Progessives Liberal Democrat Moralless : Harry Reid

I think this depicts the entire progressive socialist Democrats agenda.

There is no tragedy so bad as it can't be used to advance the political agenda of the party. The Democrats have no limits on how low they will go to score some point against the opposition.

Nothing is off the table - misinformation or out right lies will be employed to make their points. A national crisis is always good or the death of children especially welcome.

The progressive socialist liberal Democrats or soulless and moralless. They witness to these facts daily for all to see and hear.

Affordable Care Act Exchanges Prove Unworkable

There is good reason why 26 states have opted out of the health exchanges demanded by ObamaCare,(ACA). This article explains how the most important reason to not take the exchanges is that the feds will not be able to pay the bills they say they will. The federal government is broke and will remain so for decades. And what about all the new Medicare patients? Who will pay for them?

Secondly, the cost to the state will be huge in the near future as millions decide to take the federal governments offer of health care exchange, and the state would have to agree to pay it's share of the Medicaid expansion. But believe, the state will have to pay the entire bill as the feds face financial collapse. The expansion of the Medicaid entitlement and all of the new recipients would destroy the system and drain the states coffers.

Third, the care given will be greatly reduced from what it is now as there will fewer doctors and the doctors that remain will refuse to treat the new comers due to the projected pay schedule is far less then they received before, or they opt out entirely for a cash only business on their own.

An Economic and Policy Analysis of Florida Medicaid Expansion
March 21, 2013
Source: Devon M. Herrick and Linda Gorman, "An Economic and Policy Analysis of Florida Medicaid Expansion," National Center for Policy Analysis, March 2013.

The Affordable Care Act originally envisioned that all states would expand Medicaid eligibility to 138 percent of the federal poverty line or risk losing federal matching funds. This provision was subsequently struck down by the Supreme Court and now states have the option to decide whether or not to expand Medicaid eligibility.

For the state of Florida, expanding Medicaid will cost more, burden Florida's supply of physicians and displace private insurance, say Devon M. Herrick and Linda Gorman, senior fellows at the National Center for Policy Analysis.

• The federal government would pay 100 percent of the cost of benefits for adults for three years but this reimbursement rate would drop to 90 percent in 2020.
• Up to 1.6 million additional Floridians could enroll in Medicaid and more than 250,000 of these would be eligible for the existing federal match rate of 59 percent because they were previously eligible but never enrolled.
• The remaining 1.3 million individuals would qualify for the declining federal match and require Florida to increase general revenues allocated to Medicaid from $6 billion in 2008 to nearly $24 billion in 2030.

Florida's physicians will struggle to meet the needs of an increased demand for health care following the addition of new Medicare patients. In the next 17 years, Florida's population is expected to grow by 25 percent and its senior population will grow by 75 percent.

• In Florida, Medicaid pays about half of what private insurers pay, which will exacerbate the shortage of doctors willing to treat Medicaid enrollees.
• Medicaid patients will soon find that they have reduced access to care, as only about 41 percent of Florida physicians will accept new Medicaid patients.
• States that expand Medicaid will assume higher costs because many new enrollees will drop private insurance to take advantage of the public option.

While the Medicaid plan seems generous on paper, enrollees have worse health outcomes than people with private plans. Expanding Medicaid would result in an additional $1.5 billion in spending but, contrary to many claims, it is hard to prove that Medicaid expansion would significantly boost the economy.

Given the current fiscal outlook, it is doubtful that the government can maintain all of its commitments and obligations. For Florida, Medicaid expansion would result in unnecessary costs. Families between 100 percent and 138 percent of the poverty line would be better off if they enrolled in private coverage or subsidized coverage in the health insurance exchange.

Affordable Care Act Forces Doctors Into Cash Only Medicine

The Affordable Care Act will in some ways help the health care system in this country in that those that can afford to pay cash for services will save money and get good care. The really neat thing here is that most people will be able to pay cash as they dump their traditional insurance and use the savings to pay the doctor direct. The savings look to be huge.

As this article points out, the cost for care will be greatly reduced, even for a family. All you will have to do is compare the prices of the individual doctors, check their experience, and then make the call for an appointment.

The only problem will come from the progressive socialists that see this as a threat to their agenda of total control of the health care system.

Physicians Abandon Insurance in Favor of Direct Payments
March 21, 2013
Source: Jim Epstein, "The ObamaCare Revolt: Physicians Fight Back Against the Bureaucratization of Health Care," Reason Magazine, March 13, 2013.

Because of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the increased cost of doing business, many physicians are closing down their private practices to work in hospitals where they will have less control over how they practice medicine. Other physicians have eagerly shed insurance all together, instead adopting an insurance-free model that charges patients a lower price. The new model allows patients and doctors to avoid the hassle of dealing with insurance while reducing health care costs, says Jim Epstein, a producer at Reason TV.

• In the absence of insurance, doctors charge for services based on a predetermined price list.
• Without insurance, doctors are able to charge less for services because they do not have to incur the costs of paying wages to people to code, bill and collect on patients.
• Venture capitalists and celebrities are among the supporters of this new model, which is spreading quickly around the country through a few health care companies.

For doctors with private practices, eliminating insurance will reduce the number of patients they care for but allow them to make more money and provide better care. For patients following the 2014 implementation of the ACA, eliminating insurance will keep costs and quality constant while the health care system as a whole experiences dramatic changes.

• A bag of intravenous fluid may cost $128 through insurance but one doctor doesn't even bother to charge for the $1.50 in cost.
• An ingrown toenail may cost $200 through the traditional insurance system but one doctor charges $50.

High-threshold plans, like a Health Savings Account or a Health Reimbursement Arrangement, are growing in popularity because they shift most routine costs out of pocket. About 31 percent of firms offer these health plans and 19 percent of covered workers have one of these plans.

• More doctors are agreeing to list prices openly and many are signing up with services that price the care they provide for them because they are unsure how to price their services for direct-paying clients.
• An unintended effect of the ACA is that there may actually be more uninsured as people willfully opt out of an insurance system for routine expenses and opt only for catastrophic coverage.
• A provision of the ACA allows direct primary care practitioners to marry their services with a catastrophic plan and enter the health exchanges set up by the mandate.

Source: Jim Epstein, "The ObamaCare Revolt: Physicians Fight Back Against the Bureaucratization of Health Care," Reason Magazine, March 13, 2013.

California to Eliminate Coal Energy : Green Energy Is Enough

It seems that the people in California have developed a gene that makes them insane - that is, as they age they become less and less able to differentiate between reality and fantasy.

Truly, California is not part of the real world but lives in some special magical place where all that's needed to make things happen is to declare them a reality.

Remember the train that they are building that will cost billions and billions that they don't have? And now these brilliant minds have dedicated themselves to green energy that doesn't have a prayer of meeting current needs of electrical power much less the needs of an expanded industrial base.

Oh wait, back up a little here, California won't need much electrical power for industry as all that will left in the state will be migrant workers and fat political. Everyone else will have found greener pasture out side of the state.

Los Angeles Moves to Eliminate Reliance on Coal-Powered Energy
March 21, 2013
Source: Kate Linthicum, "L.A. Moves to Eliminate Reliance on Coal-Powered Energy," Los Angeles Times, March 19, 2013.

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (DWP) is moving forward with a plan to end the city's reliance on coal-powered energy.  Coal is close to 40 percent of all of the sources of energy for the city.  The two plants that provide the coal to the city include the Navajo Generating Station in Arizona and the Intermountain Power Project in Utah, says the Los Angeles Times.
The coal-free Los Angeles timeline:

• 2015: potential end to energy delivery from the Arizona plant if the DWP negotiations to sell its share of the Navajo Generating Station are successful.
• 2020: original date of achieving a coal-free city, a promise made by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.
• 2025: updated date of achieving a coal-free city, a promise made by Mayor Villaraigosa and the DWP.
• 2027: state-imposed deadline that requires the Utah power plant to become coal-free when the contract with Utah's Intermountain Power Project is up.

The promise to have the city of Los Angeles coal-free by 2025 was declared a great of a victory for Mayor Villaraigosa, even though it does not meet his original promise to have the city coal-free by 2020.

Despite claiming that the plan would have an effect the equivalent of taking 2 million cars off the roads, the DWP has not released any information about the costs or specifics of the plan. The DWP estimated the cost of ending the contract with the power plant in Utah four years early or converting it to gas would cost $1 billion. A new power plant that would have the same capabilities would cost more than $11 billion.

Progressives Demand Energy Effeciency NOW! : Pay More Get Less

There is no end to the insanity that is the federal government and the elites that see themselves as the smartest people in the room. Do they have real time experience with the what they are regulating, of courser not, having experience is not the problem, knowing what's best for everyone comes from what feels good, and seems like the right thing to do to solve a problem.

Witness the demise of the coal industry as it is thought to be a big polluter, global warming CO2 emitter, but the fact that it has meet all of the EPA's regulations that came out just two years ago doesn't cut it. Now the EPA says they have more new rules for the coal producers that will be cost prohibitive and the EPA knows it.

 And the fact that coal produces more the 40% of all our electricity doesn't factor into the progressive socialists agenda to stop all coal production. Worse, it not just stop coal production for electrical energy in the next 10 years, the EPA and the Obama administration what it stopped now.

That more then 6000 have lost their jobs already, and that we are exporting more coal then ever before to nations that are building coal plants by the thousands doesn't register with the progressive Democrats. I wonder how much CO2 China will dump into the atmosphere for the next 10 years with more then 1000 new coal fired plants?

Does it matter at all to the progressives, no it doesn't, it's all about the agenda of control. Little wonder then the progressives are "fundamentally" changing our country and a majority of the voters are willing to help them do it. Who are these people? Why are these voters willingly accepting dependence as a way of life?

Government Efficiency Mandates Harm Consumers
March 21, 2013
Source: David Kreutzer, "Dreamliners and the Hidden Cost of Efficiency," Washington Times, March 13, 2013.

The initial rollout of Boeing's new 787 Dreamliner fleet has been halted following a series of fires within the plane's battery system. The problem with the new lithium-ion batteries, designed to reduce weight and increase efficiency, will likely require a substantial investment from Boeing to iron out the problems. New technologies are prone to unforeseen costs and should not be mandated in the name of efficiency, says the Washington Times.

• The Obama administration has promised that there will be new energy-efficient mandates during the second term.
• Bipartisan support for the new efficiency mandates are likely from legislators who listen to witness after witness describe cost benefits to consumers and manufacturers.
• All of these calculations on the savings from complex new efficiency technologies fail to account for the high costs of development and likelihood of failure like Boeing has experienced.

An example of a poorly thought out efficiency mandate is the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standard for automobiles, which pushes auto manufacturers to increase the gas mileage. In order for manufacturers to accomplish this goal, they must make cars smaller, lighter, more expensive and less safe -- a tradeoff that few consumers are willing to make.

• In general, businesses and consumers appreciate efficiency because it lowers cost in the long run.
• For Boeing, it may have simply made the wrong choice in choosing which battery to equip the new 787s with.
• In the free market, Boeing's competitors should be unrestricted in offering their alternative to Boeing's offering.

However, bureaucratic decisions at the federal level are the wrong approach to improving efficiency in the private the market.

• The Environmental Protection Agency has expressed that it intends to regulate every aspect of energy use to reduce carbon emissions.
• If the government mandates certain technologies or efficiency standards, manufacturers may force consumers to make sacrifices in safety to meet these efficiency goals.

Progressives Want 401Ks : Believe

Think this won't happen in our country? But it won't be the banks, it will be their friends in Washington, the progressive socialist Democrats.

Guess again - as it was rolled out in 2009 by Obama's people to take 401K's and then guarantee a $600 a month stipend from the government.

WOW - what a good deal except the government is broke and in super debt.

I know, vote for the socialists Democrats again so they can take everything that everyone has to make the destruction of our country complete.

Farm Subsides Waste Catastrophic : Who Cares, Right?

Wait, the progressive socialist can't find 85 billion in a spend nightmare of 3.7 trillion? Along with these subsides don't for get where the all the food stamp money comes from. With nearly 50 million receiving food stamps now in our glorious country that is dominated by progressive socialists, little wonder the waste just seems to grow by the day.

What a good way for country to expand, drive the economy further into the ground by spending more money we don't have, and then regulate the companies that are making it to such a degree that they are certain to fail.

How cool is this - now make sure next year that everyone has to vote for more of the same. Really, there is no end to the amount of money that can be extracted from the productive in America. More spending, more taxes, more regulations, more unemployment and more food stamps. It just can't get any better then this. Free stuff for everyone.

Vote progressive socialist Democrat!

Farm Subsidies: Inexcusable Waste
March 20, 2013
Source: Veronique de Rugy, "Farm Subsidies Must Die," Reason Magazine, March 12, 2013.

Subsidies are typically economic assistance or tax benefits for businesses and industries to support their growth and limit their decline. Agriculture subsidies for farmers were introduced in the 1930s to help struggling small family farms. Today, they represent a form of corporate welfare that must be eliminated, says Veronique de Rugy, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center.

• On January 2, the same day President Obama signed the fiscal cliff deal, he also extended a 2008 farm bill another nine months that rewards wealthy dairy farmers with milk subsidies.
• The Department of Agriculture spent $22 billion on subsidy programs in 2012, though only 2 percent of Americans are directly engaged in farming.
• An average farm household earned $84,400 in 2010, already above the average nationwide household income.

Most subsidies go to only a handful of farmers who produce wheat, corn, soybeans, rice and cotton.

• The Environmental Working Group reports that since 1995, just 10 percent of subsidized farms --the largest and wealthiest operations -- have raked in 74 percent of all subsidy payments.
• Sixty-two percent of farms in the United States did not collect subsidy payments.
• In 2011, more than $4 billion was spent on direct payments to farmers through a temporary initiative in 1996 that is still around.
• In 2010, roughly 90,000 direct payments went to wealthy investors or absentee landowners.

Efforts to end farm subsidies have been politically unsustainable. If direct payments are eliminated, as some members of Congress are now proposing, it is likely that crop insurance will expand to compensate farmers for their loss. Crop insurance guarantees farmers against poor yields or declining prices and the government pays about 66 percent of the premiums at a cost of $7 billion annually.

• In addition to direct payments and crop insurance, farmers also receive price support loans for marketing, conservation subsidies that pay farmers not to farm and export subsidies that aid farmers in foreign sales.
• Subsidies are also combined with import quotas to create industries whose products are more expensive than world prices.
• Large amounts of farm land are rented to young farmers who incur a higher cost of renting and buying due to subsidies.

Farm subsidies are a massive waste of taxpayer dollars and hurt the poor while benefiting the rich.

Doctor Owned Practives Going - Gone : ObamaCare!

More bad news for all of us in the very near future - but " what difference does it make anyway", we all will die eventually so what if it's sooner rather then later? Good health care for all, that's what's important right now.

More importantly the rich can pay for the whole thing as well. And by the way, vote progressive Democrat if you want all this free stuff and more to come. There is no end to the good free stuff if you know who to vote for.

The Death of Physician-Owned Private Practices
March 20, 2013
Source: Scott Gottlieb, "The Doctor Won't See You Now. He's Clocked Out," Wall Street Journal, March 14, 2013

The days of doctor-owned medical practices are probably over now that the Affordable Care Act ("ObamaCare") increases the costs for doctors to practice individually. Physicians are now becoming hospital employees more frequently, which reduces quality of care and productivity, says Scott Gottlieb, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

• ObamaCare shifts money to favor "accountable care organizations" that provide outpatient care and turns physicians into hourly employees.
• As hospital employees, doctors will no longer be reimbursed for how much care they deliver, which is theoretically supposed to limit unnecessary medical procedures.
• By next year, an estimated 50 percent of U.S. doctors will be working in hospitals. This represents a nearly 75 percent increase in the number of doctors employed by hospitals since 2000.
• Physicians who do remain independent will be mandated to install expensive information technology systems that will drive up costs.

In addition, for doctors who migrate to hospitals, productivity falls by more than 25 percent.

• Hospital physicians see fewer patients, perform fewer timely procedures and the continuity of care declines.
• Hospitals measure the value of physicians in Relative Value Units (RVU), which assigns a number to every service based on the time and physical effort a doctor exerts.
• The RVU model that hospitals use fails to account for the actual quality of care provided by doctors and instead focuses doctors on goals like filling out code chart correctly.

Hospitals use the RVU system because that is how the government and programs like Medicare reimburse for care provided. Because productivity generally decreases by 25 percent to 35 percent, ObamaCare will fall short on its goal of providing more health care while containing costs.

• Medicare pays more for services when they are delivered at a hospital than when they are delivered at an outpatient doctor's office.
• This payment system encourages hospitals to buyout doctors' practices in an attempt to build local market share and monopolies.
• Hospitals are favored by politicians in Washington because their mostly-unionized forces give them political power and because they are large employers in all congressional districts.

.

Men VS Women humor : Men Are Clueless

Okay, turn about is fair play - now it her turn -


He said to me. . . What have you been doing with all the grocery money I gave you?
I said to him . . . Turn sideways and look in the mirror!
He said to me. . . How many men does it take to change a roll of toilet paper?
I said to him . . . I don't know; it has never happened.

He said to me . . .Shall we try swapping positions tonight?
I said. . . That's a good idea - you stand by the stove & sink while I sit on the sofa and do nothing but fart!

White House Shows Black Smoke : Still No Leader

I don't believe this requires any further comment - this is self explanatory.