While bad decisions and greed on the part of BP, to save money and time, caused the oil spill and the inability to contain it, Obama tries to straddle the fence on responsibility.
One one hand, Obama continues to lash out at BP as being responsible for stopping the leak and for leading the clean-up; neither of which BP is capable of doing.
Obama is satisfied with photo-ops on the gulf and having his temper tantrums with threats and name-calling directed toward BP.
Of course, the oil spill occurred 100% in United States territorial waters, a federal responsibility from the start, not in any state land as was Hurricane Katrina where jurisdictional issues arose between federal and state leaders.
Obama doesn't want this crisis to go wasted, as Rahm Emanuel has advised in dealing with crises. Obama merely sees this as an opportunity to pass energy taxes and reward his cronies with cap and trade legislation while basically saying the people suffering in the gulf don't matter in his big scheme of things of more regulation and taxes.
What kind of a fool or inept leader would appoint a commission of eight academic environmentalists to decide oil drilling policy? Obama is that kind of fool! This would be a joke if it weren't so serious for the people suffering in the gulf and the environmental disaster.
One the other hand, Obama wants America to believe he was " on top of this disaster from day one".
Of course, he has done nothing to help with the capping of the leak or with the clean-up after 65 days, where a true leader would have done many things in the first week.
Obama's "first responders" were a team of lawyers from the Justice Department, to determine who they could blame, sue or prosecute.
In week one, a leader would have convened world wide experts with actual drilling experience to advise BP on the methods of containing the leak. Obama has not done this yet.
In week one, a leader would have convened a panel of world wide experts on oil spill clean-up. Obama has not done this yet.
In week one, a leader would have suspended the Jones Act, in order to allow the 13 countries who have offered equipment and experience in cleaning up oil spills to operate their ships in American waters. Obama has not done this yet.
In week one, a leader would have suspended the David-Bacon prevailing wages law to allow rapid deployment of new workers to help with the clean-up. Obama has not done this yet.
In week one, a leader would have made sure that the EPA would suspend it's rules that were impediments to the clean-up. Obama has not done this yet.
In week one, a leader would have suspended the tedious FEMA contracting procedures, so that contracts for clean-up cold be issued rapidly. Obama has not done this yet.
Instead, Obama has the EPA, Corps of Engineers and Coast Guard doing almost everything possible to slow down and inhibit state and local plans for building barriers to protect the beaches and wetlands.
Obama is worse that just inept, he is dangerous and is causing the effects of the oil spill to be much worse than need be.
Obama's great contributions are to threaten to "kick ass" and then put an illogical moratorium on all other drilling to further the economic pain along the gulf.
THE ONLY DISASTER BIGGER THAN THE BP OIL SPILL IS OBAMA BEING PRESIDENT BECAUSE HIS PRESIDENCY SPILLS OVER INTO DISASTERS IN PROTECTING THE BORDERS, UNEMPLOYMENT AND THE PHONY STIMULUS (PORK) BILL, OBAMACARE, HOMELAND SECURITY AND MORE.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Iran Continues to Ignore Obama and the United Nations
WHAT IS OBAMA'S IRAN STRATEGY NOW?
THERE IS NO "STRATEGY" AND THERE NEVER WAS AN OBAMA "STRATEGY".
Obama always thought he could sweet-talk Ahmedinejad into giving up Iran's quest for nuclear weapons. This was the dream of an inexperienced fool.
We are on the fourth round of so-called "sanctions" that are meaningless; which put no actual pressure on Iran and make the United States look weak once again.
THE ONLY REALISTIC TACTIC SHORT OF MILITARY ACTION WOULD HAVE BEEN A STRICT BLOCKADE UNDER BUSH AND THEN CONTINUED OBAMA.
It is now way too late for a blockade to be effective and Obama doesn't have the will to implement such a tactic.
The only realistic "strategy' at this time is to bomb the nuclear facilities using deep bunker busting bombs where necessary. But Obama doesn't have the will to do this either.
So what remains, Obama could openly give Israel full support with the proper bombs and refueling support for Israel to bomb the nuclear facilities as they did to Iraq years ago and Syria more recently.
But, Obama is so intent on pandering to the Islamic nations and showing he fair to the Palestinians, by being "tough" on Israel, that this will never happen either.
So, the Obama "strategy" is one of "HOPE". Obama's hope boils down to wait and see what happens and HOPE that Iran doesn't provide a nuclear weapon to the Islamic Terrorists(who Obama makes believe don't exist),who would then smuggle such a weapon across our open borders or through our ports and detonate such a weapon in a major city.
OBAMA PUTS THIS NATION AT RISK WITH HIS INEXPERIENCE AND WEAKNESS.
THERE IS NO "STRATEGY" AND THERE NEVER WAS AN OBAMA "STRATEGY".
Obama always thought he could sweet-talk Ahmedinejad into giving up Iran's quest for nuclear weapons. This was the dream of an inexperienced fool.
We are on the fourth round of so-called "sanctions" that are meaningless; which put no actual pressure on Iran and make the United States look weak once again.
THE ONLY REALISTIC TACTIC SHORT OF MILITARY ACTION WOULD HAVE BEEN A STRICT BLOCKADE UNDER BUSH AND THEN CONTINUED OBAMA.
It is now way too late for a blockade to be effective and Obama doesn't have the will to implement such a tactic.
The only realistic "strategy' at this time is to bomb the nuclear facilities using deep bunker busting bombs where necessary. But Obama doesn't have the will to do this either.
So what remains, Obama could openly give Israel full support with the proper bombs and refueling support for Israel to bomb the nuclear facilities as they did to Iraq years ago and Syria more recently.
But, Obama is so intent on pandering to the Islamic nations and showing he fair to the Palestinians, by being "tough" on Israel, that this will never happen either.
So, the Obama "strategy" is one of "HOPE". Obama's hope boils down to wait and see what happens and HOPE that Iran doesn't provide a nuclear weapon to the Islamic Terrorists(who Obama makes believe don't exist),who would then smuggle such a weapon across our open borders or through our ports and detonate such a weapon in a major city.
OBAMA PUTS THIS NATION AT RISK WITH HIS INEXPERIENCE AND WEAKNESS.
California and the New Republican Candidates
The reasons why Republicans have not been elected in California are THE SAME as why California has:
1. 12.5% unemployment,
2 the highest taxes in the country,
3. huge budget deficits and
4. the worst state bond rating.
There is a majority of Californians who are benefiting from government handouts and state and local government employees getting exorbitant salaries and benefits. There is an out of control illegal alien problem that continues to suck money out of the system but is supported by employers and advocates of "social" justice which means no limits on illegal aliens.
Until enough people feel the pain, California will continue to re-elect the champions of socialism and pork in the likes of Pelosi, Waxman, Boxer, Feinstein and the ridiculous Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown who has left financial ruin in his wake as a professional politician for 40 years.
California is the Greece of the United States and under Obama the rest of the country is going down that path.
1. 12.5% unemployment,
2 the highest taxes in the country,
3. huge budget deficits and
4. the worst state bond rating.
There is a majority of Californians who are benefiting from government handouts and state and local government employees getting exorbitant salaries and benefits. There is an out of control illegal alien problem that continues to suck money out of the system but is supported by employers and advocates of "social" justice which means no limits on illegal aliens.
Until enough people feel the pain, California will continue to re-elect the champions of socialism and pork in the likes of Pelosi, Waxman, Boxer, Feinstein and the ridiculous Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown who has left financial ruin in his wake as a professional politician for 40 years.
California is the Greece of the United States and under Obama the rest of the country is going down that path.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Gulf Oil Spill and Obama's Response
1.The Obama Administration took NINE DAYS before organizing any response to help contain and cap the Gulf oil spill.
2. Obama has yet to personally visit the area to observe the damage.
3. The Obama team spent the weekend on talk shows trying to convince the public that they were involved "from day one". But, this is a blatant lie. No Department of Defense or any agency was involved until nine days later.
4. Once again, Obama thinks that spin, and repeating a lie often enough, can substitute for facts and actions.
5. This is arguably even more severe a dereliction of responsibility than Bush waiting two days after Katrina. In the Katrina case, we had a mayor of a New Orleans and a governor of Louisiana with responsibility and resources of their own and the protocol was for them to call in the federal government for help.
6. In the gulf oil spill, it is ridiculous to put the responsibility on a private company, BP, when an entire region of many states and industries are at risk as well a widespread environmental disaster is looming. The federal government should have been the first responder to protect the environment and stave off an economic disaster to many industries along the Gulf Coast.
7. Instead, the "first responders" from the Obama team, were a group of lawyers from the Justice Department; Eric Holder looking at who he might sue or fine, rather than fix the problem.
8. Obama spent the past nine days, bashing the new Arizona immigration law and pushing for government takeover of Wall street with a 1400 page bill, instead of immediately taking charge of the pending national disaster from the Gulf oil spill.
THIS IS ONE MORE EXAMPLE OF THE INCOMPETENCY AND MISDIRECTED FOCUS OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION.
Will this oil spill give the Democrat's and Obama the excuse to get out of his reluctant commitment to pursue off-shore drilling?
2. Obama has yet to personally visit the area to observe the damage.
3. The Obama team spent the weekend on talk shows trying to convince the public that they were involved "from day one". But, this is a blatant lie. No Department of Defense or any agency was involved until nine days later.
4. Once again, Obama thinks that spin, and repeating a lie often enough, can substitute for facts and actions.
5. This is arguably even more severe a dereliction of responsibility than Bush waiting two days after Katrina. In the Katrina case, we had a mayor of a New Orleans and a governor of Louisiana with responsibility and resources of their own and the protocol was for them to call in the federal government for help.
6. In the gulf oil spill, it is ridiculous to put the responsibility on a private company, BP, when an entire region of many states and industries are at risk as well a widespread environmental disaster is looming. The federal government should have been the first responder to protect the environment and stave off an economic disaster to many industries along the Gulf Coast.
7. Instead, the "first responders" from the Obama team, were a group of lawyers from the Justice Department; Eric Holder looking at who he might sue or fine, rather than fix the problem.
8. Obama spent the past nine days, bashing the new Arizona immigration law and pushing for government takeover of Wall street with a 1400 page bill, instead of immediately taking charge of the pending national disaster from the Gulf oil spill.
THIS IS ONE MORE EXAMPLE OF THE INCOMPETENCY AND MISDIRECTED FOCUS OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION.
Will this oil spill give the Democrat's and Obama the excuse to get out of his reluctant commitment to pursue off-shore drilling?
Mexico's Immigration Law is Common Sense and Should Be Adopted Here
Writing a straight-forward comprehensive immigration bill is a simple task. Mexico already has done all of the legislative work.
All the United States' Congress and Obama need to do is to copy the law already in place in Mexico and THEN ENFORCE IT.
Here are some key elements of the Mexican immigration law, it's common sense:
1. Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress".
2. Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents.
3. The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest".
4. Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country: Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants.
5. A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual’s identity.
6. A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number.
7. Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be fined or imprisoned.
8. Foreigners who commit a crime in Mexco may be imprisoned.
9. Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment.
10. Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons.
11. Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished.
12. Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years.
13. Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison .
14. Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico — such as working with out a permit — can also be imprisoned.
15. Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says, "A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally".
16. Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned.
17. Foreigners who "act "against national sovereignty or security" will be deported.
18. Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law.
The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens — and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, legal and illegal.
All the United States' Congress and Obama need to do is to copy the law already in place in Mexico and THEN ENFORCE IT.
Here are some key elements of the Mexican immigration law, it's common sense:
1. Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress".
2. Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents.
3. The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest".
4. Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country: Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants.
5. A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual’s identity.
6. A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number.
7. Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be fined or imprisoned.
8. Foreigners who commit a crime in Mexco may be imprisoned.
9. Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment.
10. Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons.
11. Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished.
12. Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years.
13. Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison .
14. Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico — such as working with out a permit — can also be imprisoned.
15. Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says, "A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally".
16. Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned.
17. Foreigners who "act "against national sovereignty or security" will be deported.
18. Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law.
The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens — and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, legal and illegal.
Obama White House - A Division of Goldman Sachs
GOLDMAN SACHS DONATED $1,007,370 TO OBAMA IN THE 2008 CAMPAIGN.
THE FIVE BIGGEST HEDGE FUNDS DONATED ALMOST ALL OF ITS MONEY TO DEMOCRATS; THE FIVE BIGGEST RECIPIENTS WERE SEN. CHRIS DODD (D-CT), SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV) AND SEN. CHUCKY SCHUMER (D-NY).
THE CURRENT CHAIRMAN OF GOLDMAN SACHS CHAIRMAN LLOYD BLANKFEIN ENDORSED THE DEMOCRAT'S WALL STREET REGULATION BILL. Guess why? Wall Street loves the $50 billion permanent "bailout fund" whereby big banks like Goldman Sachs can get bailed out with this slush fund and no further embarrassing congressional action would be needed. Goldman Sachs, like the government, doesn't have money of its own, its contribution to build the bailout slush fund will come from its clients (taxpayers).
What are the links between Goldman Sachs and Obama? First, Rahm Emanuel, Obama's Chief of Staff, worked for Goldman Sachs and made millions. Other major links directly in the administration, or closley allied where they affect national economic policy, include:
1. Dianna Farrell: Obama Administration Deputy Director, National Economic Council; former Goldman Sachs Financial Analyst
2. Stephen Friedman: Obama Administration Chairman, President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board; former Goldman Sachs Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005-)
3. Gary Gensler: Obama Administration Commissioner, Commodity Futures Trading Commission; former Goldman Sachs Partner and Co-head of Finance
4. Robert Hormats: Obama Administration Undersecretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, State Department; former Goldman Sachs Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs Group
5. Philip Murphy: Obama Administration Ambassador to Germany; former Goldman Sachs Head of Goldman Sachs, Frankfurt
6. Mark Patterson: Obama Administration Chief of Staff to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner; former Goldman Sachs Lobbyist 2005-2008; Vice President for Government Relations
7. John Thain: Obama Administration Advisor to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner; former Goldman Sachs President and Chief Operating Officer (1999-2003)
8. Reuben Jeffery III: Obama Administration undersecretary of state for economic, business, and agricultural affairs; former managing partner at Goldman Sachs
9.Neel Kashkari: Obama Administration assistant secretary of the treasury for financial stability, responsible for administering the TARP funds.former Goldman Sachs vice president.
10. William C Dudley: NY Federal Reserve Current President/CEO; former Goldman Sachs Partner and managing director – 2007
11. Stephen Friedman NY Federal Reserve, Former Chairman of the Board – 2009; former Goldman Sachs Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005-)
12. Edward Liddy: Current Title: AIG CEO; former Goldman Sachs Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005-)
13. Duncan Niederauer: Current Chair/CEO NYSE; former Goldman Sachs Managing Director – 2007
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Goldman-Sachs, The Financial Crisis and The Demagogue
The recently uncovered actions of Goldman Sachs are NEGLIGENT AT BEST and PERHAPS INTENTIONALLY DECEPTIVE AND CRIMINAL. The Justice Department is right in investigating Goldman Sachs and Congress needs to make some changes in the laws to better regulate megabanks and possibly break them up so we no longer have financial institutions that are "too big to fail". Goldman Sachs does not stand alone; many, if not all, big Wall Street banks and investment houses acted similarly in contributing to the 2008 crash and have been often working against the best interests of their clients while making huge profits for themselves for a decade or more. Meanwhile, many of these same megabanks got TARP fund bailouts and are now lending LESS money to small businesses than those banks that didn't get bailouts, while the executives of the bailed out firms are getting bigger raises and bonuses. This is what happens when government interferes. If Goldman-Sachs had openly informed every client that they believed the mortgage market was going to crash and that they were betting in that direction, then no-one could fault them for making a profit at a time when others did not see the looming disaster.
But, it appears that Goldman-Sachs mislead their clients, by commission or omission, to believe the opposite, which is unethical and perhaps criminal. The political grandstanding in congress is disgusting, but does not excuse Goldman Sachs actions.
What slips by with little notoriety, is the fact that the GOVERNMENT WAS COMPLICIT, for 15 to 20 years, in creating the conditions for the 2008 meltdown. The GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTITIES, FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC, led the charge for so-called "affordable housing" with little or no down payments, no proof of affordability and even without proof of employment. It is a disgrace that the government gets off the hook and is able to turn the total focus on Wall Street. If one person can be cited as being most responsible for the culmination in the financial meltdown of 2008, it is Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) who promoted the affordable housing gimmicks, who blocked every effort to regulate Fannie and Freddie, even to this day, and who lied to his colleagues in Congress and to the public many times by assuring everyone that Fannie and Freddie were financially sound. The people of Frank's district in Massachusetts must be ignorant or just gullible fools; they ought to take notice of their home values due to Frank's irresponsible actions and they can look forward to higher costs of living with inflation due to the huge debts accumulating in Fannie and Freddie. Barney Frank was not alone in protecting Fannie and Freddie from scrutiny; he had help along the way from Sen. Chris Dodd, Sen. John Kerry, Sen., Barack Obama, Sen. Hillary Clinton and others who took political contributions from Fannie and Freddie.
Another area where the government was complicit in creating the financial crisis is when the GLASS-STEAGALL ACT WAS REPEALED under Democrat Bill Clinton in 1999. Glass-Steagall kept a clear separation between what was intended to be low-risk commercial banking and high-risk investment banking. The repeal of Glass-Steagall led to the growth of the megabanks and the mixing of commercial banks, investment banks, brokerage and mutual fund firms and insurance companies with everyone getting into each others' businesses and all dealing in new high risk highly leveraged financial instruments .
Obama has gotten into the act by claiming that in the Spring of 2008 he predicted the financial meltdown due to a lack of regulation. Of course, what OBAMA DOESN'T MENTION, is that he VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED REFORM of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the two government sponsored entities that were at the core of the mortgage crisis. OBAMA SIDED WITH HIS BUDDY REP. BARNEY FRANK (D-MA) TO PROTECT Freddie and Fannie from any scrutiny. Now, with the Goldman Sachs scandal, Obama has found one more chance to demagogue, create a boogeyman and push for "change" far beyond what is required, so that he can further transform America toward becoming a socialist nation.
Obama never misses an opportunity to take advantage of a crisis (as Rahm Emanuel has been quoted in the past). The opportunity here is for Obama and big government to take over the entire financial industry instead of making a few sensible reforms. WHAT IS NEEDED is full transparency of derivatives (they should be traded like stocks with all information available), full disclosure in real time of the direction of investment from financial institutions dealing in derivatives or other highly leveraged instruments, re-instituting Glass-Steagall or some similar legislation that once again separates commercial and investment banking and strengthening of the enforcement of numerous existing regulations by numerous existing government agencies. What is NOT NEEDED is more government agencies, more bailout funds and the government deciding if and when it can take over a financial institution.
But, it appears that Goldman-Sachs mislead their clients, by commission or omission, to believe the opposite, which is unethical and perhaps criminal. The political grandstanding in congress is disgusting, but does not excuse Goldman Sachs actions.
What slips by with little notoriety, is the fact that the GOVERNMENT WAS COMPLICIT, for 15 to 20 years, in creating the conditions for the 2008 meltdown. The GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTITIES, FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC, led the charge for so-called "affordable housing" with little or no down payments, no proof of affordability and even without proof of employment. It is a disgrace that the government gets off the hook and is able to turn the total focus on Wall Street. If one person can be cited as being most responsible for the culmination in the financial meltdown of 2008, it is Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) who promoted the affordable housing gimmicks, who blocked every effort to regulate Fannie and Freddie, even to this day, and who lied to his colleagues in Congress and to the public many times by assuring everyone that Fannie and Freddie were financially sound. The people of Frank's district in Massachusetts must be ignorant or just gullible fools; they ought to take notice of their home values due to Frank's irresponsible actions and they can look forward to higher costs of living with inflation due to the huge debts accumulating in Fannie and Freddie. Barney Frank was not alone in protecting Fannie and Freddie from scrutiny; he had help along the way from Sen. Chris Dodd, Sen. John Kerry, Sen., Barack Obama, Sen. Hillary Clinton and others who took political contributions from Fannie and Freddie.
Another area where the government was complicit in creating the financial crisis is when the GLASS-STEAGALL ACT WAS REPEALED under Democrat Bill Clinton in 1999. Glass-Steagall kept a clear separation between what was intended to be low-risk commercial banking and high-risk investment banking. The repeal of Glass-Steagall led to the growth of the megabanks and the mixing of commercial banks, investment banks, brokerage and mutual fund firms and insurance companies with everyone getting into each others' businesses and all dealing in new high risk highly leveraged financial instruments .
Obama has gotten into the act by claiming that in the Spring of 2008 he predicted the financial meltdown due to a lack of regulation. Of course, what OBAMA DOESN'T MENTION, is that he VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED REFORM of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the two government sponsored entities that were at the core of the mortgage crisis. OBAMA SIDED WITH HIS BUDDY REP. BARNEY FRANK (D-MA) TO PROTECT Freddie and Fannie from any scrutiny. Now, with the Goldman Sachs scandal, Obama has found one more chance to demagogue, create a boogeyman and push for "change" far beyond what is required, so that he can further transform America toward becoming a socialist nation.
Obama never misses an opportunity to take advantage of a crisis (as Rahm Emanuel has been quoted in the past). The opportunity here is for Obama and big government to take over the entire financial industry instead of making a few sensible reforms. WHAT IS NEEDED is full transparency of derivatives (they should be traded like stocks with all information available), full disclosure in real time of the direction of investment from financial institutions dealing in derivatives or other highly leveraged instruments, re-instituting Glass-Steagall or some similar legislation that once again separates commercial and investment banking and strengthening of the enforcement of numerous existing regulations by numerous existing government agencies. What is NOT NEEDED is more government agencies, more bailout funds and the government deciding if and when it can take over a financial institution.
Truth About The Arizona Law on Illegal Aliens
Here is the truth about the Arizona law. It's a simple straightforward bill easy to read and is very specific about NOT PROFILING with various safeguards put in place which clarify the law so there should be LESS PROFILING than without the new law.
Meanwhile, with over 400,000 illegal aliens in Arizona and the vast majority being Hispanic, who should the law enforcement agencies be focusing upon in trying to identify illegal aliens? Asians? Blacks? Scandinavians? Australians? Native American Indians? GET REAL!
With limited law enforcement resources and catching illegal aliens a statistical process, it makes sense to focus on Hispanics.
THIS EFFORT IN ARIZONA PROTECTS ALL LEGAL IMMIGRANTS who are not citizens AND HISPANIC-AMERICANS AS MUCH AS ANY GROUP OF CITIZENS. IT IS A SHAME IF SOME HAVE TO BE INCONVENIENCED, BUT THERE IS A DE FACTO WAR OCCURRING IN THE BORDER STATES.
Legal non-citizen immigrants and Hispanic-Americans in Arizona and elsewhere are paying the price, just as is everyone else, in overburdened education, medical and law enforcement systems, in fewer jobs available, in lower wages in many jobs as illegal aliens work for lower pay and in being targets for crime. An element of the illegal aliens are involved in various VIOLENT CRIME, HUMAN TRAFFICKING , DRUG SMUGGLING, and GUN RUNNING, all of which degrade the quality of life, are a real threat to life and property and are are a major economic burden on United States citizens and on the tens of millions of legal immigrants from Mexico and elsewhere.
Obama's comments questioning the constitutionality of the Arizona law and judging it to create racial profiling, before the law has even taken effect and BEFORE ANY COURT HAS RULES ON ITS CONSTITUTIONALITY suggest that OBAMA IS EITHER A MORON OR A LIAR.
The Arizona law is no more punitive than federal laws on the books but which have not been enforced by Bush or Obama.
The leftist media, the race pimp Al Sharpton, the demagogue Obama, and many pro-illegal-aliens spokesmen have all intentionally mischaracterized the bill for political advantage in an attempt to create a racial divide and pander to "potential Democratic voters" known as illegal aliens.
The Arizona law calls for exactly what the grossly incompetent Janet Napolitano was requesting when she was governor of Arizona but now as Homeland Security head refuses to do anything about.
It may be irrelevant to those who want to gain political advantage or notoriety by mischaracterizing the Arizona law but: ILLEGAL ALIENS ARE NOT A RACE. This news must be a big disappointment to Obama, Al Sharpton and all the other hypocrites trying to create a racial crisis for political or financial gain.
ILLEGAL ALIENS ARE A CRIMINAL GROUP.
Arizona deserves great credit for trying to do what Obama and Bush have not had the courage to do.
This country needs a continuing flow of millions of legal immigrants to continue to thrive and grow as we have for 200 years, but we need federal laws to be enforced and the economic burden of illegal aliens to be eliminated.
Meanwhile, with over 400,000 illegal aliens in Arizona and the vast majority being Hispanic, who should the law enforcement agencies be focusing upon in trying to identify illegal aliens? Asians? Blacks? Scandinavians? Australians? Native American Indians? GET REAL!
With limited law enforcement resources and catching illegal aliens a statistical process, it makes sense to focus on Hispanics.
THIS EFFORT IN ARIZONA PROTECTS ALL LEGAL IMMIGRANTS who are not citizens AND HISPANIC-AMERICANS AS MUCH AS ANY GROUP OF CITIZENS. IT IS A SHAME IF SOME HAVE TO BE INCONVENIENCED, BUT THERE IS A DE FACTO WAR OCCURRING IN THE BORDER STATES.
Legal non-citizen immigrants and Hispanic-Americans in Arizona and elsewhere are paying the price, just as is everyone else, in overburdened education, medical and law enforcement systems, in fewer jobs available, in lower wages in many jobs as illegal aliens work for lower pay and in being targets for crime. An element of the illegal aliens are involved in various VIOLENT CRIME, HUMAN TRAFFICKING , DRUG SMUGGLING, and GUN RUNNING, all of which degrade the quality of life, are a real threat to life and property and are are a major economic burden on United States citizens and on the tens of millions of legal immigrants from Mexico and elsewhere.
Obama's comments questioning the constitutionality of the Arizona law and judging it to create racial profiling, before the law has even taken effect and BEFORE ANY COURT HAS RULES ON ITS CONSTITUTIONALITY suggest that OBAMA IS EITHER A MORON OR A LIAR.
The Arizona law is no more punitive than federal laws on the books but which have not been enforced by Bush or Obama.
The leftist media, the race pimp Al Sharpton, the demagogue Obama, and many pro-illegal-aliens spokesmen have all intentionally mischaracterized the bill for political advantage in an attempt to create a racial divide and pander to "potential Democratic voters" known as illegal aliens.
The Arizona law calls for exactly what the grossly incompetent Janet Napolitano was requesting when she was governor of Arizona but now as Homeland Security head refuses to do anything about.
It may be irrelevant to those who want to gain political advantage or notoriety by mischaracterizing the Arizona law but: ILLEGAL ALIENS ARE NOT A RACE. This news must be a big disappointment to Obama, Al Sharpton and all the other hypocrites trying to create a racial crisis for political or financial gain.
ILLEGAL ALIENS ARE A CRIMINAL GROUP.
Arizona deserves great credit for trying to do what Obama and Bush have not had the courage to do.
This country needs a continuing flow of millions of legal immigrants to continue to thrive and grow as we have for 200 years, but we need federal laws to be enforced and the economic burden of illegal aliens to be eliminated.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Happy Earth Day 2010
1. In 1968, Professor Paul Ehrlich, Vice President Gore's hero and mentor, predicted there would be a major food shortage in the U.S. and "in the 1970s ... hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death." Ehrlich forecasted that 65 million Americans would die of starvation between 1980 and 1989, and by 1999 the U.S. population would have declined to 22.6 million. Ehrlich's predictions about England were gloomier: "If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." World-wide “population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” FALSE!
2. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.” Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day 1970. FALSE!
3. “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University, 1970. FALSE!
4. “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” Life Magazine, January 1970. FALSE!
5. “Air pollution is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone,” Paul Ehrlich in an interview in Mademoiselle Magazine, April 1970. FALSE!
6. Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "... civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind." That was the same year that Sen. Gaylord Nelson warned, in Look Magazine, that by 1995 "... somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct." FALSE!
7. “By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half,” Life Magazine, January 1970. FALSE!
8. “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction,” The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970. FALSE!.
9. At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind." FALSE!
10. C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said, "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed." FALSE!
11. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970. FALSE!
12. In 1972, a report was written for the Club of Rome warning the world would run out of gold by 1981, mercury and silver by 1985, tin by 1987 and petroleum, copper, lead and natural gas by 1992. FALSE, FALSE, FALSE and FALSE!
13. Gordon Taylor, in his 1970 book "The Doomsday Book," said Americans were using 50 percent of the world's resources and "by 2000 they [Americans] will, if permitted, be using all of them." FALSE!
14. “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, 1970. FALSE!
15. In 1975, the Environmental Fund took out full-page ads warning, "The World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000." “We have about five more years at the outside to do something.” Kenneth Watt, ecologist. FALSE!
16. “We are prospecting for the very last of our resources and using up the nonrenewable things many times faster than we are finding new ones.” Martin Litton, Sierra Club director, 1970 FALSE!
17. “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, 1970. FALSE!
18. “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, 1970. FALSE!
19. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, 1970. FALSE!
20. "The Sky is falling" said Chicken Little, undated. FALSE!
Let's not forget the man-made global warming hoax of the last decade with the poster boy Al Gore who has already has made about $500 million promoting and investing in "green energy" schemes and betting on carbon trading.
Many of the false predictions about man-made global warming by film producer, Nobel Prize winner and profiteer Al Gore and by the corrupt climatologists who have promoted this hoax have been exposed.
1. 1995 was the warmest year in the past 15 years, cooling has occurred over the last decade.
2. Prof Phil Jones, the coordinator of the global warming prediction admitted his record keeping was "not as good as it should be" and he "may have lost" (conveniently)the data from around the globe used to show the infamous "hockey stick" curve that showed temperature flat for hundreds of years and recently rising sharply. (This curve is what Al Gore and numerous climatologists used to reach the so-called "overwhelming consensus" that man-made warming was occurring),
3. Prof. Phil Jones admitted that the Earth was warmer in medieval times than it is now (not previously admitted by man-made warming advocates and not shown in the hockey stick plot)
4. Prof. Phil Jones admitted that the Earth has gone through "natural heating periods"
5. The two latest warming periods, 1910 to 1940 and 1975 to 1998, could be explained by naturally occurring events and man may have had nothing to do with it (like solar flares affecting cloud formation),:
6. The U.N.'s IPCC 2007 Nobel Prize prize winning report made false claims that the Himalayan glaciers are melting (the claims were traced to media hype, false quotes attributed to the scientist who studied the Himalayan glaciers and no actual data,
7. The IPCC made false claims about sea levels rising in the Netherlands, now refuted by scientists in the Netherlands
8. The IPCC used faulty data from China to "prove" global warming.
9. Last week, the president of the Royal Statistical Society in England, said that the graph shaped like an ice hockey stick that has been used to represent the recent rise in global temperatures had been compiled using “inappropriate” (statistical) methods. “It used a particular statistical technique that exaggerated the effect [of recent warming]”.
Again, Happy Earth Day; it's good for a few laughs.
2. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.” Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day 1970. FALSE!
3. “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University, 1970. FALSE!
4. “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” Life Magazine, January 1970. FALSE!
5. “Air pollution is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone,” Paul Ehrlich in an interview in Mademoiselle Magazine, April 1970. FALSE!
6. Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "... civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind." That was the same year that Sen. Gaylord Nelson warned, in Look Magazine, that by 1995 "... somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct." FALSE!
7. “By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half,” Life Magazine, January 1970. FALSE!
8. “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction,” The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970. FALSE!.
9. At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind." FALSE!
10. C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said, "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed." FALSE!
11. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970. FALSE!
12. In 1972, a report was written for the Club of Rome warning the world would run out of gold by 1981, mercury and silver by 1985, tin by 1987 and petroleum, copper, lead and natural gas by 1992. FALSE, FALSE, FALSE and FALSE!
13. Gordon Taylor, in his 1970 book "The Doomsday Book," said Americans were using 50 percent of the world's resources and "by 2000 they [Americans] will, if permitted, be using all of them." FALSE!
14. “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, 1970. FALSE!
15. In 1975, the Environmental Fund took out full-page ads warning, "The World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000." “We have about five more years at the outside to do something.” Kenneth Watt, ecologist. FALSE!
16. “We are prospecting for the very last of our resources and using up the nonrenewable things many times faster than we are finding new ones.” Martin Litton, Sierra Club director, 1970 FALSE!
17. “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, 1970. FALSE!
18. “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, 1970. FALSE!
19. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” Kenneth Watt, Ecologist, 1970. FALSE!
20. "The Sky is falling" said Chicken Little, undated. FALSE!
Let's not forget the man-made global warming hoax of the last decade with the poster boy Al Gore who has already has made about $500 million promoting and investing in "green energy" schemes and betting on carbon trading.
Many of the false predictions about man-made global warming by film producer, Nobel Prize winner and profiteer Al Gore and by the corrupt climatologists who have promoted this hoax have been exposed.
1. 1995 was the warmest year in the past 15 years, cooling has occurred over the last decade.
2. Prof Phil Jones, the coordinator of the global warming prediction admitted his record keeping was "not as good as it should be" and he "may have lost" (conveniently)the data from around the globe used to show the infamous "hockey stick" curve that showed temperature flat for hundreds of years and recently rising sharply. (This curve is what Al Gore and numerous climatologists used to reach the so-called "overwhelming consensus" that man-made warming was occurring),
3. Prof. Phil Jones admitted that the Earth was warmer in medieval times than it is now (not previously admitted by man-made warming advocates and not shown in the hockey stick plot)
4. Prof. Phil Jones admitted that the Earth has gone through "natural heating periods"
5. The two latest warming periods, 1910 to 1940 and 1975 to 1998, could be explained by naturally occurring events and man may have had nothing to do with it (like solar flares affecting cloud formation),:
6. The U.N.'s IPCC 2007 Nobel Prize prize winning report made false claims that the Himalayan glaciers are melting (the claims were traced to media hype, false quotes attributed to the scientist who studied the Himalayan glaciers and no actual data,
7. The IPCC made false claims about sea levels rising in the Netherlands, now refuted by scientists in the Netherlands
8. The IPCC used faulty data from China to "prove" global warming.
9. Last week, the president of the Royal Statistical Society in England, said that the graph shaped like an ice hockey stick that has been used to represent the recent rise in global temperatures had been compiled using “inappropriate” (statistical) methods. “It used a particular statistical technique that exaggerated the effect [of recent warming]”.
Again, Happy Earth Day; it's good for a few laughs.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
ObamaCare Highlights and the "No New Taxes" Hype
Everything in the ObamaCare bill is not fully exposed or understood as yet but some of the highlights can now be listed by year as they kick in. ObamaCare is supposed to be coming to you with "no new taxes" from Washington if you are gullible enough or ignorant enough to believe that. This is a sneaky concept because it plays on words that don't count fees, fines, secondary taxes that will be passed along as costs, insurance premium increases and mandated state tax increases as "new taxes" from Washington. It doesn't count taxes that will automatically increase if the Democratic Congress does nothing and lets current tax rates expire (the so-called Bush tax cuts) and revert to higher rates.
Over a period of a few years, $500 billion will be cut from Medicare, while millions more "baby boomer enter Medicare, which will eventually lead to rationing of some diagnostic tests and surgeries; it happened in Canada and in the U.K.
ObamaCare creates 58 or so new federal agencies or bureaus; a massive new bureaucracy with so many government worker and rules that it cannot help but get between health providers and patients.
ObamaCare has thousands of pork projects that have to do with 'wellness", exercise facilities, inner city health food stores, and on and on, all directed to route pork to those who support the Democrats.
Here are a few of the specific highlights of the health insurance reform aspects:
2010: Establishes a requirement to provide coverage for non-dependent children up to age 26 to all existing health insurance plans starting six months after enactment (citizens over he age of 18 or at least 21 used to be adults, now they are children again in the "nanny" state).
2010: Health insurance companies will be banned from excluding coverage for pre-existing conditions for children. Adults with pre-existing conditions will be eligible for coverage into high risk health insurance pools until future health care exchanges are up and running.
Health insurance companies will be prohibited from levying annual limits and lifetime limits on coverage. All new health insurance plans must provide coverage for preventative services with no out of pocket cost (all health plans will be forced to comply by 2018). Those companies that offer health benefits for early retirees ages 55 to 64 will receive assistance from a temporary reinsurance program. All new health insurance plans will have to comply with new regulations that lay out an appeals process for when health insurance claims are denied. The Congressional Budget Office forecasts that insurance premiums will increase by $1000 per individual or $2100 per family (but this is "no new taxes").
2011: Increases the additional tax for Health Savings Account withdrawals prior to age 65 that are not used for qualified medical expenses from 10% to 20%.
2011: Everyone earning more than $200,000 as an individual or $250,000 for those who file married filing jointly will have their Medicare payroll tax increased from the current 1.45% to 2.35%.
2012: Reduces the benchmark payment for Medicare Advantage plans that cover 20% of all seniors.
2013: Imposes a 2.3% excise tax on all medical device manufacturers. (Ooops, this looks like a new tax that will certainly be passed on to the consumer).
2013: A $2,500 annual cap will be placed on all contributions to flexible spending accounts (amount indexed for inflation each subsequent year). (This will penalize everyone who has a FSA with higher limits but "no new taxes").
2013: The current tax deduction that employers receive for subsidizing the prescription drug costs of their employees who are eligible for Medicare Part D will be done away with. (Guess who will pay for this with lower raises or fewer benefits? But "no new taxes").
2013: The minimum threshold for being able to claim an itemized deduction for health care expenses increased from 7.5% to 10% of AGI although those over the age of 65 can stay at the 7.5% threshold through 2016. (Wait a minute!! What happened to the "no new taxes? Well, this is after the next presidential election.)
2013: The hospital insurance tax will increase .09% for those who earn more than $200,000 ($250,000 for those married filing jointly).
2013: Additional requirements on health insurance companies to implement uniform standards for exchanging health care information, electronic communication, and other measures to reduce insurance company administrative costs. (Sure to drive up premiums more as administrative costs go up, but "no new taxes".)
2014: All US citizens will be FORCEDto have health insurance coverage considered acceptable by the US Government or else pay a fine of $95 in 2014, $325 in 2015, $695 in 2016 (capped at 2.5% of AGI). All of the fines are per person per year except for families have a cap on the total fine of $2,250 and the fine amount for children is half of the adult fine. (This smells like a new tax but they call it a "penalty"! )
2014: Businesses with 50 or more employees will face a fine of either $2,000 or $3,000 per employee for not offering health insurance coverage. (here we go again with a "fine" but "no new taxes".)
2014: Eligibility standards are implemented for newly formed health care exchanges. (This is a code word for government deciding what needs to be in every policy and that you will have to pay for it whether you want that coverage or not.)
2014: Health insurance companies are prohibited from using an individual’s health status to issue a policy or renew a policy. All pre-existing conditions must be covered and higher health insurance rates cannot be levied because of health, gender, etc. (Higher premiums for all, but "no new taxes".)
2014: The eligibility standards for Medicaid will be changed to 133% of poverty for those who are not considered elderly. (Expect higher state taxes to cover this Medicaid increase, but the federal government can claim "no new taxes" from them.)
2014: New annual fees will be levied on all health insurance providers based on an insurance companies market share and whose total premiums exceed $25 million. (Now, who will eventually pay for these "annual fees? Not the companies!)
2017: States may allow businesses with more than 100 employees to buy insurance on their exchange.
2018: The “Cadillac” health insurance plan tax will kick in. A 40% excise tax will be levied on all employer provided health insurance plans costing more than $27,500 for families and $10,200 for individuals. (Watch the unions slip by with an exemption beyond 2018 if Democrats are in control.)
IF ANYONE THINKS THIS WILL REDUCE THE DEFICIT THEY HAVE LOST CONTACT WITH REALITY. ONCE OBAMACARE IS IN FULL SWING, AROUND 2013-2014, INDEPENDENT ECONOMISTS FORECAST DEFICITS OF ANYWHERE FROM $200 TO 500 BILLION PER YEAR. WE HAVE THE MODELS FOR SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE AND MEDICAID TO SUPPORT THE FORECAST OF SUCH DEFICITS. THIS WILL DESTROY THE AMERICAN ECONOMY AND STANDARD OF LIVING AS WE KNOW IT TODAY.
Over a period of a few years, $500 billion will be cut from Medicare, while millions more "baby boomer enter Medicare, which will eventually lead to rationing of some diagnostic tests and surgeries; it happened in Canada and in the U.K.
ObamaCare creates 58 or so new federal agencies or bureaus; a massive new bureaucracy with so many government worker and rules that it cannot help but get between health providers and patients.
ObamaCare has thousands of pork projects that have to do with 'wellness", exercise facilities, inner city health food stores, and on and on, all directed to route pork to those who support the Democrats.
Here are a few of the specific highlights of the health insurance reform aspects:
2010: Establishes a requirement to provide coverage for non-dependent children up to age 26 to all existing health insurance plans starting six months after enactment (citizens over he age of 18 or at least 21 used to be adults, now they are children again in the "nanny" state).
2010: Health insurance companies will be banned from excluding coverage for pre-existing conditions for children. Adults with pre-existing conditions will be eligible for coverage into high risk health insurance pools until future health care exchanges are up and running.
Health insurance companies will be prohibited from levying annual limits and lifetime limits on coverage. All new health insurance plans must provide coverage for preventative services with no out of pocket cost (all health plans will be forced to comply by 2018). Those companies that offer health benefits for early retirees ages 55 to 64 will receive assistance from a temporary reinsurance program. All new health insurance plans will have to comply with new regulations that lay out an appeals process for when health insurance claims are denied. The Congressional Budget Office forecasts that insurance premiums will increase by $1000 per individual or $2100 per family (but this is "no new taxes").
2011: Increases the additional tax for Health Savings Account withdrawals prior to age 65 that are not used for qualified medical expenses from 10% to 20%.
2011: Everyone earning more than $200,000 as an individual or $250,000 for those who file married filing jointly will have their Medicare payroll tax increased from the current 1.45% to 2.35%.
2012: Reduces the benchmark payment for Medicare Advantage plans that cover 20% of all seniors.
2013: Imposes a 2.3% excise tax on all medical device manufacturers. (Ooops, this looks like a new tax that will certainly be passed on to the consumer).
2013: A $2,500 annual cap will be placed on all contributions to flexible spending accounts (amount indexed for inflation each subsequent year). (This will penalize everyone who has a FSA with higher limits but "no new taxes").
2013: The current tax deduction that employers receive for subsidizing the prescription drug costs of their employees who are eligible for Medicare Part D will be done away with. (Guess who will pay for this with lower raises or fewer benefits? But "no new taxes").
2013: The minimum threshold for being able to claim an itemized deduction for health care expenses increased from 7.5% to 10% of AGI although those over the age of 65 can stay at the 7.5% threshold through 2016. (Wait a minute!! What happened to the "no new taxes? Well, this is after the next presidential election.)
2013: The hospital insurance tax will increase .09% for those who earn more than $200,000 ($250,000 for those married filing jointly).
2013: Additional requirements on health insurance companies to implement uniform standards for exchanging health care information, electronic communication, and other measures to reduce insurance company administrative costs. (Sure to drive up premiums more as administrative costs go up, but "no new taxes".)
2014: All US citizens will be FORCEDto have health insurance coverage considered acceptable by the US Government or else pay a fine of $95 in 2014, $325 in 2015, $695 in 2016 (capped at 2.5% of AGI). All of the fines are per person per year except for families have a cap on the total fine of $2,250 and the fine amount for children is half of the adult fine. (This smells like a new tax but they call it a "penalty"! )
2014: Businesses with 50 or more employees will face a fine of either $2,000 or $3,000 per employee for not offering health insurance coverage. (here we go again with a "fine" but "no new taxes".)
2014: Eligibility standards are implemented for newly formed health care exchanges. (This is a code word for government deciding what needs to be in every policy and that you will have to pay for it whether you want that coverage or not.)
2014: Health insurance companies are prohibited from using an individual’s health status to issue a policy or renew a policy. All pre-existing conditions must be covered and higher health insurance rates cannot be levied because of health, gender, etc. (Higher premiums for all, but "no new taxes".)
2014: The eligibility standards for Medicaid will be changed to 133% of poverty for those who are not considered elderly. (Expect higher state taxes to cover this Medicaid increase, but the federal government can claim "no new taxes" from them.)
2014: New annual fees will be levied on all health insurance providers based on an insurance companies market share and whose total premiums exceed $25 million. (Now, who will eventually pay for these "annual fees? Not the companies!)
2017: States may allow businesses with more than 100 employees to buy insurance on their exchange.
2018: The “Cadillac” health insurance plan tax will kick in. A 40% excise tax will be levied on all employer provided health insurance plans costing more than $27,500 for families and $10,200 for individuals. (Watch the unions slip by with an exemption beyond 2018 if Democrats are in control.)
IF ANYONE THINKS THIS WILL REDUCE THE DEFICIT THEY HAVE LOST CONTACT WITH REALITY. ONCE OBAMACARE IS IN FULL SWING, AROUND 2013-2014, INDEPENDENT ECONOMISTS FORECAST DEFICITS OF ANYWHERE FROM $200 TO 500 BILLION PER YEAR. WE HAVE THE MODELS FOR SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE AND MEDICAID TO SUPPORT THE FORECAST OF SUCH DEFICITS. THIS WILL DESTROY THE AMERICAN ECONOMY AND STANDARD OF LIVING AS WE KNOW IT TODAY.
No New Taxes
If Obama and the Democrats do NOTHING for the remainder of 2010, then taxes will increase for 100 % of Americans. Here is how it will happen. If there is no legislation to continue the Bush tax cuts, then the tax rate will go up for all income tax brackets: wealthy, middle class, lower class. Obama will claim these are not "new taxes" just the reinstituting of "old taxes" which Bush should never have cut (the old "blame it on Bush" manta of Obama and the Democrats.) Also, corporate taxes, capital gains, dividends and inheritance taxes will incease. With ObamaCare, health insurance premiums will start to go up, but of course, Obama will blame the "greedy" insurance companies and not admit that his health plan forced premiums to go up (an indorect tax). Many other fees and indirect taxes will start to appear as passed along to the consumer as a result of ObamaCare. State income taxes will have to increase as ObamaCare forces states to increase the rolls of those on Medicaid. This is easy to blame on the states, so once again slick Obama thinks he can claim he did not increase your taxes. In the longer term, the huge budget deficits and increased national debt will devalue the dollar, causing inflation that will hit everyone; and once again Obama will blame Bush or someone else for inflation and claim he did not raise taxes although the standard of living for most Americans will decrease. Only the most ignorant and blind Obama puppets will fall for these excuses.
One More Nail in the Global Warming Hoax Coffin
A key piece of evidence in climate change science was slammed as “exaggerated” on last week by the UK’s leading statistician, in a vindication of claims that global warming skeptics have been making for years. Professor David Hand, president of the Royal Statistical Society, said that a graph shaped like an ice hockey stick that has been used to represent the recent rise in global temperatures had been compiled using “inappropriate” methods. “It used a particular statistical technique that exaggerated the effect [of recent warming],” he said.
Goldman-Sachs is the Boogeyman to Justify Takeover of Financial Industry by Obama
Goldman Sachs was probably negligent, if not complicit, in the huge losses incurred by its investors. Meanwhile, there can be no doubt that the timing and method of pursuing a redress in this matter is politically motivated by Obama to once again create a boogeyman that can help ram through a piece of legislation designed to give government huge control over the financial industry and maybe even over other corporations deemed "too big to fail". It's part of the Obama-Democratic playbook to create a boogeyman. Next, we can expect those who oppose Obama's financial regulatory reform to be labeled "racists".
1. Goldman-Sachs and the entire investment banking industry needs better regulation with regard to highly leveraged instruments such as derivatives based upon risky mortgages. The problem is just as much ENFORCEMENT as it is REGULATION. The SEC, the bond rating firms and every board of directors of investment banks were highly negligent or incompetent leading up to the 2008 credit crisis. They had the authority and the means to head off the economic crash but didn't do their jobs; it was not a lack of regulatory rules that caused the crisis.
2. Hedge funds have very little activity in hedging against the market going either up or down at various times; "hedge" is a misnomer to what these funds do. The hedge funds have turned into big gambling ventures dealing in highly leveraged financial instruments much more often betting with the direction of the market than "hedging " against it. Hedge funds need to be regulated, the leverage of any instrument needs to be reduced and more importantly, regulations need to be ENFORCED in an timely manner, not just after a disaster.
3. The biggest financial gambling houses, with virtually no enforcement of regulations and, worse yet, protection by politicians, are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These are government entities that have accumulated far bigger losses than any private Wall Street banks. Many politicians had as much or more effect in causing the financial crisis of 2008, one person who stands above all others in causing the meltdown is Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) for leading the effort to force banks to make highly risky loans and then blocking all attempts at regulation of Fannie and Freddie for 15 years. His buddy, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) aided in the effort to block all regulation of Fannie and Freddie; now like all two-faced lying politicians, Chris Dodd is leading the effort in the senate to ram through Obama's financial regulatory reform which is not as much reform as it is a vehicle for the government to take over and run the entire investment and banking industries.
4. There are a few simple actions that could be taken to reduce the risk of future financial meltdowns without giving the government the power to take over these industries, such as: (a) reducing allowed leverage ratios, (b)re-instituting the separation of commercial banking and investment banking; under Bill Clinton in 1999 the Glass Steagall Act was repealed which allowed commercial banks who were supposed to deal in low risk loans to get into competition with investment houses and offer high risk instruments such as mortgage backed securities and collateralized debt obligations, (c) increase the tax on stock trades to dampen the volume of day trading which has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of companies, (d) do not give any financial institution cover through bailouts as "too big to fail", and (e) lower the tax rate on long term capital gains and dividends and (f) put immediate limits on Freddie and Fannie with no more risky loans so "poor people" can own houses and have a plan to turn these government entities into private sector institutions.
5. These simple changes do not require a 1000 page financial reform act as proposed by Obama and will not increase the size of government but they would dampen speculation, the level of outright gambling, the opportunities for fraud or negligence and would encourage safe long term investments in the private sector.
1. Goldman-Sachs and the entire investment banking industry needs better regulation with regard to highly leveraged instruments such as derivatives based upon risky mortgages. The problem is just as much ENFORCEMENT as it is REGULATION. The SEC, the bond rating firms and every board of directors of investment banks were highly negligent or incompetent leading up to the 2008 credit crisis. They had the authority and the means to head off the economic crash but didn't do their jobs; it was not a lack of regulatory rules that caused the crisis.
2. Hedge funds have very little activity in hedging against the market going either up or down at various times; "hedge" is a misnomer to what these funds do. The hedge funds have turned into big gambling ventures dealing in highly leveraged financial instruments much more often betting with the direction of the market than "hedging " against it. Hedge funds need to be regulated, the leverage of any instrument needs to be reduced and more importantly, regulations need to be ENFORCED in an timely manner, not just after a disaster.
3. The biggest financial gambling houses, with virtually no enforcement of regulations and, worse yet, protection by politicians, are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These are government entities that have accumulated far bigger losses than any private Wall Street banks. Many politicians had as much or more effect in causing the financial crisis of 2008, one person who stands above all others in causing the meltdown is Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) for leading the effort to force banks to make highly risky loans and then blocking all attempts at regulation of Fannie and Freddie for 15 years. His buddy, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) aided in the effort to block all regulation of Fannie and Freddie; now like all two-faced lying politicians, Chris Dodd is leading the effort in the senate to ram through Obama's financial regulatory reform which is not as much reform as it is a vehicle for the government to take over and run the entire investment and banking industries.
4. There are a few simple actions that could be taken to reduce the risk of future financial meltdowns without giving the government the power to take over these industries, such as: (a) reducing allowed leverage ratios, (b)re-instituting the separation of commercial banking and investment banking; under Bill Clinton in 1999 the Glass Steagall Act was repealed which allowed commercial banks who were supposed to deal in low risk loans to get into competition with investment houses and offer high risk instruments such as mortgage backed securities and collateralized debt obligations, (c) increase the tax on stock trades to dampen the volume of day trading which has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of companies, (d) do not give any financial institution cover through bailouts as "too big to fail", and (e) lower the tax rate on long term capital gains and dividends and (f) put immediate limits on Freddie and Fannie with no more risky loans so "poor people" can own houses and have a plan to turn these government entities into private sector institutions.
5. These simple changes do not require a 1000 page financial reform act as proposed by Obama and will not increase the size of government but they would dampen speculation, the level of outright gambling, the opportunities for fraud or negligence and would encourage safe long term investments in the private sector.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Obama gathered leaders of about 50 nations to talk about ways of safe-guarding weapons grade plutonium and uranium. Obama blathered on in generalities about non-proliferation and reducing nuclear arsenals with some ideal vision of a nuclear-free world. Unfortunately, Obama's prepared remarks did not specifically mention Iran or North Korea or that these rogue dictatorships with strong ties to terrorists could soon be able to supply nuclear weapons to Islamic Terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah, based either upon common ideology (Iran) or for money (North Korea). Why did Obama avoid these hot issues in his remarks? The answer is simple, Obama has no answer for the undeterred continuing development of nuclear weapons by Iran and North Korea. All of Obama's sweet talking, alternating with threats of sanctions and isolation, have had absolutely ZERO IMPACT ON IRAN AND NORTH KOREA. The leaders of these rogue nations are not charmed by Obama as were the throngs of Europeans when Obama apologized for America. Iran and North Korea continue to laugh at Obama's naive approaches.
Examine the "nuclear weapons club" of eight nations. Does anyone think that Russia or China are the big nuclear threats to the United States? Does anyone believe that India, England or France will wage nuclear war? As for Pakistan, the biggest threat is whether Islamic radicals will take over the government at some point and supply Islamic Terrorists with weapons; but it is not realistic to expect Pakistan to dismantle all of its weapons so the best policy is to support the Pakistani government against the Islamic radicals. Finally, some Islamic nations like Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia came to the conference pandering to the Islamic radicals by complaining about Israel's nuclear capability. However, this is just political grandstanding. It is not believable that the leaders of these countries actually think Israel is a threat to them; in reality they would be at much greater risk of being incorporated into a greater Persian empire if Iran developed into nuclear weapons power.
So, once again, with his nuclear non-proliferation policy, Obama reveals that he is either too naive to set foreign policy or is intentionally weakening the United States as part of a "spread the power around" global philosophy. Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, the Palestinians and others walk all over Obama at every turn as do other nations. Obama endangers our allies and panders to dictatorships and leftist governments, the modern Jimmy Carter, although more dangerous because Obama has power.
Examine the "nuclear weapons club" of eight nations. Does anyone think that Russia or China are the big nuclear threats to the United States? Does anyone believe that India, England or France will wage nuclear war? As for Pakistan, the biggest threat is whether Islamic radicals will take over the government at some point and supply Islamic Terrorists with weapons; but it is not realistic to expect Pakistan to dismantle all of its weapons so the best policy is to support the Pakistani government against the Islamic radicals. Finally, some Islamic nations like Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia came to the conference pandering to the Islamic radicals by complaining about Israel's nuclear capability. However, this is just political grandstanding. It is not believable that the leaders of these countries actually think Israel is a threat to them; in reality they would be at much greater risk of being incorporated into a greater Persian empire if Iran developed into nuclear weapons power.
So, once again, with his nuclear non-proliferation policy, Obama reveals that he is either too naive to set foreign policy or is intentionally weakening the United States as part of a "spread the power around" global philosophy. Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, the Palestinians and others walk all over Obama at every turn as do other nations. Obama endangers our allies and panders to dictatorships and leftist governments, the modern Jimmy Carter, although more dangerous because Obama has power.
Extending Jobless Benefits - The Down Side
Congress is debating whether to extend unemployment benefits for another 20 weeks. This is an unending path of people staying unemployed and Congress, led by Democrats and supported by the Obama administration, trying to play the "compassionate" role and handing out more money. Meanwhile, there are some facts that get tossed aside by the Democrats.
First, they pledged to move to a "pay as you go" budgeting system; but this was all political rhetoric on the of part of the Democrats with no intent of actually having the revenue to pay for the expense. There is NO PLAN to fund the $90 billion jobless benefits through any increase in revenue.
Second, there are so many PORK PROJECTS in the phony Stimulus bill and in in ObamaCare, that hundreds of billions could be available for jobless benefits but are not available due to the irresponsible spending and the $1.4 trillion deficits being run up by Obama and the Democrats. If Obama wanted to decrease unemployment he would have reduced corporate, capital gains and income taxes. But he is more interested in making history with major social legislation, not something mundane like creating jobs.
Third, one study after another has shown that extending jobless benefits gives people an incentive to remain out of work. For example, one of Obama's own economists, Alan Kruger, concluded in a 2008 study that "job searches increase sharply in the weeks prior to benefit exhaustion". Obama's own White House economic advisor, Lawrence Summers wrote in 1999 in the Concise encyclopedia of Unemployment that "The second way government assistance programs contribute to long-term unemployment is by providing an incentive NOT to work. Each unemployed person has a 'reservation wage' the minimum wage he or she insists on getting before accepting a job. Unemployment insurance and other social assistance programs increase the reservation wage, causing an unemployed person to remain unemployed".
Fourth, giving people an additional incentive to stay out of work puts them at long term risk for remaining out of work as they lose critical skills and contacts. Options such as changing type of job, relocating to different cities or states and retraining get passed over as the unemployed remain comfortable with jobless benefits until it is too late to rejoin the workforce.
It's ironical, that the Democrats think they will appear as the compassionate party by extending jobless benefits but in the end this will help keep unemployment higher and therefore work against them in the election.
First, they pledged to move to a "pay as you go" budgeting system; but this was all political rhetoric on the of part of the Democrats with no intent of actually having the revenue to pay for the expense. There is NO PLAN to fund the $90 billion jobless benefits through any increase in revenue.
Second, there are so many PORK PROJECTS in the phony Stimulus bill and in in ObamaCare, that hundreds of billions could be available for jobless benefits but are not available due to the irresponsible spending and the $1.4 trillion deficits being run up by Obama and the Democrats. If Obama wanted to decrease unemployment he would have reduced corporate, capital gains and income taxes. But he is more interested in making history with major social legislation, not something mundane like creating jobs.
Third, one study after another has shown that extending jobless benefits gives people an incentive to remain out of work. For example, one of Obama's own economists, Alan Kruger, concluded in a 2008 study that "job searches increase sharply in the weeks prior to benefit exhaustion". Obama's own White House economic advisor, Lawrence Summers wrote in 1999 in the Concise encyclopedia of Unemployment that "The second way government assistance programs contribute to long-term unemployment is by providing an incentive NOT to work. Each unemployed person has a 'reservation wage' the minimum wage he or she insists on getting before accepting a job. Unemployment insurance and other social assistance programs increase the reservation wage, causing an unemployed person to remain unemployed".
Fourth, giving people an additional incentive to stay out of work puts them at long term risk for remaining out of work as they lose critical skills and contacts. Options such as changing type of job, relocating to different cities or states and retraining get passed over as the unemployed remain comfortable with jobless benefits until it is too late to rejoin the workforce.
It's ironical, that the Democrats think they will appear as the compassionate party by extending jobless benefits but in the end this will help keep unemployment higher and therefore work against them in the election.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Obama Gets to Appoint Another Supreme Court Justice
Republicans are calling for Obama to appoint a "mainstream" judge to the Supreme Court replacing the retiring Justice Stevens
Obama and "mainstream" is an oxymoron.
Obama has spent his life surrounding himself with, and adopted his political-social philosophy from, far left radicals, criminals, racists and America-haters like Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Louis Farrakhan, Michael Pfleger, Van Jones, Rashid Khalid, Bernadine Dohrn, Harold Koh, Mark Lloyd, Cass Sunstein, Tony Rezko, Saul Alinsky, Henry Louis Gates Jr, Frank Marshall Davis, Susan Rice, Eric Holder and on and on.
Many of these have made it into the Obama Administration. If you don't know who they are, check them out with Google.
Now, why would anyone expect a centrist nominee for the Supreme Court?
Obama has stated clearly that he intends to "transform" America. His first supreme Court appointee, Sotomayer, has a record of ignoring the Constitution and being reversed many times as a lower court judge.
We can expect another Sotomayer at best, and perhaps someone even more radical who wants to set social policy from the judicial bench.
Obama and "mainstream" is an oxymoron.
Obama has spent his life surrounding himself with, and adopted his political-social philosophy from, far left radicals, criminals, racists and America-haters like Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Louis Farrakhan, Michael Pfleger, Van Jones, Rashid Khalid, Bernadine Dohrn, Harold Koh, Mark Lloyd, Cass Sunstein, Tony Rezko, Saul Alinsky, Henry Louis Gates Jr, Frank Marshall Davis, Susan Rice, Eric Holder and on and on.
Many of these have made it into the Obama Administration. If you don't know who they are, check them out with Google.
Now, why would anyone expect a centrist nominee for the Supreme Court?
Obama has stated clearly that he intends to "transform" America. His first supreme Court appointee, Sotomayer, has a record of ignoring the Constitution and being reversed many times as a lower court judge.
We can expect another Sotomayer at best, and perhaps someone even more radical who wants to set social policy from the judicial bench.
Value Added Tax (VAT) -What Are the Prospects?
The Value Added Tax (VAT) like in Europe is essentially a consumption tax attached to the price of everything you buy. In Europe it is 15% or higher and despite promises by politicians, income taxes have not been reduced by the VAT. Lying politicians? What a surprise! One of Obama's economic advisors has floated the idea that a VAT in the United States is the only way to combat the growing debt. Naturally, ideas like cutting spending, even for entitlement programs, and cutting taxes to grow the economy and thus increase tax revenues don't occur in the minds of the leftists in the Obama administration. Many of Obama's actions and statements reveal that he wants to create a socialistic economy of the European style or worse.
A VAT would push the United States well down the path to socialism. The one bright spot is that if Obama and Democrats passed a VAT, it might be the best way to wake up those puppets still fawning over Obama. It would be painful for all, until repealed, but all other hidden taxes, fees, health insurance premium increases, eventual impact of inflation, ObamaCare forcing states to increase taxes to cover Medicaid adds and so on are subject to demagoguery by Obama; it will always be someone else's fault. However, a VAT, is "in your face" and even those that don't pay income taxes will get hit by a VAT. Obama and the Democrats know this will hit many of their base, so they will probably hold off until after 2010 and even after 2012, before trying to pass a VAT. This is one more reason why it is so important to take Congress away from the control of the leftists in 2010 and 2012 and to defeat Obama in 2012
A VAT would push the United States well down the path to socialism. The one bright spot is that if Obama and Democrats passed a VAT, it might be the best way to wake up those puppets still fawning over Obama. It would be painful for all, until repealed, but all other hidden taxes, fees, health insurance premium increases, eventual impact of inflation, ObamaCare forcing states to increase taxes to cover Medicaid adds and so on are subject to demagoguery by Obama; it will always be someone else's fault. However, a VAT, is "in your face" and even those that don't pay income taxes will get hit by a VAT. Obama and the Democrats know this will hit many of their base, so they will probably hold off until after 2010 and even after 2012, before trying to pass a VAT. This is one more reason why it is so important to take Congress away from the control of the leftists in 2010 and 2012 and to defeat Obama in 2012
Poverty Affects Children of All Races in the United States
WHEN YOU HAVE DUG YOURSELF INTO A DEEP HOLE, THE WAY OUT IS NOT TO KEEP SHOVELING.
Massive government programs to make poor people into wards of the state, started with the Great Society and have been added to ever since with Obama making all previous "nanny state programs" look paltry. These types of programs have destroyed family values, destroyed education, destroyed incentive, motivation and individual responsibility. These types of programs have rarely provided a path out of poverty for any racial group. It is the exceptional child who works out of poverty despite the government programs to keep a status quo with housing subsidies, food stamps, welfare checks, Medicaid, etc.
As of 2008 in the United States, there were 14 million White children living in poverty, 4.3 million Black children, 4.4 million Hispanic children and 0.5 million Asian children; with the minorities in poverty being at about 2.5 times the rate for Whites. Blacks being in poverty as victims of racism is the kind of simple lazy theme we always get from the leftists media and "race baiters" like Al Sharpton or Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post. However, the causes and cure are clearly far more complex and we have 50 or more years of experience to prove that the government cannot spend the way out of poverty through direct subsidies.
Massive government programs to make poor people into wards of the state, started with the Great Society and have been added to ever since with Obama making all previous "nanny state programs" look paltry. These types of programs have destroyed family values, destroyed education, destroyed incentive, motivation and individual responsibility. These types of programs have rarely provided a path out of poverty for any racial group. It is the exceptional child who works out of poverty despite the government programs to keep a status quo with housing subsidies, food stamps, welfare checks, Medicaid, etc.
As of 2008 in the United States, there were 14 million White children living in poverty, 4.3 million Black children, 4.4 million Hispanic children and 0.5 million Asian children; with the minorities in poverty being at about 2.5 times the rate for Whites. Blacks being in poverty as victims of racism is the kind of simple lazy theme we always get from the leftists media and "race baiters" like Al Sharpton or Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post. However, the causes and cure are clearly far more complex and we have 50 or more years of experience to prove that the government cannot spend the way out of poverty through direct subsidies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)