April, 2017, Part 3, The Unfolding Disaster That Is Obama Care: More Illegal Actions By The Obama Administration and More Useless and Stupid Regulations

Every month for years now we have had to discuss how bad Obama Care is turning out to be under the continuing theme, “the unfolding disaster that is Obama Care.” This month is no different. As the legislation continues to march through America, driving up health care and health insurance prices as it serves as dead weight on economic growth, it cements its rightful place as the worst piece of legislation Washington has ever produced.

It never had a chance to be successful since it really never addressed the underlying root causes of our ever increasing health costs in the country:

• Americans eat too much of the wrong kind of food, resulting in obscenely high obesity rates for the country.
• Our food chain is infested with overdoses of high fructose corn syrup, salt, and other unhealthy additives.
• Americans smoke too much.
• Americans do not exercise enough.
• The country is in serious need of health care tort reform.
• Barriers to insurance company competition across state lines need to come down.
• Obama Care never “followed the money” to find out who is actually profiting from the ever escalating healthcare costs in this country and how to get those factors under control.
• Obama Care never got the immense amount of fraud and abuse in current government healthcare programs, Medicare and Medicaid, under control in order to save money to efficiently fund other government health care initiatives.
• Obama Care never put serious research money towards curing the major diseases that drive high healthcare costs such as high frequency cancers and dementia type diseases.

You cannot resolve any problem unless you understand and address the underlying root causes. No difference here: Obama Care legislation never addressed these listed root causes and thus, has no chance of ever being successful.

But it is not just missing the root causes of our healthcare costs that makes Obama Care so horrible. It resulted in millions of Americans losing access to their favored doctors, hospitals, and insurance policies. It has caused insurance premiums, deductibles and co-pays to escalate substantially. It will likely add trillions of dollars to the national debt. It has exposed millions of Americans to higher than necessary identity theft chances. It has created government bureaucracies that are wastefully spending taxpayer wealth and being exploited by criminal elements. It has stifled economic growth and job creation.

These are just a sample of the types of idiocy that we have been reviewing for the past several years in this blog relative to Obama Care. To read those past posts, just enter the phrase, “the unfolding disaster,” in the search box above.

1) We have often pointed out that not only was Obama Care a total failure in lowering the ever rising healthcare costs in this country, but its overbearing regulations put a major damper on economic growth since its passage. In fact, the Obama administration is the only Presidential administration that did not enjoy an annual GDP growth number above 3% and reigned over an economy that featured mostly stagnant wage and household income growth.

Now, not only do we already know that Obama Care’s regulations hurt the entire economy but an article by Drew Gonshorowski on the Heritage Foundation website on March 23, 2017 discusses the probable reality that its overbearing regulations also helped raise health insurance premiums, the exact opposite of what the law was supposed to do:

• A new research study from Milliman shows that a chief reason that Obama Care insurance premiums continued to rise is because of the many regulations and taxes the legislation imposed on that segment of the insurance market.
• For example, the law imposed a Health Insurer tax of 2.0%.
• It currently imposes a Health Exchange Fee/[tax]that is currently 1.4 - 2.3% but which will increase to 2.8 - 3.7% by the year 2023.
• A so-called Guarantee Fee is 15 - 30%.
• Reinsurance is a 1.0 - 2.0% fee.
• A Morbidity fee is 4.0%.
• A Community Rating fee can increase insurance premiums for younger Obama Care insurance customers anywhere from 19 - 35%.
• Essential Benefits requirements increases premiums by 8%.
• An actuarial adjustment increases premiums by 8.5%.

Thus, the total increase national average impact on an insurance policy relative to Obama Care policies comes out to anywhere from 44.5 to 68% according to the Milliman research.

How can anyone expect the cost of health insurance to come down or gotten under control when just the logistics of the Obama Care legislation imposes a 44% burden before the actual health insurance costs are figured in? That is why it is a disaster and such a stupid and convoluted piece of legislation.

Note: the article points out that these are national averages and that the increases on health insurance premiums because of the above Obama Care requirements and regulations vary greatly by state meaning that some residents of some states (for example a state with a younger than average population) saw worse increases than the national average.

2) We have pointed out many times on how Obama himself violated the Obama Care legislation by unilaterally changing dates and other tenets of the Obama Care. Now there appears there might be another unlawful action that the Obama administration undertook. The legislation only allowed the IRS to use private citizen data to calculate what, if any, Federal subsidy a taxpayer should get if they obtained an Obama Care insurance policy.

But according to research and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, the IRS may have illegally shared private citizen data with the Health and Human Services organization for the sole use of sending a formal Federal government communications to taxpayers who opted out of buying an Obama Care policy and paid the Obama Care tax. 

Specifically, the Judicial Watch organization filed a lawsuit looking for government documents related to this illegal action after numerous legitimate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests were ignored by the Obama administration. [On a side note, this sandbagging of FOIA requests should not be unexpected as the Obama administration was likely the worst Presidential administration ever when it came to complying with FOIA requests.)

Judicial Watch issued the following press release on April 16, 2017 which describes what is going on Apri: “Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records about the sharing of private taxpayer information under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). The lawsuit was filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Internal Revenue Service and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:17-cv-00615)).

Judicial Watch filed the suit after the agencies refused to comply with its November 15, 2016, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to the IRS and Health and Human Services seeking all records concerning their efforts to reach out to individuals claiming an exemption or paying a penalty for failing to purchase the mandatory Obamacare health insurance, as well as records where protected taxpayer information was shared between the IRS and HHS or any other state or federal government entity.”

This lawsuit follows a formal Congressional letter that was sent to the IRS back in September, 2016 so there is at least two organizations that think that Obama and his administration have again violated Federal law. Specifically, it appears that Federal law 26 § U.S.C. 6103 regarding the confidentiality of private citizens private information was possibly violated. Another day, another potential illegal action from the worst piece of Washington legislation ever enacted.

3) One last piece of Obama Care insanity for today and it is related to your local pizzeria. One of the most inane tenets of Obama Care is that restaurants with more than 20 locations have to list nutritional information on EVERY item on their menu and even worse, EVERY possible variation of an item on their menu. Consider the stupidity of this Obama Care regulation:

• Consider Domino’s pizza locations: when you consider every possible variation on Domino’s menu, from toppings to size to different types of crusts, you end up with 34 MILLION variations that Obama Care’s regulations require Domino’s to put on their menu or post in their stores, clearly an impossibility.
• Since Domino's locations are operated and owned by individual businesspeople and franchisors, any attempt to post such a sign could add thousands of dollars to a business owners’ expenses, hindering their ability to grow their stores, create employment opportunities, and help grow the economy.
• And since the vast majority of Domino’s customers place their orders on the Internet or call them in, the vast majority of customers are unlikely to ever notice or see any Obama Care sign or menu with the nutritional information even if a way was found to strictly comply with the need for 34 million combinations.

Another useless and expensive Federal government and political class effort. Expensive because it will cost restuarants to spend their thin profit dollars on a useless effort, useless because we have already discussed the reality that customers do not read nutritional signs in restaurants:

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2011/08/whats-week-without-another-weekly-obama.html

Useless and stupid Obama Care regulations, relating to food signs and unnecessary fees and taxes, and illegal actions by the slightly dysfunctional Obama administration when it came to the rule of law. More unfolding disasters to follow.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

Retro 4 - George Orwell, Doublethink and Today's Politicians

Given family engagements in town this week, we will be rerunning some of our most popular posts, posts that have garnered the most attention and which showed that we are currently enduring the worst set of politicians America has ever had.

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2010

George Orwell, Doublethink and Today's Politicians

I am a big fan of George Orwell's classic Novel, "1984." I think he was a great writer and a better prognosticator since many of the predictions he made on "1984" of how democracies would die are actually unfolding today, throughout the world and throughout America. One of the concepts he talks about is "doublethink" which he defines as the ability "to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them." If a leader can establish doublethink in the minds of his followers, then the credibility of that leader will never be questioned since whatever he says is right, doublethink suppresses free thought and free will.

I was thinking of how proud Orwell would be of our current day political class. Many examples abound of how our politicians and the government they run can implement two contradictory programs and never once stop to consider the incongruity and disconnect between the two programs. Consider:

- One of the leading drivers of escalating health care costs in this country is the poor eating habits and exercise habits of many Americans, leaving them overweight and susceptible to many diseases. In fact, one of the main activities of Michele Obama since coming to Washington has been to work hard to reduce the obesity problem plaguing many, many kids in this country. One of the efforts that both Ms. Obama is pushing, along with other parts of the government, including the Agriculture Department, is to reduce the amount of saturated fat that Americans eat, encouraging us to move towards low fat milk and other low fat dairy products.

This all sounds good. However, consider an organization called Dairy Management, as described in a November 8, 2010 New York Times article. Dairy Management is financed by a government mandated fee on the dairy industry and receives millions of dollars a year directly from the budget of the Agricultural Department. The Agriculture Department sits on Dairy Management's board, approves its marketing campaigns, and interfaces with Congress on its work. But Dairy Management recently worked with Domino's Pizza to develop a new line of pizza offerings. These new pies had 40% more cheese and Dairy Management helped develop and pay for the associated $12 million marketing campaign.

But wait. Each slice of these new pizzas contains as much as two thirds of a person's daily recommended amount of saturated fat, which has been linked to heart disease and other diseases. Thus, our government is telling people to eat better and reduce the amount of unsaturated fat in their diets while they are funding support for private companies to put more saturated fat back into Americans' diets. The particularly ironic part of this Domino's example is that I would assume that kids are high pizza eaters, the same type of Americans that Michele Obama is trying to get healthy. Doublethink in the Agriculture Department - eat healthier but don't eat healthier.

- There has been a lot of hype lately regarding all electric cars, some of which will be available shortly for consumer use, e.g. General Motors' Volt. The hope behind electric cars is that they will not spew out pollutants like the gasoline internal combustion engine, improving the environment, and will help wean us from dependency on foreign energy sources. Our political class is so excited about the future of electric cares that, according to an electric car article that was in the October 9, 2010 issue of The Economist magazine, you can get up to a $7,500 subsidy rebate from the U.S. government if you purchase one.

Sounds like a great deal. Get taxpayer money to buy a new car while helping the environment. But, are these vehicles really helping the environment? While the car itself is less polluting, the energy creation needed to generate the electricity to power these cars will increase. In the United States, we get a lot of our electrical power from coal electric plants, which are not the cleanest producers of electricity from an environmental perspective. Thus, we need to find a way to reduce the amount of coal created electricity if the potential of electric cars is to be fulfilled.

But, according to a Washington Post article from May 14, 2007, the government's National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, another Agriculture Department effort, plans to spend $35 billion over the next decade to help build conventional coal electricity plants. More doublethink in the Agriculture Department - the government hands out taxpayer funds for the purchase of electric cars to clean up the environment but uses other taxpayer money to dirty up the environment with coal electricity plants to power the cleaner electric cars.

- Over the past sixty years, the United States has probably spent hundreds of billions of dollars supporting the security and prosperity of South Korea. We fought on South Korea's side, defending them from North Korean and Chinese troops in the Korean war, we provided aid for the recovery, and have stationed tens of thousands of troops in the country since the end of that war. As a result, the South Korean economy has grown into one of the strongest in the world. Besides providing a security cover for their economy to blossom, we are also an important trading partner and market for their companies.

Recently, our State Department has been working to generate support for economic sanctions against the Iranian government in retaliation for the Iranians supposedly developing a nuclear weapon technology. The State Department strategy is to make life so uncomfortable for the Iranian people and government that they will become less likely to develop a nuclear bomb capability.

So what do the South Korean do relative to Iran? According to an article in the October 9, 2010 issue of The Economist magazine, South Korea still wants to protect its annual $10 billion trade volumes with Iran so it recently signed a deal with Iran so that Korean and Iranian business partners could settle trade accounts via a special facility established in two Korean banks and in Korean currencies. State Department doublethink: South Korea is our ally even though they go out of their way to bypass the very sanctions the State Department wants to impose on Iran.

- For years now, the Federal government has subsidized American corn farmers, recently to the tune of $7 billion a year, enticing them to grow more corn, which is eventually turned into ethanol. The ethanol is then added to our national gasoline supply to theoretically extend our gasoline supplies, reduce our dependency on foreign oil and clean up the environment by burning more ethanol and less gasoline.

But the inconvenient truth is that none of the benefits never really materialized and additional problems were created. Since ethanol contains significantly less energy potential than gasoline, more gasoline has to be burned to make up for the energy loss when burning ethanol. According to Robert Bryce of the National Review Online, studies have shown that ethanol use as a motor vehicle fuel increases nitrogen oxides and other key pollutants by 7% over gasoline and also corrodes the fuel lines of older cars and other engines.

According to Cornell Professor David Pimentel, as covered in the energy policy section of "Love My Country, Loathe My Government," corn ethanol is a terrible fuel. It diverts corn crops from the food chain to the energy chain, increasing food costs, it takes a terrible toll on the soil environment, and it is a net user of energy, i.e. it uses more energy to produce than it creates.

Sounds horrible: bad fuel economy, air pollution, soil pollution, bad economics, etc. So what is the political class about to do? According to Mr. Bryce, President Obama recently announced that his administration was going to allow the blend of gasoline to ethanol, currently 90/10, to rise to 85/15. He did this as a favor to the corn industry which has more ethanol distillery capacity than it needs. Energy Department doublethink: using ethanol in a 90/10 mixture is a bad thing to do but moving to an 85/25 mixture is a good thing.

- According to a November 8, 2010 Associated Press report, our war effort in Afghanistan faces a dire shortage of 900 trainers and not enough Afghan officers in the race to build up a viable native Afghan fighting force, which would allow NATO and the United States to get its troops out of the country as soon as possible. According to the recent report, the head of the training operation in the country said that if these trainers are not brought on board soon, the July, 2011 pulldown date of American forces is not going to happen.

Training challenges include a high illiteracy rate among Army and police forces (over 90%), high corruption among the officer ranks, and high levels of attrition (which I think is the code word for desertion.) Nine years after we entered Afghanistan, these elementary problems have not been addressed.

Since this situation is critical to successfully ending our occupation and expense of Afghanistan, one would have hoped that every effort and resource would be used to fill this training need. However, a November 4, 2010 article in the St. Petersburg Times reported that the U.S. government will spend over a half a billion taxpayer dollars to expand its embassy in the Afghanistan capital of Kabul. How many trainers do you think $511 million could buy? How many Afghanistan police officers and soldiers could be made semi-literate, enough so that they became good soldiers?

Thus, we have some Obama administration doublethink going on: we want to get out of Afghanistan as quickly as possible, our number one priority, we need a 50% increase in military trainers, 900 additional trainers, to make that happen, but we will lavishly spend resources to expand a single building complex in the capital. This is a major disconnect in logic: if we cannot produce a viable native fighting force via training, who cares how big or how nice the U.S. embassy is? It will eventually be occupied by the Taliban. Fix the root cause of the problem, the Afghan military, don't try to convince yourselves that both the military readiness and a single building are equally important. A non-doublethink approach would devote some of that $511 million to the training issue since that would recognize the vastly different priorities and importance at play here.

I am sure that you can find government and political class doublethink examples all around you. Sometimes doublethink happens because we have allowed the a Federal government to get so large that one part of it does not know what the other parts of the government are doing. One part wants to reduce pollution by promoting electric cars while another part subsidizes coal burning electric plants that dirty up the air. One part of the government wants Americans kids and adults to get healthy by eating low fat foods while another part, in this case within the same Cabinet Department (Agriculture), helps Domino's Pizza get more fatty, cheesy pizza into Americans' diets.

Sometimes doublethink happens because no one in the political class prioritizes needs and importance, e.g. the wasting of millions of dollars dressing up an embassy when military trainers, vital to our military success, go wanting. Other times politicians do doublethink to please their election campaign donors, e.g. corn farmers who get favorable treatment from the political class, even though those in the political class know that the favorable treatment is not good economically or environmentally.

Whatever the reasons underlying the doublethink situation, you can bet that the American taxpayer is footing an unnecessary bill. That is why Step 1 of "Love My Country, Loathe My Government" is so important. The Step itself calls for an annual 10% reduction in the federal government budget for five years. One way to accomplish this reduction, according Step 1, is to do a bottoms up, zero based budget review. Every government program, law, department, expenditure, etc. would be on the table, stripped down to it's core function and mission in order to look for redundancies and doublethink situations, like the Dairy Management situation described above.

Only then can we rationalize what we are paying for, why we are paying for it, should we be paying for it, and not paying for it if not worthwhile. Hopefully, once our politicians had far less government to think about and to track, they could focus much more closely on a smaller set of priorities, identifying wasteful doublethink quicker and more efficiently. Think about that wonderful goal: a quicker and more efficient government run operation. A government that has retired Orwell's concept of doublethink from our world.

The Devastation That Is Obama Care, Part 2: Digitizing Health Records, Restaurants Signs Nobody Reads, 30 Hours Makes You Full Time and More

This is a second in a series of very serious discussions regarding the impending Obama Care issues and disasters that are about to descend on the nation and our economy. Yesterday, we reviewed how the Federal government is going to have to set up a massive bureaucracy in just ten months to handle the unexpected rejection by two thirds of the states regarding Obama Care exchanges, the irony of eighteen Democratic Senators hoping to maintain their political careers in the face of their voting for an oppressive medical device tax, and the reality that many American companies are already cutting employees to cope with Obama Care taxes.

The second set of disasters:

1) Consider some Obama Care insanity that was discussed in a December 13, 2012 article on the Western Center For Journalism website:

• One Obama Care requirement, which affects all fast food and grocery stores with more than 20 locations is a requirement to post nutritional labels for every product produced.
• According to Domino’s Pizza, the pizza industry will be hit especially hard since pizza is customizable and theoretically there will have to be a nutrition label for every one of Dominos pizza combinations.
• According to a Domino’s Pizza spokeswoman, they have 34 million potential pizza combinations.
• Dominos estimates the cost to add the multiple signs required under the Obama Care mandate will be $5,000 per store.
• The spokeswoman stated the obvious that this type of expense per store will obviously raise the cost of pizza for every pizza eating American.
• According to a representative of the Food Marketing Institute, grocery stores will be hit hard by Obama Care-related costs.

The Food Marketing Institute used blueberry muffins to illustrate the insanity. If one blueberry is sold, you need a specific nutritional sign or sticker. If a half dozen blueberry muffins are sold, a different sign or sticker is required. If a store sells a dozen of the same blueberry muffins, still another sticker or sign is needed.

Given that grocery stores average 1,500 fresh-made items per store, the Food Marketing Institute estimates the grocery store industry will absorb a $1 billion financial hit from this.

Extra efforts by a business requires extra expenses and costs, expenses and costs that eventually will find their way into the wallets of consumers. Even if this was a good hearted attempt to educate consumers, who actually believes that consumers will actually read these labels? Consumers buy from habit, looks, aromas, etc., they hardly ever buy based what they read off of a sign or sticker in the store.

Thus, the expenses that are probably a total waste. A study by PMC, which is an archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institute of Health's National Library of Medicine, studied this problem a few years ago. The results of which were published in the American Journal of Public Health in May, 2009. The PMC research study involved the following methodology and findings:

• The study followed 4,311 patrons in 8 suburban and urban franchises of McDonald’s, Burger King, Starbucks, and Au Bon Pain.
• Only 6 of the 4,311 study subjects looked at nutritional information, which included calorie content, fat, carbohydrates, and sodium levels.
• One couple out of 1,501 McDonald’s customers looked at the posted nutritional info, while only 3 people eyeballed a nutritional poster at Burger King.
• One woman looked at this information at Au Bon Pain before ordering, and none of the 657 who entered Starbucks seemed to care much about seeking calorie content stats.

Great, don’t these people in Washington ever do the most basic research? It took me about ten minutes to uncover this government associated research which proves that Obama Care’s nutritional signage requirement, no matter how well intentioned, is a wasted idea that will cost Americans billions of dollars with no societal benefit in return.

Signs, no matter how colorful, how prevalent, how educational, how important, are useless if no one reads them.

2) Staying in the food industry, during the December 3, 2012 CBS This Morning episode, Cheesecake Factory CEO David Overton discussed the looming economic impact of Obama Care's implementation, especially on small businesses: "For those businesses that don't cover [for health insurance] their employees, they'll be in for a very expensive situation." Overton also warned that the cost of the law would be passed on to customers.

Again, don’t the Washington people do any research into the consequences of their actions, actions that would be apparent to any educated person with any kind of basic economic theory? Don’t they take five minutes out of their highly paid jobs to ask a few simple questions of subject matter experts?

3) In late November, Pennsylvania's Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) announced that it would slash the teaching and work hours of 400 adjunct instructors, support staff, and part-time instructors to avoid paying for Obama Care penalties and taxes. This slashing was caused because some bureaucrats in the Health and Human Services department took the inane position that under Obama Care, anyone working more than 30 hours a week, not the traditional 40 hours a week, would be considered a full time employee.

As a full time employee, the employer would be required to pay for health care insurance for these full time employees. This 30 hour definition of full time employees would have cost the college $6 million a year, an expense it could not afford. Thus, rather than having a full time job that did not provide health care coverage, 400 Americans now have part time jobs that do not provide health care coverage. Insanity.

"It's kind of a double whammy for us because we are facing a legal requirement [under the new law] to get health care and if the college is reducing our hours, we don't have the money to pay for it," said adjunct biology professor Adam Davis. These 400 employees will now work only 25 hours a week.

Reducing hours and incomes with no benefit, how idiotic is that for a government program.

4) A November 30, 2012 article that appeared on the Judicial Watch website discussed the fact that billions of taxpayer dollars are possibly being wasted on Obama Care’s requirement that the nation’s health care records by digitized and computerized.

Highlights of the article include the following:

• The government agency that oversees Medicare’s payment processes has doled out $3.6 billion to 74,317 medical providers to computerize their customers’ medical records.
• But according to a Federal audit for the computerization effort, the agency doesn’t bother following up to assure the money is appropriately spent or is meeting the required quality goals.
• Inspectors and auditors from the Department of Health and Human warn in their audit report that the electronic records program is vulnerable to abuse.
• They also concluded that immediate efforts should be made to strengthen oversight and prevent tax dollars from being wasted.
• This recommendation is not unreasonable since doctors are receiving up to $44,000 and hospitals are receiving a minimum of $2 million to switch from paper to digital records.
• In October, Congressional lawmakers questioned the costly computerization effort, experiment, claiming the effort is wasting billions of tax dollars and doing little, if anything, to improve medical care.
• In a letter to Obama Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, four Congressmen who chair various committees say the program “appears to be doing more harm than good.”
• Their letter included a mainstream newspaper article that exposed a potential scandal: the move to electronic health records may be contributing to billions of dollars in higher costs for Medicare, private insurers and patients by making it easier for hospitals and physicians to bill more for their services, whether or not they provide additional care or are just fraudulent/criminal activities.

Another typical government program, one that makes an existing situation worse and wastes billions of taxpayer dollars in the process.

Making dining more expensive, making professors earn less, and making it easier to rip off the taxpayers via computerization. It can’t get any worse…until tomorrow’s post.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

http://www.reason.com/
http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w