Karla and I have personally experienced the Israeli airport screening system and it is very thorough, intimidating, and most important, it is extremely effective.
Jan 2, 2010
Dec 30, 2009
Dec 18, 2009
Them Crooked Vultures
I don't care who you are...this is awesome. Oh and what instrument is John Paul Jones playing? Slide? It looks and sounds very, very Zeppelinish...
Dec 9, 2009
COPENHAGEN: A Convergence of Two Dangerous Colors
Naomi Klein, columnist for the Nation Magazine (that tells you all you need to know) says the real importance of the Copenhagen meeting is "a convergence between the traditional environmental movement, the green movement, and what she calls the red movement, which are those groups that are more focused on "economic inequality"..."
Dec 8, 2009
Obama's Wobbly Jobs Initiative
Robert Reich, Clinton's former Labor Secretary, makes some valid points in this criticism of Obama's jobs initiative which he unveiled today at the Liberal Brookings Institute:
The President's Job's Initiative Doesn't Measure Up
No president in modern times walks a tightrope as exquisitely as this one. His balance is a thing of beauty. But when it comes to this economy right now -- an economy fundamentally out of balance -- we need a federal government that moves boldly and swiftly to counter-balance the huge recessionary forces still at large.
States and cities, for example, are estimated to be $350 billion hole this year and next. They can't run deficits so they're wildly cutting spending, cutting jobs, cutting contracts, and raising taxes and fees. That's a huge anti-stimulus package roughly as big as the remaining direct spending in the old federal stimulus package. Which means, Obama's "new" stimulus, announced today, is about all we have, and it's not nearly enough.
The word in Washington is we're out of the woods. The rate of unemployment dipped from 10.2 percent in September to 10 percent in October. In our nation's capital, a one-month trend marks a turnaround. Don't believe it for a moment. The real story of October was the increasing number of Americans who dropped out of the labor force, too discouraged even to look for work.
Main Street is hurting worse than ever. Ten percent unemployment translates into roughly 18 percent of our workforce unemployed or underemployed. Housing markets are in terrible shape: One quarter of homeowners are paying more each month than their houses are worth; the rates of tardy mortgage payments continue to rise. Thirty percent of American households contain someone who has lost a job and can't find another, and yet almost all households are dependent on more than one wage earner in order to make ends meet. A quarter of all American children are now dependent on food stamps.
There is no reason to tolerate this degree of misery. We know exactly what to do. The government has the fiscal tools to do it. Start by bailing out state and local governments (if Congress would prefer to call it a loan and require payback over the next five years, fine). Renew unemployment and COBRA benefits. Increase federal spending on infrastructure. If we have to, hire people directly. The package should be $400 billion over two years.
We don't know exactly how much the President is proposing to spend, but sources tell me it's in the range of $70 billion, redirected from the $200 billion in TARP savings. The President's small, calibrated attempt to balance a stimulus with deficit reduction will in fact make the deficit worse over the long haul. It postpones the day when we're back to near full employment, when almost all Americans who need a job get paychecks on which they pay taxes. This isn't really balance at all. It prolongs the economic imbalance.
Those Damn Bush Tax Cuts For The Poorest 95%!
A couple of interesting charts from my friend Dr. Mark Perry...shows why the Bush tax cuts were NOT "tax cuts for the wealthiest 1%" as the exhausted Democrat Party mantra goes...indeed, quite the contrary, the Bush tax cuts were tax cuts for the poorest 95%...:
On the flip side, we now know that Obama's promise to NOT raise taxes for any American who earns less than $250,000 per year is a total fraud. Between "cap and tax" and his massive $2 Trillion health care entitlement scheme; every American, from the wealthiest to the poorest, and from sea to shining sea, will pay a higher percentage of their income to the Federal government.
Hope and change indeed...
On the flip side, we now know that Obama's promise to NOT raise taxes for any American who earns less than $250,000 per year is a total fraud. Between "cap and tax" and his massive $2 Trillion health care entitlement scheme; every American, from the wealthiest to the poorest, and from sea to shining sea, will pay a higher percentage of their income to the Federal government.
Hope and change indeed...
Dec 7, 2009
Chart Of The Day
Here is a great chart from my friend Mark Perry: Actual Friends vs. People You Hate
The 50 Best Protest Signs Of 2009
Some of these would actually be pretty funny were they not so tragic...
The 50 Best Protest Signs Of 2009
This one is especially amusing:
The 50 Best Protest Signs Of 2009
This one is especially amusing:
Dec 6, 2009
Good grief...
Tonight I am enjoying the piano styling's of Vince Guaraldi...I know, but what better way to prepare for Christmas than to crank up "The Christmas Song"?
Hello I Must be Going...
Today I decided I needed to throw Facebook under the bus...I made this decision because my goals for 2010 are many, including writing more and reading several books on history, eschatology, economics, and politics...frankly I knew Facebook would be too much of a distraction for me in 2010 so I decided to gauge it out lest I...
Dec 3, 2009
Nov 16, 2009
Nov 10, 2009
The Audacity of Deceit
At the end of the 2008 fiscal year, the Treasury Department’s “Financial Report of the United States Government” showed the present value of America's unfunded liabilities had reached a staggering $56 trillion, or nearly four times our nation's GDP.
In about a month, the 2009 Financial Report will be released and those in the know expect it to show our unfunded liabilities growing to over $60 trillion, effectively tripling in a decade.
Every day we delay rehabilitating our nation's spending addiction, America sinks $11 billion deeper into an ocean of red ink.
What is the response from Congress to this out-of-control spending habit? Pass a massive new health care entitlement of course…what else?
We've heard the argument from the "big-government-is-good-and-bigger-government-is-even-better" crowd; if we insure the 47 million uninsured it will lower the cost of health care for everyone else who has insurance. The problem is that in order to believe this excruciatingly obnoxious canard requires you believe in the Loch Ness Monster, the Tooth Fairy and that OJ really was searching for the real killers.
In other words, it requires a suspension of disbelief. And for those of us who understand how the real world works, we might as well attempt to suspend the laws of gravity as we throw ourselves off the top of the Canary Hotel.
Yes Virginia, government run health care will fail because everything the government runs eventually fails.
The issue with the recent health care bill passed by the Congress over the weekend is that it fundamentally ignores human nature and the power of incentives. Take for example the provision whereby a person who refuses to buy expensive insurance coverage would either be forced to pay a relatively small fine or go to jail for five years. Ignoring for a moment the stench surrounding the notion that the federal government would incarcerate someone for not buying health insurance…does anyone really think someone will choose a huge insurance premium over a small fine?
Oh, but wait, that would be irrational say the "big-government-is-good-and-bigger-government-is-even-better" crowd…after all, people understand they need insurance in case they get sick. The incentive, therefore, is for people to buy the insurance coverage as opposed to paying the fine just in case they are on the verge of a catastrophic illness…right? WRONG!
The house bill provides for guaranteed issue coverage. In other words, no matter what your medical status or condition, you will be allowed to purchase the coverage you need in order to pay the doctor for the treatment you want or require. Wow, why didn't insurance companies think to offer such a wonderful benefit? Why didn’t insurance agents insist on it? Oh,…the commissions I would've made.
Well, I'm no expert, but I think if insurance companies allowed people to wait until they got sick before they bought health insurance it would have maybe sort of kind of bankrupted the company…something about actuarial tables, risk management and the need to make a profit and stuff. Of course these tedious details would be of no concern to a company with a money printing operation…such as the federal government.
Which gets us back to the issue of fiscal responsibility and the future fiscal health of the United States of America. I know it seems crass to worry about such things when people are walking around uninsured, but indulge me if you would…what is the real motive behind this rush to socialized medicine anyway? Is it really to "bend the cost curve downward" as suggested by Obama? I think not.
Indeed, I think the real reason was actually given to us over the weekend by John Cassidy, who the Wall Street Journal refers to as part of the left-wing stable at the New Yorker.
Cassidy wrote last week on the magazine's Web site that "it's important to be clear about what the reform amounts to." Cassidy went on:
"The U.S. government is making a costly and open-ended commitment," he writes. "Let's not pretend that it isn't a big deal, or that it will be self-financing, or that it will work out exactly as planned. It won't. What is really unfolding, I suspect, is the scenario that many conservatives feared. The Obama Administration . . . is creating a new entitlement program, which, once established, will be virtually impossible to rescind."
Huh…ya think? I think Cassidy's onto something here.
Make no mistake, the current system of private health insurance will eventually be replaced by a government run health care system like the one they have in Europe. That is the preference of those on the left and at least people like Cassidy have the guts to admit it...Obama also wants this but he now lacks the political courage to say it.
There are words for that...I think it's called Hope and Change.
(Joe Armendariz is a city council member in the City of Carpinteria and the Executive Director of the Santa Barbara County Taxpayers Association and the Santa Barbara Technology and Industry Association. He can be reached at: 805-684-0678)
Oct 9, 2009
Justin Tevis for Santa Barbara City Council
For the first time in many years, we have an embarrassment of riches when it comes to Santa Barbara city council candidates. I believe there is an excellent chance there will be several new faces on the Santa Barbara city council and that is a good thing.
I try to avoid endorsing candidates who run for the Santa Barbara city council for fear I might ruin their reputation with the city's so-called progressive voters who probably see me as being too conservative. Nevertheless, sometimes I agree to endorse when asked and in this particular race, two candidates asked for my endorsement…Frank Hotchkiss and Justin Tevis. I am comfortable endorsing both of them for city council.
Justin Tevis is a breath of fresh air. He is extremely enthusiastic with the proverbial fire on the belly. Let me put it this way, if elected, all I can say to the cozy political establishment in Santa Barbara is watch out! This guy means business.
Therefore, I am suggesting you cast one of your four votes for Justin Tevis and shake up the political establishment that has brought this once great city to the fiscal precipice. Below is Justin's campaign commercial, you should check it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwAAY1rMiII"
I try to avoid endorsing candidates who run for the Santa Barbara city council for fear I might ruin their reputation with the city's so-called progressive voters who probably see me as being too conservative. Nevertheless, sometimes I agree to endorse when asked and in this particular race, two candidates asked for my endorsement…Frank Hotchkiss and Justin Tevis. I am comfortable endorsing both of them for city council.
Justin Tevis is a breath of fresh air. He is extremely enthusiastic with the proverbial fire on the belly. Let me put it this way, if elected, all I can say to the cozy political establishment in Santa Barbara is watch out! This guy means business.
Therefore, I am suggesting you cast one of your four votes for Justin Tevis and shake up the political establishment that has brought this once great city to the fiscal precipice. Below is Justin's campaign commercial, you should check it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwAAY1rMiII"
Oct 1, 2009
The Goleta City Council's Missed Opportunity
Goleta City
Mr Onnen
It is unfortunate for the taxpayers of
It is also disappointing that the taxpayers of
Sometimes these lessons need to be learned the hard way. Still, it is a shame that despite Councilman Onnen
Finally, but for Councilman Onnen
It is worth repeating that no politician was ever thrown out of office because they created too many jobs. On the other hand, the list of politicians thrown out of office because they refused to do everything possible to help create new jobs is too long to read.
Sep 1, 2009
We Need A Paradigm Shift on Health Care
In what was beginning to feel a lot like waiting for Godot, Santa Barbara Congresswoman Lois Capps will finally host her first Townhall meeting this week on the hot topic of health care. And since she has selected a venue that will dramatically limit the number of attendees, the audience will most likely be compromised almost entirely of people calling for a government run (single payer) health care system. The reason cited tomorrow night for a government run system will inevitably be due to the high cost of our current private system. Therefore, I thought it useful to take a closer look at the issue of the "high cost" of health care.
The cost of
• Taxes paid to government
• Actuarial and underwriting costs of providing insurance coverage
• Disease-management and wellness programs
• Government compliance
• Services such as premium billing, claims payment, customer/member service, negotiating with and quality tracking of providers, networks, etc.
It is significant that of the 14% in administration costs, 1/3 of that (4.2%), is in the form of taxes paid to the government. Therefore, only about 10% of the cost of our private health insurance system is consumed by administrative overhead. This is excellent and no serious person who has looked at this issue believes the government would do a better job of controlling costs. This is especially true in light of the government’s track record (see chart on top).
Therefore, if we want to reduce the cost of health care in
THE BOTTOM LINE is that health insurance premiums are high and rising because health care claim costs are high. So the question we need to ask is: what can individuals, families and small businesses do to reduce the 86% of costs that are directly associated with health care claims?
Most experts agree the answer is in changing personal behavior. If Americans quit smoking, for example, this would have a significant AND positive effect on bending the health care cost curve down. In fact, according to the Centers For Disease Control & Prevention, smoking alone costs our country $167 billion each year, $75 billion of that is in the form of direct medical costs and $92 billion is in the form of lost productivity.
Progressive employers who offer wellness programs and incentives to help their employees quit smoking could achieve substantial reductions in their annual health care costs. The same is true for self employed people covered by an "individual policy"…making wiser lifestyle choices, such as exercising regularly and eating a proper diet to prevent type II diabetes, and avoiding consuming excessive amounts of alcohol would pay substantial monetary dividends over the long haul.
Best of all, none of these behavioral reforms require a new government program, expensive bureaucracy or taxpayer funded "public insurance option" created and administered out of
Another argument we hear by those calling for a government run health care system is how citizens of other countries spend less money on health care. This is true unless you include the amount of taxes these citizens pay to support their country
IN
So, while Americans may spend more than any other country on health care…Americans also need to become more informed health care consumers. As was once uttered by the infamous greedy capitalist Gordon Gecko, "information is the most valuable commodity". I agree and an informed health care shopper is a more efficient health care shopper, and an efficient health care shopper will spend less money on health care than a less efficient health care shopper.
Too often missing from the health care debate is the importance of
The point I was making is that advancements in technology already are and will continue to drive down health care costs, increase access and improve quality. The only thing that can and will interfere with this positive story is a massive new government run health care behemoth that looks, acts, costs, talks and walks like Medicare.
HOWEVER, it is also important that we are honest with ourselves about the following: transitioning to a more consumer driven, market oriented health care delivery system is going to require a paradigm shift in how we as individuals and employers choose to buy health insurance. This is essential and in fact it is the first step toward accepting more personal responsibility over the type, frequency and quality of health care we decide to consume as Americans.
(Sources: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Economist.com, Centers For Disease Control & Prevention, Carpe Diem, KPMG, NAHU)
Aug 15, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
