Ideas to Save Bankrupt Detroit: Nuclear Power Plant Factory and Obamacare

Whatever works, some may say.

First, Nuke for Detroit scheme. A little-known company called American Atomics has made an offer to Detroit:

American Atomics would like to extend an offer to the City of Detroit, one that will not only “save Detroit," but that will result in Detroit becoming the fastest growing city on earth in five years.

We are going to build the world’s largest factory and begin mass producing our HOPE 40 power plant on August 1, 2018. This 8 million square foot, 720 million cubic foot highly integrated manufacturing facility will create between 100,000 and 200,000 jobs within 10 years, most of which will be accessible to semi-skilled workers based on company provided job training.

Our headquarters operations will require a separate 600,000 square foot office and laboratory campus where about 2,000 of the world’s most talented nuclear science and engineering, marketing and management, and administrative and finance individuals will work each day. The factory complex will be on a 2,000 to 2,400 acre site. Our HQ campus will be on a 60 to 90 acre site.

Our plan includes developing a companion industrial park complex where our key suppliers will build dedicated facilities for servicing our operations, with this site being another 1,200 to 1,600 acres and expected to generate another 100,000 to 200,000 manufacturing and industrial services jobs.

...We will, of course, implement HOPE 40 provided power generation for our own usage and the use of the community where we reside. This means that local businesses will enjoy 2¢ per kilowatt-hour flat rate electricity pricing, with no limitation on capacity — given that we will scale the local generating capacity with as many HOPE 40 power plants as needed to service the demand.

...We would like to choose Detroit, as we can think of no finer demonstration of the power of cheap, clean electricity to fuel economic growth than to show what happens in a location so desperately needing an economic boost. ...

What is "HOPE 40 power plant"? It sounds like a small-scale nuclear power generating unit using liquid metal as coolant, i.e. fast breeder.

From American Atomics' mission statement page:

On August 1st, 2018 the world will fundamentally, radically change for the better. That's when we'll begin shipping our first mass production run of 1,000 HOPE 40 power plants — a self-contained, truck-shippable power generator system that can be quickly set up anywhere on earth and allow its owner-operator to begin profitably selling electricity for three cents per kWH or less.

...We're rebooting the Atoms For Peace initiative by choosing the other reactor science — the fast spectrum reactor — and pouring the collective resources of the world's largest commercial venture into its completion.

The company looks like a venture-funded start-up, based in Tennessee. There is no information of officers of the company, except that "We are a group of the leading nuclear scientists, engineers, technologists, and manufacturing experts on earth, utterly dedicated to our mission of solving humanity's energy problems." (from the company's website)

I have no idea whether this is some kind of joke or hoax, or the real thing. The blog where I got the link to the company notes:

"...the technology that the company plans to develop into mass produced small nuclear power plants uses liquid metal cooling, something that has not been used in commercial nuclear plants in the United States since Fermi 1"

Fermi 1 was the 94 MWe prototype fast breeder reactor that had a partial core melt in 1966.

If this "truck-shippable" mass-produced nuclear power generating unit is real, then move over Russians (who are building nuclear power generating ships)...

And Obamacare...

From New York Times (7/28/2013):

Detroit Looks to Health Law to Ease Costs

As Detroit enters the federal bankruptcy process, the city is proposing a controversial plan for paring some of the $5.7 billion it owes in retiree health costs: pushing many of those too young to qualify for Medicare out of city-run coverage and into the new insurance markets that will soon be operating under the Obama health care law.

Officials say the plan would be part of a broader effort to save Detroit tens of millions of dollars in health costs each year, a major element in a restructuring package that must be approved by a bankruptcy judge. It is being watched closely by municipal leaders around the nation, many of whom complain of mounting, unsustainable prices for the health care promised to retired city workers.

Similar proposals that could shift public sector retirees into the new insurance markets, called exchanges, are already being planned or contemplated in places like Chicago; Sheboygan County, Wis.; and Stockton, Calif. While large employers that eliminate health benefits for full-time workers can be penalized under the health care law, retirees are a different matter.

“There’s fear and panic about what this means,” said Michael Underwood, 62, who retired from the Chicago Police Department after 30 years and has diabetes and Parkinson’s disease. ...

...retirees say they worry about what the costs would actually amount to and whether the coverage would be as generous as some have received through city plans.

A 60-year-old single man with an income of $45,000 might have to pay $4,275 a year, or about 52 percent of his total annual premium, for a midpriced plan bought through an exchange, with the balance covered by the federal subsidies, according to an estimate by the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan research group. A couple who are both 55 with a combined income of $60,000 might have to pay $5,700 a year, or 42 percent of their total premium. In both examples, additional out-of-pocket costs of up to $6,350 per person could apply, depending on how much medical care they needed.

(Full article at the link)

So the city retirees would be forced to spend nearly 10% of the income on so-called Obamacare plans, just like non-city workers elsewhere.

Tweet

ObamaCare Is Coming to Town, and Democrats Are Busy Looking for Someone to Blame for the Disaster to Come

That someone seems to be the Republicans in the Congress.

Never mind that no Republicans voted for the 1,000-page bill crafted by the industry lobby that no lawmaker bothered to read before voting.

Ms. Kathleen Sebelius claims it is beyond her expectation how complicated this legislature really is.

That sounds so familiar and so bogus.

Thanks to the US Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts who inexplicably flipped at the last moment and voted with the "minority" who therefore became the majority in affirming the US health care (insurance) reform ridiculed as "ObamaCare" is constitutional, this monstrosity will be foisted on the nation later this year.

Just as a reminder, none of these people, Dems, Republicans, Supreme Court judges, Obama administration officials, and Mr. Obama himself, will not need to suffer ObamaCare. They have their own healthcare plan for life, generously funded by tax-payers.

None of the Hollywood celebrities who pushed ObamaCare will have to suffer either. They have money to buy whatever care they want.

From Investors Business Daily (4/11/2013):

Sebelius Tries To Blame GOP For Coming ObamaCare Failures

Health Care: As Democrats grow increasingly worried that ObamaCare will explode on the launch pad just as midterm elections get going, the Obama administration seeks to pin blame on Republicans. Good luck with that.

Earlier this week, Health and Human Services head Kathleen Sebelius admitted that she didn't realize how complicated getting ObamaCare off the ground would be.

Sebelius complained that "no one fully anticipated" the difficulties involved in implementing ObamaCare, or how confusing it would be with the public.

She wasn't talking about the massive and impossible task of imposing central planning on one-sixth of the nation's economy.

Instead, she was trying to find a way to blame Republicans for ObamaCare's failures when the inevitable problems start emerging.

Rather than say "let's get on board, let's make this work," recalcitrant Republicans have forced her to engage in "state-by-state political battles," Sebelius said at a Harvard School of Public Health forum. "The politics has been relentless."

So let's see if we get this. Democrats shoved an unpopular, expensive, ill-conceived and poorly written law down the country's throat with no Republican support, and without bothering to see whether states would want to take on the thankless and costly task of helping the feds implement it.

And now that many of these states are rebelling, it's the Republicans' fault?

Sebelius' fellow Democrat, West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, had a more accurate take on the problem the administration faces: the law is "probably the most complicated piece of legislation ever passed by the United States Congress" and "if it isn't done right the first time, it will just simply get worse."

Rockefeller, like a growing number of Democrats, realizes that ObamaCare is shaping up to be a political disaster for the party next November.

The influential Cook Political Report noted earlier this month that almost all of the Democratic insiders they talked to "voiced concern about the potential for the issue to hurt Democrats in 2014."

And just what could explain these concerns?

Maybe it's because even Sebelius now admits that ObamaCare will force insurance claims up 32%.

Or possibly it's because, despite endless assurances that the insurance exchanges would be ready on time, the administration had to delay for a year a key feature meant to give small business a choice of health plans.

Or because neither Sebelius nor the states have provided evidence they can get the rest of the exchanges ready by Oct. 1, when ObamaCare's open enrollment begins.

Or perhaps Democrats' fears stem from state insurance commissioners warning of a rate shock once ObamaCare's "community rating" rules and benefit mandates start. Or from rising evidence the law is hurting job growth as small businesses try to avoid its costs.

None of this, mind you, has anything to do with Republicans. And if the GOP were smart, it'd be focused on making sure that, come next November, the public knows that, too.

Tweet

US Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare Indivisual Mandate as "Tax"

Nancy Pelosi gushed they "made history" when the Congress passed the Affordable Care Act, aka "Obamacare".

Sure. As if it was a good history.

Today, SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) ruled 5 to 4 with Chief Justice Roberts siding with the liberal judges in stating that "Obamacare"'s mandate that forces individuals to buy health insurance or face penalty is constitutional, but as a "tax". So the pathetic performance by Obama's Solicitor General in front of the Supreme Court didn't make a difference. Too bad.

Mr. Obama and his administration, and his party have been saying it is not a tax, but SCOTUS says it is. Obama's word on the SCOTUS decision? "Let's move forward..." Not a word about "tax".

The US stock market tanked on the news of the decision. Right now, tech-heavy Nasdaq is down 1.9%, Dow down 1.2%, S&P down 1.2%. The stock market, or what's left of it after incessant intervention and manipulation from the central bank, sees it correctly, for today, that it is a tax burden - the last thing that the economy needs right now.

Washington Post is a handy calculator to assess the impact on your household budget.

Using the calculator, if you have no insurance, 2 people in the household, annual adjusted gross income of $20,000 (barely above the federal poverty level), and you are married, you may be able to buy insurance in the federally assisted state insurance exchange for $800, or 4% of your gross income. If you do not buy the insurance, you will get penalized and required to pay the maximum fine of $1,390.

If your adjusted gross income is $40,000 (national average), then the cost of insurance at the insurance exchange will jump to $3,800, or 9.5% of your adjusted gross income. If you don't buy the insurance, you will be penalized with the same $1,390 fine.

If your adjusted gross income is $60,000, the cost of insurance at the insurance exchange will be $5,700, or 9.5% of your adjusted gross income. Penalty will be the same as in the previous two cases, at $1,390.

SCOTUS has decided it's all within the right of the Congress to tax citizens, as long as this Individual Mandate is a "tax".

GOP House Majority Leader Eric Cantor says a vote to repeal the law will be on July 11. Conservative media thinks the 2012 election has just become the 2010 election, a referendum on Obamacare.

Tweet

Florida Judge: Entire Obamacare Unconstitutional and Should Be Voided

YYEEESSSSS!!!

From Investor's Business Daily [emphasis is mine]:

U.S. District Court Judge Roger Vinson on Monday dealt the strongest legal blow yet to ObamaCare, ruling that the individual mandate "exceeds" the authority of Congress and that the entire law should be "declared void."

Another federal judge ruled in December that the mandate was unconstitutional. But Vinson went further, ruling that it was not severable from the rest of ObamaCare, so the entire act should be struck down.

At least two other judges have ruled in favor of ObamaCare. The Supreme Court almost certainly will hear the issue eventually.

The plaintiffs in the Florida suit included 26 state governments, giving the ruling added prominence.

...

The mandate requires individuals to buy health insurance or pay a fine. The administration argued that the federal government can compel people to buy insurance via the Constitution's interstate commerce clause.

Vinson ruled that the mandate tries to regulate economic inactivity, which he called the "very opposite of economic activity."

In December, Judge Henry Hudson of eastern Virginia also ruled the mandate unconstitutional. Courts in Michigan and western Virginia had previously dismissed challenges to the mandate.

The Supreme Court will likely offer a split decision. Historically, the high court has been loath to curtail the legislative branch's authority. But regulating economic inactivity is unprecedented. And, as the 26-state case showed, there is strong political and voter opposition to the year-old law.

Read the full article at the link.

Tweet

House to Debate Health Care Repeal Next Wednesday

From C-Span:

Today, the House is taking up the rules governing next week’s scheduled debate on a bill to repeal the health care law. Last night, The House Rules Committee met and voted on the rules for debate. It is expected that the debate to repeal the health care bill will take place next Wednesday.

Among the more disputed aspects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act is the mandate that all individuals buy health insurance, which will not take effect until 2014.

The White House and Democrats have come out against the repeal bill. Senate Democratic Leaders sent a letter to House Speaker John Boehner earlier this week stating that they have no plans to debate this repeal bill in the Senate and urged him to “consider the unintended consequences that the law's repeal would have on a number of popular consumer protections that help middle class Americans."

President Obama has also stated he would veto any repeal efforts that come to his desk. However, House Republicans say they will then try to repeal the legislation piece by piece.

The mandate that requires, under the threat of fines and jail time, Americans to buy health insurance with the terms and conditions that the federal government decides, has been ruled unconsitutional by U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson in Richmond, Virginia.

The Obama administration has admitted that it's not a health care "reform" but a new taxation. Despite the name of the law, "affordable health care" is hard to come by, when your insurance company raises the annual premium by 40% just this year thanks to this "reform" people call Obamacare.

The Republicans' effort to repeal should be encouraged, even if it's a token gesture. However, the bill that they have no intention of repealing will soon prove more costlier and deadlier to our health: the food safety bill that passed the Senate in the lame duck session in November and was just signed into the law of the land by Obama just yesterday.

Nullification at the state level seems the only way.

Tweet

Virginia Judge Ruled Obamacare Unconsitutional

From Bloomberg:

The Obama administration’s requirement that most citizens maintain minimum health coverage as part of a broad overhaul of the industry is unconstitutional because it forces people to buy insurance, a federal judge ruled, striking down the linchpin of the president’s plan.

U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson in Richmond, Virginia, said today that the requirement in President Barack Obama’s health-care legislation goes beyond Congress’s powers to regulate interstate commerce. While severing the coverage mandate, Hudson didn’t address other provisions such as expanding Medicaid that are unrelated to it. He didn’t order the government to stop work on putting the remainder of the law into effect.

Hudson found the minimum essential coverage provision of the act “exceeds the constitutional boundaries of congressional power.” Hudson was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2002.

The decision left intact other provisions of the law and only affects the part that requires most U.S. citizens to maintain minimum health coverage beginning in 2014.

Tweet

ObamaCare Chart - and This Is Only 1/3 of It

Developed by the Joint Economic Committee minority, led by U.S Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas and Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas, who released the chart.

"Brady admits committee analysts could not fit the entire health care bill on one chart. "This portrays only about one-third of the complexity of the final bill. It’s actually worse than this."

And remember, the Congress is EXEMPT from all this s--t.

Tweet

From Majority of Americans to Obama: "Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!"

Now that he signed it into law, Obama says the health care insurance reform is a form of taxation and not the "right". Oh really. As if the majority of Americans who opposed (and still oppose) the Obamacare didn't know. I mean, really.

Changing Stance, Administration Now Defends Insurance Mandate as a Tax (Robert Pear, 7/16/2010 New York Times)

"WASHINGTON — When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”

"And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

"Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.

"In a brief defending the law, the Justice Department says the requirement for people to carry insurance or pay the penalty is “a valid exercise” of Congress’s power to impose taxes.

"Congress can use its taxing power “even for purposes that would exceed its powers under other provisions” of the Constitution, the department said. For more than a century, it added, the Supreme Court has held that Congress can tax activities that it could not reach by using its power to regulate commerce.

"While Congress was working on the health care legislation, Mr. Obama refused to accept the argument that a mandate to buy insurance, enforced by financial penalties, was equivalent to a tax.

"“For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase,” the president said last September, in a spirited exchange with George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program “This Week.”

"When Mr. Stephanopoulos said the penalty appeared to fit the dictionary definition of a tax, Mr. Obama replied, “I absolutely reject that notion.” "[Emphasis is mine. The article continues.]

These people have no shame. They just say anything to get their way, and they have no problem changing the tune to fit their new purpose (in this case, fend off the lawsuits). Would anyone hold them accountable for their words?

Hell no. After all, this is an administration led by a president who won and accepted the Nobel Peace Prize as he started bombing Pakistan immediately after the inauguration. Some people have finally started to smell a rot (or "sense of malaise" for the sophisticated) and it's started at the top.

Now, what would the supporters of this so-called health care "reform" say?

Anything?

Later in the same article,

"“This is the first time that Congress has ever ordered Americans to use their own money to purchase a particular good or service,” said Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah.

"In their lawsuit, Florida and other states say: “Congress is attempting to regulate and penalize Americans for choosing not to engage in economic activity. If Congress can do this much, there will be virtually no sphere of private decision-making beyond the reach of federal power.”"

Exactly. And absurdity of it all. And now they passed the financial regulation bill that will regulate how the money flows in our economy. If it flows anymore, that is.

Nullification will be the only answer.

Tweet

Dr. Donald Berwick: The President's One-Man Death Panel

President Obama, who had condemned the practice while he was running for president (just as he had also condemned presidential executive order, Guantanamo, and so many other things), made a recess appointment of Dr. Donald Berwick as the head of the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services on Wednesday.

Even though he was nominated by Obama to the position back in April, no hearing was scheduled, and Dr. Berwick didn't submit information sought by the Senate committee (Finance Committee chaired by Max Baucus, D-Mont.) that would hold the hearing.

Not just Republicans but Democrats, including Finance Committee chairman Baucus, are troubled by the president's use of recess appointment. Baucus said "Senate confirmation of presidential appointees is an essential process prescribed by the Constitution that serves as a check on executive power." (That's really a noble statement, Senator Baucus, coming particularly from you.)

As the Investors Business Daily's article below points out, Dr. Berwick is well-known for his admiration and cheerleading for the Great Britain's health care system. (Either he is deaf and blind, or he genuinely likes the 'cost saving' feature of the Britain's system - 'cost saving' which seems to come as the result of not saving patients.) Some conservative news outlets and blogs call him "Rationing Czar".

The President's One-Man Death Panel (7/8/2010 Investors Business Daily Editorial)

"Health Care: The president recess-appoints a fan of rationing and Britain's National Health Service to direct one-third of American health care. Why does the administration want his views hidden from scrutiny?

"'The decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open." That's what Dr. Donald Berwick, President Obama's nominee to head the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, told a National Institutes of Health publication a year ago, when he was just president and CEO of the Institute for Health Care Improvement.

"Such views were to be fodder for a stormy confirmation hearing — except none has been scheduled.

"Instead, Obama opted to make a recess appointment of Berwick to head CMS, an agency that oversees a third of all health care spending in the U.S. and that will play a major role under ObamaCare in deciding what care is available and who gets it.

"Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell rightly accused the president of trying to "arrogantly circumvent the American people" with Congress out of town for its annual Fourth of July break.

"Berwick could serve through 2011 without Senate confirmation. This sleight of hand involving one-sixth of the American economy and the man who will run one-third of that is the fruit of hope and change?

"It is understandable why the administration would want to keep Berwick's views under the radar. He has praised the U.K's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), which he says has "developed very good and very disciplined, scientifically grounded, policy-connected models for the evaluation of medical treatments from which we ought to learn."

"Last year, the Orwellian-named NICE unveiled plans to cut annual steroid injections for severe back pain to 3,000 from 60,000. "The consequences of the NICE decision will be devastating for thousands of patients," Jonathan Richardson of Bradford Hospital's Trust told London's Daily Telegraph.

""It will mean," said Dr. Richardson, "more people on opiates, which are addictive and kill 2,000 a year. It will mean more people having spinal surgery, which is incredibly risky and has a 50% failure rate."

"And here we thought the first rule of medicine was to do no harm.

"If Berwick wants to imitate Britain's model, perhaps he can explain why breast cancer in America has a 25% mortality rate while in Britain it's almost double at 46%."

Tweet

To Obama on Health Care: "Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire.."

Remember the health care so-called "reform" bill that was signed into law in March? Yes, that one, which will force you, under the threat of fines and jail time and IRS on top of you, to buy health insurance from the government-created so-called "exchange" because health care is your right (they take you for a fool don't they).

Remember the promise that Obama made? No one will be turned away from obtaining the insurance?

A bloody lie.

Health law risks turning away sick (7/1/2010 The Hill)

"The Obama administration has not ruled out turning sick people away from an insurance program created by the new healthcare law to provide coverage for the uninsured.

"Critics of the $5 billion high-risk pool program insist it will run out of money before Jan. 1, 2014. That’s when the program sunsets and health plans can no longer discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.

"Administration officials insist they can make changes to the program to ensure it lasts until 2014, and that it may not have to turn away sick people. Officials said the administration could also consider reducing benefits under the program, or redistributing funds between state pools. But they acknowledged turning some people away was also a possibility.

"Healthcare experts of all stripes warned during the healthcare debate that $5 billion would likely not last until 2014. Millions of Americans cannot find affordable healthcare because of their pre-existing conditions, and that amount would only cover a couple hundred thousand people, according to a recent study by the chief Medicare actuary." [The article continues.]

A couple hundred thousand people.

But not to worry. You may not be able to afford to participate in this government program anyway, as the monthly premiums are rather high. Richard Popper, deputy director of the Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight at HHS readily admits that "many people won’t be able to afford to participate in the program since premiums will range between about $140 and $900 a month, depending on applicants’ age and where they live."

He continues:

“There are a significant number of people out there with pre-existing conditions who are uninsured, but a significant number of those people ... also have limited income. And some of them, while they may need this plan, the premiums may not be something they can afford.

“We have that to think about as well,” he added. “But for those who can afford it, this is going to be a great, great plan.”

Uh huh. I'm sure it's a great plan, particularly when lawmakers and bureaucrats don't need to participate. They have "to think about" that..? What have they been doing all along?

So people with pre-existing condition may need this plan, but cannot afford the premiums, and the puny $5 billion fund is likely to run out sooner than planned. What happens then, between that and 2014?

It looks like we will have a sort of "death panel" after all.

Nullify. Just nullify.

Tweet

Obama Signs Exec Order to Achieve "Lifestyle Behavior Modification"

Never waste a good crisis (even when the crisis - BP oil spill - has nothing to do with lifestyle behavior modification).

It's all for our own good. As increasingly cynical Zero Hedge reports:

Obama Begins "Lifestyle Health Modification" Program, Mandating Behavioural Changes Within US Society (Tyler Durden, 6/13/2010 Zero Hedge)

"Last week, with little fanfare, among the ever deteriorating oil spill crisis, the White House quietly noted the issuance of an executive order "Establishing the National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council", in which the president, citing the “authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America” is now actively engaging in "lifestyle behavior modification" for American citizens that do not exhibit "healthy behavior." At least initially, the 8 main verticals of focus will include: smoking cessation; proper nutrition; appropriate exercise; mental health; behavioral health; sedentary behavior; substance-use disorder; and domestic violence screenings."

The actual executive order that's linked in the paragraph above does say "lifestyle behavior modification". It establishes the Council as in the title of the order, plus the advisory board. These are on top of the huge and numerous councils and boards to be established by the health care "reform" bill that was passed and signed into law, unfortunately for majority of Americans who still oppose it.

Zero Hedge as this observation at the end:

"Tangentially, we wonder if the president and the head of the House Financial Services Committee have kicked their respective tobacco/KFC habits yet."

Probably haven't. That may be why they want to drag the entire nation in kicking their respective habits. Much like ancient kings and emperors demanded that his wives, slaves, their favorite horses and hapless subjects selected for the occasion, be killed so that they could accompany him when he died.

BTW, just so you know, the federal officials wants to ban peanuts on commercial flights to alleviate fears of 1.8 million Americans who has peanut allergies.

Tweet

News That Has Gone Very Quiet Very Quickly

In no particular order...

H1N1 swine flu
Now the reports say WHO exaggerated the threat, influenced by the pharmaceutical industry. Oh really? What a surprise.

Global 'warming' and Climategate
The Gores are splitting, and CBS blames George W. Bush.

Panty-bomber on Christmas Eve last year and terrorists from Yemen (and US military's involvement in that country)
CIA later admitted he was allowed to board the plane under CIA's order. No matter. No one paid attention to that part. All we got out of this shady affair is the pornographic total body scan, thanks in part to the peddling by Michael Chertoff, former Homeland Security chief.

Greece sovereign debt crisis
While Greece decided to sell off national assets to pay the bankers, evil 'speculators' have moved on to the next target, Spain. Italy next? Or France next? I guess they'll need a break before attacking a major country. Maybe take a detour in Hungary?

Heath care insurance "reform" bill actually passed and signed into law
Remember that one, which will force you to purchase insurance you don't want under the threat of fines because it is your right? ('Newspeak' at its best.) Doctors sure seem to remember that well, as an increasing number of them will be calling it quits. Canadians are finding out that the government-mandated health care is not really 'free' of charge. Duh. (Why do they think Newfoundland's minister came to the US for his heart surgery?)

Times Square non-bomber (if you can call that a bomb, you are scientifically challenged)
The news died off even quicker than the panty bomber. As a reward, Pakistan will be targeted by the Obama administration for "unilateral military action".

Second wave of mortgage default due to ARM reset
I don't think that even compares with the much bigger subprime disaster that's coming, via almost insolvent FHA and Ginnie Mae, both of which are fully backed by the US government (i.e. taxpayers).

Goldman Sachs civil and criminal charges
How can they be blamed for what everyone else was doing? By the way, according to Goldman, today's job number was going to be 700K. I guess they were just following the Obama administration's lead (that Friday's job number would be great). How can they be blamed for following Obama?

Audit the Fed
Senator Sanders blinked and watered down his bill in the last minutes to just a slap on the wrist, if that. He blinked on the day of 'flash crash'. Oh it's just a coincidence, isn't it?

'Flash crash' and (unwanted) attention on high frequency trading
Boy this story disappeared so quick. Nothing to see here (which is very true of the stock market - nothing is supporting it but algo bots working in milliseconds), move right along. Nonetheless, the SEC is implementing a new circuit breaker system starting next week, which I suspect will only benefit the high frequency traders more. (More on this later.)

Euro crisis and $1 trillion bailout plan
Remember this? It was announced on May 10 before the markets in Asia opened. The effect of the announcement lasted about 12 hours for euro. The currency closed at about 1.28 (against USD) on May 10. It closed today at 1.1964, the level last reached in 2006, despite incessant central bank intervention in the last 3 weeks.
.
North Korea's threat to go on all-out attack
I think it made the headline for a day or two. Poor Kim Jong Il, upstaged by the Israeli navy commandos only days later.

This must be the "new normal", in which one crisis every few days makes a peaceful, easy week. We would only panic when we have more than 3 or 4 reported crises per day. If they are not reported by MSM, we don't care, do we?

Move along, nothing to see here.

Tweet

"Where Do We Get the Free ObamaCare and How Do I Sign Up?"

That's what many Americans are apparently asking, according to McClatchy News.

So I guess that's why some people (less than 50% of the country) have been supporting the President's health care insurance "reform" that will:

• cost nearly $1 trillion (by the administration's own estimate; you know how it will grow)
• expand IRS power;
• expand the federal government;
• increase taxes and/or institute new taxes on goods and services in health care;
• surtax on income tax for the "rich" (you are "rich" if you make more than $200K);
• force Americans to buy health insurance that the government (not they) deems "appropriate" and only from the federally-mandated insurance "exchanges";
• cause the existing insurance policy rates to go up significantly (because the insurance companies will be required to cover everyone, pre-existing condition or not, totally defying the very model of how insurance works - to underwrite a policy based on person's health status);
• cause Medicare services to be cut back (that's how this scheme will be paid for, in part).

In addition, there will be no more "disaster coverage" with high deductibles so that they can save money. Even if they have no intention of conceiving a child or physically incapable even if they want to, their insurance will have to have maternity care coverage. Same for the substance abuse, mental health, pediatric care (even if you are single). You will have to have the coverage in those "important" aspects of health care.

The government doesn't even have a definite, reliable number of how many Americans are actually lacking the health care insurance and how many need it. These days the number is somewhere between 30 million and 35 million. It used to be 40 to 50 million. They count people on COBRA (temporary health insurance after people lose their jobs) as "uninsured".

I have seen the number as low as 8 million, when you subtract non-documented immigrants.

Speaking of non-documented immigrants, Obama's new law will be grossly unfair to them IF they want to buy the health insurance in the new government-mandated insurance exchange with their own money. The law won't allow them. And this law stipulates you will have to buy your insurance at this exchange, and nowhere else. So, what will these immigrants do? They will do what they have been doing: use hospital emergency care as their "primary care family physician" and pay next to nothing. (Maybe that's one reason for the push for so-called immigration reform - legalize them so that they will be forced to buy health insurance.)

Investors Business Daily had a nice summary of what you can expect from this health care insurance "reform": "20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms" (David Hogberg, 3/25/2010 IBD). The article mentions specific sections of the bill.

And remember: the insurance industry with powerful lobby supports the bill that is now the law. They were briefly against it (or so they said) because the penalty under the law for not having an insurance would be TOO LOW. (Nice people.)

I could go on and on, but I have already wasted so much breath (I have 75 posts on health care "reform" on this blog). As people discover what's in the bill that has become the law of the land (for now, unless these 18 states are successful), all I will say is "I told you so. You should have read my blog..."

Tweet

Bill Sardi: How to Survive ObamaCare

is to practice self preventive care to stay healthy, and never have to go to the doctors.

In an article written exclusively for Lewrockwell.com, Bill Sardi shares his natural medicine chest.

How To Prepare For Obamacare: Create Your Own Natural Medicine Chest (Bill Sardi, 4/1/2010 Lewrockwell.com)

"This article provides a list of proven home remedies and self-help strategies that readers can begin utilizing today to maintain health while avoiding costly medical care.

"While I have written articles in the past at LR that have addressed heart disease, cancer and other maladies, I hadn’t yet addressed every-day and emergent health problems that cause Americans to run to the doctor.

"Americans can begin to stock their home medicine chest with items that will avert or forestall a visit to the doctor. Many of the most common reasons to visit a doctor, stomach pains, chest pains, fever, cough, headaches, sore throats, infections, toothaches, back aches, can be handled with low-cost remedies at home." [The article continues.]

Here's part of his natural medicine chest. For more details, please visit the link above.

Tweet

Wheel of Fortune Host Ridicules Frank Rich, Theater Critic

Pat Sajak is best known as the host of long-running TV game show "Wheel of Fortune". In the article appeared in Human Events, he pokes fun at erstwhile Broadway theater critic turned political analyst Frank Rich.

Frank Rich's most recent Op-Ed column in New York Times smears anyone who opposes ObamaCare [that's more than half of Americans] as "right-wing extremist" [so anyone who opposes left-wing extremist policy must be right-wing extremist?], Glenn Beck's "tea party" [huh?], and of course racist who dare oppose a black president [never mind he's half white and was elected by whites] and a female speaker of the house. Oh and a Latina in Supreme Court.

And here's the host, Pat Sajak ...

Opposed to Obamacare? Then You Must Be a Racist
(3/29/2010 Pat Sajak, Human Events)

"Frank Rich spent many years as the theater critic for the New York Times, where, at worst, his venom could cause a Broadway production or two to close down.

"Now, however, Mr. Rich opines on political and social issues for the Times, and, while the results are usually mildly amusing (even if unintentionally so), his reach has grown a bit, so the damage he causes can travel beyond the footlights. I’m not sure why anyone turns to Rich for political analysis—heck, you might as well read the rantings of a TV game show host—but the Gray Lady continues to pay him for his weekly column, and, at the rate she’s bleeding money, that’s no small sacrifice.

"Anyway, Mr. Rich has apparently been able to get to the bottom of the vocal opposition to the “healthcare reform” bill that was recently gently shepherded through Congress.

"It turns out, according to his well-crafted analysis, that it’s not the bill that’s got people in an uproar; rather, what we’re facing is the death rattle of a dwindling cadre of white, racist, sexist, homophobic males terrified by the ascent of people of color, women and gays.

"As the ever-tolerant Rich reasons: “The conjunction of a black President and a female speaker of the House — topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay congressional committee chairman — would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play.”

"So that’s it. It’s just a bunch of scared, white males who would yelp about anything this gang came up with. As Rich makes clear, this is merely a replay of the opposition to the Voting Rights Act of 1964. You get it? If you express opposition to the bill, you’re a racist, sexist homophobe.

"Mr. Rich is shocked by the level of anger in the land, and he fears for the safety of our elected officials, much as I’m sure he did during the George W. Bush administration. He calls on Republican leaders to distance themselves from the more radical voices among them, echoing the demands I’m sure he made of the Democrats during the last campaign.

"Welcome to post-racial America, where those who oppose a piece of legislation must defend themselves against the scurrilous charges of a man who seems much better suited to reviewing “Cats”. (He liked it, by the way.) This was a particularly shameful column, and the millions of Americans who oppose this legislation are owed an apology. Are they right? Are they wrong? Let’s discuss it. Let’s debate it. Let’s yell and scream if we want to. But would it be too much to ask that we approach the matter based on its merits and leave the psychobabble to Dr. Phil?" [Emphasis is mine.]

Ouch.

Tweet

Student Loan Industry Nationalization Tacked onto Health Bill

Did you know that? I didn't, although I reported on the student loan nationalization in my past blog posts.

Starting July 1st, anyone who wants federal student loans will have to deal directly with the federal government. (Good luck with that.) It is of course touted as reducing deficit and wasteful subsidies. (Here I thought deficit and wasteful subsidies are two hallmarks of the government.)

Goodies buried in this government takeover includes:

"New borrowers who assume loans after July 1, 2014, will be able to cap their student loan repayments at 10 percent of their discretionary income and, if they keep up with their payments over time, will have the balance forgiven after 20 years."

But wait! There's more. If the borrowers find employment in the public sectors, the balance will be forgiven after only 10 years!

And of course there's much more for institutions that cater to "minorities" - $2.55 billion more.

You can read all about it in the White House statement. If you are brave, you can dig into the health care bill itself (H.R.3590). (Good luck.)

It looks to me like this is another job bill - take away the jobs from private industry and shift them to the government. The government only takes away, but gives you an illusion that it creates.

So, Americans who will be forced to buy health insurance and to pay added taxes for medical products and services with the threat of fine and jail time will also be paying for the student loans that will be forgiven by the government.

Do you wonder what else is buried in that monstrosity of the health care insurance "reform" bill? If you don't, you should.

Tweet

Ron Paul on Health Care Insurance "Reform"

He continues to say health care is NOT a right, just like having a car or owning a home is NOT a right. He says the bill would drive the U.S. into bankruptcy.

Tweet

AT&T Joins Catapillar, Valero, Verizon to Reconsider Health Care Coverage

Oh what a surprise. So much for "If you like your health care coverage, you can keep it!"

(Liar, Liar, pants on fire...)

AT&T will take $1B non-cash charge for health care (3/26/2010 AP via Yahoo Finance)

"NEW YORK (AP) -- AT&T Inc. said Friday it will take a $1 billion non-cash charge in the first quarter related to the health care overhaul.

"AT&T's charge is the largest announced so far. Earlier this week, AK Steel Corp., Caterpillar Inc., Deere & Co. and Valero Energy announced similar accounting charges, saying the health care law that President Barack Obama signed Tuesday will raise their expenses.

"AT&T said the charge is to reflect the change of the tax treatment of Medicare subsidies. Companies say the health care overhaul will make a subsidy that companies receive for retiree drug coverage taxable in 2011.

"AT&T also said it is looking into changing the health care benefits it offers to active and retired workers because of the legislation. Analysts say retirees could lose the prescription drug coverage provided by their former employers." [Emphasis is mine. The article continues.]

Tweet

What's in Store for the Rest of Us after Health Care "Reform"

It just makes me sick to the stomach to see the stock market keeps going up after the passage of the health care insurance "reform" bill whose various programs will be paid for by reduced Medicare benefits, a whole bunch of new taxes for individuals and businesses on anything from tanning to prescription drugs to medical devices, and insurance premiums which are set to drastically increase (I've already seen the numbers like 40 to 50% increase). National ID cards, vastly expanded IRS power, national computerized database for everything about you including financial information (part of that was passed in the stimulus bill of February 2009, by the way), and who knows what else. They may have revived the "Q-tip tax".

All for covering, supposedly, uninsured Americans, though the number I've heard varies from 40-plus million to mere 8 million. In other words, no one knows for sure. But the government wants to extract $1 trillion from the economy anyway - that's over $3000 for every single American.

This particular government appears hell-bent to extinguish any feeble attempt by what remains of a free market economy to recover. Now that they dump this health care "reform" on the back of the productive segment of the economy, they are eyeing to cause further damage by passing the climate bill to fight the so-called "global warming" which may or may not be happening and which may not be anthropogenic at all.

As this blog reported in the past, the additional tax burden on an average family with the climate bill alone would amount to $1761, by the administration's own admission. (GOP puts the number much higher at $3000.)

CNN's latest poll shows Obama's approval rate hit the lowest. 46% approve his job performance, while 51% disapprove. But that's not all. On health care policy, 58% disapprove, and on federal deficit, 62% disapprove, according to the same CNN poll.

Alas, poll numbers mean nothing to the administration or Congress. They just keep on doing what they've been doing - to inflict pain and suffering.

After the climate bill, it will be immigration, then financial so-called "reform" which would put the Federal Reserve in charge of "protecting" the consumers (fox in a hen house is an understatement). Ducks are lining up.

Nullification, anyone?

Tweet

Health Care Deform Bill Passes House

What a hard-working Congress we have. Sunday night, no less. It must be triple-overtime with extra donuts.

As always, Drudge Report has a caustic headline. The link goes to an article by AP about the so-called historic vote on health care "reform" which is really an insurance "reform" which is not really a reform but what the heck that's what this administration and its supporters want to call it but in reality it is a huge burden on Americans who will be taxed to death (literally, maybe) to feed the new federal and state bureaucracy with a threat of penalty and jail time and IRS breathing down their neck. (OK let me take a breath.)

Medicare benefits will be reduced (new taxes and benefit reduction are the two sources of "money" to pay for this monstrosity of a reform). People with investment income will be forced to pay Medicare tax on their passive income. Private businesses, big and small, will have hardly any incentive to hire a new employee in the US.

Oh I get it. This is not the health care bill. It is another job bill, albeit a huge (almost $1 trillion) one, except the jobs it will create will be located outside the US, just as the cash for clunkers program boosted foreign auto sales and the so-called stimulus package stimulated employment in China. Domestic job creation resulting from this bill will likely be confined to government jobs, and private sector jobs that deal with the government. What a productive economy we will have.

By the way, the above-linked AP article says "Obama's young presidency received a badly needed boost as a deeply divided Congress passed legislation touching the lives of nearly every American." Why does the writer of the article think it is a boost? Much of the country is still in severe economic recession, and the tone-deaf Congress and the administration pass a legislation that will force people and private businesses to cough up more hard-earned money for the government, the money that could be deployed for more productive use.

Maybe we should start printing our own fiat money, backed by absolutely nothing, just like the Federal Reserve does. And pay to the federal and state governments with that fiat money

The U.S. stock market futures are negative, as you would expect. We'll see if some mysterious buyer(s) appear early in the morning tomorrow. They (Obama and his Plunge Protection Team) had better be propping up the stock market, for it is about the only cheerful thing that has been happening ever since March last year.

Tweet