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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)