Washington D.C. and Detroit say ‘No’ to Wal-Mart because they don’t need Jobs or Shelves full of Low-Priced Goods

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 20th, 2013

Week in Review

The Democrats hate Wal-Mart.  As do unions.  Because Wal-Mart stores do not have union labor.  Unions hate that.  And because Democrats and unions are joined at the hip, Democrats hate what unions hate.  Which is why you won’t find Wal-Mart stores in big Democrat cities.  Because the Democrats do everything they can to keep them out.  Even writing laws specifically targeting Wal-Mart (see Trouble in store: Why Walmart has failed to woo Washington by Rupert Cornwell posted 7/21/2013 on The Independent).

Walmart has been wooing [Washington D.C.] for years, and in 2010 announced plans to open four stores there, a number subsequently raised to six. Everything was going swimmingly, with work already started on three of the sites, until earlier this month, when the council passed its Large Retailer Accountability Act, otherwise known as “Get Walmart”.

Under it, non-unionised stores with a commercial space of 75,000ft or more – ie Walmart – will henceforth have to pay employees at least $12.50 (£8.20) an hour, compared with the city’s existing minimum wage of $8.25, and the national one of just $7.25 an hour. The company retorted by threatening to scrap three of the planned stores at once, and perhaps abandon the three where construction has begun too, causing the loss of up to 1,800 new jobs…

The case for Walmart is strong – that its stores provide working-class Americans (and many wealthier ones too) with good service and a broad selection of goods “at the lowest prices possible”, to use the words of old Sam Walton, who opened his first store in Rogers, Arkansas, in 1962. And it provides jobs: 1.4 million of them in the US alone…

Nor is Washington DC alone in feeling that way. Five of the country’s other largest cities – San Francisco, Detroit, Seattle, Boston and, above all, New York – have also said no. “As long as Walmart’s behaviour remains the same, they’re not welcome in New York City,” says Christine Quinn, the New York City council speaker who may well be the next mayor. “New York isn’t changing. Walmart has to change.”

Not by coincidence all those cities, like DC, are Democratic strongholds where unions are strong. They are liberal, socially “progressive” and, by definition, urban, while Walmart’s genes are southern, conservative and suburban.

Detroit said ‘no’ to Wal-Mart?  The city that just filed the largest municipal bankruptcy in history said they don’t need jobs or low prices on food, clothing, pharmacy and household goods?  If you’re looking for the answer to why Detroit is in the mess it is in this is your answer.  The Democrat stronghold in Detroit got so anti-business that it chased all the jobs out of the city.  Once the jobs left the people soon followed.  First the whites.  Accelerating their ‘white-flight’ following the Detroit riots.  While the blacks held on.  But after 20 years (1974 – 1994) of Coleman A. Young they gave up, too.  For they don’t come further left than Coleman A. Young.  And when you’re that far left you’re no friend to business.  So businesses stay away.  As do their jobs.

The black middle class followed the whites out of Detroit.  In pursuit of greener pastures.  And jobs.  Leaving Detroit with half the population it once had.  Impoverished.  And more anti-business than ever.  Which is why they said ‘no’ to Wal-Mart.  Because Wal-Mart isn’t union.  And the two largest employers in the city, the City of Detroit and the Detroit Public Schools, are union strongholds.  So they protected their high pay and benefit packages.  By keeping nonunion jobs out of the city.  While thinking nothing of the unemployed masses in the city.  Helping to keep the unemployment rate in Detroit well above the national average.  While the unemployed masses would have loved to see up to six new Wal-Mart stores (or more) opening in the city.  The 1,800 new jobs (or more) that would have came with them.  And shelves full of food, clothing, pharmacy and household goods at low prices that their Wal-Mart paycheck could easily afford.  But no.  Wal-Mart is not union.  So the people of Detroit have to stay unemployed.  And impoverished.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One Fifth of the NHS Budget set aside to pay for Poor Health Care Lawsuits

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 20th, 2013

Week in Review

Britain’s aging population is playing havoc with the National Health Service (NHS).  More taxpayers are leaving the workforce than are entering it.  Leaving less money to pay for a growing number of retirees who are living longer.  Costs have grown so out of control that they are trying to find £20 billion ($30.54 billion) in efficiency savings over three years.  Perhaps the best way for them to do that would be to just improve the quality of their care (see ‘Jaw-dropping’ rise in NHS claims after scandals by Laura Donnelly posted 7/19/2013 on The Telegraph).

A total of £22.7 billion – nearly one fifth of the health service’s annual budget – has had to be set aside to pay compensation to thousands of people harmed by poor care…

In total, more than 16,000 patients lodged claims during 2012/13, compared with around 13,500 the previous year…

In December, 38 families were offered settlements from Worcestershire Acute Hospitals trust over a series of failings, including the case of a man who starved to death…

The highest individual pay outs are connected to NHS errors which have led to babies becoming brain damaged, with around 100 such cases occurring each year.

A man starved to death?  In a hospital?  How does that happen?  The man must be in a bed.  Nurses and doctors must look at the people occupying these beds.  Is there no chart showing what this patient ate?  And if nothing was written in under what the patient ate shouldn’t that have been a red flag that this patient didn’t eat?

I can understand trying to diagnose some diseases can be difficult.  For some diseases can be devious bastards.  Hiding deep with a patient’s myriad symptoms.  But hunger?

“Hello, random patient.  Bowels okay?”

“I haven’t had a BM in days because no one is feeding me.”

“Not feeding you, eh?  Well, we’d better do something about that?  Let me find your nurse.  She can give me the form to address that.  Then you’ll be right as rain, my good man.  Take care.  And do work on those bowel movements.”

The soothing warmth of red tape in a government bureaucracy.  Just makes you wish Obamacare would hurry up and get here already.

Forms.  Yes, forms.  Beautiful forms.  Filling in blanks.  Filing in triplicate.  The way health care was meant to be.  And the way it will be under Obamacare.

“Hungry?  Not to worry.  I have just the form here.  See?  Here we fill in what you ate.  And here we fill in what you passed.  Beautiful, yes?  And by studying the connection between the two we can fill another 1,000 positions in the health care authority.  Isn’t that wonderful?”

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

The NHS is all about keeping Labour in Power just as Obamacare is about keeping Democrats in Power

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 20th, 2013

Week in Review

Why did FDR give us Social Security?  To connect retiring Americans with the Democrat Party.  Why did LBJ give us Medicare and Medicaid?  To connect retiring and poor Americans with the Democrat Party.  And why has national health care been the Holy Grail of the Democrat Party?  Because that will connect ALL Americans to the Democrat Party.

During each election it’s the same thing.  Social Security and Medicare are going broke.  Republicans put forth plans to save these programs.  While the Democrats shout out, “See!!!  The Republicans want to take away your Social Security benefits and your Medicare benefits, seniors.  They want you to die.  They want to roll Grandma off the cliff.  Because they are nothing but a bunch of greedy, vicious, heartless bastards.  So remember to vote Democrat.  Unless you want to become homeless and die an excruciatingly painful death.  If so, then vote Republican.”  They scare seniors to vote for them and win elections.  And Social Security and Medicare become even more broke.

The Labour Party in Britain scored big with the creation of the National Health Service (NHS).  For the NHS was their baby.  And people would forever remember that fact.  And that was electoral gold.  But to maintain appearances they had to make sure everything looked hunky dory in the NHS.  Even when appalling care was killing thousands a year (see Labour must bear the blame for the shameful decline of the NHS by Sean Worth posted 7/15/2013 on The Telegraph).

One of the most depressing experiences in politics is to listen to a focus group discuss Labour and the NHS. Time after time, the voters’ attitude is simple: unconditional praise. No matter how bad the health service’s performance, there is a feeling that it is safest in the hands of the party that created it… The NHS is such an electoral asset that Ed Miliband is expected to make it a central part of his campaign to be Prime Minister – not least because he lags so badly on so many other issues, such as economic competence and personal credibility.

But does Labour really have cause to be proud of its record on the NHS? Today, the results of an investigation into suspicious death rates at 14 hospitals – carried out in the wake of the scandals at Mid Staffordshire – are revealed. The facts are appalling: their performance was so poor that up to 13,000 people may have died needlessly. So severe are the problems that Prof Sir Bruce Keogh, the medical director of NHS England, is expected to place many in special measures, or replace management teams entirely.

This comes on the back of a number of revelations about abuse and neglect in the NHS, stretching back over many years. Yet while the agencies set up by Labour to monitor patient safety have been shown to be either negligent – with many of the 14 trusts on the “death list” receiving clean bills of health from the Care Quality Commission – or actively complicit in covering up hospitals’ errors, no politician has had to carry the can. In fact, the polls show that in the wake of revelations about Labour-era scandals such as at Mid Staffs, it is actually the Tories who are blamed.

That, however, could be about to change. A parliamentary question tabled by the Tory MP Priti Patel shows that Labour ministers – including Andy Burnham, the party’s current health spokesman and former health secretary – received more than 1,500 warnings over the safety of care at the 14 hospitals on this “death list”, many from concerned staff, patients or members of the public…

In addition, people around the last government are starting to speak out. Prof Sir Brian Jarman – the expert who uncovered the original problems at Mid Staffs, Morecambe Bay and Basildon hospitals – has claimed that his work was “suppressed” by Labour ministers, describing the Department of Health as “a denial machine”, focused on producing good news stories rather than getting to the bottom of the death-rate data. Two former NHS regulators who worked under Labour, Dr Bill Moyes and Baroness Young, have also described the “pressure” exerted on the system by ministers to keep quiet about unsafe care…

One central reason why Labour has been allowed to get away with the idea that it is the “party of the NHS”, while presiding over such a shameful record, is that it benefits from the axis within the public services that tirelessly attacks those who dare to suggest that the health service might need to change. Most notorious is the treatment of Julie Bailey, the ex-nurse whose mother was killed by neglect at Mid Staffs, who has been the targeted of venomous abuse for speaking out about it. In 2011, union activists posted an internet video which stated they hoped she would die; she has since been subjected to a campaign of nuisance calls, threats and online vitriol; has been hounded from her business and her home and even seen her mother’s grave desecrated.

Fast and Furious.  Benghazi.  The IRS abuse of conservatives.  All scandals that the Obama administration was going to look into and get to the bottom of.  And here we are.  With the Obama administration getting to the bottom of nothing.  Everything is an ongoing investigation that they can’t comment on.  And time advances on.  Hopefully to the point that people get tired asking about these scandals.  So is there any question that what’s happened in the NHS could very well happen in Obamacare?

One of the reasons why Democrats want to nationalize health care so badly is to unionize those health care workers.  Because if they’re unionized they will pay union dues.  Which will be a windfall into Democrat coffers.  The administration will fight to give these health care heroes a decent living wage.  The higher the better.  For the more of the taxpayers’ dollars they get the more of the taxpayers’ dollars flow into Democrat coffers.  And once that big money revenue stream is set up you will see the public sector unions pulling out all stops to protect it.  Just like they are in Britain.  To protect the windfall of the NHS to Labour coffers.

The NHS isn’t in the health care business.  They’re in the election business.  And so far that business has been very successful.  Even if the health care side of it has not.  This is what Obamacare is all about.  To set up the same cash windfall to Democrat coffers.  And they have been salivating for that day to arrive.  And will do anything to attack their enemies that try to deny them their Holy Grail.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

New British Report to show how Horrible National Health Care Is

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 20th, 2013

Week in Review

A lot of those on the left like to point out how the United States is the only advanced economy that doesn’t have national health care.  Of course those on the right will note that the U.S. health care system is the best in the world.  And probably is because it is the only advanced economy not to have national health care.  But proponents of national health care will be quick to poo poo that.  Noting how wonderful Britain’s National Health Service (NHS) is.  Doing everything a national health care system should.  Well, apart from the appalling care they provide at times (see Evening Briefing: Losing our faith in the NHS religion by Will Heaven posted 7/15/2013 on The Telegraph).

Tomorrow is D-Day for the NHS. A damning 1500-page report on failings at 14 NHS hospital trusts will be published. Written by Sir Bruce Keogh, the NHS’s Medical Director, it will spell out failings that have led to up to 13,000 needless deaths since 2005, we report. Crucially, it will also note that the scandal of Mid Staffordshire Hospital was not a “one-off”. It follows closely today’s review of the Liverpool Care Pathway by Baroness Neuberger. She said of the LCP: “Among the worst stories were of people on the Liverpool Care Pathway for days going into weeks without communication or review or discussion. And also desperate stories of desperate people who are longing for a drink of water who were, through misunderstanding of the LCP and poor care, denied a drink.”

Make no mistake: if the NHS is Britain’s national religion, then we are currently going through a brutal reformation. Polling last month showed that 58 per cent don’t trust the NHS to be open about its standards.

Barely half those polled about the vaunted NHS trust it.  Which isn’t much of a ringing endorsement for national health care.  And yet here we are.  With Obamacare taking us down that road.  For the Democrats said they could give quality health care to everyone while cutting costs at the same time.  Something the British found to be not quite possible.  But on this side of the pond American politicians think they are so much wiser that they’ll be able to do what the British could not.

Some would call the Liverpool Care Pathway a death panel.  For it is basically a program to let people die with dignity.  People who are so ill that nothing further can be for them.  The hospital is supposed to discuss this with the family.  To help them accept that the end is nigh for their loved one.  That’s part of the official LCP.  But as it turned out hospitals were putting a lot of patients onto the LCP without consulting the family.  To, as some have claimed, cut costs.  For keeping sick people alive is costly.  And a distraction to health care providers desperately needed elsewhere in their state-run hospitals.

Anyway, this is what Obamacare will look like.  Eventually.  As they cut costs to reduce the high cost of health care.  Of course, the United States has about 5 times the population of the UK.  So the number of needless deaths the US can expect could be as many 65,000 (13,000 X 5).  And if the Americans throw in an LCP of their own that number will likely be higher.  Even if the words ‘death panels’ aren’t included in the bill.  For the LCP is a quasi death panel but they don’t call it a death panel.  Well, some do.  Those who had the pleasure of experiencing what the LCP did to their loved one.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Australia’s Carbon Tax raised the Cost of Living so much that it’s hurting the Left’s Reelection Chances

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 20th, 2013

Week in Review

The political left says we need to stop global warming RIGHT NOW before it’s too late to save the planet.  And the children.  Of course they’ve been saying that we need to do something RIGHT NOW since the Nineties.  When global warming became all the rage.  Leaving poor old global cooling and the coming ice age it foretold behind in the ash heap of fear mongering.

Why the change?  Simple.  What can you do to prevent global cooling?  Force businesses to emit more carbon into the atmosphere?   To remove carbon scrubbing equipment from power plants?  To produce more of our electric power from coal-fired power plants and less from solar, wind and hydro?  Reduce business taxes to lower the cost of electric power?  Thus lowering electric utility costs to encourage people to use more?

As you can see these are all options that benefit taxpayers.  Not the government.  That’s why the 180-degree change from global cooling to global warming.  Because government can combat global warming.  By forcing businesses to emit less carbon into the atmosphere.  To add carbon-scrubbing equipment to power plants.  Produce more of our electric power from solar, wind and hydro (that the government can subsidize) and less from coal-fired power plants.  Raise the cost of electric power generation to encourage people to use less.  These things benefit the government.  Not the taxpayer.  For the whole purpose of fighting global warming is to transfer more wealth to the government.  So they have more money to spend (see Australia to scrap carbon tax for trading scheme by AFP posted 7/14/2013 on Yahoo! 7 News).

Key greenhouse gas emitter Australia on Sunday announced it will scrap its carbon tax in favour of an emissions trading scheme that puts a limit on pollution from 2014, a year earlier than planned.

The move is set to cost the government billions of dollars but Treasurer Chris Bowen said cuts would be made elsewhere to compensate with the Labor Party sticking to its plan to return the budget to surplus in 2015-2016.

Bowen confirmed media reports that the fixed Aus$24.15 ($21.90) per tonne carbon tax would be dumped in favour of a floating price of between Aus$6 and Aus$10 per tonne from July 1, 2014, to ease cost of living pressures for families and help support the non-mining sectors of the economy.

The political left in Australia implemented a carbon tax to save Australia from global warming.  Yet when they’re making changes in that program what is the BIG problem they have to address?  Billions of dollars of lost tax revenue.  As if they’re spending that money elsewhere.  On government pork.  Not just on subsidizing green energy.  Which makes the carbon tax not about saving the planet.  But about giving the government more money to spend.  As governments everywhere have an insatiable appetite to spend money.  So the carbon tax was a lie.  Surprise, surprise.

And how do you get billions of dollars in additional tax revenue in the first place?  By increasing the cost of living and business with more taxes.  People don’t like paying more taxes.  Politicians on the left understand that.  Which is why they lie during political campaigns.

Former Labor prime minister Julia Gillard’s popularity sunk after she announced plans for the carbon tax in early 2011 — after pledging before her 2010 election that it would not be introduced by a government she led.

The policy backflip prompted protests around the country and conservative opposition leader Tony Abbott, who opinion polls suggest will narrowly win the 2013 election, has vowed to abolish it.

Abbott on Sunday said the shift to 2014 was “just another Kevin con job”.

“Mr Rudd can change the name but whether it is fixed or floating it is still a carbon tax,” he said, adding that “it’s a bad tax, you’ve just got to get rid of it”.

Wherever you are in the world liberals make up a minority of the population.  So the only way they win elections is by lying.  President Clinton promised he wouldn’t raise taxes on the middle class.  But after he won the election he raised taxes on the middle class.  President Obama promised that he wouldn’t nationalize health care.  And within his first 2 years in office he signed the most sweeping health care bill into law.  Obamacare.  Which has put the U.S. onto the path to national health care.  And in Australia Julia Gillard promised she wouldn’t allow a carbon tax happen under her watch.  When she apparently planned to implement a carbon tax all along.  And just lied to the people.  Knowing that they never would have voted for her if she had told the truth.  That she intended to raise the cost of living for everyone.

Politicians lie.  Especially those on the left.  And yet they fool the people time and again.  Getting exactly what they want.  By going out of their way promising that they will never do what they always end up doing.  Clinton.  Obama.  Gillard.  They’re all the same.  They get what they want by saying one thing.  And then doing something completely different.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,