As a follow up to our discussion yesterday regarding Obama's health care reform legislation, let's talk about problem solving today. No where in the Congressional and public debate about this issue have I seen anyone define the root cause of the problem. As laid out in the book, what is the real cause of escalating health care costs in this country? Is it because doctors make too much money? Do lawyers drive up cost with phony malpractice law suits? Do drug companies make too much profit? Is the American public health care system riddled with fraud with crooked doctors, lawyers and criminals scamming the system? Is government paperwork to massive, adding costs to the system?
Nowhere and no one, that I can see, has done a simple problem solving exercise in this area to 1) identify the root cause(s) of the problem 2) quantified the impact of the root cause(s) and 3) developed a solution to solve the root causes. Until you know the root cause of a problem any solution you propose is just a crap shoot, you may or may not solve the problem. In Obama's case, he and other members of the political class are willing to take over a trillion dollars of our money to the crap tables and gamble they can solve the problem without identifying the cause of the problem. Escalating American health care costs are the symptom, not the cause.
Thus, the Paris Hilton analogy: Paris Hilton is famous because......she is famous. Health care costs are high .......because health care costs are high. It is circular reasoning in both cases, not problem solving. Thus, when ever you see a member of the political class stating that we as a nation need to spend a trillion dollars to fix health care costs because costs are too high, think of Paris Hilton solving the problem instead. Both parties will have the same chance of getting it right.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Monday, August 3, 2009
Health Care Reform Lies Start To Unravel Already
During the whole recent Congressional and public debate on Obama's health care reform plans, the Democratic wing of the political class claimed that only the rich would get soaked for the extra trillion dollars in government expense that the program would generate. Their strategy, typical of the political class, is to set one group of Americans against another, in this case rich vs. poor, to increase their power and decrease our freedom. Their reasoning is that as long as we can convince the middle and lower classes that only the rich will get hit for the costs of this reform, they can sell this defective approach.
A little bit of history: recently the new customer welcome center in DC opened to some fanfare. It is supposed to be a pretty nice place. It should be, given that it missed its construction budget number by about 100%, i.e. this relatively small government project cost about twice as much as originally forecasted. On a larger scale, the Federal "Big Dig" road project in Boston was originally supposed to cost between $2 and $3 billion. At last count, the actual costs were over $14 billion. There are untold similar budget nightmares that political class projects have incurred over the years. Nothing they ever do hits the cost estimates they sell to the American public.
Back to health care reform. Looks like the trillion-dollar-only-the-rich will pay lie is already coming apart. This weekend Treasury Secretary Geithner and National Economic Council Director Summers hinted that taxes may have to be raised on ALL Americans to pay for Obama's healthcare reform proposal (AP story listed on Earthlink's home page). In other words, it is not only the rich that will pay for this, we will ALL pay for this since it looks like the trillion dollar estimate is too low already and the program has not even started. As we know from the book, Economic Freedom = Political Freedom. Obama's program will cost far more than the trillion dollars he said it would cost(several credible independent sources have already reached this conclusion, now political insiders are basically saying they are right, a trillion is too low), all Americans, not just the rich will pay, and our freedom takes another hit as we send more and more of our wealth and freedom to Washington.
Tomorrow we will look at another fallacy of Obama's reform program, i.e. what is the root cause problem he is trying to solve? (Hint: he does not know).
A little bit of history: recently the new customer welcome center in DC opened to some fanfare. It is supposed to be a pretty nice place. It should be, given that it missed its construction budget number by about 100%, i.e. this relatively small government project cost about twice as much as originally forecasted. On a larger scale, the Federal "Big Dig" road project in Boston was originally supposed to cost between $2 and $3 billion. At last count, the actual costs were over $14 billion. There are untold similar budget nightmares that political class projects have incurred over the years. Nothing they ever do hits the cost estimates they sell to the American public.
Back to health care reform. Looks like the trillion-dollar-only-the-rich will pay lie is already coming apart. This weekend Treasury Secretary Geithner and National Economic Council Director Summers hinted that taxes may have to be raised on ALL Americans to pay for Obama's healthcare reform proposal (AP story listed on Earthlink's home page). In other words, it is not only the rich that will pay for this, we will ALL pay for this since it looks like the trillion dollar estimate is too low already and the program has not even started. As we know from the book, Economic Freedom = Political Freedom. Obama's program will cost far more than the trillion dollars he said it would cost(several credible independent sources have already reached this conclusion, now political insiders are basically saying they are right, a trillion is too low), all Americans, not just the rich will pay, and our freedom takes another hit as we send more and more of our wealth and freedom to Washington.
Tomorrow we will look at another fallacy of Obama's reform program, i.e. what is the root cause problem he is trying to solve? (Hint: he does not know).
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Bad Math, Worse Economics
Today's blog will cover some depressing math numbers. As pointed out in the book in several places, the government never pays for anything. Just about everything the political class spends comes out of your pockets and my pockets. The myth that "government will pay for it" is just that, a myth. We all pay for it although our expenditures are camouflaged by "government programs".
A few examples will make you realize how badly we are being treated as the wealth creators in this country. According to the White House website, www.whitehouse.gov, on April 20, 2009 President Obama told his Cabinet to crack down on spending and find at least $100 million in savings. Around the same time he was submitting a record budget to Congress which was about $3.55 trillion. Since there is about 130 million households in the country today, if Obama actually found $100 million in savings, each US household would see a savings of about $.77 (that's 77 cents).
Another approach would be to compute how much of a percentage saving $100 million is to Obama's budget. If we divide his proposed savings by his budget number we get a savings of .0028%. Since the average US household annual income level is about $50,000 (Census Bureau as of 2007), if the average American family reduced their spending by the same percentage, the annual "hardship" they would incur comes to about $1.40. Thus, Obama wants to reduce spending by the equivalent of one Sunday newspaper purchase.
In both cases it is pretty obvious that this administration is not serious about reducing the size of government and allowing us to keep our hard earned wealth and tax dollars. The $100 million number is a joke no matter how you look at it, it is less than a trivial amount. Washington obviously does not get it like readers of "Love My Country, Loathe My Government" get it. As outlined in the first few steps in the book, significant and deep (50%) spending cuts need to be made in the size of government in order to keep the nation and its citizens financially solvent. $100 million is not a cost savings, it is a bad public relations stunt.
A few more examples to show you how insignificant the savings of $.77 or $1.40 are. Congress is about to expand the infamous "Cash For Clunkers" program, the program where car buyers can get up to $4500 from the government if they trade in an old, low mileage car for a new, higher mileage car, so that the total program cost will now be $3 billion. This is supposed to stimulate the economy. Given that there are about 130 million households in the country, each of our families is contributing about $23 to the program, immediately wiping out our $.77 savings. I think it would have been better for us all to keep our $23 and stimulate the economy in our own way (it's called freedom) rather than being coerced into giving up $23 for some stranger to get a new car.
One last example. According to The Week magazine, the political class has incurred potential liabilities of $8.5 trillion by pledging to financially support and bailout various government agencies (e.g. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), insurance companies (e.g. AIG), banks (Citicorp, Bank Of America) and others. Using the same 130 million household number above, the political class has put each American family on the hook for up to $65,400 in liabilities. Kind of wipes out that $.77 that Obama is looking for!
Downsize government now as outlined in our fifty steps and stop this math and economic insanity.
A few examples will make you realize how badly we are being treated as the wealth creators in this country. According to the White House website, www.whitehouse.gov, on April 20, 2009 President Obama told his Cabinet to crack down on spending and find at least $100 million in savings. Around the same time he was submitting a record budget to Congress which was about $3.55 trillion. Since there is about 130 million households in the country today, if Obama actually found $100 million in savings, each US household would see a savings of about $.77 (that's 77 cents).
Another approach would be to compute how much of a percentage saving $100 million is to Obama's budget. If we divide his proposed savings by his budget number we get a savings of .0028%. Since the average US household annual income level is about $50,000 (Census Bureau as of 2007), if the average American family reduced their spending by the same percentage, the annual "hardship" they would incur comes to about $1.40. Thus, Obama wants to reduce spending by the equivalent of one Sunday newspaper purchase.
In both cases it is pretty obvious that this administration is not serious about reducing the size of government and allowing us to keep our hard earned wealth and tax dollars. The $100 million number is a joke no matter how you look at it, it is less than a trivial amount. Washington obviously does not get it like readers of "Love My Country, Loathe My Government" get it. As outlined in the first few steps in the book, significant and deep (50%) spending cuts need to be made in the size of government in order to keep the nation and its citizens financially solvent. $100 million is not a cost savings, it is a bad public relations stunt.
A few more examples to show you how insignificant the savings of $.77 or $1.40 are. Congress is about to expand the infamous "Cash For Clunkers" program, the program where car buyers can get up to $4500 from the government if they trade in an old, low mileage car for a new, higher mileage car, so that the total program cost will now be $3 billion. This is supposed to stimulate the economy. Given that there are about 130 million households in the country, each of our families is contributing about $23 to the program, immediately wiping out our $.77 savings. I think it would have been better for us all to keep our $23 and stimulate the economy in our own way (it's called freedom) rather than being coerced into giving up $23 for some stranger to get a new car.
One last example. According to The Week magazine, the political class has incurred potential liabilities of $8.5 trillion by pledging to financially support and bailout various government agencies (e.g. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), insurance companies (e.g. AIG), banks (Citicorp, Bank Of America) and others. Using the same 130 million household number above, the political class has put each American family on the hook for up to $65,400 in liabilities. Kind of wipes out that $.77 that Obama is looking for!
Downsize government now as outlined in our fifty steps and stop this math and economic insanity.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
The Start Of Regular Posts
A little later than I expected but this post will start the regular blog and communication phase of our efforts to change America for the better. First, I would like to thank everyone for their purchase of the book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom and Destroying The American Political Class." Sales have been much better than I expected and your follow up supporting comments after reading the book are really appreciated. I especially want to thank those of you that have forwarded the news of our message of change to their friends and family members. That kind of support will go far in getting the fifty steps implemented.
In driving back recently from New Jersey to Florida, I started a list of political class members, from both parties, that have had some recent "problems." Unfortunately, the drive was long but the list seemed even longer:
Ex-President Bill Clinton - liar, adulterer and disbarred lawyer
Senator John Edwards (NC) - liar, adulterer, father out of wedlock and owner of $400 haircuts
Ex-Governor Eliot Spitzer (NY) - liar and adulterer
Senator Larry Craig (ID)- alleged airport rest room sex trawler
Ex-Governor Jim McGreevey (NJ) - liar and adulterer
Ex-Congressman Mark Foley (FL) - alleged sexual advances towards Congressional pages
Senator John Ensign (NV) - liar and adulterer
Governor Mark Sanford (SC) - liar and adulterer
Ex-Mayor (DC) Marion Barry - not enough room to list all the problems
Ex-Mayor (Detroit) Kwame Kilpatrick - pled guilty to several felony counts
Ex-Governor Otto Kerner (IL) - convicted felon sentenced to three years in prison
Ex-Governor Daniel Walker (IL) - convicted felon sentenced to seven years in prison
Ex-Governor George Ryan (IL) - convicted felon sentenced to six and a half years in prison
Ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich (IL) - allegedly tried to sell political favors to the highest bidders
Ex-Senator Tom Daschle (SD) - failed to pay over $120,000 in owed Federal taxes
Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner - failed to pay over $30,000 in owed Federal taxes
Ex-Congressman William Jennings - alleged took bribes and froze some of the proceeds in his freezer
Entire State Of New Jersey - recent arrests of forty people on corruption charges continues the long history of corruption at the state and local government levels in New Jersey
*********************************************
I will stop now since I think you get the message. Why do we continue to elect these types of people to represent our interests? Why do we continue to believe the fallacy that they act and behave to some higher standard of behavior and integrity? Why do continue to think that they are smarter than us? And most importantly, why do we continue to think that they put our best interests ahead of their personal enrichment? Any number of steps in the book would address this issue of bad politicians including term limits (Step 39) and shared values oath (Step 38) among others. If you are tired of the types of behavior listed above, than we need to take action so that honesty and integrity is restored to holders of public office.
This is a great lead-in to a monthly feature of this blog. Every month I will put out out a hypothesis and would appreciate your comments and views. Each month's issue will be related to one or more of the fifty steps outlined in the book. The issue for this months is:
I would bet that residents of New Jersey or Illinois could both present strong cases for their home grown politicians but let us know if you think your state can compete with these two. Let the comments and debate begin.
In driving back recently from New Jersey to Florida, I started a list of political class members, from both parties, that have had some recent "problems." Unfortunately, the drive was long but the list seemed even longer:
Ex-President Bill Clinton - liar, adulterer and disbarred lawyer
Senator John Edwards (NC) - liar, adulterer, father out of wedlock and owner of $400 haircuts
Ex-Governor Eliot Spitzer (NY) - liar and adulterer
Senator Larry Craig (ID)- alleged airport rest room sex trawler
Ex-Governor Jim McGreevey (NJ) - liar and adulterer
Ex-Congressman Mark Foley (FL) - alleged sexual advances towards Congressional pages
Senator John Ensign (NV) - liar and adulterer
Governor Mark Sanford (SC) - liar and adulterer
Ex-Mayor (DC) Marion Barry - not enough room to list all the problems
Ex-Mayor (Detroit) Kwame Kilpatrick - pled guilty to several felony counts
Ex-Governor Otto Kerner (IL) - convicted felon sentenced to three years in prison
Ex-Governor Daniel Walker (IL) - convicted felon sentenced to seven years in prison
Ex-Governor George Ryan (IL) - convicted felon sentenced to six and a half years in prison
Ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich (IL) - allegedly tried to sell political favors to the highest bidders
Ex-Senator Tom Daschle (SD) - failed to pay over $120,000 in owed Federal taxes
Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner - failed to pay over $30,000 in owed Federal taxes
Ex-Congressman William Jennings - alleged took bribes and froze some of the proceeds in his freezer
Entire State Of New Jersey - recent arrests of forty people on corruption charges continues the long history of corruption at the state and local government levels in New Jersey
*********************************************
I will stop now since I think you get the message. Why do we continue to elect these types of people to represent our interests? Why do we continue to believe the fallacy that they act and behave to some higher standard of behavior and integrity? Why do continue to think that they are smarter than us? And most importantly, why do we continue to think that they put our best interests ahead of their personal enrichment? Any number of steps in the book would address this issue of bad politicians including term limits (Step 39) and shared values oath (Step 38) among others. If you are tired of the types of behavior listed above, than we need to take action so that honesty and integrity is restored to holders of public office.
This is a great lead-in to a monthly feature of this blog. Every month I will put out out a hypothesis and would appreciate your comments and views. Each month's issue will be related to one or more of the fifty steps outlined in the book. The issue for this months is:
Which state has historically had the most corrupt political class members?
I would bet that residents of New Jersey or Illinois could both present strong cases for their home grown politicians but let us know if you think your state can compete with these two. Let the comments and debate begin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
