Month: June 2009

Rationing: A New Dirty Word

For months the health care debate has been raging…..and for months info has been flying at the people at an outstanding rate…..and for months the poepl are more confused and disillusioned than they have been in a long time.  Why is this?

Well first of all, it is very good for the health care opponents…they can say anything they like and the confused electorate will buy any argument…as long as it sounds like a BAD deal.  One such word is rationing.

I would like to help the readers understand the word and the debate….hopefully…my attempt will be successful.

The NT Times had an excellent report filed by David Leonhardt on rationing and excerpts are here:

Wait, are you talking about rationing medical care? Access to medical care is a fundamental right. And rationing sounds like something out of the Soviet Union. Or at least Canada.

The r-word has become a rejoinder to anyone who says that this country must reduce its runaway health spending, especially anyone who favors cutting back on treatments that don’t have scientific evidence behind them. You can expect to hear a lot more about rationing as health care becomes the dominant issue in Washington this summer.

In truth, rationing is an inescapable part of economic life. It is the process of allocating scarce resources. Even in the United States, the richest society in human history, we are constantly rationing. We ration spots in good public high schools. We ration lakefront homes. We ration the best cuts of steak and wild-caught salmon.

Health care, I realize, seems as if it should be different. But it isn’t. Already, we cannot afford every form of medical care that we might like. So we ration.

There are three main ways that the health care system already imposes rationing on us. The first is the most counterintuitive, because it doesn’t involve denying medical care. It involves denying just about everything else.

The rapid rise in medical costs has put many employers in a tough spot. They have had to pay much higher insurance premiums, which have increased their labor costs. To make up for these increases, many have given meager pay raises.

The second kind of rationing involves the uninsured. The high cost of care means that some employers can’t afford to offer health insurance and still pay a competitive wage. Those high costs mean that individuals can’t buy insurance on their own.

The uninsured still receive some health care, obviously. But they get less care, and worse care, than they need. The Institute of Medicine has estimated that 18,000 people died in 2000 because they lacked insurance. By 2006, the number had risen to 22,000, according to the Urban Institute.

The final form of rationing is the one I described near the beginning of this column: the failure to provide certain types of care, even to people with health insurance. Doctors are generally not paid to do the blocking and tackling of medicine: collaboration, probing conversations with patients, small steps that avoid medical errors. Many doctors still do such things, out of professional pride. But the full medical system doesn’t do nearly enough.

That’s rationing — and it has real consequences.

So the opponents of the Obama Health plan will use rationing as a way to try and prove that we will be separated from your doctor or that you will not be able to receive proper medical attention.  Both are not proven…both are scare tactics and as we know Americans are very suspectable to FEAR.  For that reason any health care programs will probably be watered down to be a mere reflection of what is needed and in all administrations to come will be methodically dismantled until we are back where we are now.

More Good News In The Making

At least that is what the economists want us to believe…..housing is trying to make a comeback…it will but slowly…..unemployment claims are down…..markets were doing better, but that is a daily indicator….means nothing in the overall picture right now.

Apparently the rest of the economic world does not agree with thye cheerleaders of the US economy.  The World Bank issued this statement:

The World Bank said today the global recession this year will be deeper than it predicted in March and warned that a flight of capital from developing nations will swell the ranks of the poor and the unemployed.

The world economy will contract 2.9 percent, compared with a previous forecast of a 1.7 percent decline, the Washington- based lender said in a report today. Growth will be 2 percent next year, down from a 2.3 percent prediction, the bank said.

I know ….some will say that the World Bank is more concerned with the poor third world than the US, but sorry Irene…in this age of globalization it is all the same.  What effects Kenya will have an effect on the US.  That is why it is called “globalization”.

Nowhere are the indicators saying that the picture of the economy is becoming brighter….only in the lies of the economists that make their living off the markets.  Main Street has been suffering….and will continue to suffer until some how the guys in Washington realize that there is a diminishing middle class.

Will Dems Ever Find Their Spine?

The best answer for now is–it is very doubtful.  With the most recent election there was such hope…the Dems had a good majority in Congress and a prez that was talking change and progress.  But 5 months into the new presidency and what was happened–the Dems have lost what little spine that had in the first place.

Take health care….why are so many Dems back off the idea of universal health care?  It is not because the people are against….that poll shows that over 70% of the voters want a health care plan.  Then why are they dragging their feet on health care, after all they have a great majority and could pull a GW move and force their programs through the Congress….then why are they so timid?

Could it be that they do not want to offend their campaign contributors?  That makes more sense than any of the other reasons I have heard.

Recently Kaiser Health News wrote:

“Almost 30 key lawmakers helping draft landmark health-care legislation have financial holdings in the industry, totaling nearly $11 million worth of personal investments in a sector that could be dramatically reshaped by this summer’s debate,” The Washington Post reports. The list of members includes “Congress’s most powerful leaders and a bipartisan collection of lawmakers in key committee posts.” For example, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., “has at least $50,000 invested in a health-care index” (fund), and Sen. Judd Gregg, R-NH, “a senior member of the health committee, has between $254,000 and $560,000 worth of stock holdings in major health-care companies, including Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck.” The data was part of a “release of financial disclosure forms for the House and Senate” on Friday.

“While no congressional rules bar members from holding financial stakes in industries they regulate, some ethics experts suggest that it often creates the appearance of a conflict of interest, particularly if there is a chance that the legislation could result in a personal financial boost.” But at “nearly 20%” of the national economy, “many legal experts say the health-care industry is so predominant that it is impossible for lawmakers to avoid financial ties to that sector, suggesting that the best antidote is a clear disclosure system that makes every lawmaker’s finances publicly available.”

I have suggesdted that someone in the mainstream media publish a list of the politicians that have received money from the health industry and then publish the vote on any health issues and see who votes where.  I suspect that the health industry has bought many friends and they will now repay them for their generosity.

The Dems have had NO spine for many years and now they have a chance to redeem themselves inb the eyes of the voter and yet they waffle.  I have heard many so called “liberal” politicians waffle ….Feinstein has said “we may not have the votes” on health issues and then Daschle has said “we will have to trim federal health programs”.

They were so close to having a spine and yet so far away.

Rational Ignorance Effect

Ever since the election in November 0f 2008, many people, bloggers and journalists have been trying to explain thye actions of the GOP.  We have heard that they are a dying party or that they are not in touch with the feelings of the voter.  No matter which or what you think is happening to the GOP there is one thing to keep in mind….they are professionals and they are pretty good at the game of politics.

So what is the reason that the GOP is appearing so weak?

First of all, the American people on an individual basis, realizes that their single vote is unlikely to determine the outcome of anything.  For this reason they do not spend too much time researching to get the reliable information they need.  The voter relies heavily on the media for their information and in these days of cable they look for those channels and reports that will reinforce their beliefs in the world view.

The voter lacks incentive to cast an informed vote.  Therefore FOX and MSNBC form their knowledge of any given situation.  Most voters will be rationally uninformed on many issues.  They wilkl depend on political information suppliers like the mass media to the issues that are of personal importance.

This situation has a name….it is called the “Rational Ignorance Effect”

In my opinion this is what the GOP is employing in their attacks on Obama.  They use buzzwords that have no real place in the conversation with the hope that political ignorance will play in their favor.

If one needs an illustration then I say just take a long hard look at the last “Tea Party” protests…..they were billed about the outrage in Obama tax increases….but if anyone bothered to check there were few if any tax increases.  Basically it was just a ploy to get people lavered up and go out and bash the president.  It was NEVER about raising taxes.

Some will say that the “Rational Ignorance Effect” is losing some of its validity…..because to the popularity of the internet……I say that is not completely accurate……voters will use the internet like they use the media….they will find information that supports their world view.  For that reason, Rational Ignorance Effect is still as valid as it ever was.

2009 Anal-Ocity

It is now summer and the debates in Washington are raging….on this side or that…and I suspect that there will be a plethora of anal statements this year.

Found great piece of verbage from the Maryland GOP……this is from Joyce Thoman:

Obama and Hitler have a great deal in common in my view. Obama and Hitler use the “blitzkrieg” method to overwhelm their enemies. FAST, CARPET BOMBING intent on destruction. Hitler’s blitzkrieg bombing destroyed many European cities – quickly and effectively. Obama is systematically destroying the American economy and with it AMERICA. First the banking/investment industry, next private enterprise (GM and Chrysler) and now HEALTH CARE. And he is working on grabbing more of the American economy with his environmental extremism!

………I wish I could think of something witty…but I cannot…..just another GOP moron….that should not be allowed near anyone.

Is There An Energy Crisis Brewing?

I am sorry everyone remembers the oil at $150 a barrel or that gas was over $5 a gallon and what are the chances that it will come again?

Canadian economist Jeff Rubin has a somewhat oracular reputation. Since 2000, he has predicted a massive oil-price spike, and he was among the first in 2007 to prophesy that oil would soar over $100 per barrel (a few months later, he said $150 a barrel and was basically proved right again). Now, even though oil has dropped considerably from its peak, Rubin warns that it’s bound to skyrocket once more and cause another, even greater economic crisis. In his new book, Why Your World Is About to Get a Whole Lot Smaller, he lays out how this energy crunch will occur—and why it will spell the end of globalization.

The scenario goes something like this: the ongoing depletion of the world’s oil resources, coupled with soaring demand from emerging economies like India and China, will send the price of crude through the roof, Rubin says. This will seriously escalate transportation costs, which in turn will cripple international trade, reverse commercial interdependence and disable the global economy. The resulting age will be one in which nations are isolated, technological progress is sluggish and travel is infrequent. The Middle East will be less relevant than it is today, and food scarcity will emerge as the foremost international problem. Countries with a shortage of arable land will scramble and compete to buy agricultural real estate from other nations (for example, as Saudi Arabia is already now doing in Sudan) to alleviate their ever-worsening food crises.

Rubin’s future isn’t all bad. To offset the effects of the energy crisis, governments will have to invest heavily in national infrastructure (especially public-transportation systems); national industries once hurt by outsourcing and foreign competition will thrive; and the environment will become cleaner as people are forced to use less fossil fuel and as cars disappear from the streets. But Rubin warns that governments can do only so much—successful adaptation to an energy-starved world will largely depend on individuals altering their energy-consumption norms. Still, he is willing to bet that people will make the right choices. All in all, he says, “don’t be surprised if the new, smaller world that emerges isn’t a lot more liveable and enjoyable than the one we are about to leave behind.”

There will always be a boom or bust cycle in the oil industry.  I do not know if I agree with Rubin on the statement that the people will make the right choice in the long run.  Especially in the US, if they do make the right choice then the oil crisis, the energy crisis, would have been avoided in the 70’s.  It is possible that the people could make a good choice, however the government and industry does not give them the chance to do so.

IMO, I do not see oil companies allowing anything that would harm their profits or their stranglehold on the economy.

Random Thoughts

As usual, I have made more notes on more things than I can do posts on, so I decided to share my thoughts with my readers in my Random Thoughts posts.

1–Transparency?  If the Obama admin wants transparency then I say publish a list of Reps who take health industry money and then publish a list of how they vote on the health care issue….I believe we would see who these people REALLY represent in Congress.

2–A Flock Of Morons–neocons are just plain moronic in their attacks on Obama for his supposed “inaction” in the Iranian election situation.  They say he needs to tell the world on which side he falls on….now think about that….this there any doubt which side he is on?  Just another example of the moronic attitudes of these idiots in Congress.  These people are just as silly as the 80’s group “A Flock Of Seagulls”, they look silly and they sound silly.

3–It is time for the media to retire the label of “maverick” when speaking of John McCain….he is proving that he is a loyal son of the GOP….he has NOT been a maverick since his unsuccessful run for the presidency.

4–Where in the world was South Carolina’s governor Mark Sanford, when he was missing for those days?……..thinking…….actually….who cares?

5–Sanford found…..”Don’t Cry For Me Argentina”……”Another One Bites The Dust”…….Just a few songs that come to mind……maybe a new rule is needed…politicians must be eunchs.

6–Always in threes–Ed…then Farrah…and now MJ.

7–Would the world have remembered Jackson so fondly if he had been convicted of the crime?

Understanding Iran–Conclusion

From the Professor’s Classroom.

It is the summer of their discontent…..I read that somewhere…..it explains what is happening in Iran.  And what is happening is that history is repeating itself….all over again…as Yogi would say.

Let us step back into my trusty “way Back” machine and travel to the 1960’s.  The Shah has been installed as “supreme” ruler of Iran by the oil companies and the CIA and he begins his “White Revolution”.  A massive program of economic and cultural reforms.  And at the same time opposition to the Shah and his US handlers was growing.  Enter the SAVAK–the Shah’s secret police that was used to quell any and all opposition throught arrestys, torture and murder.  They helped the Shah retain his power over real and pertend political opposition.

Then in the late 70’s the protests grew and grew from all corners of the country.  And all looked to a little known cleric exiled in France, the ayatollah Khomeini.  There was marching in the streets, beatings, arrests and deaths associated with these protests until the Shah lost it all and the Islamic Republic was formed.

The US and its citizens lost sight of basic human rights in there fear of “creeping” communism and at lead to a blind eye to what was actually going on in Iran.  So in the attempt to protect the flow of oil from Iran, they allowed those to come to power that would cease the flow of oil to the west.  Kinda like shooting oneself in the foot.

Now we return to the present and the election results and the ensuing protests.  It all sounds so darn familiar, right?  The politics of Iran is coming in full circle back to the beginning.  The results of the recent election has brought about beatings, arrests and death; weapons used by the SAVAK are now the weapons of the Council.

Wish I could go forward in time and see what the result will be, but I cannot….it will all depend on the actions of the clerics on the Council and the strength of the opposition.  There is a rumor circulating that Washington is pumping money into the opposition to the tune of $400 million, but that is just a rumor….but one cannot discount it….it is not like we have never done that before.

The protesters seem to have the will and the guts to continue their actions….the leaders are behind them 100%….maybe the leaders should step forward and prove they are willing to face the same dangers and results as the protesters…then maybe all this will be for the good of the country…well the good of the west,  at least.

Afterword:  Slowly but slowly the ruling mullahs and their lackeys are quelling the protests….the protests are becoming smaller and smaller as the “enforcers” use violence to get a handle on the demostrations.

2009 Anal-Ocity

God, I love this stuff!

The hits have been slower in arriving this summer, but as usual there will always be someone that has something totally anal to say.

This time it is from Missouri state rep. Cynthia Davis:

Who’s buying dinner? Who is getting paid to serve the meal? Churches and other non-profits can do this at no cost to the taxpayer if it is warranted. […] Bigger governmental programs take away our connectedness to the human family, our brotherhood and our need for one another. […] Anyone under 18 can be eligible? Can’t they get a job during the summer by the time they are 16? Hunger can be a positive motivator. What is wrong with the idea of getting a job so you can get better meals? Tip: If you work for McDonald’s, they will feed you for free during your break. […] It really is all about increasing government spending, which means an increase in taxes for us to buy more free lunches and breakfasts.

This from the Missouri chairwoman of the Special Standing Committee On Children And Families.  Why is it always Repubs that hate the poor and those disadvantaged?



Understanding Iran–Part 3

From the Professor’s Classroom:

The recent election and the results have brought a familiar name to the forefront of the opposition, Rafsanjani, an old “friend” from the past.  The media analysts are saying that he has the key to the modernization of Iran and the possibility of a slackening of the hostiles between Iran and the US.  The media calls him a moderate and as such he is in direct opposition to the ruling mullahs.

That analysis is not quite accurate.

Once again it is to the “way back” machine.

It is 1989 and the ayatollah has died, one Khomeini and with that the speaker of the Iranian parliment becomes the presdident of Iran, Rafsanjani.  He is a shia cleric and a founding father of the Islamic Republic Party.  Late that same year aftyer the US releases some of Iran’s frozen funds, Rafsanjani attempts to massage the west but is quickly slapped down by the Supreme Council.

Then in 1991 with a slump in oil prices and the debt from the war with Iraq, Rafsanjani tries to slide economic reform through the parliment and was not too successful.  Then in 1993 Rafasanjani runs for his second term as president and squeeks out a win, not the resounding 95% total he had first got, his popularity was waning.

During his second term, his presidency was marked with western sanctions,  most of them financial and economic in an attempt to bring down the regime of the clerics.  When Rafsanjani bowed out in 1997, he could not run for a third term, there was NO popular front runner to take his place,  It seems that the Supreme Council had learned their lesson with Rafsanjani.

It is to be known that the candidates for the presidency are put up by the clerics on the Council of Guardians, therefore they are basically all fundamentalists.  That can explain the present president and his support within the Council.

Rafsanjani’s name keeps reappearing occassionally when analyst talk about any reform in Iran.  But he does not have the support he once had, but he seems to stay in the running, at least in the minds of westerners.  Just remember, whoever becomes president can do nothing without the approval of the Council of Guardians and they hate the west and all it stands for.

In the recent protests over the election results Rafsanjani and his daughter are mentioned as leaders, as well as the losing candidate, Moussavi.  Are they truly the leaders or just names mentioned in passing?