Well, with a 16% approval rating, Congress definitely is representing the people(?). The president’s 46% approval isn’t much better, the lowest of his presidency, and on the decline… We may as well change the constitution since the will of the people is now an after thought…
Thanks again Ramirez…
Well, with the passing of the healthcare bill, John Stossel posted on his blog simply mentioning 3 issues to wait for with the new bill. I decided to quote most of the his post as it is good. Also, be sure to check out the links within his words as they open up more of the reality and disparity of this decision…
HERE’S JOHNNY:
Now that the deed is done, we know which of the politicians’ brilliant ideas will become law. Here are three of the most harmful:
1) The ban on “discriminating” against anyone with a pre-existing condition. This is popular, and yet one of the most damaging part of the bill. It forbids insurance companies to charge sick people more for insurance. The result: I will wait until I get sick to get insurance. The bill supposedly has a $750 fine for not buying insurance [Page 323.] But that won’t even be enforced [page 336.] Even if I did have to pay a $750 fine, so what? That’s much less than the $20,000 plus that it would cost me to buy insurance for my family. I’d be a fool to buy insurance now.
Soon only sick people will buy insurance, so premiums will skyrocket. One study found that it would increase premiums by 50%. Will our politicians see their mistake and fix it? No, they’ll bash “evil” insurance companies. The insurance market is competitive today. Obamacare will reduce competition.
2) The cost. Supposedly $568 billion just for the years 2015 to 2019 (it doesn’t really kick in until 2015.) This comes at a time when the debt is already so high that the federal government is in danger of losing its AAA credit rating. And get this — Warren Buffet’s company can now borrow money at a lower rate than the US government–apparently investors believe his company is more likely to pay them back.
What got the bill through were the dubious promises given to the CBO, ie: the promise to cut Medicare. But we all know Congress won’t actually cut Medicare — it has voted to ignore automatic, scheduled Medicare cuts every year since 2002 (once they even overrode a veto to do it).
This graph represents the future of our debt payments, before the health care bill passed. The area in red shows how much the federal government will have to pay in the coming years simply in interest on the debt.
Now, Congress adds a nearly $1 Trillion health care bill. And of course, government programs always cost more than promised.
3) Mandates will raise costs. The bill forces all insurance plans to cover “at least… maternity and newborn care… Mental health and substance disorder services… behavioral health treatment… preventative and wellness services and chronic disease management… pediatric services, including oral and vision care.” In the real world, some people want these and some don’t. By requiring insurance companies to pay for all, we guarantee vast increases in wasteful spending. Also, the future offers endless new mandates — the bill gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services the power to create them. [Page 105.]
With problems like those, the disgusting earmarks in the bill — like the $100 million “Cornhusker Kickback” and the $300 million “Louisiana Purchase” — seem barely worth a footnote.
The New York Times editorial board says that the bill “has some imperfections but is worthy of support.”
Give me a break.
Read more: http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/03/22/the-3-worst-obamacare-ingredients/#ixzz0jA3k5U26
This is one of my favorite discussions on Health Care…. Since when has the government been an efficient OR effective “business person”? Nothing can ever pay for itself or work like a business, that just wouldn’t be politically correct… Luckily, when you have a “money machine” it will keep going!
Thanks again Mr. Ramirez. see more of him here…
Well, education spending is a hot topic, especially where I come from. Here in my area, the Jordan School District is struggling due to poor policy management over the last while and the separation of the budget between districts. I still don’t know the real numbers or what is needed but this video brings to light something we all need to understand about costs in education…
You will also want to see this, a pdf article by Adam Schaeffer (the guy in the vid) discussing this lack of transparency in public education. How can we ever fix a system we don’t even understand? …when the issues are clouded or hidden?
Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics by Henry Hazlitt
My rating: 4 of 5 stars
A phenomenal synopsis in economic thought. This is a book that everyone ought to read as informed citizens, allowing us all to make wiser economic decisions versus voting for what “sounds” good. Hazlitt writes so all will understand and does a fantastic job at it. That doesn’t mean it is the most exciting thing you’ve ever read, however. It can be a little dry but remains understandable and clear. Hazlitt’s examples illuminate economic concepts better than most. He is not distracted by the complexity generated by many economists of a discipline that should not be so. This tends to be the issue of many academics and can be seen in the economic learning process. As you advance through economic theory, simple concepts are often discredited and replaced with complex ones creating substantial contradictions. Hazlitt’s observations continue to be relevant 30+ years after the latest edition of this book. We haven’t learned much, apparently. This is one lesson everyone should read.
Cash for clunkers is simply another political blunder that economically skews the markets, misplacing resources through malinvestment (Mises’ term) all at the cost of the common tax payer. Isn’t that what we need? This vid is sweet…
Oh Paul… Paul Krugman, our Keynes Reincarnate… here to influence us to continue walking toward the “Keynesian light”. I recently read an article by Lilburne from the Ludwig von Mises Institute regarding Paul Krugman’s current influential role in our political economy. The article is titled “The Second Coming of Keynes” and highlights some interesting points regarding America’s tendency to NOT learn from our experiences. He states:
Paul Krugman is a devotee of John Maynard Keynes. He’s such a hard core disciple that he was Keyensian when Keynesianism wasn’t cool: the period between the 1970s stagflation, which seemed to disprove Keynesian doctrine, and now, when it is groundlessly renascent due to our society’s stunted memory span.
And what of the years and years of proofing done by classical economists, testing the original ideas of Adam Smith? Richard Ebeling (former president of FEE) wrote in the Freeman a few years ago:
The classical economists of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries had persuasively demonstrated that government intervention prevented the smooth functioning of the market. They constructed a body of economic theory which clearly showed that governments have neither the knowledge nor the ability to direct economic affairs.
…During the Napoleonic wars of the early nineteenth century, many European countries experienced serious inflations as governments resorted to the printing press to fund their war expenditures. The lesson the classical economists learned was that the hand of the government had to be removed from the handle of that printing press if monetary stability was to be maintained.
I will leave the evidence behind these claims to the authors (see their articles and other writings for detail). Suffice it to say we cannot recall our past with the prudence to understand that the social collectivist movements– no matter the name albeit communism, socialism, or progressivism– are not effective systems. We are set to govern ourselves and no individual carries a divine calling as supreme decision maker for the collective (which is interesting considering Marx was anti-religious. I wonder how he assumed his calling?).
Now back to Krugman… as a devout Keynesian disciple, he once stated:
one of the high points of the semester, if you’re a teacher of introductory macroeconomics, comes when you explain how individual virtue can be public vice, how attempts by consumers to do the right thing by saving more can leave everyone worse off. The point is that if consumers cut their spending, and nothing else takes the place of that spending, the economy will slide into a recession, reducing everyone’s income.
I must agree with Lilburne that such as statement is an example of “childish theory.” As Lilburne quotes Gary North:
peak of saving as if it were a system for hiding paper currency under a mattress. They refuse to answer this crucial question: What does the bank do with the money that a consumer deposits instead of spending? Put another way: What analytical or conceptual difference does it make whether a saver deposits a dollar [in] his bank, which the bank will lend, or whether he spends it, enabling the seller to deposit the dollar in his bank, which his bank will lend?
The Keynesian theory is either ignorantly arrogant (as Keynes himself often was) or completely naive to banking and finance processes.
The best part is this country’s people and leaders’ willingness to accept it without a thought or research. I guess that’s the definition of progressivism: “Don’t look back, don’t read old thinking, we must move forward with “new” ideas that you don’t call “classic” cuz that’s too old and un-progressive…”
It may be much simpler as to why this thought realm is so popular with politicians and governments, as I’ve previously quoted and discussed here, from Ebeling again:
What Keynes succeeded in doing was to provide a rationale for what governments always like to do: spend money and pander to special interests.
Welcome Back Maynard… I mean Paul… whatever…
I recently read an editorial from Investors Business Daily here. It starts by stating:
Free Speech: The White House and Congress claim the anti-ObamaCare uprising is artificially organized. But the violent — even racist — union counterattacks, urged on by Democrats, are the real Rent-a-Mobs.
I can’t believe they actually think these uprising are artificial! It sounds much more like reactions out of fear… especially when they claim “its all just racism because they don’t like their black president…” HA! Yeah, use the bogey counter, that’s it… this is a simple case of fearful reaction to an uncontrollable situation. Even if they are “manufactured”, whatever that means, people still have to willfully choose to participate. Besides, the level of manufacturing doesn’t come anywhere near that achieved by left-wingers such as Acorn or the Union rallies of the past. The right is not the rallying type as we’ve seen over history so when they do, it makes you wonder. As for racism comments, they come with somewhat hypocritical actions:
The White House-ordered push-back has extended even to racist violence. Thugs at Rep. Russ Carnahan’s St. Louis town hall meeting last week beat and knocked down a black man, Kenneth Gladney. One called him the N-word, according to Gladney — all because he was distributing “Don’t Tread On Me” flags.
As for “proof” of manufactured rallies versus the actions of the White House and it’s supporters:
Indeed, it is the opposition to this opposition that is aggressively and meticulously organized. White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina last week gave the order to “push back twice as hard.”
And the national field director of the union-backed Health Care for America Now (HCAN) on Aug. 4 apparently sent out a four-page, single-spaced, 2,500-word-plus “how to bully” memo.
The document, featured on the Talking Points Memo Web site, says “it’s important that you take away right-wingers’ opportunities to talk with reporters.” It tells operatives to “confiscate signs or leaflets” of those opposing ObamaCare. It adds: “Make sure that you assign marshals to take care of moving the crowd.”
Human Events recently exposed a memo from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stating that congressional Democratic leaders and the White House are “working in close coordination with” HCAN and other union-backed groups in organizing a pro-ObamaCare PR blitz this month…
There’s no evidence behind the wild claims of Pelosi and other ObamaCare proponents that the grass-roots protests against them are artificially manufactured.
But there is well-documented proof of the coordinated planning that has led to violent White House/Pelosi-backed thuggery.
Keep up the good work, white house crew. I wonder if you remember what the office is for? or what “representative” actually means? Again, check out the article here.
Stewart Brand recently shared some interesting insights about the “poor” and their efforts to escape poverty. It happens almost entirely outside of the “formal” economy, outside of government regulation, outside of socialistic bureaucracy. This is the only way it can happen as collective regulation does nothing more than prohibit growth and development. Although I don’t agree with much that is shared by your typical environmentalist, as they tend to follow Malthusian thought limitations, I found the initial point in this video interesting as well as a point here and there throughout the video. Take what you will:
Bravo! Isn’t she grand! Check out more here.
Get a unique perspective on today’s issues with the political cartoons of IBD’s Pulitzer Prize Winner, Michael Ramirez.
Twitter
LinkedIn
Facebook
Flickr
RSS