Every political election is marked by promises that can't be kept. But almost every candidate, even the one's I don't support, have something to say that I agree with. In the last Presidential election, I had different hopes and fears for each of the candidates, based on promises that I believed they had control over. The best case scenario is when the winning candidate lives up to your hopes, and proves your fears to be unfounded.
In President Obama's case, I hoped that he would bring more transparency to government, and feared that he would successfully live up to three little words he accidentally slipped out during the campaign, "redistribute the wealth". It is very disappointing to see him succeed and fail in the wrong areas.
Obama has failed the transparency hope in two ways.
His ability to organize a grass-roots campaign, and to collect unprecedented campaign funds using the Internet earned him high-tech accolades from the media. After his victory, I hoped he would use his Internet prowess to create the new interactive government, giving a voice to those of us who are not actively asking the government for a handout. We are the voices that are not being heard. Not only has President Obama been silent on this front, but it is now clear that he did not deserve credit for the workings of his cash machine, and probably understood little about it.
He also failed the transparency hope when managing the Wall Street bailout mess. From what I could tell at the time, powerful Wall Street execs had a seat at the table in back-room deals between Wall Street and Washington. It's clear to me, from the outcome, that deals were cut to benefit the players at the table. Evidence of "change" from the past are nowhere to be found.
Obama's government randomly chose which companies lived and died--they were unable to explain why Lehman's could die, but others were too big to fail. They not only kept some banks alive, but they did it so poorly that executives who over-leveraged their firms were allowed to keep their jobs AND their bonuses, and they were able to protect the bonuses of hundreds (probably thousands) of others who had some culpability in the mayhem. This is like making a long-shot bet at the horse track where winners keep the profits when they're right, and losers get their money back courtesy of tax payers.
Leading up to the meltdown, banks made huge bets against each other. When losers didn't have the cash to payoff their bets, we the tax payers made the bets whole...explain that to me! We gave one bank our hard earned money so it could pay another bank for its gambling losses. Is there a form for that? Next time I'm in Vegas I'll probably want to submit one.
My biggest disappointment, however, is that Obama has proven my fears to be well-founded. While I have no problem with Health Care Reform, I do have a problem when the resulting legislation is a mess, doesn't effectively and dramatically reduce costs, and will be very difficult for everyone to navigate. I have no confidence whatsoever that the federal government is capable of implementing this program effectively, or that the stated assumptions will be realized. Our national debt will skyrocket, and our tax rates will have to follow.
Obama clearly believes that government can solve our problems, despite little empirical evidence to support this belief. I don't know what would have happened if the government didn't bailout the banks, but I do know that its interference has thrown off an inherent market force. For the first time in our history, it is unclear to big banks exactly who bears the risk of failure, even if they (the banks) are responsible for catastrophic misjudgment.
As a result, we now "need" massive new legislation to prevent the banks from failing again. If Obama had let them fail the first time, opportunists would likely have stepped in to recreate the financial system, or to fill gaps made available in the current system; incompetent banking executives would be gone instead of receiving continued bonuses from us; a lot of risk-takers would have lost their bets and their money; and it would be dead-clear who bears the risk of incompetence and misjudgment. In addition, oversight legislation could either be eliminated or dramatically reduced in scope.
I clearly misjudged Obama's strengths. I was duped into believing he would make inroads toward a more participative, and more transparent government--an objective that was well within his control. I hoped that he was more pragmatic in his view of governments role and in the tax consequences of his proposals. Sadly, I couldn't have been more wrong.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Monday, April 12, 2010
Kudos to the RNC for a Masterful Conference
Dear RNC,
Congratulations for your successful Southern Republican Leadership Conference. We know it's important not to show your cards to the democrats too far in advance, so we commend you for masterfully concealing your 2012 strategic plan. That will certainly keep your opponents on their toes, and excite the GOP base as they anticipate your clever moves that lie ahead. With conservatives fired up and health care reform weakening Obama's support among independent's, the GOP will finally be able to return common sense to the White House. We don't mind waiting to hear how you plan to get there, because we know the GOP is the party on the right side of the issues.
It's always great to see Sarah, we all love her you know. We love it when she says stuff like "time to reload", and "yucca mountain is a perfectly safe place to store nuclear waste", and "snake oil science stuff that is based on this global warming, Gore-gate stuff", because we know she's just firing up the base--but admittedly, we're a little concerned that some folks might actually think she's serious. All in all though, she did an excellent job of entertaining the media and filling time. In a long conference, we know it's hard to keep everyone's attention when you can't really talk about your plan--it's just too early for that.
And coaxing the attendees to vote for Romney in the straw poll--that was a classic! Putting Romney at the center of attention was a perfect way to obfuscate the party's intent. The dems are going to spend all their time preparing to defend Obamacare against Romneycare, and they won't be ready for the bait-and-switch that is undoubtedly coming later. Simply masterful! We know there's no way you guys are going to consider fixing health care again, but what a fabulous distraction.
As Sarah lovers, we really hope you have a plan for getting her in and out of the 2012 race without tarnishing her reputation. We certainly need her to get the various nut-Party's teed up, but please help her gracefully exit before the GOP primary debates. Not only would she steal the limelight from your candidates of choice, the left wing media might make them say things about Sarah that are disrespectful, and she doesn't deserve that!
So again, thanks for the entertainment and we look forward to a grand slam victory in 2012!
Sincerely,
The RNC Raw Raw Team
Congratulations for your successful Southern Republican Leadership Conference. We know it's important not to show your cards to the democrats too far in advance, so we commend you for masterfully concealing your 2012 strategic plan. That will certainly keep your opponents on their toes, and excite the GOP base as they anticipate your clever moves that lie ahead. With conservatives fired up and health care reform weakening Obama's support among independent's, the GOP will finally be able to return common sense to the White House. We don't mind waiting to hear how you plan to get there, because we know the GOP is the party on the right side of the issues.
It's always great to see Sarah, we all love her you know. We love it when she says stuff like "time to reload", and "yucca mountain is a perfectly safe place to store nuclear waste", and "snake oil science stuff that is based on this global warming, Gore-gate stuff", because we know she's just firing up the base--but admittedly, we're a little concerned that some folks might actually think she's serious. All in all though, she did an excellent job of entertaining the media and filling time. In a long conference, we know it's hard to keep everyone's attention when you can't really talk about your plan--it's just too early for that.
And coaxing the attendees to vote for Romney in the straw poll--that was a classic! Putting Romney at the center of attention was a perfect way to obfuscate the party's intent. The dems are going to spend all their time preparing to defend Obamacare against Romneycare, and they won't be ready for the bait-and-switch that is undoubtedly coming later. Simply masterful! We know there's no way you guys are going to consider fixing health care again, but what a fabulous distraction.
As Sarah lovers, we really hope you have a plan for getting her in and out of the 2012 race without tarnishing her reputation. We certainly need her to get the various nut-Party's teed up, but please help her gracefully exit before the GOP primary debates. Not only would she steal the limelight from your candidates of choice, the left wing media might make them say things about Sarah that are disrespectful, and she doesn't deserve that!
So again, thanks for the entertainment and we look forward to a grand slam victory in 2012!
Sincerely,
The RNC Raw Raw Team
Friday, April 9, 2010
Social Heath Care Inevitable: Don't Blame Obama
Many Americans believe Obamacare is the precursor to socialized health care. Though it probably is, the end is likely to be the same, with or without it.
Our current, federal entitlement programs are going broke (Medicare and Social Security are at the top of the list). Demand for these resources will spike over then next 3 decades as tens of millions of baby boomer's reach retirement age. Health insurance is rising rapidly, to the point that employers have to seriously consider this cost as they decide whether or not to hire an employee. Our national debt is skyrocketing, and tax increases are in quick pursuit. Our domestic economy is waning, unemployment is high, we are clearly losing ground (and clout) as a world economic power, and there isn't a clearly defined path back to our pre-recession comfort zone.
Health care demand and costs are on a scary trajectory.
The number of retirees will increase rapidly over the next 10-30 years. In 2030, it's estimated that we will have 58 million seniors between ages 66 and 84.
The top five causes of death (in year 2002) in people 65 and over are:
Are boomer's prepared to pay for this expensive health care? Is Medicare able to absorb these costs?
The answer appears to be NO, and NO. We've heard time and again that we aren't saving enough for retirement. John Cunniff in ABC News lays it out clearly: When we can't afford to maintain both our lifestyle and savings, we choose lifestyle, hoping that it will all work out in the end.
As for Medicare and Social Security--forget it.
So, not too many years from now millions of people are going to need expensive health care and won't be able to afford it! What are we going to do? Some will say screw 'em, it's their own fault. But as a compassionate society, we're not good at letting people suffer.
Unless a major shift in our lifestyles is forthcoming, and we start saving adequately for retirement prior to buying iPads, iPhones, recreational vehicles, and expensive cars, we'll keep digging ourselves into debt until something breaks and reality finally trumps dreams and politics. Since near term change is unlikely, I can't see how public health services can be avoided.
Our current, federal entitlement programs are going broke (Medicare and Social Security are at the top of the list). Demand for these resources will spike over then next 3 decades as tens of millions of baby boomer's reach retirement age. Health insurance is rising rapidly, to the point that employers have to seriously consider this cost as they decide whether or not to hire an employee. Our national debt is skyrocketing, and tax increases are in quick pursuit. Our domestic economy is waning, unemployment is high, we are clearly losing ground (and clout) as a world economic power, and there isn't a clearly defined path back to our pre-recession comfort zone.
Health care demand and costs are on a scary trajectory.
The number of retirees will increase rapidly over the next 10-30 years. In 2030, it's estimated that we will have 58 million seniors between ages 66 and 84.
The top five causes of death (in year 2002) in people 65 and over are:
- Heart Disease (32%)
- Chronic lower respiratory disease (6%)
- Cancer (21%)
- Stroke (8%)
- Diabetes (3%)
Most of these diseases eventually kill, but only after very long and expensive treatments.
Arthritis and conditions related to arthritis are the leading cause of disability. Currently, 21% (or 46 million) Americans suffer from arthritis, and by 2030, "40 percent of American adults will suffer from some form of arthritic disease".
Are boomer's prepared to pay for this expensive health care? Is Medicare able to absorb these costs?
The answer appears to be NO, and NO. We've heard time and again that we aren't saving enough for retirement. John Cunniff in ABC News lays it out clearly: When we can't afford to maintain both our lifestyle and savings, we choose lifestyle, hoping that it will all work out in the end.
As for Medicare and Social Security--forget it.
So, not too many years from now millions of people are going to need expensive health care and won't be able to afford it! What are we going to do? Some will say screw 'em, it's their own fault. But as a compassionate society, we're not good at letting people suffer.
Unless a major shift in our lifestyles is forthcoming, and we start saving adequately for retirement prior to buying iPads, iPhones, recreational vehicles, and expensive cars, we'll keep digging ourselves into debt until something breaks and reality finally trumps dreams and politics. Since near term change is unlikely, I can't see how public health services can be avoided.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
