March 19, 2010
He Claims to Believe in Property Rights...
Yet, as a service to ThreeSourcers who do not subscribe to the WSJ (Heretics!), I provide the full text of their ObamaCare Editorial today.
Gotta go now, Rupert's jack-booted thugs are at the door...
March Madness
Continue reading "He Claims to Believe in Property Rights..."
Words fail...
Instead, are you in the mood for a little more optimism?
We've discussed before that if the Obama Administration had not thrown the American electorate into boiling water, or if Democrat-Lite John McCain had been elected, the voters likely would never notice the ever forward creep toward American socialism. So why do Obama and Pelosi keep the rolling boil going? Why not back off the pressure and accept a slightly faster pace of creep instead of a wholesale leap into their egalitarian "paradise?" The answer, in my opinion, is that they know the veil has already been lifted and Americans don't like the looks of the new bride Democrats are walking down the aisle for them. For them, it's shotgun wedding time.
Resist with dignity now. Don't pucker up when she kisses us. Take it like a man. Make sure all the relatives and the local papers know, over the next seven months, what an abomination was forced upon us. November 2nd is the filing date for divorce court and we need to be the first in line.
P.S. It seems that WSJ made the entire editorial visible without subscription. And who said they're not charitable!
March 18, 2010
Will She Even Bother to Run Again?
Despite what meager effort I and my family and those I emailed in CO-4 could make, today's fake CBO report gave Betsy Markey the cover she wanted to commit political suicide in this traditionally conservative district. I hope voters remember the "Markey Mistake" for a long, long time.
Markey's decision to vote in favor of the bill will almost certainly become a dominant issue for Republicans as they try to oust her in November. Markey in 2008 became the first Democrat in 36 years to win the 4th Congressional District seat, and national Republicans have made ousting her a top priority this year.
Two recent polls released by business groups opposed to the Democrats' health care bill showed a majority of district residents were against the bill.
Markey said her decision to support the bill was about policy, not politics.
"I'm not a career politician and I've said this before, this is not a stepping stone for another career. I'm not here as a place to retire," she said.
Ironically, I think she just did exactly that.
She shoulda held out for the plane ride.
I've seen many TV commercials lately asking me to "call Betsy Markey and tell her to keep up the fight."
I think we lost, boys. I got overconfident less than one month ago. But today it feels very much over. Most have given up on stopping it and are choosing to revel in November's gains. Small damn comfort.
I've been overconfident before. I don't know if my pessimism now is a reaction to that or just to the Markey disappointment. You do realize that if they pass Healthcare with this unsavory process there's no reason for them not to pass every other leftist wet-dream on their wish list too. Perhaps the spectre of that will be enough to stiffen the resolve of the less progressive Dems.
Laura Ingraham told Bill O'Reilly today that Bart Stupak told her for every vote Pelosi switches to a yes, his guys are switching a no. Sounds like Stupak might really be all in after all.
Might there be, dare I say it - Hope?
My pessimism has the same source. Kucinich covers the left, Markey covers the middle, game over. I see that it is still a fight, but the bogus CBO score and the Speaker's calling for a vote portend bad things.
Not a Dealbreaker?
Blog friend Terri asks the question which perplexes me: "With Romneycare, I often wonder why he polls so high."
She links to a Mark Steyn Post that answers "He shouldn't"
According to what he's told at least a couple of NR audiences I've been among, he sought to solve a problem that doesn't exist — ie, that the uninsured are using emergency rooms as their family doctor, and supposedly the rest of the populace has to pick up the tab for that in increased health-care costs. In fact, ER use by the uninsured is in rough proportion to their percentage of the population, and the rest of the populace has to pick up a far greater tab for the under-reimbursement of doctors by Medicare. In other words, Mitt misdiagnosed the disease, and his prescription was a bigger dose of it:
The result is all the problems familiar to patients in socialized systems — longer wait times, fewer doctors, overstretched emergency rooms — with the uniquely American wrinkle of dramatically increased costs. Mass. residents now pay 27 percent more than the U.S. average.
Many other things I like about the Gov, but if this isn't a dealbreaker as we watch ObamaCare®, then I really am going to have to join the Libertoids.
Coffeehousin'
Great feedback on the last instrumental. (Umm, you don't suppose that says something about my vocals, do you?) so here is Harold Arlen's "Over the Rainbow."
My friend Kirk is in a trio in the guest slot again.
www.liveatthecoffeehouse.com
More Patients - Fewer Doctors
First, I don't believe that Obamacare would lead to 31 million more patients. I believe they're all receiving care when they need it already but I went with it for a snappy title. Investor's Business Daily surveyed some 25,000 doctors last summer (about 1400 of whom responded) and reported that 45% said they'd close their practice or retire early if Obamacare passed. And they opposed the measure two to one. The left-stream media slammed this as "ludicrous."
Yesterday IBD reported a similar survey by a physician's job placement firm, reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, with similar findings:
This poll, conducted by the Medicus Firm, a physician search and consulting outfit, found that 29.2% of the nearly 1,200 doctors it queried said they would quit or retire early if a health overhaul were passed into law. That number jumped to 45.7% — nearly identical to our own — if a public option were included.
(...)
In the end, it's clear: A health care overhaul, as it's now being pushed, could lead to a precipitous drop in the number of doctors.
"Many physicians feel that they cannot continue to practice if patient loads increase while pay decreases," wrote Kevin Perpetua, managing partner of the Medicus Firm, summing up his findings.
*Ahem* - Duh. (This is John Galt speaking.)
South of the Border, Down Mexico Way.
That's where I fell in love, when the atars above came out to play.
'Cause it was fiesta, and we were so [happy, frivolous, carefree]
South of the Border, Down Mexico Way...
March 17, 2010
Partisan Hackery
Oh, those Blue Dogs -- ain't they cute when they're puppies? Big brown eyes and floppy ears. I just love 'em. Professor Reynolds shares an email from Roy Herron, who's running as a Democrat in TN-08:
My top three priorities in Washington will be fiscal responsibility, fiscal responsibility, and fiscal responsibility.
Washington is mortgaging the future of my sons and your children and our grandchildren. And Washington is risking the future of this country with trillions in debt.
I drive a 12-year-old truck with 375,000 miles on it. My sons call me cheap, but Washington needs more of us with 375,000-mile pickups who’ll spend your money like our own.
Prompting me to write to his Instantness:
Apologies in advance for filling your inbox with partisan hackery, but:
Roy Herron sounds like just what we need in Congress. Will he vote for Rep Nancy Pelosi as Speaker?
I assume, yes, he is running as a Democrat. Watching her "pass" health care by any-means-necessary-and-some-things-that-are-not-really-means-at-all makes me skeptical of some guys no matter how old their trucks.
See, those blue dog pups grow up to be mangy, mean, bad-tempered congressdogs.
I'm going to hurt my arm one of these days from patting myself on the back so much, but remember that I've warned since November 2008 that the Blue Dog is a myth. You'll have an occasional few who will claim to oppose something for the sake of fiscal responsibility, but it's all smoke and mirrors. They'll be House members, whose districts are, of course, not state-wide and therefore have more targetted demographics. Pelosi will engineer votes so those members' votes aren't needed, allowing them to put on "fiscal conservative" masks.
Hell, there's been more obstruction from Kucinich than Republicans. It didn't have a public option, so he wouldn't support it, meaning he wouldn't vote for it because it wasn't socialist enough.
Until he got a plane ride. I saw him coming out of Air Force One the other day and said "his vote's in."
These guys do campaign as moderates. I always like to remind people that they will vote for the überliberal Democratic leadership.
Destroy America or Become a National Hero?
I just called my congressperson, U.S. Representative Betsy Markey of CO-4. Her website touts a report that she is one of the most centrist and independent members of congress. The House Switchboard number was busy so I called her office directly and got right through.
I asked if the congresswoman had decided how she intends to vote on the Health Care bill. Her staffer told me that she is waiting for a cost analysis by the CBO and has not yet made a decision. I said, "I am her constituent, residing near Fort Lupton, and I would like to encourage her to vote NO. I think if she votes yes then this won't be the United States of America any more and if she votes no she will become one of a handful of national heroes."
I was asked for my name and contact information, which I gave. (Not that they couldn't have guessed I'm a registered Republican anyway.)
Her D.C. office number is: 202.225.4676
UPDATE: 3/18 4:25pm MDT
The verdict is in: GUILTY
Colorado following California into Anti-Coal Stupidity
Watch out Pennysylvania, you're probably next. Yesterday Colorado's lame-duck governor announced a "Clean Air - Clean Jobs Act" that looks like it's on the fast track through the state legislature, having "bipartisan" sponsorship in both the house and the senate. The sponsoring GOP senator, in particular, draws my ire. It's been a while since I've felt the need to publish outside of the friendly confines of ThreeSources, but I wrote the editor of the Denver Post about it.
Re-thinking Josh Penry
Dear Editor,
Senate Minority Leader Josh Penry has been making a name for himself in conservative circles but it may be time to reconsider. The Post reported Tuesday that he co-sponsored Governor Ritter's new "Clean Air - Clean Jobs Act" that outlaws coal power in Colorado. Have we not learned from California's mistake? Electricity costs 40% more there, largely due to their coal ban. Why do it?
Penry isn’t quoted but reasons given include anticipation of federal regulations that could “lead to a 4 to 6 percent increase in rates.” That’s still 34% less than California. Xcel Energy and natural gas companies support the plan. The latter because coal always wins in a free-market; the former because they’ll get money for new plants and cover for raising rates. It’s like light bulb manufacturers encouraging the ban on cheap light bulbs.
And then there are coal’s higher carbon emissions. As Curtis Hubbard alluded last month on his Post blog, if the events of the past year haven’t convinced us that the whole ‘Climate Change’ issue was a fraud we have reason now to at least ask the question.
Quote of the Day
One more post and we're goiing to need a "Prius" Category.
IS IT WRONG TO make speeding-Prius jokes? One of my colleagues thinks the whole Prius thing will actually be good for Toyota -- before, Priuses were associated with smug hipsters, but now they'll be associated with death-defying daredevils! -- Glenn Reynolds (well, his colleague)
Every day in my parking garage, I park next to one of several Prii (I'm willing to accept correction on the plural form) that infest our vehicle population here. It's the only one that doesn't have an Obama bumper sticker, but nothing exudes brain-dead, lefty, Obama-votin' nutbaggery like a Prius. And I can tell you from personal experience that when I park next to it, any smugness, hipness, or death-defying adrenalin-rushiness the Prius might have slinks back into its battery housing and cowers.
By the way, I've looked at the 2011 Mustang and consider it drool-worthy. I'm giving serious thought to trading up. Note to FoMoCo: you can send the check for my endorsement to my home address.
Want some fun at a lefty's expense? Pull your V-8 into a gas station next to a Prius and start tanking up. Invariably, the treehugger will make a comment about your mileage, his mileage, or something similar. Tell him you're glad he's driving a Prius - because it means that much more gasoline that you can burn.
Works every time.
I always say, "I'm doing my part to help make 'Peak Oil' a reality. Doesn't seem to be working though - there's always more gasoline to buy."
Related: My brother wrote to Bill O'Reilly, after he slammed "gas guzzling SUVs" that this is America and we're free to drive whatever we'd like. Bill read the letter on the air and chided him, "That's your right sir, but it's not good for the country. Wise up."
Sometimes Bill is a jackass. This was one of those times.
No, jg, with all doe respect: Bill is ALWAYS a jackass, it is just that sometimes you agree with him and it is less apparent.
I don't care whom you like, but I want to pick a fight here because of the grounds surrounding my termination of appreciation for Mister O.
My dislike for O'Reilly is very Randian in nature. When I read "For the New Intellectual" on your good recommendation it made me think of O'Reilly. He has no solid, grounding principles. He plays every question on a hunch. If the coffee was bad in the cafeteria, he'll rail against "pinhead, overreaching government that can't keep its books or perform basic services." But if he's in a good mood, the next day or the next segment, he will call for government to take over some underperforming aspect of society or free market. Contradiction is not a hint to him, he'll just turn up the bluster to "11" and keep on rolling.
Resolved: that Bill O'Reilly lacks the foundational principles and reasoned, coherent philosophy required to be a public thinker. And no person who appreciates rational philosophy or empirical principles should watch his show.
What say you, Mister G?
Don't know about Mr. G but Mrs. G is on board. Noone without a sound, reasoned philosophical base has the proverbial snowball's chance of making consistent appropriate decisions.
Case in point number one - blowhard Republican at our caucus who was supporting Dan Maes although he is a newcomer without the money and momentum of Scott McInnis but was supporting Jane Norton because she has the money and the momentum over Ken Buck. Huh???
How in the world can you convince him of anything if he does NOT know why he thinks what he thinks?
Also with all due respect, I note that I do not consider pragmatism part of a sound philosophical base.
It's a fair cop, guv. Curious if (either of) you are onboard for my assessment of Bill O'Reilly.
Pragmatism is a tactic, Dagny; little-l libertarianism is my philosophy. I concede that I do distasteful and less-than-consistent things to achieve certain ends, but I think I am both cognizant and open about it.
To bring it back to our State candidates, I am perilously close to your blowhard friend. For the record, I went all in for Maes and Buck to send a Tea Party Message to the national GOP. But in the end, I see little difference between Norton and Buck (heresy on these pages I know) and will be tempted to go with the far slicker campaign of the LtGov in the primary. Maes, in contrast, does seem enough of a step up from Rep McInnis that I might take a flyer.
It's a wonder you still talk to me sometimes, huh?
Yes, I think we're both on board with your assessment of Bill O'Reilly's contradictory foundational principles. Where we, or at least I, part with you is on his qualification to be a public thinker or the rectitude of my choice to watch him from time to time.
Can you tell me which public thinkers have a consistent, coherent philosophy? I'm afraid most of those have a consistently wrong philosophy.
Additionally, the vast majority of the voting public hasn't a consistent, coherent philosophy either. If this could be reversed then you'd have less need for your tactical pragmatism.
Salsa Clinic Staffing
Things are looking up for our Mexican Health Care venture! Insty links to this NEJM Survey of physicians who might "Go Galt" if ObamaCare® passes. There's some up and down and the leftist slant of NEJM's readership shows through in spots ("0.8% feel income will 'improve dramatically' with a public option." -- kinda hope that's not my doctor...)
But the money quote for us is:
Health Reform and Primary Care Physicians
* 46.3% of primary care physicians (family medicine and internal medicine) feel that the passing of health reform will either force them out of medicine or make them want to leave medicine.
To which I say "Don't Go Galt, Go Kranz!"
Join us in sunny Puerto Viarta at a free market hospital serving North America and the world.
Perfect - just as US citizens are being evacuated from six cities in Mexico, and a travel advisory is being issues warning of travel in three Mexican states. The US consulate in Juarez still has chalk outlines and blood on the carpets.
The timing is conspiring against you. It's not to late for Costa Rica...
We're going to bid Costa Rica against Mexico. Each will have to make a convincing case for security.
In defernce to your opinions, brother ka, I can assure you that Juarez is out. No, really, Keith has spoken!
Think of bullets and death threats as part of the working environment, which is a legitimate market force (cost of doing business). It's not me - the market has spoken.
Fair competition between Costa Rica and Mexico - I do love free market solutions!
I have no proof but still suspect that the violence is in the sleazy border towns (the only part of the country I frequent, curiously) and that higher-end, more modern tourist locations are fairly safe.
March 16, 2010
Caucus Nite!
In addition to Cory Gardner I'll be caucusing for Ken Buck tonight:
Whenever your caucus is, wherever you live ... GO. Find the grassroots candidates. Support them. Tell the McCain PAC money boys (and in Colorado's case, girls) to go home. The GOP primary is the only place you can make a real difference. By the time the general election rolls around it's just lesser-of-evils time. In Colorado, tonight's the night. 7 pm.
CO GOP caucus location info here: http://www.cologop.org/
UPDATE:
Caucus Report - There were 13 participants from our precinct who chose 4 delegates from 5 nominees. Yours truly was one of those selected (and the only one to be chosen unanimously, with 13 of 13 votes.) This is even more remarkable when you consider that one of the couples in attendance had expressed their strong preference for Jane Norton, since they know her personally. Even though I was unabashedly for her chief rival, Ken Buck, the both of them voted for me. I had chatted them up about the other races and the general condition of the country. I also volunteered to be precinct secretary and one of two precinct chairmen for the next go 'round. When given my chance at a mini campaign speech I said I'm not a member of any TEA Party or 9.12 groups but I attend the Tea Parties when they happen and that best describes my priorities. I said that I consider over taxation and regulation at the federal level to be the chief reason for the sad state of the economy these days. Charity should start at home and that sort of thing. In closing I joked that everyone should "vote for me because I WON'T buy your vote."
Our precinct/district results were:
Buck - 9/49
Norton - 4/20
McInnis - 7/42
Maes - 6/38
Gardner - 11/49
Lucero - 2/16
Brown - 0/9
Statewide results for Senate and Governor are here.
As of (Good Lord!) 1:15am MDT (last updated 11:25pm with 94% reporting) the numbers are:
Governor
McInnis - 15,213 (60%)
Maes - 9,952 (39.3%)
Senate
Buck - 9,324 (37.9%)
Norton - 9,295 (37.7%)
Wiens - 4,054 (16.5%)
Thoughts:
- If the rankings hold through the final count this is a major coup for the grassroots candidate Ken Buck over the much better funded Norton. I think he was just hoping for a good showing to get some credibility. An outright win is a bonus.
- Wiens spent a lot of ad money too, mostly hammering Norton for supporting the tax grab Referendum C. If he drops out none of his support will go to her.
- Buck's current margin of victory is 29 votes, of which two were my dad and me. It sure feels good to make a difference like that.
Good night. And, goodnight!
UPDATE II:
As of 10:30 AM 3/18, 99.69% reporting -
Governor
McInnis - 15,385 (59.1%)
Maes - 10,421 (40.1%)
Senate
Buck - 9,776 (38.2%)
Norton - 9,613 (37.5%)
Wiens - 4,223 (16.5%)
Buck's margin has grown - from 29 to 163.
Winner winner, chicken dinner!
Still not sure about Ken, I will keep an open mind. I definitely like the idea of Dan Maes over Scott McInnis.
This video is not compelling. The problem is...Lobbyists? Really? Fat cat bankers in Greenwich, CT? I just don't get it.
He tweets "Tonight, CO has the opportunity to stand against D.C. special interests. Please support my campaign at your..." Sounds like John Edwards! Gonna fight the drug companies for me!
Headed to Legacy School in Frederick by any chance?
You didn't like the improved fuel economy promise from his bumper stickers?
For Buck it's all about the national PAC money being funneled to Jane Norton. You can't blame the guy for feeling a little like Rodney Dangerfield: The NRSCC has reportedly reserved domain names for Norton's general election run already.
And no, it wasn't "fat cat" bankers, but "bailed out" bankers. When I hear that I think Lehman Brothers. I understand if you think he's just talking about arm-twisted TARP recipients. In the final analysis though, for me it's about the Republicans who brung us attempted amnesty, half-hearted SS reform, no adult supervision over spending and entitlements, Speaker Pelosi and President Obama versus the mad as hell types who reluctantly chose to take on the careerists and show Democrats what a REAL "party of NO" looks like.
And no, we weren't in Frederick but the other direction - Fort Lupton Middle School.
Oh yeah, I love the message to the national GOP (cough losers! cough!) I was actually more surprised at Dan Maes's showing. I think the grassroots spoke loudly and clearly.
Ft. Morgan, huh? Big town! You probably went in early for sushi and stayed late to catch a show...
You made the same mis-identification that my dad repeatedly makes. I have no idea why it's so easy to recognize Ft. Collins but Ft. Lupton is easily confused with Ft. Morgan. As for the civic charms of our nearby little burg, I've come to appreciate that what it lacks in size, demographics and amenities it makes up with history and friendliness.
My best to your Dad. I make it <italics>repeatedly</italics> as well. No idea why. I go to Ft. Lupton for license plates and maybe drove through Ft. Morgan ten years ago.
Grame Frost, Call Your Office
We all have a favorite kind of story or blog post. I'll readily confess mine is exposing the huckster prop in a Democratic "feel their pain" pitch.
I suppose it goes back farther, but it all started for me with Grame Frost the 12-year-old poster boy for SCHIP. Way back in 2007, mean ol' President George W Bush vetoed the expansion of SCHIP (I do enjoy reminding right-wing Bush haters of this). So the Democrats chose young Grame to deliver their radio response. He pulled the heartstrings as he was recovering from a serious accident and his medical bills were affecting his parents.
Well, Dad turns out to be a hyper-partisan and a loser. He quit a good job to start his own woodworking business. The more one looked, the less sympathetic the family appeared.
I invoked their name on these pages in July of 2008. The Nunez family, in George Bush's Evil Amerikkka, could not afford meat. They were highlighted on an NPR story. But the 'R' is for radio, and once people saw the extremely obese family, sympathy rolled off a bit.
Today, FOXNews via Gateway Pundit brings us Natoma Canfield. She was President Obama's prop in Ohio -- follow the link to hear the President say "I am here for Natoma."
Natoma has cancer and is dying in the street without care after being kicked out of her home for failure to pay her medical bills and has nothing to eat or wear or...no....wait a minute, this just in: No, it appears she is in a top flight cancer center receiving care after 12 years of not working and dropping her insurance. She will get financial aid and will not lose her house:
Lyman Sornberger, executive director of patient financial services at the Cleveland Clinic, said "all indications" at the outset are that she will be considered for assistance.
"She may be eligible for state Medicaid … and/or she will be eligible for charity (care) of some form or type. … In my personal opinion, she will be eligible for something," he said, adding that Canfield should not be worried about losing her home.
"Cleveland Clinic will not put a lien on her home," he said.
Well, I'm glad that ended so well, aren't you?
"Yeah, it's a good thing the president went there to pressure the CC to do the right thing" say Obamacare apologists.
You love to write 'em and I love to read 'em.
Thanks for the link, man. I had heard about her last night, in a naturally sympathetic segment on CBS radio news. Knowing only that she appealed to Obama to force others to pay for her care, I expressed my feelings thusly to a friend: "She can f------ die, for all I care."
My sentiment has not lessened. She was paying $5000 annually for insurance? For crying out loud, she had cancer, so that was quite a reasonable rate. And her insurance, presumably, is privately bought and therefore higher than group insurance. My high-deductible policy, between what my employer and I pay, is more expensive!
Even $8000 annually, considering her cancer could have returned -- and did -- is not bad at all, considering her health history and what she could cost the insurer. Cancer can be so managable these days that her insurer could easily spend half a million dollars for the rest of her life on all the drugs and treatment to keep her alive.
There were some excellent comments. "This is just a Henrietta Hughes redeux."
Indeed. It sounds like her real problem is (1) not working a steady job, and (2) refinancing a house that should have been paid off years ago.
"Obama has reinvented the Potemkin village. It used to be that Communists would create fake prosperous villages to deceive gullible Westerners into thinking Communism was a success. Now we have Comrade creating fake suffering in order to persuade gullible liberals that free markets are a failure."
We can call them "Obama's Nikmetop victims."
"Nikmetop" -- I like it.
At my brother-in-law's suggestion, I watched some of the "one-minute speeches" on CSPAN today. The Republicans seemed to have facts or procedural arguments, but the Democrats all had a letter from a constituent.
Ms. Canfield did everything wrong and is still receiving care in a top-notch institution. Her bills will be paid (thanks, Perry!) and she will keep her house. I love it.
I'm thinking I need to write one of those heart-tugging letters. How a middle-class family in a small town in flyover country received amazing, truly life-saving care, ran up more than a half-million in bills, and then kept their home and lifestyle thanks to insurance that was anything but "Gold-plated" or "Cadillac."
Here's another one for you in a bit of a different vein:
Lance Lewis was paralyzed 20 years ago from falling down the stairs backwards. His employer, Core States Bank, kept up his insurance which provided him with in-home 24/7 nursing care. That care has been uninterrupted for 20 years, through no less than 5 bank mergers. With the last merger, from FU to Wells Fargo, Wells says they no nothing about the nursing and insurnace care deal that Lewis has. Lewis, of course, has nothing documenting this deal he cut with a bank five mergers ago.
Not to lessen the plight of Mr. Lewis, but in the volitile banking industry, shouldn't it be his responsibility to make sure that his insurance follows through the merger? Furthermore, I don't think that any of the Banks, from Core Staes on through Wells, has a legal obligation to conitue Lewis' insurance and it was damned genreous that they did for so long.
Besides being a poor case to illustrate the need for Obamacare (which was, make no mistake, the intent of the article) it highlights the need for separating health insurance from the emplooyer--a conservative idea, if I'm not mistaken, and one that makes no appearance in the 2,700 page abomination that our president is currently campaigning for.
Wow--I apologize for the horrid typos. I guess I shouldn't post while I'm in class.
U typ bettr n me. I did convert the long url to a link. You can always email me anything you'd like changed -- or just give up and accept an author's login around here already.
Reason Saves Cleveland
I do take my shots at Reason Magazine. But their new Reason TV series "Reason Saves Cleveland" with Drew Carey is really shaping up. Part One is a setup piece: well worth watching -- especially for the clip of the Broncos-Browns AFC Championship.
But part two gets starts to get into specifics. Fix the schools:
March 15, 2010
In Markets We Trust II
Last Friday, Jack Calfee asked if health insurance profits are so healthy, why weren't large firms like Walmart, Microsoft and the like diving in. I mean, who would miss a chance to bilk an unsuspecting public out of -- wait for it -- $66?
Mark Perry at The American links to the Calfee piece and adds the $66 figure to the discussion:
Using the industry profit margin of 2.2 percent last year, it means that insurance companies make only about $66 on average per policy in profits for individual coverage, and less than $140 in profits for each family policy.
Wow! Two-point-two percent profit! Man, why doesn't every business give up the stupid things they do and hop into this lucrative pool?
A related statistic I heard is that the total profits of health insurance companies would pay the health care costs of Americans for 4 days out of each year.
- I think I heard this on Mike McConnell's radio show last Sunday night. (It's a mediocre show that KOA switched to as a cost-cutting measure, IMHO.)
That's what you get when you put heartless capitalist corporations in charge of programming. Jeez, NPR has great stuff on the weekends...
Government Motives
Brother jg gets the comment of the week for suggesting -- at the end of "Cousin Milton's" devastating takedown of ObamaCare:
Analysis above is, of course, predicated on the notion that extending longevity and quality of life are the intended goal of the health care system.
Thanks to government, they can actually claim a "crisis" in health care. And yet health insurance has
similar saturation rates as broadband Internet. Ergo, Crisis! Ergo, government needed!
Last year, Congress directed the FCC to develop a plan to make high-speed Internet available to more people. But given that 95% of Americans already have access to some form of broadband—and 94% can choose from at least four wireless carriers—rapid broadband deployment is already occurring without new government mandates.
[...]
In 2009 alone, broadband providers spent nearly $60 billion on their networks. Absent any evidence of market failure, the best course for the FCC is to report back to Congress that a broadband industrial policy is unnecessary. Instead, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is moving to increase the reach of his agency and expand government control of the Web.
I just dropped my 7Mb DSL for a screamin' 16Mb pipe. The good folks at Comcast run as high as 50 Mb out to my condo, which is not in the sticks but is isolated from other dense development.
So, government has a chance to declare victory and go home. But, to coin a phrase, analysis above is, of course, predicated on the notion that extending access to broadband is the intended goal of the system.
"I'm Going to Pick a Fight"
Those were the words of William Wallace [1:03] as he set out to meet representatives of English tyranny over Scotland. They're the same words I heard a GOP candidate for CO-4 say to a fellow debate attendee. She had asked him, "How long do you want to keep this job?" Cory's reply was, "I don't want to go to Washington to make friends, I'm going to pick a fight." There were only a few of us standing around him at the time so I don't believe it was a rehearsed line, but it sure made an impression on me: He's going to pick a fight with representatives of federal tyranny over America.
Cory was the only one of the four candidates not wearing cowboy boots so I joked with dagny, "Cross him off the list!" But by the end of the debate the other three had not won me over like Gardner did. I went to meet him afterwards and that's where the quote comes from. My question for him was whether he would have a problem having any of the other three candidates on his "team" to which he said, "Not at all." I had a better question for him this morning, which you can read about below the fold.
I intend to stand for election as a delegate for Cory at tomorrow's GOP caucus.
Continue reading ""I'm Going to Pick a Fight""
Quote of the Day
Dear choir, today's sermon:
America has the finest health care delivery system in the world. Let's not forget that and put it at risk in the name of reform. Desperate souls across the globe flock to our shores and cross our borders every day to seek our care. Why? Our system provides cures while the government-run systems from which they flee do not. Compare Europe's common cancer mortality rates to America's: breast cancer - 52 percent higher in Germany and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom; prostate cancer - a staggering 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway; colon cancer - 40 percent higher in the United Kingdom.
Look closer at the United Kingdom. Britain's higher cancer mortality rate results in 25,000 more cancer deaths per year compared to a similar population size in the United States. But because the U.S. population is roughly five times larger than the United Kingdom's, that would translate into 125,000 unnecessary American cancer deaths every year. This is more than all the mothers and fathers, aunts and uncles, cousins and children in Topeka, Kan. And keep in mind, these numbers are for cancer alone. America also has better survival rates for other major killers, such as heart attacks and strokes. Whatever we do, let us not surrender the great gains we have made. First, do no harm. Lives are at stake. -- Dr. Milton R. Wolf, Barack Obama's second cousin once removed.
Analysis above is, of course, predicated on the notion that extending longevity and quality of life are the intended goal of the health care system.
Ow! You're sadly correct. Silly cousin that went into medicine instead of politics probably assumed that.
Give Thanks for What Divides Us
I have been meaning to ask whether any reproductive-rights ThreeSourcers had found new respect for pro-life legislators since they became the best chance to kill ObamaCare® and keep the last vestige of freedom in these United States.
But then I saw this, and I am laughing too hard to type:
That's especially true given yesterday's report indicating that at least seven of Stupak's faction have confirmed they will not vote for a reform bill without a change in the abortion language.
Another single-issue conflict with a different House faction also reared its head: The Hispanic Caucus is now publicly threatening to torpedo reform because of the Senate bill's ultra-restrictive language prohibiting illegal immigrants from buying health insurance through the state-run insurances exchanges that would be set up. At least one high-profile former yes vote, Illinois Rep. Luis Gutierrez, has said that he'll switch his vote to no if the immigrant restrictions aren't changed. (For more detail on this conflict, see the Reason Foundation's Shikha Dalmia.)
Strange bedfellows indeed.
March 13, 2010
In Markets We Trust
Larry Kudlow knocked it out of the park last night. Like the White House releasing bad news on Friday night, I fear it will vanish into the aether. He hat-tipped Barry Ritholtz on the show but I do not see anything to link to in Ritholtz's blog or Kudlow's.
Thursday, more evidence came out that Lehman Bros. was "cooking the books" with the delightfully named accounting trick Repo 105. In short, Lehman moved a lot of paper off-balance sheet to lower its apparent leverage. Curiously, it was high grade debt that they could park at a hedge fund, not so much hiding the toxic assets.
The point Kudlow makes (and attributes to Ritholtz) is that only the short sellers discovered this chicanery. Kudlow listed the soi disant watchmen who missed it:
- Ernst & Young -- nope, nothing to see here folks!
- The New York Fed, chaired at the time by one Timothy Geithner
- The layers and layers of bullshit and suffocating regulations dictated by SarbOx
- The SEC
So, let me get this straight. No government regulator or oversight board got a whiff this was going on. Or worse, problems were found and were hidden. One of the last of the Big Eight accounting firms signed off on a Sgt Schultz audit.
And yet, at the same time, those who make a living trading Financials (and a pretty decent living I am led to believe) realized that it smelled funny. They sold short -- adding information to the market and positioning themselves to make a tidy profit if they were right (and limitless loss t'were they not). These people found the problem, caught it, and shut the company down. No regulator, no legislator, the aggregate wisdom of the market discovered and corrected the problem, while the regulators and regulations did nothing but add deadweight to all firms.
So how are we making sure this doesn't happen again? More regulation of course! A bigger role for Timothy Geithner to "manage" systemic risk: to bring that New York miracle to the whole country!
Oh, yeah, and propose a rule to ban short sellers.
Stop. World. Me want off.
Well, as I was telling a friend Friday, short-selling is the big scapegoat. Not only is it a legitimate investment tool, it hardly does what its detractors claim it does. However, the SEC in particular needs a scapegoat because all its regulations (especially record-keeping, which I can personally attest to) and all its audits failed to do the job the SEC claims as its mission. The rightful outrage at the SEC's incompetence with Bernie Madoff, when they had a smoking gun, was quickly forgotten.
In and of itself, short-selling had and still has nothing to do with "attacking" financial companies' stocks so the prices would go down. When you buy shares of XYZ, you have no idea if the person is selling shares he currently owns or if he's shorting. You're simply buying whatever shares are offered.
So when you short XYZ, your motive stays with you, and your buyer implicitly thinks the shares are going up -- otherwise why would he be buying? (Barring that he sold someone some uncovered calls and had the market move against him, but this is a tiny minority of cases.) Thus both sides cancel each other out, just like so-called "speculators" weren't driving up oil prices.
If blame lies with short-sellers, it should also lie with others who owned the shares and dumped them. Even though John Q. Public felt Lehman was going down the tubes, he was sending just as much of a signal to the markets when he placed the order to sell it all. Why isn't the SEC going after owners also, for "market manipulation" and other nonsense?
The reason financial companies' stock prices went down is very simple: buyers weren't willing to pay the asking prices. That's it. Buyers who were aware or prescient of those companies' problems, or even just guessing, wouldn't budge at current market prices, so sellers had to keep bidding lower. It's buyers who send the strongest signals, because they are ultimately the ones in control of prices.
Mises said, "The captain is the consumer." In stock exchanges, buyers are "the consumer."
One thing I mentioned to my friend: what if Larry Wildman had made good with his threat to dump Anacott to "burn" Gekko? In real life, any knowledgeable investor would have laughed to himself at such a wonderful opportunity. Once Wildman dumped his own shares, Gekko should have been the first to start buying!
Excellent post, JK! It's like blaming the canary:
"Gentlemen, we've noticed a high correlation between canaries dying and mine disasters. Everytime the canary dies, we have a disaster. Clearly, we need to get rid of the canaries."
"Yeah, damn canaries can't be trusted."
Next, the New York Times runs a front page expose' on the Republican canaries.
Excellent Post, that I overquoted since most people never link through. Thanks!
March 12, 2010
International Club for Meddling with Local Government
One of moderator Amy Oliver's questions at last night's CO-4 GOP debate was about an international organization called the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives, or ICLEI. They've changed their name to ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability.
Apparently they encourage local governments to impose environmental regulations all over the world. They describe "members" as "the strongest allies of ICLEI by contributing a yearly membership fee, but also by hosting ICLEI offices, financing events or contributing staff time to projects and activities." That would be staff time of the local governments they work for, paid by local tax dollars.
The online membership directory is unavailable: "Please accept our apologies. We are presently working to update our membership information pages. This page will be available again shortly."
They do, however, list the 1124 local governments these members come from. They include:
Arvada, Aspen, Boulder, Breckenridge, Carbondale, Denver, Durango, Ft. Collins, Frisco, Golden, Gunnison County, La Plata County, LAFAYETTE, Loveland, Manitou Springs, San Miguel County, and Westminster in Colorado.
Haverford Township, Lower Makefield, Meadville, Montgomery Township, Mt. Lebanon, Narberth, Nether Providence Township, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Radnor, Upper Dublin Township, and West Chester in Pennysylvania.
Find your town. Complain to your city council. I DON'T WANT MY TAX DOLLARS, IN THE FORM OF STAFF TIME, SPENT ON ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISM.
