Obama Health Care-Not

So, Obama wants to spend $1 Trillion over the next ten years to provide Health Care for 16 million uninsured Americans. Nevermind that this number isn't set in stone, and is a fraction of what the actual cost will be, but for argument's sake, we'll use it. Here are the numbers broken down, $1 Trillion divided by 16 million is $62,500 per person over a ten year period. Hmm... I have Kaiser, and I pay about $350 a month, which is a total of $4,200 per year. Using 4% (average projected growth rate for Health Care Costs), after ten years, the total cost of Health Insurance for me will be $50,426. If the Federal Government paid for these people to have my Health Insurance plan, after ten years the cost would be $807 Billion. For some reason, can't put my finger on it, I almost believe it would be better if the Federal Government just bought these people a Health Insurance plan.

This does not even take into account that family plans cost less per person than individual plans. This does not take into account that if the Federal Government just purchased Health Insurance for the uninsured, 3.8 million more uninsured would get coverage than the proposed 16 million. Knowing that the insured burden the cost of the uninsured, this does not take into account the realized savings that would occur for people that pay for their own insurance. Hence, making Health Care more affordable. These are just a few of the financial considerations that come to mind.

We all know how efficient the DMV, AmTrak, Social Security Administration, Post Office, etc. are. Oh wait, they're not. It's okay though, 60% of Americans pay Federal Income Taxes; the other 40% are too poor to, but they'll be the ones receiving this benefit at public largesse and won't trouble themselves with whatever future price tag that comes with it. I ponder the thought that the Democrat Party is buying the Public. Hmm... at least 40% of them, and there are enough useful idiots in the other 60% to help ensure Democrat dominance in future elections. If only the milquetoast Republicans could make the argument that this is a theft of Liberty. Oh, forgot, under Bush they created Prescription Drug Coverage for Seniors. Shall we say cheers to the proposed Obama Health Care-Not Plan?

Enough is enough

In this Bloomberg article, "California Democrats Seek Tax Boost as Battle Looms," the title says it all. California Voters rejected the May Ballot initiatives seeking to raise taxes to close the $24 Billion deficit. What were Obama's words, oh yeah, 'I won, so I'm gonna trump you on that." Well, California Voters won and we're going to trump you on that. No new taxes. No raising taxes. Now cut the damn budget. We understand the consequences.

However, I have a proposal. Let's not go through the budget and cut program's budgets in order to keep all current programs. Let's ask ourselves, what do we really need from our State. We pay gas taxes for infrastructure projects. We pay CA State Disability Insurance (Income Tax) in case we get injured on the job. We pay Sales Taxes, soon to be 9.75% in LA County. Some of the money is retained by the State, the other portion is distributed to local and county municipalities for their general budgets. We pay property taxes to pay for public education. What do students need most in order to be educated? Books and teachers. Special, expensive programs or technology should be put on the back burner until revenues increase enough in order to provide for these non-essential expenditures. On and on the process goes.

When the revenues are spent on these essential services, and there's no funding left for projects such as paying five years of welfare benefits to single mothers taking education classes, that's too bad. When our prison system has to cut theatre classes, stop maintaining tennis courts, lose cable TV, that's too damn bad. Our State Legislatures need to provide us with a list of essential priorities and continue to fund those priorities as usual. The non-essential programs have to go until the Economic situation improves to the point we can begin to fund them again. Will our State be worse off without these non-essential programs, absolutely not. It's inexcusable as well to withhold county and local municipality revenues when the State isn't mature enough to control its spending.

One last thing, if our State made itself more competitive by lowering Income Taxes and Sales Taxes; businesses and rich individuals (aka people with disposable income) will move here and help create jobs, thus boost our sagging economy. As long as Politicians' focus is to hose the productive segment of Society for the benefit of the not-so-productive segment of Society; the productive segment will vanish.

Herr Charles "Joseph Göbbels" Gibson

I wrote my two US Senators and my US House of Representative the following:

"'Prescription for America' by Charlie Gibson will be hosted on June 24, 2009 in the Blue Room of the White House. It's my understanding that this will be a one-sided debate about National Health Care in America. As a Capitalist, I'm opposed to any Socialist remedy that taxes one segment of our Society to provide a benefit for another segment of Society. It's becoming blatantly apparent that Network News and most Cable News Networks are Propaganda Organs for the Obama Administration. I encourage you to stand up for a debate on ideas and end this ridiculous media circus; or is it that Charlie Gibson is the Joseph Goebbels of this Administration?"

Joseph Goebbels was a German politician and Reich Minister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945 (wikipedia). Though Charlie Gibson is not a Cabinet Member or Politician, he serves the Administration by promoting its cause. In this case, National Health Care. It's not just unfair that this is a propaganda piece for the Administration, it's disingenuous on the issue of rectifying our Health Care system. The Obama Administration has not only defined the problem, it's proposed the only acceptable cure. The solution isn't a ghastly new Federal Bureaucracy such as what Obama proposes either. However, how are we going to have a genuine debate over this issue when a major Network News channel is acting like the mouthpiece for this Administration? Goebbels and Hitler believed that if you told a big enough lie, the public would believe it through public credulity. National Health Care is that lie.

It has begun

In this Wall Street Journal article by Deborah Solomon and Damian Paletta, they stated, "The Obama administration has begun serious talks about how it can change compensation practices across the financial-services industry, including at companies that did not receive federal bailout money" while at the same time "House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.) is working on legislation that could strengthen the government's ability both to monitor compensation and to curb incentives that threaten a company's viability or pose a systemic risk to the economy."

"This is not going to be about capping compensation or micro-management," said an administration official. "It will be about understanding what is the best way to align compensation with sound risk management and long-term value creation." In February, President Obama "said executive pay helped lead to a 'reckless culture and a quarter-by-quarter mentality that in turn helped to wreak havoc in our financial system.'"

Free market principles in banking allow bankers, investors and borrowers to take risk in order to create wealth. The borrower needs money for a business idea, the investor gives the bank the money needed to make loans, and the bank charges interest to the borrower in order to make a profit and pay interest back to the investor. In order for this system to work, incentives need to exist for people to choose this career.

If Doctors were paid one billion a year, everyone would clamor to be a doctor, however the limited school facilities that provide the education one needs to become a doctor would create a system where many compete for the few seats available. Conversely, if doctors were capped at $50,000 a year, we could accurately predict the demise of our health care industry as doctors would leave it and individuals not suited to practice medicine would become doctors.

Now analogize this to our financial industry. The best and brightest seize advantage of the few best business schools we have in this country in order to get the best advantage to work for a financial firm or other business in order to make a ton of money. That's their reward. However, this Administration is taking away the incentive people will have to choose this career. This Administration has an absolute failure of understanding how the free market works.

This is also clear in their ad nauseum arguments that this financial crises was somehow created solely by Wall Street greed. In a previous paragraph, three people are needed; borrowers, investors and creditors (banks). The Administration is currently blaming the creditors for the financial disaster without looking at the other two legs in this three legged stool. This entire event was precipitated by one group of people, the borrowers. There would have been no collateral debt obligations (CDO's) to be had if there were no loans to back them up. The unscrupulous lending of money to sub-prime borrowers was made possible only because of socially engineered policies like the Community Reinvestment Act of 1979 (Carter Administration) and Bill Clinton directing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to incur more sub-prime debt.

The solution to this financial debacle is not salary caps on bankers. The solution is to ensure that only financially sound individuals are able to take out home mortgage loans. That their incomes be verified. That they be required to put up 10% of the purchase price in order that they have a vested interest in not walking away from their home. When CDO's are collapsing because the sub-prime borrowers are defaulting, that tells you something, and that something has nothing to do with a banker's salary. The free market should be allowed to take its course and the banks that invested heavily in sub-prime mortgages, like Countrywide and IndyMac, should rightly collapse because of their unscrupulous lending practices. The banks should learn the lesson the government is not there to bail them out of their misdeeds; in order that there be an incentive to keep them from making bad loan decisions.

Lastly, it's a laughable statement when Administration officials are making pronouncements they will not be micro-managing banking institutions. Did they not fire the CEO of AIG? Did they not fire the CEO of GM? Did they not cut in half the advertising budget of Chrysler? Did they not force Chrysler into bankruptcy because the Administration did not want to negotiate five cents on the dollar for the hedge funds that were invested in Chrysler? This Administration is acting like that tin pot dictator in Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. I shudder to think how this Administration is going to treat Ford Motor Co. when Ford turns out better products and is more profitable without having nefarious government regulations controlling them. I shudder to think what's going to happen to America's Economic prowess as these nefarious government salary compensation regulations come to fruition. Good Bye America, it was great while you lasted.

Time to leave Reagan behind???

The Washington Times has a great article why the Republican Party is doomed. Jeb Bush said, "So our ideas need to be forward looking and relevant. I felt like there was a lot of nostalgia and the good old days in the [Republican] messaging." He then added, "From the conservative side, it's time for us to listen first, to learn a little bit, to upgrade our message a little bit, to not be nostalgic about the past because, you know, things do ebb and flow." Mitt Romney added, "Let's not underestimate the people of America; let's make sure and listen to the people of America ... listen to what they're feeling and get their ideas."

So, here we have a "Listening Tour" hosted by John McCain, Bobby Jindal, Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush. These four believe the Republican Party, based on their comments, need to redefine its message and create a forward looking platform, as well as listen to the American people. Really? Is that really what the Republicans need to do? I disagree. We had a Republican Party that properly opposed the Clinton Agenda in the 1990's. Americans rewarded the minority leadership with majority status under Newt Gingrich's 'Contract with America.' The Republicans kept that majority until 2006. Further losing seats in 2008. Obama did not win by a landslide victory; he received slightly more votes than George Bush did in 2004.

What Republicans are are disenchanted. For six years, Republicans never passed a balanced budget. For six years, Republicans never made permanent the tax cuts that let us keep more of our paycheck. For six years, Republicans let Democrats, the minority, control the agenda in Washington. We allowed Liberals to create airport security protocols which culminated with 80-year old white grandmas being patted down. We watched Republicans in Washington create Prescription Drug Coverage for Seniors [I didn't know we were for a massive new spending program that gives Seniors even more of an incentive to vote for government programs]. We watched as the President failed to never come up with a solution to winning in Iraq. We listened to ad nauseum Liberal arguments about how every policy decision would result in failure or some imagined horror and the Bush Administration did nothing to counter those arguments. When Republicans start acting like Democrats, they lose. Ask George H.W. Bush what happened to him when he raised taxes.

It's not that the Republicans need a new message, the proper message is that Conservatism works. However, what Republicans do need is Republican leadership with fortitude and ideological conviction. The problem with the Republican Party is that it's fractured. You have pseudo-Republicans like John McCain who won the Party nomination, and the guy never once challenged Obama on ideological grounds. Being the "Maverick" he "is," he didn't have ideological ground to stand on. How do you challenge a Marxist when you don't have ideological convictions? Let the Republicans move left; let them switch Parties and betray their true convictions like Arlen Spector. Let the Republican Party continue to destroy itself because they lack political conviction and fortitude.

However, let We the People form a new Political Party. A Party whose foundation and ideological conviction is liberty. We don't have liberty when we're tied down with ever increasing taxes and a hand of government that grows heavier by the year. We don't have liberty when we don't have secure borders and our laws are not enforced; that's anarchy. We don't have liberty when Liberals are charging us with hate speech. First Amendment anyone? We don't have liberty when McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Laws prevent us from speaking our minds within 30 or 60 days from an Election. Again, First Amendment anyone? We don't have liberty when government gives criminals the upper hand and law abiding Citizens suffer because of draconian "Assault Weapon Bans" and magazine limitations and bullet restrictions. We don't have freedom of religion when Liberal atheists and secularists strip our public squares of religious displays during Holidays. We need as radical an ideological mindset to counter the radical ideological mindset of this President and his regime. Vote for actual change. Vote for Liberation.

Let this be a Lesson for ya'

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.91afc63abb93d5e6768f1eb67b4c5022.a91&show_article=1

"Govt hikes top income tax rate to 50%" in England that is. We already know that European Socialist regimes have high taxes, one needs it when half the population works to support the other half. But I digress. Originally, Chancellor Alistair Darling stated "In November [2008], I announced a new rate of income tax of 45 percent on incomes above 150,000 pounds -- the top one percent of taxpayers" however "In order to help pay for additional support for people now, I have decided that the new rate will be 50 percent and will come in from next April -- a year earlier."

This is hilarious. Not only did he originally propose raising the tax burden by 12.5%, he changed his mind and decided to raise the tax burden by 25% from 40% to 50%. The lesson one can learn is that when Politicians promise a tax increase, be prepared once you've accepted the original rationale, for justification for an even bigger raise. I know Obambi proposed raising our Federal Income Tax burden, but perhaps him and Alistair Darling, two Socialists, think alike? One might recall the greatest threat to Obambi's Candidacy for President was a guy named Joe the Plumber who questioned Obambi's Tax Policy. I think I see a correlation.

Losing our Moral Bearings over...

"harsh methods—waterboarding, face slapping, sleep deprivation and other techniques." My goodness, how immoral of us, simulating drowning, face slapping, sleep deprivation, all in the name of National Security and we're losing our moral bearings because of it. Why, we need to smile more, self-flagellate and tell others how we're sorry for having rescued them from tyranny like we did for Europe during WW1, WW2 and the Cold War. Obama said, "In America, there is a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive." How much more ignorance and naivete can we tolerate? We need change we can believe in; we need a man for a President, not a pussy.