Medicaid, Medicare and Frivolous Lawsuits make the Best Health Care System in the World more Expensive

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 23rd, 2013

Week in Review

The American left loves Canada.  In particular their single-payer health care system.  This is what they wanted in the US.  Not Obamacare.  But they settled for Obamacare.  Until they get what Canada has one day.  Because it’s better.  At least, according to a chart.  That shows how wonderful Canadian health care is and how horrible American health care is (see The U.S. Health Care System Is Terrible, In 1 Enraging Chart by Mark Gongloff posted 11/22/2013 on the Huffington Post).

Yes, among this group of big countries, the U.S. spends far and away more on health care than any other. And yet it has among the lowest life expectancies of any developed country. People live longer in pretty much every country in Europe, including Greece, where the economy has been wracked by austerity for years…

Why is our system so terrible? Largely because it is built for profit. Unlike many other countries, the government has no role in either providing care or setting prices, and so prices skyrocket. It’s also too complex, which is one reason the Affordable Care Act, President Obama’s signature reform law, has gotten off to such a bad start.

The health care law is supposed to help with the cost problem somewhat. But it is built on the existing privatized system, which means it will probably not make a significant difference. A public option, also known as a “single payer” plan, would help. But that still seems like a pipe dream — although maybe Obamacare’s clumsy rollout will bring it closer to reality.

First of all it should be noted that Canada has one of the finest private health care networks in the world.  Outside of their single-payer system.  Which is something they share with all nations that have some form of national health care.  A private health care network for those who want and can pay for it.  And why is Canada’s private health care network the best in the world?  Perhaps you can guess why when you hear the name of it.  The Untied States health care system.  Just south of the border.

That’s right, for those with the means don’t wait in line for less than the best of health care.  They spend their own money to go to the front of the line to get the best health care available.  In the United States.  Often administered by Canadians.  Because the US pays the best doctors and nurses more than they can get in Canada.  So Canadian doctors and nurses, too, travel south across the border.

The US is one of the only countries where their poor suffer from obesity.  Because of generous food assistance programs.  Also, because we are a for-profit nation our food industry has figured out to give us more food for less.  Our beverage sizes have gotten so big giving us so much value for the money that Mayor Bloomberg tried to limit the size of beverages in New York.  And all American restaurants give us free refills.  Because they can.  While some European countries will charge extra for a package of ketchup.  All of this more food for less has led to our obesity problem.  Giving Americans heart disease and diabetes.  Shortening life expectancies.

US doctors are dropping out of Medicaid.  And Medicare.  More so now that the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is rolling out.  Why?  Because the government pays for these nonprofit programs.  And they are constantly trying to reduce their reimbursements.  Because the aging population is straining the Medicaid and Medicare programs.  And the government has addressed this problem by ‘discounting’ Medicaid and Medicare billings.  For years doctors and hospitals have tried to recover these shortfalls by charging more.  Especially insurance companies.  Greatly increasing the cost of health care and health insurance.  But the discounting grew so great that many health care providers just dropped these programs.  Because they couldn’t pay their people, their lab costs, their overhead, etc.  Especially since Obamacare has taken money from Medicare.  And ‘forced’ states to expand their Medicaid rolls.  But these discounted reimbursements aren’t the only thing raising health care costs.

While most of Europe has loser-pay laws to curtail frivolous lawsuits the United States doesn’t.  Because of the trial lawyers.  Who get quite wealthy suing doctors, hospitals and pharmaceuticals.  Exploding the cost of malpractice and liability insurance.  Which increase the cost of doctors, hospitals and pharmaceuticals.  Forcing them to raise their prices to recover these costs.  Making American health care more costly.

These are the reasons why the US spends more per capita on health care than all other nations.  Because they have the best health care system in the world.  And the best costs more.  While the government forcing health care providers to work below costs (Medicare and Medicaid) and the cost of frivolous lawsuits raise these costs even more.

The American health-care system is not terrible.  Single-payer systems are.  Because they all have a private health care network.  Which they wouldn’t have if single-payer systems were the best systems.  Just ask the Canadians who use their private network.  The US health care system.  Who will probably be the second greatest losers under the Affordable Care Act.  After the Americans.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Canada has Record Number of Doctors but Canadians still have Trouble Finding a Doctor

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 28th, 2013

Week in Review

Obamacare is coming.  The path to single-payer/national health care.  Which we’ll have once Obamacare kills the private health insurance business.  By forcing insurers to cover so much that they have to raise their premiums beyond what people can afford.  As people stop buying insurance they will have to raise their premiums further still due to fewer people in the insurance pool.  Which, of course, will force more people out of the pool as they simply won’t be able to afford insurance anymore.  Eventually the insurance companies will not be able to insure enough people to remain in business.  Leaving only the government.  And then the left has their single-payer/national health care.

So what will that be like?  Well, we probably won’t be able to keep our doctors.  Like President Obama promised us we could.  No.  Socialized medicine does not encourage people to go through the hell of medical school to become a doctor.  So there will be fewer doctors.  Requiring higher caseloads per doctor.  Prompting many to retire.  And then it will be more like it is in Canada (see Canadian doctor total at record high posted 9/26/2013 on CBC News).

Canada had a record 75,142 doctors last year and they earned $328,000 gross on average, according to two new reports…

But the numbers alone don’t present the full picture. It’s important to ask not just how many doctors are needed, but where are they most needed and in what specialties, said Geoff Ballinger, CIHI’s manager of physician information.

Kristin Speth, 35, of Toronto, has been looking for a regular doctor since she moved from Alberta four years ago. She’s had headaches since childhood and has been going to walk-in clinics but is frustrated with the experience.

She’s tried the provincial service to find a doctor but keeps getting notices saying there are no leads.

“It is extremely frustrating,” said Speth.

“It’s just so hard to find someone who will just stay longer than the one year that I need for my physical. They just don’t stick around or you know, you can’t find anyone who is taking new patients.”

Canada’s population is around 35 million.  So there’s about one doctor per every 468 Canadians.  The US population is around 314 million with about 691,000 doctors (in 2010).  That’s about one doctor per every 454 Americans.  So the Canadians have more doctors per capita than they do in the US.  But currently finding a doctor in the United States is not as difficult as it is in Canada.  Well, until Obamacare, that is.  After which Americans will be as exasperated as their Canadian neighbors.  Because they already have what Obamacare will give us.  Single-payer.  And doctor shortages.  Even though they have more doctors per capita than we do.  But apparently their ‘single-payer’ workloads are so heavy they just can’t—or won’t— take on new patients.   Something to look forward to under Obamacare.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

The High Taxation of the Welfare State leads to Substandard Daycare

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 22nd, 2013

Week in Review

Governments everywhere on the left want state-funded daycare.  As they want state-funded everything.  But state-funded daycare is especially insidious.  Many parents can’t raise their families on a single income.  Because of high taxation in an advanced economy with a nanny state.  Which has to keep raising tax rates and adding new taxes to pay for the expanding welfare state.  Which is why both parents have to work.  And the left’s solution to this is even more taxation to pay for state-funded daycare.  When if they just shrunk the size of the welfare state parents could raise their children on a single income.  And fewer things like this would happen (see Listeria found in Toronto daycare where child died posted 9/2/2013 on CBC News).

Food in the kitchen of a private daycare north of Toronto where a two-year-old girl died in July tested positive for the potentially deadly food bacteria listeria, according to an inspector’s report.

The York Region Public Health inspection also found expired food in the refrigerator and freezer and other sanitation problems at the daycare located at 343 Yellowood Circle where two year old Eva Ravikovich died on July 8.

A day after Ravikovich’s death, inspectors arrived to find inadequate dishwashing capacity, unsanitized toys and improperly stored food…

Education Minister Liz Sandals said in July that officials received three complaints in late 2012 about the number of children being monitored at the Vaughan facility.

Ministry officials only followed up on one of the complaints with a site inspection, Sandals said, calling the lack of action “unacceptable.”

Calver said the province’s failure to act decisively on previous complaints puts children at risk…

Don Giesbrecht, chief executive of Canadian Child Care Federation, said that while many unlicensed private daycares fill a need for working parents, there is little government oversight into how they operate.

Giesbrecht also said the demand for daycare spaces in Canada far outstrips supply. He added there are 900,000 licensed daycare spaces in Canada but three million children with parents in the workforce.

What’s also insidious about state-funded daycare is the true reason why the state wants to provide this.  To help mothers return to work as quickly after child birth as possible. Why?  Because a stay-at-home mother is not earning income that they can tax.  Which is why they want these women to return to the workforce as quickly as possible.  The children will be better off with a stay-at-home parent.  But the state isn’t interested in children.  They’re interested in taxpayers.

Now there are some women who want to return to work to continue their career.  As the left has told them that a career is what defines a woman.  Not providing the best possible home for a child to grow up in.  One with a stay-at-home parent that loves his or her child.  And doesn’t look at him or her as yet another annoying task to do like taking out the garbage.  Or doing the laundry.  If you’re relieved to drop your kid off at daycare so you can do what you love best then why did you ever become a parent?

Of course if we based our decisions on what was best for our children instead of what was best for us there would be no daycare.  We would wait until we were married and one spouse was established in a career before even having children.  But even that is not possible for everyone due to the high taxation of the welfare state.  Which is the real problem here.  This is why there is substandard daycare.  Because the government creates such a high demand for daycare with their high taxation to support the welfare state.  For one parent just can’t earn enough these days to raise a family.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Ontario will try to Fix their Doctor and Nurse Shortage by luring Doctors and Nurses from Quebec

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 15th, 2013

Week in Review

The political left has long wanted national health care in the United States.  And often point to Canada and their health care system.  For the left does not believe that anyone should be denied their right to medical care.  Or that anyone should profit off of the medical misfortunes of others.  So everybody gets free medical care.  While no one is allowed to profit from the giving of that care.  A noble idea.  But a flawed idea.  For being a doctor or a nurse is not easy.  It requires years of education.  Further years of on the job training.  Enormous school loan debt.  And long and stressful working days.  Not everyone can do it.  Which is why we pay those who do well.  Unless you have national health care.  Which leads to doctor and nurse shortages because they don’t pay their doctors and nurses as well as they do in a private health care system (see Ad aims to lure Quebec doctors to Ontario, targeting values posted 9/12/2013 on CBC News).

An Ontario hospital is trying to lure Quebec-trained health-care workers by tapping into the controversy surrounding Quebec’s values charter.

Lakeridge Health is planning to run the ad, which features a woman wearing a headscarf, in a McGill University student newspaper.

The ad says: “We don’t care what’s on your head. We care what’s in it…”

Empey said the hospital is in need of qualified medical staff and they chose to target the ad at McGill students because they have a strong medical program…

Quebec’s proposed secular values charter, announced earlier this week by the Parti Québécois government, includes a provision that would prohibit public employees from wearing obvious religious symbols while performing their official duties.

That includes the wearing of kippas, turbans, burkas, hijabs and “large” crosses by civil servants while they are on the job.

There isn’t a whole lot of love between French Canada and English Canada.  Personally I love both Canadas.  I spent a lot of time in both and the people couldn’t have been nicer to me.  It’s just each other they have a problem with.  I won’t go into details about that as it is not necessary to make a point.  That point being that English Canada is trying to lure French Canada to come and be doctors and nurses in their hospitals because there is a doctor and nurse shortage.  This despite the fact they don’t love each other.  Which shows how bad that shortage is.

It is admirable that English Canada is offering these French Canadians a place to work without having to suspend their religious principles.  But note one thing English Canada is NOT doing.  Offering these doctors and nurses more money.  Because they just can’t afford to.  So they hope to exploit Quebec’s new secular values charter to cure a problem common to national health care.  Doctor and nurse shortages.  But if Ontario reduces their shortage it will only increase the shortage in Quebec.  For national health care is a zero-sum game.  For someone to win someone must lose.  As there are a finite number of doctors and nurses in Canada.

This is what Obamacare will do for the American health care system.  Create doctor and nurse shortages.  Because Obamacare is going to fix the high cost of health care by paying doctors and nurses less.  Because no one should profit from the medical misfortunes of others.  But it is okay for patients to wait longer to see a doctor.  Apparently.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

FT177: “For democracy to work you need responsible citizens who will temper their wants with knowledge and experience.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 5th, 2013

Fundamental Truth

The British Subjects were bothered by their Protestant King having a French Catholic Wife

King Henry VIII had a falling out with the Pope.  And broke away from the Catholic Church.  Putting England on the path to becoming Protestant.  Now, for those of you unfamiliar with the Protestant Reformation the resulting conflicts between Catholics and Protestants were really horrible.  And bloody.  Some of England’s greatest enemies during that time were Spain and France.  Both Catholic.  But this Catholic-Protestant animosity was not limited to her foreign enemies.

Religion played a large part in the English Civil War (1642–1651).  In fact, it started it.  When King Charles I tried to impose an English prayer book on Presbyterian Scotland.  To have a singular religion in England and Scotland.  Which the Scottish didn’t embrace.  And pushed back on King Charles.  Who then wanted to teach the Scottish a lesson.  With an army.  But to raise an army he needed money.  Which meant he had to call Parliament.  And when he did they weren’t all that keen on spending money for another war.  Then one thing led to another.  Resulting in a war between supporters of the king.  Cavaliers.  And supporters of Parliament.  Roundheads.

But there was another religious element.  The king’s wife.  Henrietta Maria.  Of France.  Who was a proud practicing Catholic.  This bothered a lot of people.  The king having a French Catholic wife in a Protestant country where they were still executing Catholics.  For practicing religion wrong.  And now the king had a Catholic wife.  Who they believed was turning the Protestant king Catholic.  In fact, they thought that English churches even looked too Catholic for their liking.  And they did something about it.  They smashed idols.  Altars.  Vestments.  Stained glass.  Etc.  Anything that you might find in a Catholic Church they destroyed.  Believing their churches should be properly Protestant.  Plain, boring and dull.

When Hostilities broke out the Anti-Catholic Sentiments among these British Americans were as Strong as Ever

About a hundred years later we come to the American Revolutionary War.  Another war between the British people.  Great Britain.  And the American colonists.  Who had grown into their own people.  And did not like the mother country treating them as second class citizens in the British Empire.  They didn’t like the taxation without representation.  Or their mercantile economic policies.  Which limited the colonists to raw material suppliers.  That they had to sell to Britain.  Ship on British ships.  Then buy only British goods.  Shipped on those same British ships.  Goods often manufactured from their own raw materials.

When George Washington settled his accounts with his British agent he didn’t like what he saw.  The British mercantile house was profiting more from his labors than he was.  And it pissed him off.  For George Washington was an astute businessman.  One of the few planters that actually made a profit in Virginia.  And the current system with Great Britain was just bad business.  So when talk of independence came around he was quick to sign on.  Both for principle.  And for business.  For he was an old man.  Who knew a lot.  And experienced even more.  One of the privileges of being an old man.

When hostilities broke out the anti-Catholic sentiments among these British Americans were as strong as ever.  And when General Washington’s soldiers expressed those sentiments publically the general quickly put an end to it.  For the memories of the English Civil War were not that distant.  He did not need to make his task more difficult by adding in that Catholic-Protestant animosity to the current struggle.  Especially when there was an attempt to get Canada to join their cause.  Which was recently French Canada.  A colony of Catholic France.  Before the British defeated the French in the Seven Years’ War.  Making French Canada British.  So the Americans were counting on cashing in on Canada’s anti-British sentiments.  And hopefully France’s anti-British sentiments.

Americans were able to Win the Peace because they didn’t Need Government to tell them how to Live

The Canadians didn’t join the Americans.  But the French did.  And General Washington avoided defeat for 8 years.  And won the American Revolutionary War.  Against the mightiest empire in the world.  A remarkable feat.  Then Washington won the peace.  Which was even more remarkable.  For revolutions rarely end in peace.  Because these conflicts are typically civil wars.  Where brother fights brother.  And when brother fights brother the fighting gets especially brutal.  With bitter feelings of animosity.  Like those between Catholics and Protestants.  Which they often just can’t shut off after the fighting is over.  But the Americans could.  And did.  Which is why their democracy worked.  When so many others have failed.

America’s experiment in self-government worked because of men like George Washington.  Responsible citizens who tempered their wants with knowledge and experience.  Who saw the bigger picture.  Who knew when to stand on principle.  When to compromise.  And when to leave things the hell alone.  Not acting on passions.  Or emotions.  Not acting like children.  But adults.  Who knew they couldn’t have everything they wanted.  And went without a lot of the things they really wanted.  For with liberty came personal responsibility.  You were free to do pretty much whatever you wanted to do.  But that personal responsibility kept you from doing a lot of the things you shouldn’t do.  By exercising restraint.  Which our Founding Fathers exercised after winning the Revolutionary War.  There were no reprisals.  No vengeance.  Only law.  Where justice was blind.  Something that didn’t happen during the French Revolution.  Fought but 5 years from the close of the American Revolution.  But unlike the American Revolution the streets of France ran with blood.  Where vengeance ruled the day.  And justice wasn’t blind.

This is what makes the American Revolution different.  It was the character of the men fighting it.  Men of the Enlightenment.  Selfless men.  Who put the country first.  Instead of settling old scores.  Helped in part by a short history in the New World.  And a long history in the Old World.  As they were able to learn the lessons of history.  Without having centuries of wrongs to right inflaming their passions.  Exceptional men.  And exceptional circumstances.  Something the French just didn’t have.  Which is why the streets of France ran with blood.  And why there were many fits and starts to their republic.  While the Americans were able to make theirs work from the beginning.  Because of the character of its people.  Who were not used to a ruling power subjecting them.  Who expected no one to take care of them.  And just wanted their government to leave them the hell alone.  So they could work hard.  And provide for their families.  And their ideal form of government was one that let them do just that.  Not one that was a big part of their life.  Or one that provided for them.  Made them dependent on it.  The Americans were able to win the peace because they didn’t need government to tell them how to live.  They chose to live harmoniously together.  Thanks to a character honed by their religious beliefs.  And having exemplary men to emulate.  The Founding Fathers.  This is why the Americans were able to win the peace.  Why the French were unable to win theirs.  And why the Egyptians are struggling to win theirs.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

The Language Police descend upon a Spoon in a Montreal Yogurt Shop

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 22nd, 2013

Week in Review

If you think there is hostility between liberals and conservatives in the United States try this.  Go to Ontario, Canada, and greet someone by saying, “Bonjour personne anglophone.  Permettez-moi de parler lentement alors même que vous mon obtus ami peut comprendre ma langue supérieure.  (Which, according to Bing, translates to “Hello English-speaking person.  Let me speak slowly so even you my dim-witted friend may understand my superior language.”)

Do NOT do this.  Because if you do you may really offend someone and cause an international incident.  For the English-speaking Canadians are not exactly thrilled with French-speaking Canadians and their French language agenda.  Who even have language police enforcing a French-only language law in Quebec (see Quebec language cops object to yogurt shop’s spoons by Giuseppe Valiante, QMI Agency, posted 6/21/2013 on the Toronto Sun).

David Lipper said he had no idea his two Menchies Frozen Yogurt franchises in the Montreal area were carrying potential contraband.

Lipper said he “was so paranoid to ensure everything in the store was in French” that he missed a pivotal item: the yogurt spoons.

Lipper said an inspector told him he violated the province’s language laws and the oversight will cost his head office at least $30,000…

The “cow” spoon is engraved with the words “sweet moosic!” The language inspector who visited Lipper’s yogurt shop a few days ago didn’t appreciate the play on words.

So why are the English-speaking Canadians so upset with the French-speaking Canadians?  Because of things like this.  While every other province outside of Quebec has to be bilingual.  All of their businesses, their courts, their stores and even their road signs have to be in both English and French.  Which costs a pretty penny.  Yet in Quebec there is no English allowed.  Despite Canada being officially bilingual.

So don’t go up to an English-speaking Canadian and say something rude to them in French.  For it is almost certain that they will fail to see the humor in it.

For the record the French were first to Canada.  The lower town of Quebec City dates back to 1603.  So they had a lot of history there before the British defeated them in the Seven Years’ War and made French Canada British.  So you can understand their desire to keep the French language, customs and institutions alive in the heart of what was once New France.  But on the other hand they have imposed bilingualism on the rest of Canada.  Where the vast majority of these people trace their history back to the British.  So it is a touchy subject.  And will forever remain one.  Just be polite and respectful to whomever you talk to in Canada and you can’t go wrong.  For they are a kind people.  And will treat you like family.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Aging Populations and State-Provided Health Care will Stress State Systems to Collapse

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 16th, 2013

Week in Review

When people provided their own health care and retirement nest eggs it didn’t matter if the population was aging or getting younger.  For each person planned to take care of him or herself.  But when the government took over health care and retirement nest eggs the age of the population began to matter.  For when the state provides these benefits they have to pay for them via taxes.  And if the population is aging that is a big problem.  Because more people are leaving the workforce and consuming health care and pension benefits than there are entering the workforce to pay for them.

Which means the government has to increase tax rates on those paying for these benefits.  And when people are living longer into retirement it really throws a wrench into the state’s plans.  For it is requiring a level of taxation that simply isn’t possible.  And this is exactly what the baby boom generation is doing to advanced welfare states throughout the world.  It’s causing greater governmental expenditures.  Resulting in larger budget deficits.  And financial crises (see Our aging population set to put a heavy toll on our systems, and we’re not ready by Simon Kent and Shawn Jeffords posted 6/14/2013 on the Toronto Sun).

The first baby boomers began turning 65 in 2012, and by 2036, one out of every four of our neighbours will be elderly…

“We don’t have a health care system in Canada, we have an acute care system,” [Sharon] Carstairs [former senator and was the first woman to lead an opposition party in Canada] after becoming Manitoba’s Liberal leader in the ’80stold QMI Agency.

The very sick are cared for well but we don’t do a good job of keeping others at home and out hospitals and high-cost facilities.

“We’re using acute care hospital beds to hold thousands of Canadians who should be in long-term care or home care,” she says…

Canada has a “little bit of breathing space” for preparations to cope with aging boomers, but not much, suggests University of Toronto professor emeritus David Foot, one of the country’s most respected demographers.

“We need to get this right to prepare for that boomer onslaught,” Foot says. “We can have an excellent system if we choose to.”

Zero hour is 2027.

“The first boomer born in 1947 reaches 80 in 2027,” Foot says.

That’s when the critical mass, the largest bulge of the baby boom, approaches 80 and will require the most care of their lives…

Canada needs to train gerontologists, therapists, psychiatrists, palliative care nurses and specialists, replace the workforce of aging nurses and the army of some 3 million volunteers who currently provide the bulk of in-home care to seniors, say experts…

“The sheer number of baby boomers that will be drawing on the system will magnify and put pressures on the systems that has not been felt before,” he says.

Both the United States and Canada have aging populations.  And a baby boomer bulge coming down the pike.  It will make it very difficult in Canada.  And far worse in the United States.  For they have about 9-times the population of Canada.  And will have 9-times the baby boomer bulge.  Making it a very poor time for the state to take over more pension and health care spending obligations.  Which is exactly what the Americans did by passing Obamacare into law.

The United States is already suffering record trillion dollar deficits.  By the time Obamacare pays to train gerontologists, therapists, psychiatrists, palliative care nurses, specialists, etc., and builds nursing homes to handle the baby boomer bulge the deficit will soar even higher.  Unless there really are death panels in Obamacare.  Which may be the only way not to break the fiscal back of the nation.  Well, there’s that.  Or they could let people provide their own health care and retirement nest eggs like they once did.  And then the age of the population would be irrelevant.  For it basically comes down to these two options.  Either we pay for our own health care and retirement.  Or the government will have to figure out how to cut costs.  And how do you do that when the largest cost is caring for the very old and the very sick?  In a word, death panels.  Well, two words, actually.

Welcome to the brave new world of Obamacare.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

President Obama is OK with Food Assistance for Illegal Immigrants but wanted to charge Legal Border Crossers a Toll

Posted by PITHOCRATES - May 12th, 2013

Week in Review

Does the Obama administration have a spending problem?  Or a revenue problem?  Well, according to an article in the Examiner, since Obama has been president the food stamp program (SNAP) has “increased at 10 times the rate of job creation, the annual spending on SNAP has doubled, and one in seven Americans now participates in SNAP.”   The USDA even sent a Spanish-language flyer to the Mexican Embassy “advising Mexicans in the U.S. that they do not need to declare their immigration status in order to receive financial assistance.”

The Obama administration is giving away so much food assistance that the treasury will soon be unable to borrow money fast enough to pay for it.  Showing a real spending problem.  And a love for illegal immigrants living in the country.  Or who would like to live in the country.  Basically throwing open our southern border.  While at the same time President Obama wants to make Mexicans and Canadians crossing the border legally pay a toll (see U.S. Senate nixes planned U.S.-Canada border tolls by Paul Koring posted 5/10/2013 on The Globe and Mail).

Obama administration plans to impose a toll on land travellers crossing the U.S. borders with Canada and Mexico were scrapped Thursday.

The proposed toll, which sparked angry responses on both sides of the borders, was blocked in a rare show of bipartisan unanimity by Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Senate…

It effectively killed a Homeland Security suggestion contained in Mr. Obama’s proposed budget that tolls on pedestrian and vehicular traffic crossing the Canada-U.S. and Mexico-U.S. borders be considered as a means of raising revenues for the cash-strapped federal government.

When the president wants to make people pay for the privilege of crossing our border to spend their money in our economy it’s time to admit you have a spending problem.

It is interesting that the Department of Homeland Security wants more money to secure the border when they continue to refuse to secure the border.  Which seems to be more of a policy decision than a cost factor.  Especially when the USDA is telling illegal immigrants that they can get food assistance without being able to speak English or prove that they are a legal citizen.

Bridges and tunnels need maintenance.  Which is why we charge tolls at river-crossings.  But we don’t charge tolls at land-crossings.  To do so would add a tariff to cross-border trade.  Violating the North American Free Trade Agreement.  As well as defeating the purpose of a free trade agreement.  To encourage cross-border trade.

The problem is with America’s southern border.  Making Canadians pay for the problems at our southern border would be unfair to say the least.

President Obama has a spending problem.  And he needs to fix that problem by cutting spending.  Not by raising taxes everywhere and on everyone.  Higher taxes and a less friendly business environment destroy economic activity.  And he should know this.  As he had a front-row seat for his destructive economic policies that have created the worst recovery since that following the Great Depression.  And yet all he ever comes up with is more of the same failed policies of the past.  It’s as if he just tries them one more time they will have a different outcome.  Which is either a sign of insanity.  Or of someone that puts politics before all else.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Obama’s Rejection of the Keystone XL Pipeline raises Food Prices and makes the World a more Polluted Place

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2013

Week in Review

President Obama yielded to the environmentalists in his liberal base on the Keystone XL pipeline.  Who opposed it on environmental grounds.  Ironic as the environment will be at greater risk if the president doesn’t let them build the pipeline.  And to make matters worse the price of gasoline will go up also.  Making one of the worst economic recoveries in U.S. history worse.  By leaving less money in consumers’ pockets.  While at the same time raising the price of everything that uses refined oil to get to market (see Killing Keystone Seen as Risking More Oil Spills by Rail by Rebecca Penty & Jim Efstathiou Jr. posted 4/9/2013 on Bloomberg).

A rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline by President Barack Obama would push more of Canada’s $73 billion oil exports onto trains, which register almost three times more spills than pipelines…

Shipping more supplies by rail would lead to higher costs for oil producers because train shipments are more expensive than pipelines…

Without Keystone, designed to carry 830,000 barrels a day of oil, shipments of Canadian crude by rail would rise an additional 42 percent by 2017, according to RBC Capital Markets.

“One of the unintended consequences of delaying Keystone XL is that more oil has been getting to markets in Canada and the United States using rail, truck and water-borne tankers,” Shawn Howard, a spokesman for TransCanada, said in an e-mail. “None of those methods of transportation are as safe as moving it by pipelines,” he said.

Trains are one of the most efficient ways to transport heavy freight.  Bulk freight carriers on the Great Lakes can ship heavy freight cheaper but they don’t travel as fast as trains.  And they can only travel on water.  A train can travel almost anywhere.  Over, under and around bodies of water.  Something a ship just can’t do with land.  But the benefit of train transport comes with a cost.  Rail infrastructure is very costly.  And you have to have it wherever a train travels.  Unlike a ship.  Still, rail is the best way to transport bulk freight.  Except that kind of bulk freight that we can push through a pipeline.

To think of the immense advantage of moving things by pipeline consider the hot water in your house when having a bath.  Without the pipeline system in your house you would have to heat water outside over a fire.  Then carry it in small containers and pour it into your bathtub.  Container after container you would have to fill with cold water.  Carry it to where you converted it into hot water.  Then carry the hot water by foot where you could stumble or fall, spilling your converted cold water.  Leaving you a mess to clean up.  And the need to burn more fuel to convert more cold water into hot water.

Now imagine having a bath by simply opening the hot water tap at your bathtub and letting it fill your tub.  It’s a whole lot easier.  Less chance to spill water.  And you burn less fuel.  So which would you rather do?  Clearly moving anything by pipeline is the best way to move anything.  You reduce the chance of spills because the only moving part is the oil in the pipeline.  And there are no loading and unloading costs to factor into the price of gasoline.  As the refineries basically have a hot water tap to turn on when they want to refine oil.  It just doesn’t get simpler than that.

Keystone XL pipeline doesn’t put the people or the environment first.  Just those people who oppose businesses and capitalism.  Who don’t care that people have to spend more to put gasoline into their cars.  Or have to spend more at the grocery store thanks to higher fuel costs passed along in higher food prices.  For if it were up to them people wouldn’t even have cars.  Or enjoy eating anything that came from an animal.  That’s the world the environmentalists have in mind for the American people.  Where the people sacrifice.  So the animals can enjoy a pristine environment.  Where they can happily eat each other.  And crap all over the place.  The way Mother Nature meant it to be.  Before God created man.  Who the environmentalist hate.  And blame for making a mess of everything.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

Canada looking at Rationing Health Care for Senior Citizens to Reduce Costs

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 17th, 2013

Week in Review

Proponents of national health care in the U.S. have long pointed to Canada and said, “See?  That’s the way you do health care.”  While critics say national health care will only lead to longer wait times.  Poorer quality.  And rationing (see Health ministers look to cut back on pricey diagnostic tests by Adrian Morrow posted 3/15/2013 on The Globe and Mail).

The provinces are also looking at ways to cut back on pricey diagnostic tests and surgeries such as MRIs, knee replacements and cataract removals. After consulting with health-care professionals, they hope to draw up a series of voluntary guidelines, to be presented this summer, on when such procedures are necessary and when they can be skipped…

The greatest cost pressure on the system, however, may be the demographic shift and the steady rise in the number of senior citizens requiring chronic care…

Most of the new model involves finding ways to keep seniors out of hospital. Ontario, for instance, is pumping money into providing more home care. Manitoba is looking toward preventive medicine. Saskatchewan is reviewing ways to improve long-term care. Nova Scotia has a system where paramedics treat some ailments in long-term care facilities to avoid tying up hospital beds.

Britain is also working on a way to keep seniors out of hospitals.  And they have a plan for those who do get into their hospitals.  If they’re really sick and need a lot of expensive health care.  They withdraw all medical care and nourishment.  They call it the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient.  Something that let’s really sick patients die with dignity.  Or so the program says.  Family members who lost a loved one because he or she was placed on the Liverpool Care Pathway without their knowledge see it differently.  Some even have called it a death panel.  Because it results in more deaths.  Which helps the bottom line.

Obamacare will have some kind of death panel, too.  With bureaucrats being introduced into the medical decision-making process.  Who will consider the bottom line when making their decisions.  And one thing that helps the bottom line in national health care is death.  For dead people don’t need pricey diagnostic tests, surgeries, MRIs, knee replacements and cataract removals.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

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

« Previous Entries   Next Entries »