Month: October 2009

So You Want A Budget Neutral?

The more programs that the Obama group puts out there trhe call for them to be budget neutral….that is not adding to the deficit…..good gig if it can be found…..

This is a joke in the first place……when was the last time conservatives were fiscally responsible?  Reagan comes to mind…..it is becoming a tiresome argument at best….

Let us go with health care for a moment….the latest CBO report says that it will cost $820 billion to pass the health bill issued by Bauccus and his gang of insurance agents….but will it be budget neutral?  Obama has said he will NOT sign a bill that adds to the deficit…..good sentiment…….

But can it be accomplished?  Uh huh….but some would not like the solution…..Between the years 2002 to 2008 the wars we are fighting have cost $1.6 trillion….I do not recall anyone asking that these wars were budget neutral….Sorry I digress…..

If we stop all that stuff then there is more than enough cash to cover everyone in the US with cash left over for helping education out…..

God, how could I have been so silly as to think that the people of this country would be more important than fighting wars….after all the defense industry needs its corporate welfare…..

When will the citizens of this country tire of the silliness of the political system?  When will the people realize that others in our country need our help?  This why some people stop voting…..their choices one bowl of shit or the other bowl of shit….not much of a choice if one wants American citizens to succeed and be well….

Just a thought……

Is “Opt Out” Proposal Good Or Bad?

It is about enough of who won what prize and who wants to own a NFL team…there is far more important issues that need analysis……

Since single payer was a NO SHOW in the deliberations and the public option will most likely be in name only….what options are being considered now?  Glad you asked….and this one is a doosey (sp?)…….

As reported in the Huffington Post:

Senate Democrats have begun discussions on a compromise approach to health care reform that would establish a robust, national public option for insurance coverage but give individual states the right to opt out of the program.

How such a system would work is still being debated, according to those with knowledge of the proposal. But theoretically, the “opt-out” approach would start with everyone having access to a public plan. What kind of public plan isn’t yet clear. States would then have the right to vote — either by referendum, legislature, or simply a gubernatorial decree — to make the option unavailable in their health care exchanges.

A simple thought experiment might clarify the issues at hand: What if Medicare had been passed with this ‘opt-out’ provision? To make the thought experiment more appropriate to the situation at hand, we must imagine that the 1965 law creating Medicare had already been subject to the same compromises that the public option has been: that its ability to negotiate with certain suppliers and providers has been negotiated away, and that instead of being available to all older Americans, access has been restricted so that only an estimated 5% of them are expected to join.

A plausible answer is that a number of states, especially in the South, would have chosen not to participate.

This appears to be a weak lame attempt to pacify as many Dems as possible with the chance that a 60 vote super majority can to reached……in other words, it is all about the vote not what is best for the people, who those voting have taken an oath to serve….did I miss something?  Is that not grounds to throw the ilk out of office?

Are There Other Health Ideas?

We have heard all the clap trap about the Dems and we have have heard the plan from the Repubs…wait…my bad there is no plan coming from the Repubs……but there are others out there that have plans…..some pretty good some not so…..but at least they are trying to find a balance….

“A Better Way To Health Reform” written by Martin Feldstein in the WaPo….excerpts quoted below:

A good health insurance system should 1) guarantee that everyone can obtain appropriate care even when the price of that care is very high and 2) prevent the financial hardship or personal bankruptcy that can now result from large medical bills

A good system should not try to pay all health-care bills. That would lead to excessive demand, wasteful use of expensive technology and, inevitably, rationing in which health-care decisions are taken away from patients and their physicians. Countries that provide health care to all are forced to deny some treatments and diagnostic tests that most Americans have come to expect.

Here’s a better alternative. Let’s scrap the $220 billion annual health insurance tax subsidy, which is often used to buy the wrong kind of insurance, and use those budget dollars to provide insurance that protects American families from health costs that exceed 15 percent of their income.

Specifically, the government would give each individual or family a voucher that would permit taxpayers to buy a policy from a private insurer that would pay all allowable health costs in excess of 15 percent of the family’s income. A typical American family with income of $50,000 would be eligible for a voucher worth about $3,500, the actuarial cost of a policy that would pay all of that family’s health bills in excess of $7,500 a year.

The family could give this $3,500 voucher to any insurance company or health maintenance organization, including the provider of the individual’s current employer-based insurance plan. Some families would choose the simple option of paying out of pocket for the care up to that 15 percent threshold. Others would want to reduce the maximum potential out-of-pocket cost to less than 15 percent of income and would pay a premium to the insurance company to expand their coverage. Some families might want to use the voucher to pay for membership in a health maintenance organization. Each option would provide a discipline on demand that would help to limit the rise in health-care costs.

Two related problems remain. First, how would families find the cash to pay for large medical and hospital bills that fall under the 15 percent limit? While it would be reasonable for a family that earns $50,000 a year to save to be prepared to pay a health bill of, say, $5,000, what if a family without savings is suddenly hit with such a large hospital bill? Second, how would doctors and hospitals be confident that patients with the new high deductibles will pay their bills?The simplest solution would be for the government to issue a health-care credit card to every family along with the insurance voucher. The credit card would allow the family to charge any medical expenses below the deductible limit, or 15 percent of adjusted gross income. (With its information on card holders, the government is in a good position to be repaid or garnish wages if necessary.) No one would be required to use such a credit card. Individuals could pay cash at the time of care, could use a personal credit card or could arrange credit directly from the provider. But the government-issued credit card would be a back-up to reassure patients and providers that they would always be able to pay.

I am not endorsing what Mr. Feldstein is saying, but at least he has some ideas…which is more than we can say for a wealth of people on the Right.

What the final bill will look like is anyone’s guess….but I would almost bet that it will look nothing like a real “public option”…..most likely some pale imitation of the original concept…….but I think that ALL viable conceptions and solutions should get their day and then the best of ALL should be the final bill…..it is that simple….no need to turn it into rocket science….

Jobs!….Jobs!….Jobs!…..

The news is not good on the job markets…..we keep losing job after job, but yet the recession is over……well that is crap to begin with….it may be over for investors but if you work for a living it still very much a threat to your life.

Sorry…I digress…….since the GOP has absolutely nothing to counter any Dem proposal on health reform, they have jumped head long into blaming Obama for the jobs lost and immediately equate that with a failed stim plan that he, Obama, had passed in the early days of his presidency.

Bloomber is reporting”

Republicans said the jobs data are evidence Obama’s $787 billion stimulus plan and the administration’s other economic recovery programs are failing. The report put Obama on the defensive after previous economic reports signaled a recovery was gaining traction.

Within minutes of the release of the government’s report, Republicans began e-mailing statements faulting Obama’s policies.

“President Obama can either acknowledge that his economic experiments have failed and change course, or continue down this path and see even more Americans lose their jobs,” Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, said in a statement.

House Republican leader John Boehner, who criticized Obama for traveling to Copenhagen, said Democrats’ pledges that the stimulus package would create jobs are proving false.

bama may soon suffer the political fallout from the recession, said political scientist Bruce Buchanan at the University of Texas in Austin. The president and his party would pay a price in next year’s congressional elections if the numbers continue to disappoint.

Democrats at this point aren’t in danger of losing their majorities in Congress, he said. The political damage will be limited, “barring some peg to hang repetition on.”

When Obama took office in January, the U.S. unemployment rate was 7.6 percent. September’s unemployment figure would have reached 10.4 percent if hundreds of thousands of Americans hadn’t opted out of the labor force because jobs are so hard to get, Rupkey said.

Unfortunately, the voter does not realize nor care that any job losses began a year before Obama took office….all they know is that their neighbors and friends are unemployed and the sitting president will have to suffer the consequences of someone else plunders.

The Repubs will attack and attack the Obama admin, and eventually they will hit on something that will resonate with the voter, whether it is true or not, the voter will take heed….and it appears that jobs may just proves to be that position that actually works and not backfires on the GOP.

Was It As Bad As They Said?

It has been a year since the massacre of last October, economic massacre that is…..but was it as bad as they all said it was?

The AP has published a pretty good list of then and now sort of stuff:

• $11.2 trillion: Total losses in the stock market from the Dow’s peak in October 2007 to the March 2009 bottom.

• $4.6 trillion: Total gains in the stock market since March 9.

• 6: The number of the 10 worst point drops in the 113-year history of the Dow that occurred in 2008. The 777-point drop on Sept. 29, 2008, ranks No. 1.

• 3: The number of the 10 worst percentage drops that occurred in 2008. The Sept. 29 decline of 9 percent is the third-biggest behind 22.6 percent on Oct. 19, 1987, and 10 percent on April 14, 2000.

• 92 percent: Decrease in Citigroup Inc.‘s share price from Oct. 10, 2008, ($13.90) to March 9 ($1.05).

• 341 percent: Increase in Citigroup‘s share price from March 9 to Friday’s close of $4.63.

• 18-20: The historical average for the Volatility Index of the Chicago Board Options Exchange, also known as the VIX, or “Fear Index.”

• 89: Where the VIX peaked last October.

• 23: Where the VIX was on Friday.

• 16 percent: The amount by which the Dow’s closing level on Friday was higher than its average close the previous 200 days. Earlier this month the number hit 20 percent, the highest since the early 1980s.

• $6.5 trillion: Value of assets in stock mutual funds at end of 2007.

• $3.7 trillion: Value at the end of 2008.

• $4.5 trillion: Value at the end of August.

• -$72 billion: Net cash flow (money put in minus money taken out) for stock mutual funds in October 2008.

• -$25 billion: Net cash flow in March.

• $4 billion: Net cash flow in August.

• $9: The amount, out of every $10 investors put into mutual funds in August, that went into bond funds.

• $855.40: The price of an ounce of gold on Oct. 10, 2008.

• $1,048.60: The price of an ounce of gold on Friday.

• 6.2 percent: Unemployment rate a year ago.

• 9.8 percent: Unemployment rate today.

• 95.2: Consumer confidence two years ago. Reading above 90 means the economy is on solid footing; above 100 signals strong growth.

• 25.3: Consumer confidence in February — record low.

• 53.1: Consumer confidence today.

• 2.8 percent: Decline in retail sales in October and December 2008.

• 2.7 percent: Increase in retail sales in August.

• 4.75 percent: Federal funds rate two years ago.

• 1 percent: Fed funds rate last October.

• 0 – 0.25 percent: Fed funds rate today.

• 4.81 percent: London interbank offered rate (LIBOR), the amount banks charge each other to borrow money for three months, at its peak, on Oct. 10, 2008.

_0.28 percent: Three-month LIBOR rate Friday.

• -0.5 percent: Personal savings rate in 2005 as home prices were soaring.

• 6.9 percent: Personal savings rate in May.

• $975 billion: Credit card debt held by Americans last September.

• $899 billion: Credit card debt held at the end of August, down 8 percent.

• 7 million: Home resales in 2005, a record year.

• 4.5 million: Home resales in January at annual rate.

• 5.1 million: Home resales in August at annual rate.

• $245,000: Median price of homes sold in 2006 — record high.

• $213,000: Median price of homes sold last October.

• $195,000: Median price of homes sold in August.

Like I said a pretty good list….but what does it all mean?  If you are rolling in money then all this means that you will probably make more money to bath in….but if you are human and have lost your job or are worried about your job then none of this means CRAP!  So they make the news for people with money….the rest of us know that it is unrealistic to say the recession is over…..go shopping and tell the world just how much you appreciate all the good economic news….

Is He Mr. Right?

I will put all the Nobel bitching behind for a day and focus on something that most of us think is just fine….SEX!

The greatest ionvention in the last 50 years has been “The Pill” or at least to those of us who enjoy a good toss every now and then….but if you, the ladies, are taken the pill does it change your consciousness about who you mate with?

In an article in Health Day the pill could be changing evolution.

“The use of the pill by women, by changing her mate preferences, might induce women to mate with otherwise less-preferred partners, which might have important consequences for mate choice and reproductive outcomes,” said Alexandra Alvergne, lead author of a study appearing in the October issue of Trends in Ecology & Evolution.

“One prediction is that offspring of pill users are more homozygous than expected, possibly related to impaired immune function and decreased perceived health and attractiveness,” according to the report by Alvergne, a postdoctoral research associate in the department of animal and plant sciences at the University of Sheffield in England, and colleague Virpi Lummaa.

Women who are ovulating tend to be attracted to so-called “manly men,” those with more masculine facial features and traits of dominance and competitiveness, according to background information in the study. They also tend to prefer the man who is not like them, genetically speaking.

And men, given a choice, will gravitate towards an ovulating female rather than a non-ovulating female.

But women on the pill are more consistently in a state that mimics pregnancy, the authors stated.

According to the study authors, who stress that “modern contraception has improved the quality of life worldwide,” 100 million women around the globe are on the pill.

“There are important limitations from previous studies, due to the fact few of them have been addressing the question as their main focus,” Alvergne said.

Future research should focus on two questions in particular, she said: Does use of the pill affect marital relationship, satisfaction and durability; and does it affect the ability of couples to reproduce?

Okay ladies if you are taking the pill and think you have found Mr. Right….you might want to think it over….and here is another question…is the high rate of divorce have anything to do with the pill?  Like women stop taking it to try and have a baby…and once the pill wears off do they realize that they do not have any attraction to their mate?  It would be interesting to find out one woman at a time…..

FOX Pundit Goes Rogue

First, I like to give due to people I think have “Cajones Of Steel”, those people that may go off  message or who jump up and do what I think ios the right thing.

This time it is FOX News pundit Shep Smith….recently in an interview with Dr. and Senator Barrasso of Wyoming:  Thanks to thinkprogress.org—-

“Why would we not want a public option?” Shep Smith asked Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), kicking off a tense and lively exchange this afternoon on Fox News. When Barrasso quickly launched into his Frank Luntz-inspired GOP talking points, calling it a “government take-over of health care,” Smith — who’s been known to go off the Fox News reservation from time to time — pushed back:

SMITH: It’s not a government take over, Senator! That’s not fair and we both know it. It’s not a government takeover because what it would be is a government option if you have insurance now and you like it you can keep it. … That’s not a government take over if we’re being fair is it Senator?

Barrasso struggled to muster a response. “Well compare it to Medicare, which we know right now is going bankrupt,” he said. Later, Smith engaged in fierce advocacy in favor of the public option:

SMITH: As the costs have gone up, the insurance industry’s profits on average have gone up more than 350 percent and it’s the insurance companies which have paid and have contributed to Senators and congressman on both sides of the aisle to the point where now, we can’t get…what more than 60 percent of Americans say they support, is a public option. This has been an enormous win for the health care industry. That is an unquestioned fact. […]

[E]very vote against a public option is a vote for the insurance companies, sir. It is!

Again, Barrasso replied with trite talking points. “We’re not even allowing the people of America to read the bill,” he said, later adding that “Washington is incapable” of running health care. “I want to be clear,” Smith told Barrasso, “this wouldn’t be Washington running the system, Senator. It would be a government run plan paid for by the people who sign up for the plan.”

That is a big OOPS!  Smith went off the reservation of FOX by calling the senator out on the crap about the government take over of health care.  This is not the first time Smith has left the fold….my question is…how much will FOX tolerate before he is bounced?  God forbid one of their pundits actually hold politicians accountable for their words…FOX does not…..

Mississippians Lose!

A Gulf South Free Press Opinion

The following post are for my friends in Mississippi….granted they do not have much to celebrate but they need to know what the morons they voted for are doing on the taxpayer’s dime.  I thought I would take a day out and report on their plight.

I saw this report on projo.com and thought I would pass it on to Mississippians for they probably did not get too much of this in their local rags that is best used to wrap fish in.

At least 14 Republican governors have recently issued, or will soon issue, similar letters urging their representatives in Congress to reject health-care overhauls that may create millions of dollars in new costs for state governments.

The Republican governors’ collective lobbying effort was reported Tuesday by the Washington-based publication The Hill, which described the move as a “coordinated attack on Sen. Max Baucus’ health-care reform legislation.”

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, the association chairman, issued a letter to Mississippi’s congressional delegation on Sept. 8, “and did share it with his Republican governor colleagues,” according to Kempe. “It was sent through the RGA policy person to our policy team, back in early September, via e-mail.”

Gov. Barbour?  Yep the man in Mississippi….the governor that did not want stim money to help put people to work…..the governor of a state that has about 12% unemployment…..the governor of a state where about 20% of the population is uninsured…. a state where damn near 30% of the population lives in poverty…….The GOP in Mississippi are doing nothing to make the lives of the people in this state any better….could that have anything to do with the large number of minorities in the state?  After all the GOP has become and will always be, in the South at least, the party of old white guys that are still stuck in the 50’s and not in the good way.

As long as Mississippi continues down this disguised “racist” path, it will continue to be a backwoods society….maybe we should try to change the state motto to read, “Welcome to Mississippi…set your clocks back a hundred years”.

And The Winner IS…………Obama!

The Nobel Peace Prize that is…….Pres. Barack Obama….OMG!…Here comes the noise from the Right…..the questions….what has he done?  So on and so on……actually, it is the HATE that will come through.

Just like the loss of the Olympics many on the Right will feel that they should speak out on this outrage…..my question is…if not him then who?

Qualifications?….what a crock!  I suggest that most of the conservative talk show hosts like Limbaugh, Beck and the rest are not qualified to be pundits….them do not depend on facts just the spin they care to carry.

Once again the Right seems to be against America being a winner anywhere…or maybe it is just the color of the man’s skin that bothers them the most.  There seems to be an overwhelming desire for the country to fail or to avoid any recognition…is it hate for the country or just that for a black man?

Time for these little pricks to be eliminated from the political landscape…they are doing NOTHING to make America stronger…they are however doing all in their power to turn the citizens on each other……that is something Americans should not allow…..but they do….and in doing so I question their motives…….

If these people cannot keep America first or appreciate the recognition, then maybe they should be the ones to pack up and find another country to INFECT!

Repubs Defend Medicare

That is right…you heard it right…the GOP is defending Medicare from any cuts that the Obama Admin may be considering…..No…this is not some parallel universe….unless you consider Washington in some parallel universe…I guess we could a case that it is….but that would be for the math dudes to work it out with a pencil.

I will bet you are wondering why I am attempting to be humorous?  After decades of trying to find ways to dismantle Medicare, they are now concerned that the Obama group will hurt seniors in their declining years.  I am NOT making this stuff up…I swear!

As written in Medical News Today website:

The GOP’s change of stance on Medicare raises questions about its motives, The Associated Press reports in a separate story: “Weren’t Republicans against Medicare before they were for it? It’s a question vexing Democrats in the fierce battle over President Barack Obama’s push for a health care overhaul as the head of the Republican Party has portrayed the GOP as the lone bulwark preventing deep cuts to the popular, government-run health plan for older people.”

“It’s a remarkable turnaround for a party whose leaders tried to slash billions from Medicare more than a decade ago and have assailed the program as a wasteful entitlement. None other than Ronald Reagan, a hero to Republicans, warned in 1961 that creation of Medicare would push the country toward socialism. The new GOP posture may be politically savvy given older Americans’ fears of major changes to Medicare, which were among the concerns widely on display at angry town hall meetings across the country last month. But the new stance also contradicts the party’s long history of skepticism toward government-run programs and Republican concerns about the long-term viability and health of the Medicare system”

Even thew chairman of the RNC is on the “save Medicare” bandwagon:

“Our seniors have really come under fire in the last few weeks, as more and more proposals look to be cutting benefits out of Medicare programs,” Steele said of the six-point proposal, which calls for the president to not cut Medicare benefits in his health care overhaul.

In an October 2006 interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” then then-Senate candidate said that cuts to Medicare “absolutely” had to be “on the table” in order to “control runaway federal spending.”

“Everything has to be on the table, my friend,” Steele said at the time. “If you don’t have enough money in any given month, what do you do? You’ve got to reprioritize. You’ve got to take care of the business at hand.”

Are confused yet?  Don’t worry everybody is also……after a decade of trying to kill ALL Medicare and now they are ALL for saving it from the budget axe……

What brought about such a glorious turn around?  One word answer…..OBAMA!

You see if he, Obama, is calling for anything, anything at all then the GOP is against it….No it is not just politics…..it is a HATE for the man and his plan.