Category: Politics

Another one bites the dust

The Obamacare supporting retards a few months back were all pissed at those of us that pointed out the abysmal failure that the exchanges Obamacare were going to drive every insurer out of that scam. When United Health Group started talking like they would have to bail, we were told that this was all talk that would go nowhere, because in the end Obamacare was not just sound, but the law of the land. fast forward a few months, and we get an article titled “UnitedHealth Makes Good on Threat to Pull Out of Obamacare that points out just that:

The Affordable Care Act suffered another jolt late last week with the news that UnitedHealth Group, the nation’s largest health insurer, was making good on its threat to pull out of Obamacare, beginning with its operations in Georgia and Arkansas.

UnitedHealth roiled the market last November when it revealed that it was considering exiting Obamacare after incurring hundreds of millions of dollars in losses related to ACA business. Then UnitedHealth CEO Stephen Hemsley confessed to investors meeting in New York in December that the company should have stayed out of the program a little longer to better gauge its profitability potential.

The company had cautiously tiptoed into the market in January 2015 after sitting out the first full year of Obamacare operations in 2014. “It was for us a bad decision,” Hemsley admitted to his investors. “In retrospect, we should have stayed out longer.”

So it wasn’t a huge surprise on Friday when UnitedHealth spokesperson Tyler Mason confirmed to The Washington Post that the company, indeed, was pulling out of Georgia and Arkansas, two relatively small states that proved to be highly unprofitable terrain for the company.

This development is troubling, especially if it UnitedHealth pulls out of other bigger states, or if other major insurers such as Aetna and Anthem follow suit. But experts have cautioned not to make too much of UnitedHealth’s flight from the market. While it is one of the largest insurers on the national scene, UnitedHealth nonetheless is a bit player in Obamacare and holds a much smaller market share than other rivals like Aetna and Blue Cross Blue Shield.

Get the fuck out of here! This idiotic Ponzi scheme will fall apart as the major players all realize they got duped and pull out? Say it ain’t so! I guess I shouldn’t be celebrating this vindication, because after all, Obamacare was never about fixing anything that the collectivists claimed was wrong with our existing healthcare system or controlling costs: it was about destroying the existing system by creating so much tumult, chaos, and pain, that even the most adamant anti-single-payer system advocate would have no choice to accept the left’s takeover of this enterprise that comprises 1/6th of the economy and gives a government that has already shown it is willing to use its various branches against its political and other enemies, even more power to do so and control the uppity serfs. All of us better get used to our healthcare being crappy like this.

Shades of Lois Lerner and the IRS Scandal coverup

I guess that fearing the fact that the Hillary Clinton e-mail security scandal was getting traction, despite a massive campaign by the DNC controlled media to conceal the criminal activity that caused a massive breach of security, Obama took to the airwaves this past weekend to defend Clinton. I can’t say I am surprised. Hillary probably has evidence that will drag Obama down with her if she gets indicted, as she should be, and then convicted an locked up, so Obama is now covering his ass. From the article;

The latest example came this weekend, when Obama again insisted that Clinton hadn’t put the country at risk by using a private email server during her time at the State Department.

“I continue to believe that she has not jeopardized America’s national security,” Obama said during a Fox News interview, going on to praise her job as secretary of state.

Even in those remarks Obama noted he needed to be “careful” in what he said, since his administration continues an investigation into Clinton’s email arrangements. He stopped short of declaring that Clinton hadn’t broken any laws, a conclusion that his Justice Department has yet to make.

Why does this all conjure up memories of the Lois Lerner, IRS Scandal insider job? It is as if these democrats all think and act as if they are above the law, because they know that they will never be held accountable or something. This country is run by a crime syndicate that seems compelled to hand off the baton to another crime syndicate. How the mighty have fallen. Love that fundamental change Obama promised us all yet?

Religious fanatic wants to punish heretics.

I had to laugh at this idiotic and dangerous article by another one of the SJW morons that form the AGW priesthood. If you were to just read this stupid article, you might come away thinking that the idiot that wrote it, Michael E. Kraft, somehow has a scientist background, and thus, is to be taken seriously and even believed. This retard sure makes a call to authority with his demand that anyone not willing to just suck the cock of members of the AGW priesthood should be punished by the authorities, because “Scientific Consensus”!

I tried googling the guy, and while most of the links when followed through come up dead, I was absolutely not surprised to find out that the guy has no real scientific background to speak off: his supposed field of expertise is a fucking political science! Color me unsurprised, but to me political science ranks right up there with Astrology in scientific rigor or scientific depth, and given a choice between the two, I would rank Astrology as the more scientific of the two on the simple notion that political science is nothing but the refuge of old time collectivist douchebags and people that feel instead of reason.

People should also not be surprised that when you dig deep you find that the bulk of the supposed members of the “scientific community” that sign up to the beliefs of the AGW cult, and those that defend it the most vehemently and make demands like this one that the heretics be punished for their lack of faith, tend to be the members of the breadth of idiotic faiths that have added the terme science to what amounts to a refuge for collectivist twits and grievance mongers (it is an insult and something that detracts from other fields of study that actually amount to real disciplines to call these fucking duplicitous and garbage hangouts for the collectivist and grudge carrying dregs of society that have appropriated the term “science”).

While they are smart enough to never do so in public, and definitely not in the academic community, members of the real scientific disciplines – physics, chemistry, mathematics, biology, and the hard engineering disciplines (sorry social engineering) – laugh at those that belong those other jokes that have appropriated the word science to lend credence to the idiotic cargo cults, and they do so for a good reason. If you fall under the umbrella of “social” or “soft” science, you are part of a group of idiots that believes in and engages in practices that are anything but following rigorous scientific principles and/or methods. If you dare to point this out however, these fucking idiots will use the political correctness machine, by appealing to authority and resorting to the most mean spirited and despicable tactics you can imagine to destroy you. Which is exactly what Kraft is doing in this article.

When you have no real scientific claim to make a stand on, but you have a politically driven agenda you want to push, you are a faith. That’s also when you demand the heretics be punished for daring to defy your “scientific consensus”, a term that absolutely clarifies you are engaged in something wholly unscientific. Fuck the lot of you.

Minimum wage cronyism

I guess there is more than one way to skin a cat, but when you have a government system that is predicated on the idea of the big government machine ultimately picking winners & losers, people should not be surprised that practically all the “good things” the big government types push for involve someone carving themselves some special niche. Case in point the recent CA minimum wage hike which was heavily pushed by a whole slew of SJW types as helping people out. Sure they all told you this was the decent thing to do and that everyone opposing it had a nefarious agenda of their own – after all, SJW types point out that the only people that would argue against helping those making minimum wage out, are those that want to profit by robbing these unfortunates of their earned income – but, sooner than later, it comes out they had one of their own.

Yeah, the SJW big government types love to take the credit for helping minimum wage earners make more cash, but only an idiot thinks they do this to help/ Case in point the union that pushed the hardest for this new legislation, asking for an exemption for themselves from it:

The labor union that led the charge for a $15 minimum wage hike in cities across California is now moving to secure an exemption for employers under union contracts.

The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor buried the exemption on the eighth page of its 12-page proposal for the Santa Monica City Council to review Tuesday while deciding whether to follow Los Angeles and increase the minimum wage.

The loophole would allow employers with collective bargaining agreements to sidestep the wage hike and pay their union members below the proposed $15-per-hour minimum wage.

James Sherk, a research fellow in labor economics at The Heritage Foundation, said the exemption is a union attempt to encourage businesses to unionize by making themselves the only low-wage option as union membership continues to drop off.

Oh, this is far more than about encouraging others to unionize: it is about creating an unfair advantage for the unionized entities by actually creating a huge disadvantage for those that are not unionized. As most of us that knew higher minimum wages would negatively distort economic practices pointed out, the lies about wanting to help people were just that: lies. There always is a down and dirty agenda, and as things like this despicable maneuver shows it is always really about helping the big government nanny-staters enhance their power and create even more opportunities for graft.

The only real effect this move to jack the minimum wage to $15 an hour will have on way too many minimum wage earners will be the chance that they end up losing their jobs, as employers cut down or switch to use unionized labor. Similarly, people trying to get minimum wage low skilled entry jobs will find far fewer of those available. Ask the people in Seattle how well it worked for them. But hey, the big government types and their special interests sure as hell scored big with this job killing idea. Of course, when someone in traditional media finally gets to reporting that this was just another scheme to help the people feeding at the government trough steal more money from the productive, those of us that pointed out there was some ulterior and nefarious motive, are going to be the ones painted in a bad light again.

Got to protect the agenda…

Banana republic it is

I speak from personal experience when I point out that when people piss off the left and members of this administration in particular, they end up being raided by the legal arm of the corrupt system. And I am sure this is done to find a way to punish anyone that dares stand up the these corrupt kleptocrats as well as set an example for anyone else that might think to stand up against the establishment’s chosen.

We have a system of law that was created by these plutocrats over decades, always pretending the idiotic laws were to help people, that now ends up making sure every single one of us is a criminal, at least 3 times a day. Most people feel fine with the bureaucratic morass that passes for a legal system, because the masters that direct that system against their enemies usually finds them not worthy of much effort, and lacking any taste of how contemptible things have become, they think the system still serves to mete out justice instead of the will of the masters. But piss off the masters, and they will show you that your assumption of having rights and constitutional protection was long ago rendered mute, and that you are at their whim, like this sap and so many others have found to be the case.

You ask why they would allow something like this to be published if they were abusing their power? The answer is simple: they not only see it as a deterrent, but they flat out believe nobody can do anything to them about it. After all, they have been pissing all over the constitution and over our freedoms for so long, setting new records of abuse over the last 7 plus years, and have not just gotten away with it, but get defended by idiots that think that not only is this fine because it is their side sticking it to the others, but because they are either naive enough to think that because they pledge allegiance to these vile and corrupt masters, they will be spared, or worse, because they hope that as everyone gets thrown to the crocodiles, they will be last.

Don’t piss off the new American aristocracy of this fundamentally transformed country, or else. When you trade your freedoms for the veneer of security or social justice, don’t end up surprised when you end up with nothing at all but an obligation to your new masters.

Because this worked out so well before..

Being a social justice warrior/collectivist twit means never learning any of the lessons reality slams you with when the fucked up shit your supposedly well intentioned stupid ideas cause to happen blow up in your face. Oh sure, the leftist twits tried their best to blame it on the evil banks and their predatory practices not being regulated enough, but of course, as is always the case, they covered for the fact that it was deals they made to make this giant shit sandwich look semi-palatable to the lending industry that basically was being told to burn money by giving loans to people that were all but guaranteed to fuck things up.

Despite the usual heap of idiotic SJW bullshit about a rigged system, people that are considered high risk and thus are not able buy homes, usually are there because they have proven not to be fiscally responsible. That suddenly doesn’t go away when they are able to buy a home on the cheap, without any serious commitment or risk on their part, and continue to engage in the same idiotic things that cause them their financial pain. That republicans chose to go along with this idiotic scheme shouldn’t let them off the hook, but the push to get more of this crap going definitely comes from one party, as the Clintons doubling down on the stupid shows. Fast forward, and scams to make the whole mess look palatable fail to prevent the inevitable collapse of the house of cards this nonsense created.

Yeah yeah, I know that the DNC driven media has put out a ton of articles trying to blame evil Wall Street and provide cover for big SJW government’s role in this disaster, but you must be a liberal idiot if you are going to pretend that Wall Street could have done any of the things it did without government backing. in fact, the lie that the problem was caused by lack of regulation is galling. It was specifically caused by the regulation in place: the deals made with the big lenders to back their horribly crappy loans to people that never should have qualified for any such loan came from government.

American tax payers didn’t bail out Wall Street – like your usual leftist twit would like you to believe – because republicans wanted to save their friends, but because the SJW types in government knew that if they didn’t do this they would never again get any private institution to go along with any of their harebrained schemes again. Pelosi and the other criminals in her clique pretended not to want to bailout Wall Street and only to go along once they got their way to “reform” the system, but those of us that knew better, saw through that deceit. As many of us predicted, what followed was nothing but a charade, and that we would not only get zero action to prevent such a crisis again, but that the democrats would double down on pushign the same idiocy with renewed vigor.

Fast forward about 7 or so years, and here we are again:

The Obama administration is engaged in a broad push to make more home loans available to people with weaker credit, an effort that officials say will help power the economic recovery but that skeptics say could open the door to the risky lending that caused the housing crash in the first place.

President Obama’s economic advisers and outside experts say the nation’s much-celebrated housing rebound is leaving too many people behind, including young people looking to buy their first homes and individuals with credit records weakened by the recession.

In response, administration officials say they are working to get banks to lend to a wider range of borrowers by taking advantage of taxpayer-backed programs — including those offered by the Federal Housing Administration — that insure home loans against default.

Housing officials are urging the Justice Department to provide assurances to banks, which have become increasingly cautious, that they will not face legal or financial recriminations if they make loans to riskier borrowers who meet government standards but later default.

Officials are also encouraging lenders to use more subjective judgment in determining whether to offer a loan and are seeking to make it easier for people who owe more than their properties are worth to refinance at today’s low interest rates, among other steps.

Now what could go wrong with government forcing lenders to provide loans to people that are unqualified in the name of social justice, huh? We are back at the same junction we started of with the idiotic community reinvestment act. SJW are decrying the fact that people that make poor finical choices are being left behind, so they now are telling lenders that they should ignore the golden lending rules – as well as the laws of the land – and pony up. And don’t worry! Government, meaning the productive American tax payers that are already being fleeced at a record rate to finance other such SJW boondoggle schemes and scams, will back them up when the shit hits the fan!

Seriously, nobody should be surprised that an administration that has seen itself not only as “above the law”, but views the law and the legal system as a means to attack their political enemies while providing cover to their friends, decides they can openly tell the very financial entities that they so actively and effectively falsely blamed for the previous crisis that they better ignore the new set of idiotic laws of their own making, and to go back to doing more of the same stupid shit that destroyed the wealth of and screwed up so many in 2008.

What could go wrong this time? And it isn’t as if we might have any other bubbles to worry about either.

Insanity: doing the same stupid shit over and over under the pretense that this time you will overcome the laws of human nature, economics, and reality. But that’s liberal social justice warfare for you in a nutshell.

The Bernie Pill

The amazing thing about the Bernie Sanders campaign is that his ideas are so … tired. Nothing he has proposed — “free” healthcare, “free” college, “free” daycare — is particularly original or innovative. Sanders admits as much, saying that he wants is to imitate the model of the social democracies of Scandinavia. Of course, that itself is an indication of how outdated his ideas are. Many of those social democracies have moved beyond Sander’s 1970’s ideal of what they really are, privatizing and shrinking government and now enjoying comparable or even superior economic freedom compared to the United States.

Matt Welch has a thorough rundown of just how bad many of his ideas area. A lot of them are things I’ve hit on these pages: how expensive socialized medicine would be, how ineffective “universal pre-K” is, how bad a federal minimum wage of $15 would be. But it also hits a few topics I haven’t gotten around to such as Sanders’ opposition to reforming the VA:

Sanders was lucky the question wasn’t about his actual track record as chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs. As The New York Times reported in February, “a review of his record in the job…shows that in a moment of crisis, his deep-seated faith in the fundamental goodness of government blinded him, at least at first, to a dangerous breakdown in the one corner of it he was supposed to police.” Ouch.

What was Sanders doing in May 2014 instead of holding oversight hearings and sounding the alarm bell over a national disgrace? Complaining to The Nation magazine about “a concerted effort to undermine the V.A.,” led by “the Koch brothers and others,” who “want to radically change the nature of society, and either make major cuts in all of these institutions, or maybe do away with them entirely.”

(The VA, incidentally, was long upheld as the shining model of what single payer healthcare would be like in this country. Well … they weren’t entirely wrong about that. Much of Sanders’ blind support for the VA was precisely because he wanted it to be the example for single payer.)

You should read the whole thing.

So why is Sanders so popular? Is it because America loves his crackpot ideas? No.

First, like Trump, he really isn’t that popular. He’s drawing about half the votes in a Democratic primary, which means about 10% of the vote. If he were the nominee, he’d have to get a lot more independent and conservative votes, which I don’t see materializing unless Trump is the Republican nominee.

Also, like Trump, he’s appealing to economic populism. Sanders supporters hate it when you compare Trump to Sanders (which is one of the reasons I like doing it). But they both harp on a similar message — trade is bad, Washington doesn’t work, you’re being rooked, vote for me. That sort of populism traces through a long and diverse array of politicians from Roosevelt I to George Wallace to Trump/Sanders. It never has worked out.

(Both also prefer a more isolationist foreign policy; another key element of populism).

But I think the main reason, as I’ve said before, is that Sanders isn’t Clinton. Sanders is honest about what he thinks, has stayed positive and his earnestness is almost refreshing contrasted against the calculated fumbling of Clinton. Last week, the Clinton camp said she wouldn’t debate Sanders any more unless he changed his “tone”. Even for Clinton supporters, like the ever-reliable Vox, this was laughable. Sanders’ tone has been very respectful toward Clinton. The only thing she could complain about is that he’s called her out — accurately, as it happens — on such things as her Wall Street ties, her support for the Iraq War and her role in runaway criminalization.

In any case, I don’t expect Sanders to be the nominee. But I do expect that his success will lead to an insistence that his ideas are awesome and that this country is ready for socialism. Don’t be fooled. Single payer healthcare failed to gain support in Sanders own state once it became obvious how much it was going to cost. Even Clinton’s plans are going to require big tax increases that I don’t see the public swallowing.

So let the socialists enjoy their moment. Once the extent and cost of their ideal system becomes clear, support for it will evaporate. Because it’s one thing to promise the moon; anyone can do that. It’s another to actually deliver it.

(PS – Speaking of Vox, Yglesias has another article arguing that the Democrats shouldn’t be too concerned with how to pay for their pipe dreams. Since interest rates are low, he argues, we should be borrowing to pay for “investments”.

Yglesias is usually a reasonable voice but this is one area where he, and many liberals, have lost their minds. Interest rates will not remain low forever. And when they come up, we’ll not only have $19 trillion in debt to roll over, but massive structural deficits for all this new spending. Any increase in spending increase the baseline for future spending. Deficit spending now because interest rates are low is a long walk off a short plank.

Besides, it’s not like the deficit isn’t about to explode anyway.)

What collectivism really looks like..

This is what collectivism always really looks like. The “benevolent leader or leaders ” live like kings of old, with the power of life and death, and the rest, divided and conquered, fight over the scraps.

Don’t for a second let the people selling this shit religion tell you that this is the exception and what they want is different. Especially when they allude to the successes of their government religion in other places. The fact of the matter is that these things, while they work for a while, eventually end up in disaster. And when things go wrong, it is always the fault of others and external forces. That’s why these people tell you with a serious face that having an entity rob the productive at gun point, to buy votes from people quite content to fight over the scraps they get handed as part of this idiotic setup, as long as they feel others are made to suffer as well, can work if the “right people” are in charge.

The Kims, Castros, Pol Pot, Lenin, Stalin, and those that followed them, Mao and his successors, and so on and on, all are excused, along with the over 100 million killed and billions made to live in misery that the collectivist movement have caused, with the final insult being the admonition that the right people in charge would finally make it work. Well, the fact is Obama was also lauded as “the right people”, and only a real partisan hack with an agenda would pretend that those of us that point out that the only thing Obama and his cronies have really managed to accomplish was to make things worse, are wrong in saying so. As always, the way to validate this is to ask yourself what the reaction would be if someone with an R next to their name had done any of the things the media and the left have let pass when done by Obama, Hillary, or any of the other aristocrats of the left.

Contrary to what the people driven by greed and jealousy of what others have come to believe, the truth is that collectivism can’t create heaven on earth. No matter how well intentioned and what promises it makes, in the end it can only provide hell on earth. At least those pushing the old time religions knew better than to promise what couldn’t be delivered ever would happen in an afterlife.

Manhattan Institute article misses a key point..

A very good Manhattan Institute article titled Hillary & Bernie’s tax fantasies points out some very big problems with the left’s tax-and-spend approach to business. From the article:

Soak-the-rich proposals ignore history and wouldn’t raise nearly enough money to fund big spending plans.

If they stole every penny from anyone making over $100K a year, the collectivist government Hillary & Bernie promise wouldn’t be able to operate for more than a year anyway. Who would they steal money from after they robbed the productive? And the sad thing is that Hillary at least knows this. Bernie is a fucking loser and doesn’t care. It is about revenge for the fact that he couldn’t hold a real job or bag a real women. That is why, in practice, I firmly believe that the left wouldn’t do this (maybe Bernie would). So why this charade then?

Here is a question to ask Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders: What is the best tax rate to impose on high-income earners to ensure there is enough government revenue to pay for your trillion-dollar promises to voters?

Perhaps they think it is 83%, a rate that economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saezhypothesized in 2014 in a widely circulated paper. Or maybe it is 90%, which Sen. Sanders told CNBC last May was not out of the question. “Our job is not to think small,” Mr. Sanders elaborated in the Huffington Post a month later. “It is to think big.”

Progressives have often reminded us that the U.S. had such rates in the past. From 1936 to 1980, the highest federal income-tax rate was never below 70%, and the top rate exceeded 90% from 1951 to 1963. Under Ronald Reagan, the top federal rate declined to 28% by 1988 and has never reached 40% since.

The discussion of these rates can easily create the impression that the federal government collected far more money from “the rich” before the Reagan administration. And it can also leave another impression: There would be no downside to raising rates to 1950s levels, given that decade’s prosperity.

Neither impression would be correct. The effective tax rates actually paid by the highest income earners during the 1950s and early ’60s were far lower than the highest marginal rates. Few taxpayers reached the top brackets, the code was rife with loopholes, and capital gains were taxed at much lower rates.

And when you read between the lines, that last paragraph, it becomes obvious why the left still thinks this absolutely idiotic idea has merit. Insane tax rates provide the political left with the greatest opportunity for graft. In the name of “social engineering” they would flood that system with loopholes to favor their preferred constituencies: lobbyists, mega crops, the ultra rich, and the people that vote for a living. If we went back to the tax rates of the 50s, it would come with a trough feeding frenzy by the lawmakers pushing this crap on the people, as one special interest after another lines up to buy their own bennies.

The only people really screwed would be the middle class. The left can’t operate their totalitarian command driven economy nanny state unless they get rid of the middle class, anyway. History shows us that you always end up with a 2 class system: the aristocracy in charge, and the serfs bearing the brunt of the horrible policies they are made to live under.

Nostalgia aside for a world that never existed, few people paid the top tax rates of the 1950s and early 1960s…

Meh, the political left doesn’t pine for any of that. They spout it to hide their real intention: to rob taxpayers fucking blind by making everyone line up to buy favors from them. In short, they think this move will enhance their ability to pick the winners and the losers even more while in the process lining their pockets. gangsters the lot of them.

The Fields Incident Gets Weirder

Let’s review how we got here:

On March 8, Breitbart reporter Michelle Fields claimed she was asking Trump a question when campaign manager Corey Lewandowski yanked her away from Trump, grabbing her hard enough to leave bruises on her arm. The Trumpers and her own employer turned on her, saying she made it up.

Video and audio then surfaced, confirming that Lewandowski grabbed her. At least one reporter supported her account. They were called liars and told they were exaggerating. “Why don’t you file an assault complaint!” the Trumpers said. So Fields filed an assault complaint. And yesterday, Lewandowski was charged with one count of simple battery.

The response from the Trump camp has been nothing short of astonishing. They’ve been coming up with all sorts of explanations for what happened other than that Lewandowski manhandled her. Trump speculated that she might have gotten those bruises anywhere. They claimed that Lewandowski thought she was a danger to Trump. They brought up a video still showing something in her hand and claimed it could have been a pen-shaped bomb (Fields apparently being a secret Islamist or something). By now, they might be claiming she accidentally fell down a flight of stairs.

Of all the political stories of 2016 so far, this has be the most bizarre. This should have been a minor incident. A reporter claims she was grabbed, the campaign says they’re sorry without admitting anything, story done. And yet, here we are, with battery charges and accusations of assassination attempts.

Normally, I wouldn’t write about this sort of thing. But it has provided an astonishing insight into Trump. Bear with me for a moment.

Read more… »