Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Investors.com - Cap-And-Trade For Babies?

Investors.com - Cap-And-Trade For Babies?

This is not a joke. There is now a "fringe" movement to issue so-called carbon credits as an incentive to curb childbirth, which is now a hazard to the environment.
Revkin volunteered that in allocating carbon credits as part of any cap-and-trade scheme, "if you can measurably somehow divert fertility rate, say toward accelerating decline in a place with a high fertility rate, shouldn't there be a carbon value to that?"

He went on to say that "probably the single most concrete and substantive thing an American, young American, could do to lower our carbon footprint is not turning off the light or driving a Prius, it's having fewer kids, having fewer children."

"More children equal more carbon dioxide emissions," Rivkin has blogged, wondering "whether this means we'll soon see a market in baby-avoidance carbon credits similar to efforts to sell CO2 credits for avoiding deforestation." Save the trees, not the children.

If there can be this kind of incentive to reduce childbirth, could we take it one step further, and issue carbon credit bonuses for each aborted fetus? They could even offer one time, lump sum sterilization carbon credits. This would all certainly fit the abortion agenda for the same ideological crowd, and would be a way to supplement the child tax credit. Get your tubes tied = government handout; get pregnant and have baby = government handout; get pregnant and have abortion = government handout. What better way to line voters up to exercise their "reproductive freedom"? Sound crazy? It used to sound crazy that the government would try to influence our choice in light bulbs and automobiles. It used to sound crazy that the government would own General Motors, have a "Pay Czar", and provide tax "refunds" to those who had paid no taxes. Still sound crazy?

Here's an idea they may not like so much:

How about carbon credits for hunters? It makes sense, really. Think about a deer or an elk, for example. All a deer or elk does for it's entire lifetime is eat grass and foliage, which would have taken "dangerous" CO2 out of the atmosphere, and then "emit" methane flatulence, another dangerous greenhouse gas. Oh, they also create more deer/elk through uncontrolled reproduction, of course exacerbating this environmental hazard. Hunting deer and elk provides safe haven for grass and vegetation to soak up CO2 without risk of being eaten, and cuts dangerous emissions from these wild beasts. Think of the environmental benefit provided by these hunters, thinning the herds of these polluting, environmentally insensitive animals, and the hunters provide this service to the Mother Earth for FREE. The least we could do is issue them some carbon credits.

The danger of Obama's dithering

The danger of Obama's dithering -- latimes.com

Hard to say it better than John Bolton.

Monday, October 19, 2009

"Oba Mao"

Looks like the Chinese understand our dear leader pretty well.....

"Oba Mao" items popular with foreign tourists in Beijing

Shared via AddThis

Saturday, October 17, 2009

MSNBC's Chris Matthews is not very smart

Meet Chris Matthews: "Journalist"

This is an interview with Phillip Dennis from the Dallas Tea Party, in which Matthews comes out of the gates trying to paint Mr. Dennis to be some kind of idiotic secessionist redneck from Texas. He challenges Mr. Dennis on "knowing history" about Hoover and the depression ("well you know history sir"), then when Dennis demonstrates his thorough knowledge of history--that FDR policy likely EXTENDED the Great Depression by 7 years--all Matthews could do was laugh, and fall back on the fact that FDR was reelected, and that it "wasn't believed at the time".

Matthews also condemned the Bush stimulus while simultaneously defending the Obama stimulus. (Mr. Dennis of course condemned both.) In typical lib fashion, Matthews also equates opposition to Obama's action to support of "doing nothing". Clearly, Mr. Dennis had an alternative proposal, of tax cuts and reduced spending, but Matthews didn't want to hear about that, just continually reducing the ideas to "a big tax cut and lots of speeches", and "doing nothing".

Liberals just don't know what to do when confronted with facts. Everyone knows (not everyone accepts) that the Great Depression was ended by WWII, NOT by FDR's Keynesian economic policy.

Friday, October 9, 2009

Krauthammer spells it out perfectly on Afghanistan

Krauthammer asks of Obama "Does anything he says remain operative beyond the fading of the audience applause?"

Answer: NO

Young Hamlet's Agony

Shared via AddThis

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

my response to the White House on Healthcare reform inquiry

I received an email today (via LinkedIn) soliciting opinion on Healthcare reform proposals, directly back to Office of Health Reform Director and Counselor to the President Nancy-Ann DeParle. I guess I got this email, since my LinkedIn profile lists me as working in the healthcare industry, which I do, in my employment with a medical device innovator/manufacturer. It may have been intended to seek input from medical professionals only, but I gave my input anyway.

The context of the question was basically this. Watch this video, and tell us if you agree with these doctors who support Obamacare. They also asked "What is the biggest health care problem in your state?" Here was my response:

my experience is quite different from the doctors on the video, and I do not think the proposals currently being discussed by the White House and Congress will solve the problems faced by our healthcare system.

We first should differentiate between the healthcare payor system and MEDICINE. Medicine today in the United States is the best in the world, and in history. Our healthcare PAYOR system is what needs reform, to improve access, choice and competition. Adding new layers of government and bureaucracy will make things worse, not better.

I am happy with my health insurance coverage (Anthem Blue Cross-California), but it is very expensive, and my premiums have gone up. I have employer based coverage, through my company which is based in California, but I live in Texas. I was certain I could get a better deal buying coverage on my own, and began shopping for a plan, including taking a look at high-deductible/catastrophic coverage, combined with an HSA. Unfortunately, even though I found much lower prices for adequate coverage, they were made unaffordable by the federal tax system, which makes health insurance premiums tax deductible only if purchased through my employer. This is a scenario where the federal government is currently LIMITING choice and competition through taxation. I would like to see this fixed in any proposed healthcare reform.

Additionally, it became obvious that my options were limited to what was available in my state. Current regulations prohibit a NATIONAL market for health insurance. This is another example of government currently LIMITING choice and competition. I would like to see this fixed in any proposed healthcare reform.

Professionally, I am very concerned about the federal government having increased involvement in setting fees for services. We already see this with Medicare, which causes a shifting of cost-burden to private insurance companies, driving up premiums for private insurance. As more Americans shift to a public "option", more services/procedures will fall under government fixed fee schedules, which will continue to drive up cost of private insurance, eventually eliminating private health insurance as a viable business model. Government setting prices/fees will quickly affect our medical technology/pharmaceutical innovators, as they will not have a true marketplace in which to market medical innovations. Medical breakthoughs will come to a grinding halt in this country, as the potential reward will be too small to take the risk of investing the necessary capital. This will be a disaster for the continued advancement of MEDICINE in the United States.

Many physicians I work with are already contemplating early retirement, if the plans by the White House are enacted. We need patient, consumer, and physician friendly reform, which should also include tort reform. There is no need to "test" this in certain areas, as the President has suggested. Tort reform has already been successfully implemented in Texas and other states, and should be adopted immediately on a national level. There is no reasonable position that be taken in support of the current medical/legal environment in this country.

I am all for reform, but I am against the proposals being made by the White House and Congress. I am for the right kind of reform, as I have outlined above, and still waiting for it to show up in proposed legislation.

Joseph D. Terry


Tuesday, October 6, 2009

SNL Obama parody

The Vapor Bill – The Left’s Plan For A Filibuster Free Public Option

From The Heritage Foundation.......(Facebook note)

The Vapor Bill – The Left’s Plan For A Filibuster Free Public Option

President Barack Obama’s push for a sweeping health care overhaul is inching toward a full consideration by the Senate and we have learned the left’s plan to add the public option to the Vapor Bill and avoid a filibuster. Congressional Quarterly reported in “Health Bill Nears Tricky End Game” that there is a way for Senate Leaders to start debate on the bill, then add the public option later with a mere simple majority.

Here is the scenario after the Senate Finance Committee finishes work on their part of the Vapor Bill (remember that that Senate Finance Committee has been debating and amending a description of legislation, not actual legislation) Senator Harry Reid will have the task of merging the Senate HELP Committee Bill and the Senate Finance Committee description of legislation being completed later this week. As the AP reported yesterday, this is no easy task.

Senator Reid will write the Vapor Bill with either no public option or one that goes into effect after the insurance industry does not meet certain benchmarks. This is called the public option “trigger.” Senator Reid will have to have a product that would keep together a 60 vote majority to prevent a filibuster of the bill and many health care vote counters don’t see 60 votes supporting proceeding to an Obamacare bill containing an expensive pubic option. Senator and the American public will finally get to see the Vapor Bill and the starting point for an Obamacare debate in the Senate when Senator Reid releases his draft Amendment, that he intends on adding to a House passed tax bill.

To get the measure on the floor, Senator Reid will have to use an unusual procedure. As The Foundry has reported last week, “Senator Reid will have to move to proceed to a House passed tax measure to avoid a “Blue Slip” problem. The term blue slip describes the procedure the House uses to stop the Senate from originating a tax bill. The Constitution states “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” It is the most likely that the Reid will move to proceed to H.R. 1664 The AIG Bonus Bill.

A Senator who wants to add a public option to the bill will offer an amendment to the legislation and then it will be called up for consideration. Reid will then, purposely not take any action on that Amendment, and he will file cloture on the legislation. The cloture vote will be a 60 vote threshold to end debate on a bill that does not contain the public option. After cloture is invoked, the public option, and any other very controversial matters that are deemed “Germane to the bill,” can be added to the bill with a simple majority. Translated into English that means that many moderates in the Senate can vote for cloture on Obamacare without the public option and it can be added after a filibuster is ended.

It is possible to get a public option added to the Vapor Bill, a bill the American people and most Senators, have yet to see, with a simple majority.

Monday, October 5, 2009

Time to try the "Rush Stimulus Plan"

Rush proposed this plan in the Wall Street Journal back in January. Now that the Obama stimulus plan has failed, it's time to try the Rush Plan!

Rush Limbaugh: My Bipartisan Stimulus - WSJ.com

Shared via AddThis