In my opinion “AARP” should be changed to the Association for the Annihilation of Retired People.  The health care reform they support will have a devastating impact on senior citizens. 

The same government that taxed us for over 27 years and spent all our money, now intends to solve the problem they created by screwing us out of our Social Security benefits and our Medicare.  In the future, baby boomers that become seriously ill are likely to be given happy pills to help exit this world gracefully, while illegal immigrants get free medical care.

In case you need proof, read the following article from the Washington Post.

Without higher taxes,
the national debt will be crushing
Washington Post, by David S. Broder

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/09/AR2010040903717.html

Note the following quote from Ben Bernanke:

“Inevitably, addressing the fiscal challenges posed by an aging population will require a willingness to make difficult choices. The arithmetic is, unfortunately, quite clear. To avoid large and unsustainable budget deficits, the nation will ultimately have to choose among higher taxes, modifications to entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, less spending on everything else from education to defense, or some combination of the above.”

 Key words:  Aging population.  Difficult choices.  Unsustainable budget deficits.  Modifcations to entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare.  Who do you think he has in mind?

 President Obama already cancelled the Social Security Cost of Living Increase for the first time since 1950.  He also increased Medicare Premiums.  I don’t recall hearing any objections from AARP.  Democrats have been winning close elections for years by claiming Republicans would cut Social Security.  Well, Democrats are in power and the first thing they did was cut Social Security.  The silence from AARP is deafening.

But that is just the start.  The following article from the Christian Science Monitor outlines key provisions of the new law:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0322/Health-care-reform-bill-101-What-does-it-mean-for-seniors

Pay attention to the Independent Payment Advisory Board made up of 15 members.  This board will submit legislative proposals to reduce per capita Medicare spending, if that grows too fast.

Medicare spending will grow too fast.  This board will soon be making decisions on how to cut costs.  What actions are they likely to recommend?  The following article published in 2002, regarding the Canadian Health Care System provides some valuable clues:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0LVZ/is_8_17/ai_84895863/

This report indicates that according to Canadian Institute of Actuaries, 30% to 50% of lifetime health car expenditures occur in the last six months of life.  The solution they propose?   More use of palliative care and focus on living wills.

“More use of palliative care.”  That means when baby boomers get seriously ill, under Obama care they are probably going to get more pain pills and free access to a really nice hospice, but no real treatment.   They will also get a steady diet of creative government advertizing campaigns designed to encourage them to die quickly and cheaply for the greater good. 

At a time when seniors desperately need a strong voice to represent their interests, they get the AARP.  AARP was so busy helping Obama jam through his health care program that it didn’t notice the cut to Social Security benefits or the increase in Medicare premiums.

We can’t possibly have a strong voice on this subject until we first stop the AARP from pretending to speak for us.  All the AARP does now is give political cover for the Obama administration.

Meet the CEO of the AARP:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-03-12-aarp_N.htm

Read what the AARP is saying about health care reform:

http://bulletin.aarp.org/yourhealth/policy/articles/reform_splash.html

Learn what the AARP may have gained from this legislation:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/26/AR2009102603392.html

At a minimum, the AARP should be demanding that if cuts have to be made, they must be made across the board, without sweetheart deals for unions and uninsured minorities or illegal immigrants.  The AARP should be negotiating for protection of senior citizens against the kind of health care rationing that is likely to come.  The AARP should be standing up for seniors and holding the House, the Senate and the President accountable.  They aren’t doing that.  Since AARP is not on board, we need to throw them overboard. 

Suggestions:

1. Start with the truth.  Acknowledge that what is obviously true is obviously true.  Understand that if senior citizens don’t unite now and stop this, we are going to pay a terrible price in the future. 
2. Start an e-mail campaign to get the message out to every senior citizen.  Forward this e-mail to everyone you know.   Ask them to pass it on.  Pass on other e-mails that support the same goals. 
3. Inundate AARP with e-mails, phone calls and letters.  Write letters to the editor of your local newspaper regarding AARP.  Cancel your AARP membership.
4. Vote to remove anyone who voted for this health care reform legislation.

 Baby boomers have been paying higher Social Security taxes since 1983.  We have already paid for our Social Security benefits and our Medicare expense.  If we don’t act now, the greatest generation will be rapidly replaced by the generation that got screwed.

Use the following link to e-mail top executives at AARP.  Just click on his/her name, and then click on “e-mail.”

http://www.aarp.org/aarp/About_AARP/leadership/

The mailing address is:

AARP
601 E Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20049

Toll-Free Nationwide: 1-888-OUR-AARP      (1-888-687-2277)

Toll-Free TTY:           1-877-434-7598

Toll-Free Spanish:      1-877-MAS-DE50        (1-877-627-3350)

International Calls:     1-202-434-3525

The sooner we act, the better chance of stopping this.

TDM

Senator Obama said on August 1, 2007:

We must not, however, repeat the mistakes of Iraq. The solution in Afghanistan is not just military — it is political and economic. As President, I would increase our non-military aid by $1 billion. These resources should fund projects at the local level to impact ordinary Afghans, including the development of alternative livelihoods for poppy farmers. And we must seek better performance from the Afghan government, and support that performance through tough anti-corruption safeguards on aid, and increased international support to develop the rule of law across the country.

Above all, I will send a clear message: we will not repeat the mistake of the past, when we turned our back on Afghanistan following Soviet withdrawal. As 9/11 showed us, the security of Afghanistan and America is shared. And today, that security is most threatened by the al Qaeda and Taliban sanctuary in the tribal regions of northwest Pakistan.

Note the following story from the Times online UK: 

As soon as Obama got elected, he told Afghanistan that he would send in additional troops, but eventually the U.S. was going to leave.  Notice the difference between how Bush cultivated the relationship with Karzai and how Obama has arrogantly destroyed it.  Sadly, this story is under-reported in the U.S. press, including Fox News.  It is hard to read this story and predict a good ending for the U.S.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7094233.ece

Any questions?

TDM

Most of the problems facing this country today would be solved if we just held more people accountable for telling the truth.  There was a classic example last night on Crossfire with Chris Matthews.  Ron Reagan tried to take a shot at Michele Bachmann.  He snarkly said she was several McNuggets short of a Happy Meal.  This is a typical liberal attack, always assuming that conservatives are idiots.  Why does the media ignore or down play the bitter hatred so often displayed by the liberal left?  Rush Limbaugh says he disagrees with Obama’s policies, and he is a hate monger.  Ron Reagan says that Michele Bachmann is several chicken McNuggets short of a Happy Meal and this is dismissed as just humorous commentary.

But Ron Reagan did not stop with the cheap shot.  He claimed that in an interview with Glenn Beck, Bachmann said the Census was designed to put people in concentration camps.  I wondered about this, so I went back and listened to the actual interview.  It was clear that Ron Reagan deliberately misrepresented what Bachmann said.  What she really said was that she was concerned that the Census was asking for far more information than seemed reasonable.  The question she asked was: “where did it stop?”  Did the government really need to know our telephone number or what time we left for work?  She felt it was an unnecessary intrusion on our privacy.  She also pointed out that one question that is not asked is whether or not you are a U.S. citizen.  Glenn Beck asked her why gathering this information on the Census was potentially dangerous, and she pointed out that between 1942 and 1947 the U.S. government used Census data to round up Japanese Americans and put them in interment camps, even though the government had promised to never use Census data against citizens. 

That is a far cry from claiming that the intent of this Census was to put people into concentration camps.  What she did point out, accurately by the way, was that during World War II the government used the Census data for exactly that purpose.

Ron Reagan either failed to understand what Bachmann said, or he deliberately misrepresented what she said.  It caused me to reflect on the obvious.  Michael Reagan, Ronald Reagan’s adopted son, inherited his heart.  Ron Reagan, his biological son only inherited the rectal cavity.

Regards,

TDM

Barack Obama made a major mistake while being interviewed by Harry Smith.  He said people can’t answer when asked why they think Obama is a socialist.  Unfortunately for Obama, people like Glenn Beck can hit that softball out of the park with one hand tied behind their back.  But the real problem is that Obama just may have opened Pandora’s Box.  This is similar to when Gary Hart challenged the press to follow him because he was boring.  It may even open the long simmering missing birth certificate issue.  Once people start asking questions about Obama’s background, they are going to find fertile soil.

Just this week a high-ranking officer refused to accept orders to go to Afghanistan.  He says he will not go until Obama produces a certified copy of his original birth certificate.

President Obama Needs to Prove His Constitutional Eligibility to Be Commander-in-Chief

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/04/president_obama_needs_to_prove_1.html

While I honestly think Obama was born in Hawaii, it is troubling that he will reveal absolutely no documents regarding his background.  Why should the standard be less for the President of the United States than for an officer in the United States Army?  Our servicemen must produce their birth certificate before deploying to Afghanistan.  According to Lt. Colonel Terry Lakin:

My deployment orders for a second tour in Afghanistan included a requirement to bring copies of my birth certificate. I would be glad to obey this order and provide a certified copy of my original birth certificate with common, standard identifiers, including the name of an attending physician and a hospital. Every day in transactions across the country, American citizens are required to prove their identity; standards for identification have become stricter since the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

 There have been other servicemen who have refused deployment for this reason.  The problem was solved, temporarily, by having their orders for deployment revoked.  Then the judge dismissed the case because the person filing no longer had legal standing.  This is why all of these cases have been dismissed.  The courts have consistently found a lack of legal standing.  But, a field grade officer ordered to deploy overseas to a combat zone just may have legal standing.  This may be  harder to sweep under the rug.  I would not be surprised to see other servicemen and women join in.  There are many people who are very concerned about this President and they may just decide to do something about it. 

One thing is certain:  Obama is hiding something:  in fact, he is hiding darn near everything.  Either he is an ignorant fool (quite possibly true) or he has reason to be very afraid of what people will find.  The only thing consistent about Obama’s background is the great effort he has spent to hide it.  I cannot think of another other public official who has not released his birth certificate, his medical records, or even his college transcripts. Even John Kerry released his transcripts even though they showed that, compared to him, George Bush was Rhodes Scholar material.  My guess is that whatever Obama is hiding is a real deal breaker.  Otherwise, or he is really, really dumb.

In my personal experience, everytime I met someone who was overly secret about their background, they had good reason to do so.  I doubt that Obama is an exception to the rule!

TDM

Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/06arms.html

So far, President Obama has limited the damage caused by his naïve incompetence to destroying our economy and taking over our health care system.  Oh he has also managed to botch the war in Afghanistan, but even he appears to be incapable of reversing the tide in Iraq.  

But now, he is literally putting us in great danger.  It is not so much that his policy is an unreasonable approach to the potential use of nuclear weapons.  I am sure that every President has a similar approach.  No sane leader would consider using a nuclear weapon, other than as an absolute last resort measure in a worst case scenario.  However, it is beyond stupid to tell the world exactly how you will respond.  Basically it is providing our enemies with a blue print for destroying us.  

Compare this to a homeowner.  You hear the sound of someone breaking into your house.  You have a shot gun.  You run down stairs, confront the intruder and aim the gun at him.  He does not know that the gun not loaded.  In most cases the intruder is not going to risk getting shot.  He will either leave quickly, or surrender, but he is very unlikely to attack you.  Obama, on the other hand, would quickly tell the intruder that the shotgun isn’t actually loaded, because he wants the intruder to know he won’t hurt him.  He thinks that will make the intruder less likely to harm Obama.  This works really well.  A lot of criminals are stopped by people who make them feel less threatened.  That is why muggers always pick targets like big burly guys who look like professional bouncers and ignore the elderly woman using a walker to carry her purse. 

In addition, now the homeowner (President Obama) wants to make sure everyone understands his policy to make us even safer.  So he puts up a sign on the door that says:  If you break in, we will call the police, but as long as you don’t try to harm us, we won’t try to stop you.  The house next door has a sign that says “To Hell With The Dog, Beware Of Owner” along with a cartoon drawing of an angry man with a double barrel shotgun.  If you were a burglar, which house would you choose?   Exactly! 

Sleep Tight.

Lawmakers: Afghan leader threatens to join Taliban

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9ET066G0&show_article=1

The Obama administration is such a total disaster with regard to foreign affairs that it is becoming increasingly hard to pick the single greatest failure.  However, for my money, Afghanistan has a definite shot at first prize.  Bush conquered Afghanistan in about three weeks.  (Remember the Soviets failed after eight years.)  The Karzi government took power.  And although they were far from perfect, they did kinda like us.  Bush kept Afghanistan under control for over six years, with minimal involvement by U.S. troops.  The Taliban and al Qaeda were trapped in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan.  They were still eager to kill us, but being trapped in caves and rat holes diminished their ability, along with a loss of prestige. 

So, the terrorists decided to move the front line on the war to Iraq.  Brilliant!  They moved away from some of the most rugged terrain on earth to flat open desert.  High-tech equipment works really well in the flat desert.  That is why the vast majority of people who volunteered to attack us in Iraq are now learning, first hand, the truth about the alleged 12 virgins in paradise.

We were winning in Iraq, and Afghanistan was basically a mess, but not really a threat to anyone.  Enter the Annointed One. This, of course, was unacceptable.  Changes had to be made.  Even though Obama had absolutely zero military experience, he announced that he was going to focus on winning the necessary war in Afghanistan.  He sends in thousands of new troops.  To make it even better, Obama demanded politically correct rules of engagement.  Our enemies will love us because it makes it harder for us to kill them, but makes it easier for them to kill us.  This is definitely the way to win the hearts and minds of the population.  I mean, would you rather side with the U.S. where the Taliban will definitely kill you, or with the Taliban where the U.S. will try desperately to make sure you don’t get hurt?  It also was embarrassing to discover that the war against al Qaeda in Afghanistan was made more difficult by the simple reality that Bush had killed most of them. It is somewhat harder to make a war on people who are already inconveniently dead.

The Obama administration quickly decided that the secret to success in Afghanistan was not through military force, but rather to increase the efficiency of the Afghan government and hold it accountable.  He explained this to Karzai.  (I want you to get more of your people killed, so our guys won’t be at risk.  By the way, eventually we will abandon you.)   The U.S. developed a brilliant strategy to accomplish this goal.  They made public announcements expressing doubt that the Afghanistan government was really up to the task.  Obama even decided to send in James Carville, as political advisor to the opposition leader in Afghanistan.  What a brilliant way to win support from the current guy in power, fund his opposition.  (However, sending in an idiot like Carville may actually have been a material factor in assuring Karzai’s ultimate victory.)  In spite of our best efforts to get Karzai defeated in an election, he still won.  So, naturally, we demanded a new election under rules carefully designed by us to help the other guy win.  This failed miserably, and the other guy withdrew before the election.  To rub salt in the wound, when President Karzai called Obama to announce the election results, Obama stiffed him and refused the call.  Then he sends Rahm Emmanuel out on the Sunday Morning talk shows to solemnly declare that we are not sure we have a reliable partner in Afghanistan.  Nice vote of confidence that!

Karzai, unlike most Democrats, appears to have a brain.  He figured out that Obama tried desperately to remove him from power.  It is clear that Obama is setting him up to fail by saying the success of failure of the war depends on Karzai, someone he despises.  And, by the way, we are tired of our troops getting killed, so we want you to use Afghan troops instead so they can get killed, and we can reduce our casualty counts.   And, oh, we have great new rules.  Winning the hearts of the people is so much more important than winning military battles that we have great new rules of engagement.  Now, we can’t actually shoot people unless they shoot at us first.  If we spot them with an aircraft, we must buzz them to give them a warning so they have a chance to hide or escape.  If they have any civilians with them, we can’t risk firing back if there is a chance of civilian casualties.   This is working really well.  We all know that people like the Taliban wouldn’t even consider using women and children as human shields.  Of course not!

Well, surprise, surprise! Karzai is having some problems running the country.  And, he now believes that the U.S. government is not only not his friend, instead it is out to destroy him.  Just yesterday he announced that he is seriously considering joining forces with the Taliban.  Nice!  This will really help.

Don’t be surprised if the U.S. government decides that the Afghan government they deliberately undermined is unable to govern.  Perhaps it’s time for the CIA to step in and remake the Afghan government in our own image.  This reminds me of when the CIA overthrew the Diem government in Vietnam.  This replaced a brutal dictator, who was successfully killing communists, with a long list of people who never came close to gaining the support of the people.  The problem is that just because these leaders were put in power as puppets of the United States, the Vietnamese people tended to view them as puppets of the United States.  Removing Diem accomplished great things.  It removed someone who was effectively keeping the Viet Minh and the NVA at bay, with only about 15,000 U.S troops, and replaced him with a long line of clowns who couldn’t accomplish this in spite of the support of nearly 500,000 U.S. troops.  By the way, Diem was assassinated after a Coup D’Etat funded with $40,000 by the CIA, three weeks before Kennedy was assassinated.

This is also similar to Carter’s brilliant strategy in Iran.  Even though the Shah was a good friend of the U.S, he was a nasty guy when dealing with Muslim insurgents.   Why he actually treated these people like terrorists!  How bad was that?  Carter became convinced that the Shah had to go and ultimately, he did fall.  Obviously, the Iranian people are thrilled with wonderful freedom they have received under the Sharia law of the Islamic Republic.  We may never know the full story, but we sure know what the Shah said about it:

“I did not know it then – perhaps I did not want to know – but it is clear to me now that the Americans wanted me out. Clearly this is what the human rights advocates in the State Department wanted … What was I to make of the Administration’s sudden decision to call former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an adviser on Iran? Ball was among those Americans who wanted to abandon me and ultimately my country.” – Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran                

Perhaps Karzai is smart enough to do some historical research and observe that the U.S. has a sad history of throwing our friends under the bus of political correctness.  It is clear that Afghanistan is going to go in one of two directions very rapidly.  Either, the U.S. will greatly expand its presence and take over the government, or, we are likely going to find our troops fired upon by both sides.  Nice work there, BO!

TDM

Massachusetts was supposed to show the country how universal health insurance would work.  Actually, it did a good job regarding that.  Kind of like the canary in the coal mine.  Canaries are very sensitive to methane gas, so the miners carried one with them on their shift.  If the canary dropped dead, it was time to leave.

Well, folks, the Massachusetts canary is feet up on the bottom of the cage.  The following article from the Boston Globe illustrates the problem:

http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2010/04/04/short_term_customers_boosting_health_costs/

I know this will shock some of you, but there are a fair number of people who aren’t buying health insurance, even though they have the money.  Instead, they just wait until they get sick then conveniently buy the coverage.  They cancel as soon as they get well.

Health care costs are skyrocketing in Massachusetts.  What a shock!  The first response by Barack Obama’s buddy and inspiration, Deval Patrick, was to ask for legislation that would give his administration broad new authority to cap rates charged by insurers and medical providers.  Profits are so yesterday!

He also included a provision that would only allow people to enroll in a health care plan twice a year, either in June or December, except for people facing significant life changes, such as the birth of a child.  This is actually a good idea.  That is why the HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY has been doing exactly that for about 30 years.

Oh, it would also allow insurers to exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions for six months.  This, of course, has also been done by the HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY, for about 30 years.  This is also one of the major things the Obama administration wants to change. 

Now to me, two things seem really clear:  First, all of the great new ideas used in Massachusetts have increased costs and increased the burden on small employers.  Second, every proposed change, except for the government micro-management bit, involves doing the exact same thing the HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY has used successfully for decades.

The Massachusetts canary may not be dead, but it is sure on life support.  It would be incredibly stupid to just adopt this failed program on a national basis.  Oops!  We already did that, only we doubled down on every provision of the Massachusetts law that is producing the worst possible results. 

Plus, there is another problem.  There are so many people flocking to Massachusetts that there is now grave concern that the increased weight may cause the entire State to tilt up and slide into the ocean.  Ironically, even Guam may be safer than Massachusetts.

TDM

Warning, warning, warning.  If Global Warming was not enough threat to mankind, now we have this!  The U.S. Navy is proposing the construction of more facilities on Guam.  This congressman explains why all this additional weight may cause Guam to tip over and slide into the ocean.  Pray for Guam!

http://www.weaselzippers.net/blog/2010/03/congressman-hank-johnson-dumbocrat-is-concerned-that-the-island-of-guam-is-becoming-so-overly-popula.html

My thanks to weaselzipper.net for posting this on their website and for MR for forwarding it to me.

By the way, it has been reported that he also believes future missions to the moon will cause the Earth’s satelite to go all crazy and spin out of orbit.  He fears that drilling in ANWAR wil cause the poles to shift and Kansas City will end up as the new North Pole.  In addition, he believes that excessive use of the office microwave will cause the oxygen in the oven to interact with the atmosphere making it overheat and burn away.

He is the person elected to replace Cynthia McKinney in congress.  He may be the only person in this entire country capable of making a legitimate case for a sane person to even consider voting for her.

This does make it easier to understand the thinking process for people who honestly believe that our inept and corrupt government is really capable of managing health care.   I wonder if he’s related to Al Gore?   Hmmmmm.

Happy Easter

William Paterson is probably the Scottish equivalent of Barack Obama.  He was a trader in the West Indies and he later founded the Bank of England.  One would think that the man who founded the Bank of England would be someone to admire, but it might be hard to convince a Scotsman, based on the damage he did to their country.   You see, William Paterson convinced a majority of the citizens of Scotland to do something so stupid that it literally bankrupted the country.  The time was 1695, and even though Scotland was in dire economic straits at home, the citizens scraped together ₤400,000 in order to fund a colony, so that Scotland could begin building an Empire.  Since all of the good locations for a colony were long gone, Scotland was left with some rather undesirable options.  They seriously considered garden spots like Greenland and Africa before William Paterson intervened to convince them of the ideal spot:  Darien. 

Hmmm.  Having a little trouble placing Darien on the map, are we?  Well, Darien is now known as Panama.  This was the ideal spot, in the brilliant mind of Mr. Paterson, because even then people knew the value of the Isthmus of Panama.  Scotland would control the trade between the Atlantic and the Pacific.  What could possibly go wrong?  It was hard to believe that someone else hadn’t already grabbed up this gem.  Okay, technically the Spanish had grabbed it up, but they didn’t have anyone actually living there.  So, in 1698, the Scottish people rejoiced as they sent off 1,200 people in five ships to establish the Scottish Empire.  A few minor problems developed.  One problem is that the Scots are used to a climate that is cold and rainy.  Panama is certainly rainy, but not exactly cold.  Tropical jungle, or as they say in Scotland, bloody swamp,  is probably a better description.  The Scots soon learned about several tropical diseases that made them hunger after kilt wearing weather.  Then there was this little problem that Spain had a lot more ships and troops, and they were not very welcoming to this colony on their territory.  But perhaps the final straw was that King William, who had Scottish roots, ordered the English to avoid trading with Darien, for fear of offending Spain.  The Scots literally found themselves starving, waist deep in mud, tormented by mosquitos,  deathly ill from malaria and yellow fever, unable to trade anything with anyone, all the while being constantly shot at by the annoyed Spanish.  Nice!

The colony was a complete and total failure, with the few survivors surrendering to the Spanish army in an act of desperation.  Of course, the people in Scotland did not know that, so they blissfully sent another expedition with another 1,200 Scots.  If anything, these people had it even worse, and they never actually got to go ashore at Darien.  The few survivors of the disastrous sea voyage promptly surrendered to the Spanish Navy waiting for them.   Historical records show that approximately 2,400 Scots traveled to Darien.  The best estimate is that about 30 of them somehow managed to return.

But, the story does not end there.  Bankrupt Scotland agreed to sign the Act of Union.  For their part of the deal, England paid back the people who had invested in Darien everything they had lost, with 5% interest.  The Scots may have been incredibly stupid in trying to establish Darien, but they clearly learned their lesson.  This money was later used to found the Royal Bank of Scotland and the rest is history.

[copy of the announcement of the Equivalency Fund, reimbursing those had had invested in Darien]

I guess the point is that the United States is not the first country to commit economic suicide by following the leadership of someone who was absolutely clueless.   We can, at least, take comfort that others have been just as stupid as those who voted for the brilliant leadership of Pelosi, Obama and Reid.  Unfortunately, the price of stupidity in 2010 is likely to be similar to that experienced by the Scots in 1698, but we, hopefully, won’t lose as many lives.  Who knows, maybe we can find someone, say the Chinese, to fund our stupidity so that we can prosper in the future.

[Pictures and historical records from:]

GLASGOW UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
SPECIAL COLLECTIONS DEPARTMENT 

Book of the Month 

The Darien Scheme

Darien letters : from the Spencer Collection Glasgow University Library. Glasgow : 1971 Sp Coll Spencer Add. q2

Cundall, Frank.  The Darien Venture. New York : 1926 Sp Coll Spencer 63

Prebble, John.  The Darien disaster.  London : 1968 Economics P486.D6 PRE

Taylor, Benjamin. The Darien Expedition. [Paisley] : [1892] Sp Coll Spencer 71

Aetna CEO Ronald A. Williams gave an interview on the Charlie Rose show.  For those of you interested in reading the entire interview I have provided a link to the BusinessWeek article.  

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_14/b4172015497854.htm

 Here is what Mr. Williams predicted:

 Health insurance premiums will increase dramatically for the following reasons:

1. This bill levies significant taxes on the insurance industry that will have to be paid during the first year.
2. The recent premium increase was the result of a combination of inflation from hospitals, physicians, drugs, devices and technology and a major change in demographics: 

There are a lot of baby boomers and they are getting older.

Healthy people are cancelling their insurance, reducing the amount of premium available to pay claims.

Young people are not buying insurance at all.

1.  He thinks that there is a significant chance that smaller health insurance companies will go insolvent as a result of this legislation.
2. The Obama administration started out talking about health-care reform, but they shifted to focusing solely on health-insurance reform.  As a result, nothing was done to change the fundamental factors that are causing the increase in health care premiums. 

If he is right, and I believe he is, then we are going to experience immediate and sustained economic fallout from this legislation.  Here are things to watch for in the coming weeks and months:

1. Large corporations will have to make a significant one-time adjustment to earnings.  Certainly, any Fortune 500 company that provides drug insurance benefits to retirees will have to do this.  This plan reduces the tax deduction for providing drug benefits for retirees.  Since this is a retiree benefit, under ERISA accounting standards the company must book the anticipated costs now.  They cannot wait until they occur.  
2. Insurance premiums are going to go up rapidly.  Some carriers will simply stop accepting new customers at all.  This plan requires insurance companies to change underwriting rules by accepting people who are ill, or who have pre-existing conditions.  That may be a noble thing to do, but it will result in an increase in costs.  In addition, there is already a proposal to cut Medicare fees to doctors and hospitals by an additional 21%.  Medicare fees are already inadequate to cover costs.  Doctors and hospitals will have to increase charges to insurance companies to cover this shortfall.
3. More and more doctors and hospitals will decline to treat Medicare patients.  Doctors who treat Medicare patients are already losing income because of inadequate compensation.   
4. Companies are not going to be able to absorb the cost of increased heath care premiums.  They will cut benefits and increase co-payments.  They will increase employee contributions, and they will have to lay off a significant number of workers. 
5. All of the above developments are likely to take a poor performing economy and make it immediately worse.

The Obama administration will try to fight back by demanding that large employers and insurance companies prove that their costs have really increased.  There will be hearings, charges and executive orders to try and prevent companies from taking the actions I have described above.  But, these costs are all too real, and companies who fail to make these changes will not be able to survive economically. 

Pelosi, Obama and Reid (“POR”) now own health care reform.  If you think we have “buyer’s remorse” with regard to putting Democrats back in power, it will be nothing compared to the remorse that will be felt by those politicians foolish enough to hitch their political careers to this turkey.