Last week, I watched The Hunger Games with my wife and some friends. It seems that everyone was struck by the brutality. One of my wife's friends was upset that her young son had been to see the movie with a friend. She was worried that he would be scarred by viewing the violence.
I was struck by something else. I saw the people living with no freedom. The police were called peace keepers. That sounds very much like the United Nations military force. There was stark poverty. The people were supposed to stay within their home district, and electric fences were erected to prevent free travel between districts. The capitol district was filled with members of the ruling class. They were affluent. They were the trendsetters. The ruling class was an elitist bunch that smugly considered the folks from the outlying districts to be ignorant hicks.
I wonder if the kids today have any clue what they were watching. The fact that the characters spoke English with an American accent indicated that this was some futuristic United States. Many of the scenes of the outlying District 12 looked a lot like the Appalachian mountains in North Carolina or Tennessee. Everything I saw with the way the people lived brought back visions I had developed in my mind of the Eastern European communist states during the cold war. Is this the vision the communists have of the United States of the future? Is this their dream for America?
I hope that the schools today teach our kids about the realities of communism. After all, there are a number of countries in Eastern Europe and Asia where communism was tried on a very large scale over decades. Do the kids get a good, realistic view of what life in a communist country was like? Do they understand shortages of basic necessities like food and clothing? Have they been taught that making everyone equal doesn't mean that everyone will be rich? Are they aware that everyone won't be in the middle class? Is the brutality of an unbridled police force taught to our next generation? If communism is the ideal state, why did communist countries need to erect fences to keep people inside? We don't need fences to keep Americans here; I don't see hordes of Americans emigrating to communist states for a better life.
Communism allows the government to seize all private property and share everything with everyone. Although it seems that everything is shared equally, some folks are "more equal" that others. That's an interesting way of saying that the ruling class can be rich, while non-government rich folks get their property taken away.
In the 1960's and 1970's, Americans in general were strongly against communism. They understood the difference between our laissez-faire, capitalist economic and political system and communism. Any American that claimed to be a communist was considered to be pretty far out there. Today, things have changed. The MessAPolitico is slowly eroding our freedoms. They run for office and offer everyone a bunch of "free" services that will be paid for by getting the rich to pay more and more taxes. The tax system today has managed to get about half of us a free ride; the bottom half of the economic scale doesn't pay any taxes. The budget is hopelessly out of balance, and the MessAPolitico continues to tell us that the rich can afford to pay more to get it balanced.
Is this not taking from the rich and moving it to the poor to equalize us? That seems like a good idea on the surface, but there is a major flaw in the communist system. First, the communists will tell you that the rich got rich by taking from the poor. In fact, the rich got rich by selling products and services that deliver more value than they cost to produce and deliver. The difference is the profit. Everyone is better off for this exchange of money for goods and services. The purchaser gets a product or service that they need at a price they find acceptable. The business owner gets a profit and return on their investments in capital. The people that are employed by the business earn a salary and benefits helping the business produce and deliver the goods and services. The suppliers of equipment and raw materials to the business are also better off. When communists come along and convince us to punish the rich people that made all of this possible, everyone is hurt. All of the folks that received all of the benefits of a vibrant economy lose out. That's how we all end up poor, except for the ruling class that skims a bunch off of the top to feed the bureaucracy. That's why the government is so terribly inefficient.
Getting back to The Hunger Games, it was an interesting movie. I thought it was a good view of communism and the affect of a totalitarian government on the average people. I wonder if President Obama watched this movie with a gleam in his eye. I also wonder if the parents have pointed out something to their kids that wasn't pointed out in the movie. Have they told the kids that this is the way a communist country looks?
Monday, December 30, 2013
Friday, December 20, 2013
Can Republicans Play Hardball?
I have watched the Republicans operate over the past several years, and I don't believe they know how to play hardball. They just don't have the courage to stick to their principles. When the Democrats control everything, they get everything they want. When the Republicans are in power, they reach across the aisle and compromise. The Democrats control the mainstream media, and most things the Republicans do gets spun into a MessAPolitico. The Republicans are left cowering in the corner.
When Democrats get in trouble, they circle the wagons. The media ignores the story. It all goes away with no lasting ramifications. The Republicans, by contrast, often very publicly denounce one another. They can tell the Tea Party members that helped elect them to stand down. At times, this has infuriated me. I do understand that no law can be passed without Democrat support in the Senate. I also understand that the President won't sign anything that gives conservatives everything they want.
With the Republicans compromising on the budget and giving up the sequester cuts, it appears that they don't realize the position they are in today. Just a couple of weeks ago, one of my Senators wrote me a letter bragging that the continuing resolution passed to end the "government shutdown" had preserved the sequester cuts. Those were the cuts that weren't really cuts. Well, now those cuts have been given away by the Republicans.
Today, the opinion polls are solidly against Obama and the Democrats in Congress. Everyone out here in the real world now sees that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is anything but affordable. Already, almost 6 million people have lost their health insurance coverage. This number dwarfs the number of folks that have gained insurance through the PPACA. The people that have lost coverage will need to replace it with a new policy that is undoubtedly going to be much more expensive than the original. Many others are finding out that their doctor is not covered by their new Obamacare coverage. Still others are receiving letters from their doctor, because Obamacare has made their medical practice financially unsustainable. The inadequacies of the website to sign up for Obamacare coverage have been covered extensively in the media, and it is highly unlikely these problems will be fixed anytime soon.
All of the Democrats in the House and about one third in the Senate are up for re-election next November. The folks out in America know that the PPACA was passed without a single Republican vote. I'll bet that the Democrats that passed this health care MessAPolitico are hoping we will forget about all of the problems by next November. Of course, we are all reminded with each monthly insurance premium about how much we abhor Obamacare. Those folks that lost their jobs or got their hours cut back or lost the insurance formerly offered by their employers won't forget.
Now is the time to ask for the Democrats to help repeal this MessAPolitico. The people are demanding it. The people are going to replace the politicians that don't help stop Obamacare. A bunch of these Democrats are going to have to be recruited to override the veto of Barack Obama. The dirty little secret is that the Republicans don't want to fix this MessAPolitico any time soon. In fact, they want it around until after the election in 2014. They need it for political reasons. Instead of taking advantage of the current Democrat political situation, the Republicans would prefer to hold out for bigger gains in November. Who cares if it is terrible for America? Their political futures are much more important than their constituents' needs.
When Democrats get in trouble, they circle the wagons. The media ignores the story. It all goes away with no lasting ramifications. The Republicans, by contrast, often very publicly denounce one another. They can tell the Tea Party members that helped elect them to stand down. At times, this has infuriated me. I do understand that no law can be passed without Democrat support in the Senate. I also understand that the President won't sign anything that gives conservatives everything they want.
With the Republicans compromising on the budget and giving up the sequester cuts, it appears that they don't realize the position they are in today. Just a couple of weeks ago, one of my Senators wrote me a letter bragging that the continuing resolution passed to end the "government shutdown" had preserved the sequester cuts. Those were the cuts that weren't really cuts. Well, now those cuts have been given away by the Republicans.
Today, the opinion polls are solidly against Obama and the Democrats in Congress. Everyone out here in the real world now sees that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is anything but affordable. Already, almost 6 million people have lost their health insurance coverage. This number dwarfs the number of folks that have gained insurance through the PPACA. The people that have lost coverage will need to replace it with a new policy that is undoubtedly going to be much more expensive than the original. Many others are finding out that their doctor is not covered by their new Obamacare coverage. Still others are receiving letters from their doctor, because Obamacare has made their medical practice financially unsustainable. The inadequacies of the website to sign up for Obamacare coverage have been covered extensively in the media, and it is highly unlikely these problems will be fixed anytime soon.
All of the Democrats in the House and about one third in the Senate are up for re-election next November. The folks out in America know that the PPACA was passed without a single Republican vote. I'll bet that the Democrats that passed this health care MessAPolitico are hoping we will forget about all of the problems by next November. Of course, we are all reminded with each monthly insurance premium about how much we abhor Obamacare. Those folks that lost their jobs or got their hours cut back or lost the insurance formerly offered by their employers won't forget.
Now is the time to ask for the Democrats to help repeal this MessAPolitico. The people are demanding it. The people are going to replace the politicians that don't help stop Obamacare. A bunch of these Democrats are going to have to be recruited to override the veto of Barack Obama. The dirty little secret is that the Republicans don't want to fix this MessAPolitico any time soon. In fact, they want it around until after the election in 2014. They need it for political reasons. Instead of taking advantage of the current Democrat political situation, the Republicans would prefer to hold out for bigger gains in November. Who cares if it is terrible for America? Their political futures are much more important than their constituents' needs.
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Tea Party Racists?
Last night, I was watching a talk show where a Democratic strategist was debating a Tea Party person. The Democratic strategist was an African-American gentleman, and he repeated over and over that the Tea Party is a racist organization. The host and the other guest from the Tea Party asked him for an example of something racist that was done by the Tea Party or said by one of its members or leaders. The strategist kept bringing up some Neo-Nazi group that has a website claiming they are affiliated with the Tea Party or maybe they support the Tea Party.
I had never heard of this Neo-Nazi organization, and I didn't write down the name so I could check it out. In any case, this is a pretty loose interpretation of what it means to be a racist organization. I guess it would make Barack Obama a socialist if a socialist organization supported him. Alec Baldwin was recently accused of yelling an anti-gay slur at a reporter, and he is well known for his liberal leanings and support for Barack Obama. Mr. Baldwin also had a show on MSNBC. Does that make MSNBC an anti-gay network? Is the Democrat party also anti-gay since Alec Baldwin supports it?
Interestingly, Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia was a member of the Ku Klux Klan in his younger years. In fact, some people referred to him as "Sheets" Byrd. He wasn't just dabbling in the Klan, but was a recruiter. Considering that Senator Byrd was a Democrat, you might think that this certainly would qualify the Democrat party as a racist organization. After all, they supported his campaigns for the Senate over decades. They didn't even think of kicking him out of the party. The Democrat party didn't even denounce his past life. So why are these Democrats given a free pass on this issue, with even the NAACP giving him a 100% rating for his votes in the 108th congress.
I've attended a few Tea Party meetings. I'm not a member. I don't think you can even become a member per se. It seems that some regular folks get together twice a month and discuss issues with the country. Sometimes a candidate for some local office comes in and discusses their platform. On several occasions, a candidate was addressing the group, and their positions weren't fiscally responsible. That candidate was told by several attendees that they would not be getting their support, and in one case the attendee said that this candidate would receive active opposition.
Never once have I heard or seen anything that was the least bit racist at any Tea Party function. I've never seen it at my local meetings in person. I've never seen or heard anything racist from a national figure on the radio or television. I visited www.teapartypatriots.com and found this mission statement:
The MessAPolitico can't fight a common sense message like the one above head-on. So, how do they take on the Tea Party? It has to be done with spin, lies, innuendo, and a carefully crafted image of the Tea Party. I think I heard the real gist of the Democrat strategist's argument that the Tea Party is an inherently racist organization. He made some offhand comment that some Tea Party members were "birthers." He said that the Tea Party people were trying to prove that the President was born in Kenya and thus, not an American citizen. That's why the Tea Party is racist.
First, I will say that I heard something at a Tea Party meeting that was quite contrary to this. I was told by another attendee at a tea party meeting that Barack Obama's real father was an American named Frank Marshall Davis. He loaned me a movie that I watched, and it presented a case for Mr. Davis being his real father. I was told that it was a mistake to try and prove that Barack Obama was not an American citizen. Photographs are shown to illustrate the similarity of their appearance. Mr. Davis lived in Hawaii when Barack Obama was born and thereafter. The movie stated that Barack spent a lot of time with Mr. Davis, who was a Communist party propagandist. It also says that the President was born in the US. Never once have I heard anyone question Barack Obama's citizenship at a Tea Party function.
In any case, I'm not sure how it is racist to check into Barack Obama's background to find out if he is a US citizen. I guess any questioning of Barack Obama is inherently racist, since he is African-American. Probably it is racist to disagree with Barack Obama or any of his policies. Since the Tea Party disagrees with the liberal fiscal policies and the massive power grab that is currently eroding our freedoms, they are racist. Me, I'm not racist. I'm just anti-MessAPolitico. My personal mission is precisely aligned with the mission statement above for the Tea Party Patriots.
I had never heard of this Neo-Nazi organization, and I didn't write down the name so I could check it out. In any case, this is a pretty loose interpretation of what it means to be a racist organization. I guess it would make Barack Obama a socialist if a socialist organization supported him. Alec Baldwin was recently accused of yelling an anti-gay slur at a reporter, and he is well known for his liberal leanings and support for Barack Obama. Mr. Baldwin also had a show on MSNBC. Does that make MSNBC an anti-gay network? Is the Democrat party also anti-gay since Alec Baldwin supports it?
Interestingly, Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia was a member of the Ku Klux Klan in his younger years. In fact, some people referred to him as "Sheets" Byrd. He wasn't just dabbling in the Klan, but was a recruiter. Considering that Senator Byrd was a Democrat, you might think that this certainly would qualify the Democrat party as a racist organization. After all, they supported his campaigns for the Senate over decades. They didn't even think of kicking him out of the party. The Democrat party didn't even denounce his past life. So why are these Democrats given a free pass on this issue, with even the NAACP giving him a 100% rating for his votes in the 108th congress.
I've attended a few Tea Party meetings. I'm not a member. I don't think you can even become a member per se. It seems that some regular folks get together twice a month and discuss issues with the country. Sometimes a candidate for some local office comes in and discusses their platform. On several occasions, a candidate was addressing the group, and their positions weren't fiscally responsible. That candidate was told by several attendees that they would not be getting their support, and in one case the attendee said that this candidate would receive active opposition.
Never once have I heard or seen anything that was the least bit racist at any Tea Party function. I've never seen it at my local meetings in person. I've never seen or heard anything racist from a national figure on the radio or television. I visited www.teapartypatriots.com and found this mission statement:
- The Tea Party Patriots’ mission is to restore America’s founding principles of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets.
The MessAPolitico can't fight a common sense message like the one above head-on. So, how do they take on the Tea Party? It has to be done with spin, lies, innuendo, and a carefully crafted image of the Tea Party. I think I heard the real gist of the Democrat strategist's argument that the Tea Party is an inherently racist organization. He made some offhand comment that some Tea Party members were "birthers." He said that the Tea Party people were trying to prove that the President was born in Kenya and thus, not an American citizen. That's why the Tea Party is racist.
First, I will say that I heard something at a Tea Party meeting that was quite contrary to this. I was told by another attendee at a tea party meeting that Barack Obama's real father was an American named Frank Marshall Davis. He loaned me a movie that I watched, and it presented a case for Mr. Davis being his real father. I was told that it was a mistake to try and prove that Barack Obama was not an American citizen. Photographs are shown to illustrate the similarity of their appearance. Mr. Davis lived in Hawaii when Barack Obama was born and thereafter. The movie stated that Barack spent a lot of time with Mr. Davis, who was a Communist party propagandist. It also says that the President was born in the US. Never once have I heard anyone question Barack Obama's citizenship at a Tea Party function.
In any case, I'm not sure how it is racist to check into Barack Obama's background to find out if he is a US citizen. I guess any questioning of Barack Obama is inherently racist, since he is African-American. Probably it is racist to disagree with Barack Obama or any of his policies. Since the Tea Party disagrees with the liberal fiscal policies and the massive power grab that is currently eroding our freedoms, they are racist. Me, I'm not racist. I'm just anti-MessAPolitico. My personal mission is precisely aligned with the mission statement above for the Tea Party Patriots.
Monday, December 16, 2013
Fracking: Friend or Foe?
The environmentalists are all worked up about hydraulic fracturing. I have been reading some information on the Ohio Environmental Council's website. They refer to fracking as a "relatively new drilling technology." Interestingly, this technology was first used in 1949. I guess that is "relatively new" compared to the Earth.
The website www.dangersoffracking.com states that "Up to 600 chemicals are used in fracking fluid, including known carcinogens and toxins." Numerous websites out there want to imply that "fracking" is destroying the Earth. There contention is that the process pollutes ground water and produces cancer deaths. In fact, they don't have any studies showing this to be the truth. Former EPA administrator Lisa Jackson is quoted as saying that there is no "proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water." Fracking has been done on federal lands, and the former director of the Bureau of Land Management says that his federal agency "has never seen any evidence of impacts to groundwater from the use of fracking technology on wells that have been approved by [the Bureau of Land Management]. . . We believe, based upon the track record so far, that it is safe."
It is ironic that the MessAPolitico is trying to block the use of fracking. Stopping fracking would limit the supply of natural gas. This technology has unlocked a lot of domestic sources of natural gas and oil. About 10-12 years ago, the price of natural gas was rising dramatically, and we were being told that the last supplies of clean natural gas were depleted. Those of us that heat our water and our homes with natural gas could see the effects of this waning supply of natural gas. I live in a new, efficient home, but I would have two gas/electric bills in the winter every year that were around $400. Of course, that makes the cost of industrial production where heating is used, very expensive too.
The big irony is that 71% of our electricity is produced by burning coal. Coal is a cheap, but not very efficient way to produce electricity. It also produces a lot more greenhouse gas and other pollutants in heating your home than electricity produced by burning coal. Wouldn't it make sense to a tree-hugger to encourage folks to use more natural gas and less electricity? Wouldn't more plentiful natural gas tend to reduce it's cost relative to electricity and make folks migrate from electricity toward natural gas?
The truth is that the environmental movement is littered with liars and people that believe the lies. I don't believe that the tree-huggers are really all that worried about fracking destroying the environment by pumping chemicals and water into the ground. I firmly believe that they want to stop anything that reduces the cost of energy produced by fossil fuels. They are using EPA regulations to shut down coal-fired power plants. They are stopping the Keystone XL pipeline based on environmental concerns that are shaky at best. They don't want any drilling for oil in the ocean or northern Alaska or anywhere else. The environmentalist wacko strategy is to very simply limit the supply of all fossil fuels to make the alternative energy sources cost competitive.
What does this mean for us regular Americans? They aren't going to make alternative energy less expensive to make it competitive. The goal is to make our current sources a lot more expensive -- probably more than double what it is today. That drives energy intensive manufacturing out of the USA. It means we spend more on energy and less on other stuff. It hurts our economy. It drives the prices of a lot of things that require significant amounts of energy to produce and/or deliver up, up, up.
If you believe the doom and gloom brought to you by the tree-huggers that are controlling the strings of their puppets in the MessAPolitico, then I would bet that you are a voter who helped put them in power. You are hurting us all by believing the crap they are spewing. That's the biggest pollution problem we have in America today -- the crap being spewed into the environment from Washington, DC. Don't forget that increasing the use of natural gas instead of electricity and oil would make the environment cleaner, and the environmental movement is fighting this.
The website www.dangersoffracking.com states that "Up to 600 chemicals are used in fracking fluid, including known carcinogens and toxins." Numerous websites out there want to imply that "fracking" is destroying the Earth. There contention is that the process pollutes ground water and produces cancer deaths. In fact, they don't have any studies showing this to be the truth. Former EPA administrator Lisa Jackson is quoted as saying that there is no "proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water." Fracking has been done on federal lands, and the former director of the Bureau of Land Management says that his federal agency "has never seen any evidence of impacts to groundwater from the use of fracking technology on wells that have been approved by [the Bureau of Land Management]. . . We believe, based upon the track record so far, that it is safe."
It is ironic that the MessAPolitico is trying to block the use of fracking. Stopping fracking would limit the supply of natural gas. This technology has unlocked a lot of domestic sources of natural gas and oil. About 10-12 years ago, the price of natural gas was rising dramatically, and we were being told that the last supplies of clean natural gas were depleted. Those of us that heat our water and our homes with natural gas could see the effects of this waning supply of natural gas. I live in a new, efficient home, but I would have two gas/electric bills in the winter every year that were around $400. Of course, that makes the cost of industrial production where heating is used, very expensive too.
The big irony is that 71% of our electricity is produced by burning coal. Coal is a cheap, but not very efficient way to produce electricity. It also produces a lot more greenhouse gas and other pollutants in heating your home than electricity produced by burning coal. Wouldn't it make sense to a tree-hugger to encourage folks to use more natural gas and less electricity? Wouldn't more plentiful natural gas tend to reduce it's cost relative to electricity and make folks migrate from electricity toward natural gas?
The truth is that the environmental movement is littered with liars and people that believe the lies. I don't believe that the tree-huggers are really all that worried about fracking destroying the environment by pumping chemicals and water into the ground. I firmly believe that they want to stop anything that reduces the cost of energy produced by fossil fuels. They are using EPA regulations to shut down coal-fired power plants. They are stopping the Keystone XL pipeline based on environmental concerns that are shaky at best. They don't want any drilling for oil in the ocean or northern Alaska or anywhere else. The environmentalist wacko strategy is to very simply limit the supply of all fossil fuels to make the alternative energy sources cost competitive.
What does this mean for us regular Americans? They aren't going to make alternative energy less expensive to make it competitive. The goal is to make our current sources a lot more expensive -- probably more than double what it is today. That drives energy intensive manufacturing out of the USA. It means we spend more on energy and less on other stuff. It hurts our economy. It drives the prices of a lot of things that require significant amounts of energy to produce and/or deliver up, up, up.
If you believe the doom and gloom brought to you by the tree-huggers that are controlling the strings of their puppets in the MessAPolitico, then I would bet that you are a voter who helped put them in power. You are hurting us all by believing the crap they are spewing. That's the biggest pollution problem we have in America today -- the crap being spewed into the environment from Washington, DC. Don't forget that increasing the use of natural gas instead of electricity and oil would make the environment cleaner, and the environmental movement is fighting this.
Friday, December 13, 2013
New IRS Regulations
The IRS has announced new regulations governing 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations. They say it was done to remove the ambiguity that led to the IRS scandal a few months ago. Of course, the IRS was denying tax exempt status to Tea Party groups and other conservative groups on the basis that they were political organizations. Of course, they were approving the 501(c)(4) applications for liberal or progressive organizations and showing favoritism.
The new regulations were released for discussion on November 26th, just before the Thanksgiving holiday. I don't remember hearing any mention of these new rules in the mainstream media or talk radio or anywhere. Imagine that. I read a little about the changes on line today, and it doesn't really appear that the new regulation will remove the ambiguity at all. The rule now says that a 501(c)(4) social welfare entity can take part in political activities related to a candidates as long as these activities don't constitute the entity’s primary purpose. So what does that mean? If an organization is talking about liberty or fiscal responsibility or following the constitution and that happens to be the platform of a candidate, then does that make candidate promotion a primary purpose of the organization?
Furthermore, why is this any concern of the IRS? Are they supposed to operate in such a way as to tax free speech? Isn't that what this is about? If you want to be a tax exempt organization, then you can't say things in support of the position of the opposition party to the one currently holding office.
Now, let's look at the bigger picture. The IRS isn't a legislative branch of the government. How can they operate within the confines of the US Constitution and create all of these regulations? What's the difference between a law and a regulation? The IRS, like most other federal government entities, is producing rules and regulations that we must follow or be fined or imprisoned. That is nothing but a law hiding behind the name of IRS regulation.
Our federal government is a huge MessAPolitico that is totally out of control. Our freedoms are under assault every day. The IRS is busy taking from the rich and giving to the poor -- and also giving to their cronies. It's time for another American revolution. Hopefully this time it can be a political revolt rather than a military operation, but it's going to happen. Maybe Obamacare will be the straw that breaks the camel's back, or maybe it will be the IRS or the NSA or something else. Americans are nearly at their breaking point. It is my optimistic belief that the revolt will take place at the polls next November.
The new regulations were released for discussion on November 26th, just before the Thanksgiving holiday. I don't remember hearing any mention of these new rules in the mainstream media or talk radio or anywhere. Imagine that. I read a little about the changes on line today, and it doesn't really appear that the new regulation will remove the ambiguity at all. The rule now says that a 501(c)(4) social welfare entity can take part in political activities related to a candidates as long as these activities don't constitute the entity’s primary purpose. So what does that mean? If an organization is talking about liberty or fiscal responsibility or following the constitution and that happens to be the platform of a candidate, then does that make candidate promotion a primary purpose of the organization?
Furthermore, why is this any concern of the IRS? Are they supposed to operate in such a way as to tax free speech? Isn't that what this is about? If you want to be a tax exempt organization, then you can't say things in support of the position of the opposition party to the one currently holding office.
Now, let's look at the bigger picture. The IRS isn't a legislative branch of the government. How can they operate within the confines of the US Constitution and create all of these regulations? What's the difference between a law and a regulation? The IRS, like most other federal government entities, is producing rules and regulations that we must follow or be fined or imprisoned. That is nothing but a law hiding behind the name of IRS regulation.
Our federal government is a huge MessAPolitico that is totally out of control. Our freedoms are under assault every day. The IRS is busy taking from the rich and giving to the poor -- and also giving to their cronies. It's time for another American revolution. Hopefully this time it can be a political revolt rather than a military operation, but it's going to happen. Maybe Obamacare will be the straw that breaks the camel's back, or maybe it will be the IRS or the NSA or something else. Americans are nearly at their breaking point. It is my optimistic belief that the revolt will take place at the polls next November.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Obamacare: Does the Strategy Make Sense?
Regardless of whether the folks supporting it knew this, Obamacare had a strategy for reducing insurance premiums for some, while increasing them for others. The plan had a number of tactics for taking money from one group and giving it to another group. Here was the plan:
Does any of this stuff make sense when you think about it for a minute or two? Let's take a look at these tactics:
- Force young, healthy people to buy insurance that will only be used rarely, and use these extra premiums paid to the insurance companies to subsidize the people that need health care
- Make these young people pay a fine if they don't buy insurance, and use that to pay for the coverage of the uninsured
- Make anyone else that doesn't have insurance also pay the same fine, and use that to pay for some of the health care they use (the rest will be paid for by the young people and the insured folks with higher premiums)
- Tax the so called "Cadillac" insurance plans that are obviously purchased by the rich, and use the collections to provide coverage for the uninsured
- Tax the evil companies that make profits off of the misfortune of the sick, which can be translated into liberal speak as "tax the profits of medical device manufacturers"
- Make it unlawful for an insurance plan to refuse coverage for pre-existing conditions
- Allow children to stay on their parents' health insurance plan until age 26
- Set a minimum standard for the things that must be covered by a health insurance plan
Does any of this stuff make sense when you think about it for a minute or two? Let's take a look at these tactics:
- Does a penalty that is much lower than the cost of the insurance do anything to induce the purchase?
- Will the healthy, young folks with insurance continue to pay for it when their premiums triple? (I work with a young, single man of 23 years old that is having his health insurance premium go up from about $50/month in 2013 to over $150/month in 2014.)
- Will young folks sign up for Obamacare when they are allowed to stay on their parents' plan to age 26?
- Why would anyone of any age buy health insurance today? You can pay a fine that is much less than the new higher premiums for a PPACA compliant plan. If you get a terrible, very expensive illness, just sign up for a plan then. They will have to accept you and the pre-existing condition.
- The "Cadillac" plans were mostly held by union members that had negotiated a premium insurance plan as part of their labor contract. The unions were exempted from this tax penalty because of their support for Obama and the Democrats. Maybe we should call them cronies of the Democratic party.
- What happens when the medical device manufacturers have to pay a larger tax? They raise the prices so that they are passed along to their customers. That raises the price of the medical care being paid for with the extra money collected. On the other hand, if you liberals are right and the cost can't be passed along, then the return on investment developing the products will be reduced. That will cause some product development projects to be cancelled. This also encourages these companies to move their production and sales overseas, reducing US employment and limiting access to advanced medical care.
Monday, December 9, 2013
Obama's Latest Diversion
Obama has decided that wage disparities are really bad. Look at all of these companies with increased profits of billions of dollars? According to Barack Obama, we need to raise the minimum wage from $7.25/hour to $9.00/hour. It's only fair that the excessive corporate profits should be shared with the workers.
Who holds the jobs that earn minimum wage? Most minimum wage earners are high school and college students working to earn money for college. Many of them are working in retail and fast-food jobs. The rest are unskilled workers that are career minimum wage earners, and many of them also work in the retail and fast-food industries. Interestingly, many of these workers are making less money than they did before Obamacare took effect. Now their employers are required to buy them health insurance unless they work less than 30 hours/week, so their hours have been cut back by 25%. I guess this increase in minimum wage will almost get them back up to the same money they earned at 40 hours/week before.
Why do all these folks work in retail and fast-food today? When I was in high school and college, I had jobs at four different manufacturing companies. I worked in a shoe factory, a freezer factory, a truck axle factory, and a cotton gin factory. The problem today is that the minimum wage has risen pretty high, and more than ever, we are competing with low cost, third world countries all over the planet. All of the manufacturing jobs that require little or no skill are moving to these low cost countries. As the minimum wage rises, the folks in these countries must cheer the influx of new jobs moving there from America. Everyone in this country whose job skills are worth less than minimum wage will be permanently unemployed.
Of course, the fast-food jobs can't move overseas. That means we will see inflation in these sectors. Who will pay the higher wages? Is it the rich, capitalist small business owner? No. It is you and me that pay the higher prices.
What happens in the retail sector? People are replaced by a website and an automated warehouse.
Obama's answer to every problem is another MessAPolitico. In this case the problem is the Obamacare debacle. He hopes that raising the minimum wage will make you forget that MessAPolitico. Now Obama is making a play to the uninformed voters out there, and this play lacks substance. Or maybe it does have substance, and it is all negative.
Who holds the jobs that earn minimum wage? Most minimum wage earners are high school and college students working to earn money for college. Many of them are working in retail and fast-food jobs. The rest are unskilled workers that are career minimum wage earners, and many of them also work in the retail and fast-food industries. Interestingly, many of these workers are making less money than they did before Obamacare took effect. Now their employers are required to buy them health insurance unless they work less than 30 hours/week, so their hours have been cut back by 25%. I guess this increase in minimum wage will almost get them back up to the same money they earned at 40 hours/week before.
Why do all these folks work in retail and fast-food today? When I was in high school and college, I had jobs at four different manufacturing companies. I worked in a shoe factory, a freezer factory, a truck axle factory, and a cotton gin factory. The problem today is that the minimum wage has risen pretty high, and more than ever, we are competing with low cost, third world countries all over the planet. All of the manufacturing jobs that require little or no skill are moving to these low cost countries. As the minimum wage rises, the folks in these countries must cheer the influx of new jobs moving there from America. Everyone in this country whose job skills are worth less than minimum wage will be permanently unemployed.
Of course, the fast-food jobs can't move overseas. That means we will see inflation in these sectors. Who will pay the higher wages? Is it the rich, capitalist small business owner? No. It is you and me that pay the higher prices.
What happens in the retail sector? People are replaced by a website and an automated warehouse.
Obama's answer to every problem is another MessAPolitico. In this case the problem is the Obamacare debacle. He hopes that raising the minimum wage will make you forget that MessAPolitico. Now Obama is making a play to the uninformed voters out there, and this play lacks substance. Or maybe it does have substance, and it is all negative.
Friday, December 6, 2013
Obama: Constitutional Scholar?
Obama was a professor of constitutional law before running for Senate and the Presidency. So, has he used this knowledge of the constitution to keep it sacred and use it for guidance in governing? I don't believe so. I believe he has used this knowledge to figure out how to get around the constitutional checks and balances. It would appear that Obama doesn't believe in the sanctity of the US Constitution. His actions seem to snub this most powerful and important document at every turn.
Last week our President was speaking on immigration in San Francisco. In the middle of the speech, a person behind the stage began heckling the President. He was shouting that Mr. Obama should use his executive authority to give amnesty to illegal immigrants. When the heckler was shouting, the president turned around and acknowledged the voice he heard, and addressed the concerns being expressed. Wow! That was an amazing moment, where the President of the United States was actually listening to this little voice yelling from behind the stage. Mr. Obama actually gave the man a response that was coherent and showed that he cared about him and folks like him.
The President said that he would like to do something to help, but he couldn't. The Constitution prevented him from taking this kind of executive action. The law needs to be changed or passed by Congress to fix this. If it wasn't for the Congress and the Constitution, this problem would be fixed. What was the unspoken message between the lines? It's those evil, obstructionist Republicans in the House. Even, I, the great and powerful Obama, can't help you out. My hands are tied.
Hey, Barack, since when did you let the Constitution stop you from doing anything? You always try to get Congress to pass the bills you want, but it doesn't even slow you down if they don't cooperate. They don't pass Cap and Trade, and you just use the EPA regulations to close power plants. If Congress won't pass gun control, just use the EPA to close all of the lead smelting plants in the USA. You can't fire your guns if you can't get ammunition. You don't like the laws that prevent illegal immigration, then just choose not to enforce them. Obama operates more like a dictator than the President of a representative republic that has a strong Constitution to divide the power of governance between three equal branches of the federal government.
If you think that the President seemed smoother than usual when he was talking without a teleprompter, then maybe you are on to something. You see, the whole incident was completely staged. The heckler was a plant. He is Ju Hong, a Cal-Berkeley graduate from South Korea. Mr. Hong came to America on a student visa, but he has graduated. Consequently, his visa has expired, and he is in the country illegally. Why didn't our President enforce the immigration laws and have Mr. Hong arrested and deported? Maybe it was because the whole incident was planned. You see, Obama was really smooth in his response to Mr. Hong since he could read it on the teleprompter in front of him. Our most transparent administration of all time was not treating us with respect. He was lying to us.
This is the MessAPolitico that was elected by the American people. It's time to deport all of the illegal aliens from our country. It's also time to crack down on the businesses and people that hire them. Let's forget about the civil rights of these illegal visitors, because they aren't protected by the US Constitution. Only American citizens are covered by the Constitution. Mr. Obama, we know that your Democrat party needs the votes of these non-citizens to retain your control of the government. America, please stop this MessAPolitico, and keep in mind whom the MessAPolitico is concerned about when they give these law breakers amnesty. They are concerned about themselves and their re-election.
Last week our President was speaking on immigration in San Francisco. In the middle of the speech, a person behind the stage began heckling the President. He was shouting that Mr. Obama should use his executive authority to give amnesty to illegal immigrants. When the heckler was shouting, the president turned around and acknowledged the voice he heard, and addressed the concerns being expressed. Wow! That was an amazing moment, where the President of the United States was actually listening to this little voice yelling from behind the stage. Mr. Obama actually gave the man a response that was coherent and showed that he cared about him and folks like him.
The President said that he would like to do something to help, but he couldn't. The Constitution prevented him from taking this kind of executive action. The law needs to be changed or passed by Congress to fix this. If it wasn't for the Congress and the Constitution, this problem would be fixed. What was the unspoken message between the lines? It's those evil, obstructionist Republicans in the House. Even, I, the great and powerful Obama, can't help you out. My hands are tied.
Hey, Barack, since when did you let the Constitution stop you from doing anything? You always try to get Congress to pass the bills you want, but it doesn't even slow you down if they don't cooperate. They don't pass Cap and Trade, and you just use the EPA regulations to close power plants. If Congress won't pass gun control, just use the EPA to close all of the lead smelting plants in the USA. You can't fire your guns if you can't get ammunition. You don't like the laws that prevent illegal immigration, then just choose not to enforce them. Obama operates more like a dictator than the President of a representative republic that has a strong Constitution to divide the power of governance between three equal branches of the federal government.
If you think that the President seemed smoother than usual when he was talking without a teleprompter, then maybe you are on to something. You see, the whole incident was completely staged. The heckler was a plant. He is Ju Hong, a Cal-Berkeley graduate from South Korea. Mr. Hong came to America on a student visa, but he has graduated. Consequently, his visa has expired, and he is in the country illegally. Why didn't our President enforce the immigration laws and have Mr. Hong arrested and deported? Maybe it was because the whole incident was planned. You see, Obama was really smooth in his response to Mr. Hong since he could read it on the teleprompter in front of him. Our most transparent administration of all time was not treating us with respect. He was lying to us.
This is the MessAPolitico that was elected by the American people. It's time to deport all of the illegal aliens from our country. It's also time to crack down on the businesses and people that hire them. Let's forget about the civil rights of these illegal visitors, because they aren't protected by the US Constitution. Only American citizens are covered by the Constitution. Mr. Obama, we know that your Democrat party needs the votes of these non-citizens to retain your control of the government. America, please stop this MessAPolitico, and keep in mind whom the MessAPolitico is concerned about when they give these law breakers amnesty. They are concerned about themselves and their re-election.
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Will the Democrats Join the Republicans in January?
Obamacare is proving to be very troublesome for the Democrats that are up for re-election in 2014. Will they abandon the Democrat leadership to save their skins? That remains to be seen. If they don't join the Republicans to change the course of Obamacare, there will be a Republican landslide of monumental proportions. Maybe you Democrat voters out there who are suffering the effects should tell your favorite politician what you expect. Do you like what you are seeing from Obamacare? Are your premiums going down $2500/year? Can you keep that health care insurance you like? Do you still have the same doctor under Obamacare? Will you be able to keep that doctor going forward?
Those Democrats can still take the steps needed now to save the Democratic party. They can end this particular MessAPolitico and help repeal the PPACA. These Democrats can work together with the Republicans to pass smaller, incremental reforms to health care and health insurance. The results can be in the best interest of America. That would be much better than a bill that helps a politician get what he wants -- re-election. The results can be so good that folks actually re-elect the politicians because they like what they have done. The bills can be truly bipartisan. I use the plural "bills" because no bill should ever be so big that it can't be read in a short time and understood. No bill should be large enough to hide things that are unrelated inside. No bill should ever be so big that it must be passed to find out what's in it. Break this thing down into a hundred bills that can each be debated and decided individually. All or nothing is a terrible choice to make.
You know, I heard an interview with a House member from Tennessee a couple of weeks ago. He was commenting that he is one of twenty medical doctors in the 113th Congress. Did you know that during the crafting of the PPACA and in discussions since its passage, not a single one of these physicians was consulted? The law was written and is being implemented by lawyers instead of doctors. Does that make any sense at all? Maybe, the fact that the law doesn't work at all makes more sense now. Maybe we can all understand why the PPACA is such a MessAPolitico.
Democrat voters, I'm asking for your help. I don't think you want this MessAPolitico anymore than I do. We can stop it together. Threaten your congressional representatives and Senators with something that gets there attention. Tell them you won't vote for them next time unless they stop this MessAPolitico.
Those Democrats can still take the steps needed now to save the Democratic party. They can end this particular MessAPolitico and help repeal the PPACA. These Democrats can work together with the Republicans to pass smaller, incremental reforms to health care and health insurance. The results can be in the best interest of America. That would be much better than a bill that helps a politician get what he wants -- re-election. The results can be so good that folks actually re-elect the politicians because they like what they have done. The bills can be truly bipartisan. I use the plural "bills" because no bill should ever be so big that it can't be read in a short time and understood. No bill should be large enough to hide things that are unrelated inside. No bill should ever be so big that it must be passed to find out what's in it. Break this thing down into a hundred bills that can each be debated and decided individually. All or nothing is a terrible choice to make.
You know, I heard an interview with a House member from Tennessee a couple of weeks ago. He was commenting that he is one of twenty medical doctors in the 113th Congress. Did you know that during the crafting of the PPACA and in discussions since its passage, not a single one of these physicians was consulted? The law was written and is being implemented by lawyers instead of doctors. Does that make any sense at all? Maybe, the fact that the law doesn't work at all makes more sense now. Maybe we can all understand why the PPACA is such a MessAPolitico.
Democrat voters, I'm asking for your help. I don't think you want this MessAPolitico anymore than I do. We can stop it together. Threaten your congressional representatives and Senators with something that gets there attention. Tell them you won't vote for them next time unless they stop this MessAPolitico.
Monday, December 2, 2013
Did Congress Have an Ulterior Motive?
Recently, I speculated in a post that Congressional Republicans didn't really want to de-fund Obamacare. I received a letter from my Senator on Friday, and it further confirmed my belief that this is true. The establishment Republicans would prefer that we have Obamacare with all of its problems. They don't want the website to be fixed, and I doubt that they have to worry about it working well for a long time. They want a lot of folks to lose their insurance policies. They want you to lose access to your favorite doctor. They want everyone to be required to beg a bureaucrat for access to health care. If you don't lose your policy, they want the price to rise dramatically. If you do lose your policy, they want the replacement to be very expensive or to come from a terribly flawed website or both.
Why do they want the middle class folks to suffer this way? They want it because the Obamacare MessAPolitico was brought to you 100% by the Democrats. Everyone knows the promises Barack Obama made about your health care under the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act. We are now learning that almost all of those promises were wrong. There is also evidence that the Democratic leadership held meetings discussing whether they should lie about the effects of the PPACA on your health care and mine. Ultimately, they decided to use those lies to get Barack Obama re-elected in 2012 and to retain control of the Senate.
Now the Republicans have helped pass a continuing resolution to fund the government, including Obamacare, through January 15th. They wanted us all to get a big old dose of unadulterated PPACA for several months. If they hadn't done it, the Democrats and the media would have said that everything that has happened was the fault of the Republicans. After all, these obstructionist Republicans have denied everyone the benefits of the PPACA. The PPACA would have reduced the cost of health care, but they stopped it. The PPACA would have prevented your insurance company from denying you coverage based on pre-existing conditions, but those Republicans took it away. Now, the Republicans have allowed the results of the PPACA to turn the public against the Democrats in huge numbers.
This is certainly good for their re-election and election possibilities in Congress in November 2014. It's not so good for all of the regular, middle-class Americans out there trying to live. It's not good for all of us that want to be employed in a good job. They may win their election in 2014 and maybe even in 2016 for the presidency. The problem with our health care system remains though. Unless they can win a large enough majority to over-ride a presidential veto, they won't be able to repeal Obamacare until 2016. Can we afford the cost of health insurance until 2016? Can our economy survive the worst effects of Obamacare on employment and GDP growth until 2016? Will there be any doctors left in 2016? Will the health insurance companies still be in business then, or will we have a one-payer, government insurance system?
Can America survive the ongoing MessAPolitico? Will the American people wise up and end the MessAPolitico? These are some great questions, but I don't like the answers I'm coming up with.
Why do they want the middle class folks to suffer this way? They want it because the Obamacare MessAPolitico was brought to you 100% by the Democrats. Everyone knows the promises Barack Obama made about your health care under the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act. We are now learning that almost all of those promises were wrong. There is also evidence that the Democratic leadership held meetings discussing whether they should lie about the effects of the PPACA on your health care and mine. Ultimately, they decided to use those lies to get Barack Obama re-elected in 2012 and to retain control of the Senate.
Now the Republicans have helped pass a continuing resolution to fund the government, including Obamacare, through January 15th. They wanted us all to get a big old dose of unadulterated PPACA for several months. If they hadn't done it, the Democrats and the media would have said that everything that has happened was the fault of the Republicans. After all, these obstructionist Republicans have denied everyone the benefits of the PPACA. The PPACA would have reduced the cost of health care, but they stopped it. The PPACA would have prevented your insurance company from denying you coverage based on pre-existing conditions, but those Republicans took it away. Now, the Republicans have allowed the results of the PPACA to turn the public against the Democrats in huge numbers.
This is certainly good for their re-election and election possibilities in Congress in November 2014. It's not so good for all of the regular, middle-class Americans out there trying to live. It's not good for all of us that want to be employed in a good job. They may win their election in 2014 and maybe even in 2016 for the presidency. The problem with our health care system remains though. Unless they can win a large enough majority to over-ride a presidential veto, they won't be able to repeal Obamacare until 2016. Can we afford the cost of health insurance until 2016? Can our economy survive the worst effects of Obamacare on employment and GDP growth until 2016? Will there be any doctors left in 2016? Will the health insurance companies still be in business then, or will we have a one-payer, government insurance system?
Can America survive the ongoing MessAPolitico? Will the American people wise up and end the MessAPolitico? These are some great questions, but I don't like the answers I'm coming up with.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)