Cato has a peice that talks about how and why our health care system, for all its faults, is much better than any other system, including Britain and Canada.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
News and Commentary re: the great health care debate.
Fox News reports that Medicare Trustees say program will spend more in this year (2009) than it takes in. And team P/R/O want us to let them federalize everyone's health care? WTF???
Monday, May 11, 2009
Editorial Summary - 11 May 2009
Richard Posner is a big name in Law & Economics and is a Federal judge. When he speaks, I listen. Period. Here, he tells of what caused the current economic recession, how severe it is, and what can be done to get us out of the recession. His ideas are clearly more conservative than what is coming out of P/R/O (Pelosi/Reid/Obama), yet phrased in a way that might appeal to independents and some moderate Democrats.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Editorial Summary and Review - Sunday, 22 March 2009
Fed's Secrecy Policy is 2 Years Old
WND.com
Rate: **** (4)
Ok. Not an OpEd – but important
In 2006, the Federal Reserve stopped reporting M3. For those of you who are not economists, M3 is the amount of cash in circulation. When the Fed prints a $100 bill, M3 increases by $100.00 When the Fed takes a $100 bill out of circulation, M3 decreases by $100. Although the article is a tad conspiratorial sounding, the importance of discussing M3 is so high that people need to read this.
- Because the Fed is not reporting this number anymore, the American people do not know how much of the “stimulus” is being borrowed and how much is being just printed. Since the quantity of dollars is unknown, the amount of inflation that must be occurring right now (even if the effects are not yet seriously felt), is also unknown. The inability to accurately price goods for inflation can only lead to more volatility and large price swings.
Let's Have a Constitutional Showdown
Henry Lamb
WND.com
Rate: **** (4)
Call to action for H.R. 450, “Enumerated Powers Act” (authored by Rep. John Shadegg). Legislation would require Congress to cite chapter & verse on what section of the Constitution authorized each section of the legislation. Author makes a call for action after explaining the bill, asking for talk radio callers and constituent outreach to Congress and then says that “Soon, congressmen will have to sign the bill or explain why they won't.” Saying that the author is a little optimistic is like saying that D.C. has a few liars and thieves. Just a few...
- Two big things here: 1) Did I see that a Congressman other than Ron Paul supports the Constitution??? Damn. I need to put out my joint, walk off the munchies I'm getting, and re-read this. 2) Although I love the idea of this legislation, the discussion of how private citizens can get involved is valuable information that I want all of MY readers to know.
Vindicating McCain
WSJ.com
Rate: *** (3)
Remember the OB1 v. Mac debates? Mac said the economy was fundamentally sound and got creamed. Mac said that he wanted to tax employee health benefits and everyone freaked out. Then last week, OB1 said the economy is fundamentally sound. Now WSJ article says that OB1 wants to tax employee health benefits. Hmmm... Who did we elect? Oh yeah. The guy whose rhetric was so over-the-top about how unfair taxing health benefts would be that I thought that he thought that this was the 3d rail. Blah. Big difference though on Mac v. OB1 on the health care tax. Mac wanted to restore valuation of services through prices. OB1 wants socialized health care.
Government vs. Confidence
Michael Gerson
Townhall.com
Rate: *** (3)
Not a typical Op/Ed piece. Contains a series of assertions beginning with an explanation of how either Geithner or Dodds put bonus loophole in place and the new “AIG outrage” bonus tax. This series of events is then tied to an argument about why the government is not going to succeed in getting the private sector to invest in the banks' toxic assets.
- The abnormal design of this Op/Ed makes it somewhat difficult to follow. It sounds more like an angry rant followed by an assertion that the administration is in La-La-Land in its recovery plan rather than a well-thought out argument. One thing saves this piece – No one else is making this link – that the Obama/Geithner/Dodds behavior on AIG bonuses is going to scare away anyone who would otherwise consider investing in toxic assets.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Editorial Summary and Review - 20 March 2009
Begins with a review of Chris Dodd's AIG - Bailout Bonus connection and the implications on his political career. Makes a brief reference to AIG donations to Obama. Ends with a bang. If we own AIG, is it a violation of the First Amendment for AIG to have a division that promotes Shariah? Thomas More Law Center is suing the government. Stay tuned.
This is exactly why we should not mix economy and state. Muslims in the United States have a right to worship as they please and to choose to deal only with corporations that do not offend their religion. Bravo to AIG for meeting an untapped market. Now, the bailout appears to create a situation where the Constitution must be violated. Either a government owned corporation funds and promotes religion, or people who made contracts with AIG when it was a private corporation will have their contracts wrongfully violated by the U.S. government. The only other option I see is to remove AIG from the public sector entirely.
Has a summary of the history of top bracket income tax rates and spells out the macro-effects of tax cuts vs. tax increases on the country over the decade(s) after the tax policy change. Speculates that the 90% tax on over $250K may not be about AIG. Although it came through different channels, the $250K number is the same that Obama uses to describe "the RICH" that he wants to tax.
I am not a conspiracy nut. Although I do believe that Obama wants to "spread the wealth around", I do not currently subscribe to the idea that he is planning to raise the ordinary top bracket to 90%. It is much more likely that this is nothing more than the Demos trying to play CYA. But even if I don't agree with the hint of conspiracy in Kudlow's piece, he does a good job of explaining the long term (uber-macro)-effects of changing the top marginal tax rate. More Americans need to know this information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)