly support changing something as vast and important as the health care system? Remember that a generation ago, we rejected Hilary Care. We weren't buying that oinker.
Obama is President. In him we have a person with no real experience as the leader of anything significant or being responsible for anything important. He is changing so much with so little foundation of experience. And we are the ones who will be affected. Now is that common sense? I would be interested in knowing?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
