Makes me want to move to Texas…
*Shamelessly lifted from Threedonia
Remind me again how ObamaCare is going to reduce cost and increase access to heath care?
A row has broken out over a debt-ridden NHS hospital being handed over to a private company that will keep a large chunk of the millions of pounds in savings it will seek to make.
Bosses at Circle, which is running the Hinchingbrooke Health Care Trust in Cambridgeshire, have insisted they will improve standards despite claims that they will need to make what have been described as “eye-watering” cuts.
The Health Service Journal (HSJ) has published a report saying the hospital will need to make surpluses of at least £70m over the next decade if it is to clear its debts and meet Circle’s contracted share.
Who could see that coming… A private company running a hospital (or any business) more efficiently than a government agency.
The group is demanding that DTE and others like it do more to help the 99%, especially in the city of Detroit. Reverend Charles Williams II was among those demonstrators outside the headquarters. He said they want the company to take the millions that they got in tax breaks from the state the federal government and give some of that back to the city of Detroit and its residents.
The demonstrators tried but were turned away from getting inside the shareholder meeting and then spilled out onto the street. Other demonstrators claim DTE is not paying it’s fair share of taxes and it’s time that changed. The protestors also called for a moratorium on shut-offs for those who have not paid their bills.
Detroit has a bad image, and protesters trying to overrun a shareholder meeting only reinforce this image.
Of course, no one protesting has bothered to stop and think where companies such as DTE get the money to PAY taxes in the first place.
They need to spend a little time watching Milton Friedman.
Besides, having government redistribute the wealth isn’t a good idea.
Catholic Bishops are fighting back against Obama’s “health care law” and have issued a very powerful statement rejecting Obama’s healthcare law (and several other governmental assaults on personal freedom and liberty).
The following are few key excerpts:
Religious Liberty Is More Than Freedom of Worship
Religious liberty is not only about our ability to go to Mass on Sunday or pray the Rosary at home. It is about whether we can make our contribution to the common good of all Americans. Can we do the good works our faith calls us to do, without having to compromise that very same faith? Without religious liberty properly understood, all Americans suffer, deprived of the essential contribution in education, health care, feeding the hungry, civil rights, and social services that religious Americans make every day, both here at home and overseas.What is at stake is whether America will continue to have a free, creative, and robust civil society—or whether the state alone will determine who gets to contribute to the common good, and how they get to do it. Religious believers are part of American civil society, which includes neighbors helping each other, community associations, fraternal service clubs, sports leagues, and youth groups. All these Americans make their contribution to our common life, and they do not need the permission of the government to do so. Restrictions on religious liberty are an attack on civil society and the American genius for voluntary associations.
The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America issued a statement about the administration’s contraception and sterilization mandate that captured exactly the danger that we face:
Most troubling, is the Administration’s underlying rationale for its decision, which appears to be a view that if a religious entity is not insular, but engaged with broader society, it loses its “religious” character and liberties. Many faiths firmly believe in being open to and engaged with broader society and fellow citizens of other faiths. The Administration’s ruling makes the price of such an outward approach the violation of an organization’s religious principles. This is deeply disappointing.
This is not a Catholic issue. This is not a Jewish issue. This is not an Orthodox, Mormon, or Muslim issue. It is an American issue.
Exactly.
The Bishop’s continue; pointing out that many laws emanating from Washington are unjust laws and, therefore should not be followed.
In his famous “Letter from Birmingham Jail” in 1963, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. boldly said, “The goal of America is freedom.” As a Christian pastor, he argued that to call America to the full measure of that freedom was the specific contribution Christians are obliged to make. He rooted his legal and constitutional arguments about justice in the long Christian tradition:
I would agree with Saint Augustine that “An unjust law is no law at all.” Now what is the difference between the two? How does one determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of Saint Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.
It is a sobering thing to contemplate our government enacting an unjust law. An unjust law cannot be obeyed. In the face of an unjust law, an accommodation is not to be sought, especially by resorting to equivocal words and deceptive practices. If we face today the prospect of unjust laws, then Catholics in America, in solidarity with our fellow citizens, must have the courage not to obey them. No American desires this. No Catholic welcomes it. But if it should fall upon us, we must discharge it as a duty of citizenship and an obligation of faith.
It is essential to understand the distinction between conscientious objection and an unjust law. Conscientious objection permits some relief to those who object to a just law for reasons of conscience—conscription being the most well-known example. An unjust law is “no law at all.” It cannot be obeyed, and therefore one does not seek relief from it, but rather its repeal.
The Christian church does not ask for special treatment, simply the rights of religious freedom for all citizens. Rev. King also explained that the church is neither the master nor the servant of the state, but its conscience, guide, and critic.
Be sure to read the rest. It is a very powerful statement.
It’s interesting this hasn’t made a bigger splash in the media. As pointed out at Ace O’ Spades:
It’s surprising how little press this got, considering how much the make-believe-media loves to bash Christians. Explicitly calling for Americans to ignore or disobey a law beloved to the Left is certainly otherwise newsworthy, no?
Perhaps the media wants to ignore this because polls show most Americans agree with the Church that the mandate is a violation of our liberty. A call for open rebellion like this could start an embarrassing preference cascade.
Yep, Obama’s healthcare law is not popular. Not at all.
The American left has a visceral contempt for the Constitution, disregard for the individual liberty and a general disdain for the rule of law when it conflicts with their objectives.
Check out Secretary Sebelius’ lame “separation of church and state” explanation beginning at the 2:10 mark of the video.
It is not surprising that Obama selected Sebelius as HHS Secretary. They both share the American lefts’ aversion to the Constitution.
Many people are approaching the 2012 election as a “referendum on Obama.” While in many ways it is a referendum on Obama, the 2012 election really needs to be a “referendum on the corrosive ideology of the left.”
Via The WaPo:
Surrounded by thousands of uniformed members of the Army’s Third Infantry Division, President Obama Friday signed an executive order cracking down on for-profit colleges that prey on service members and veterans to collect tuition dollars without providing meaningful education in return.
Sure… ”Not for profit” College or University are obviously a better deal for your educational dollars.
If you are looking for a meaningful education, UCLA offers a course on Queer Musicalogy, instructed by Associate Professor Mitchell Morris. Not to be outdone, The University of Michigan (who paid their president, Mary Sue Coleman $783,850 in 2010) offers a minor in Gender, Race, And Nation studies.This gem of a program prepares students with a meaningful education:
Courses examine race and ethnicity in contexts that are local, transnational, or both. They analyze the ways in which gender, race, and nation are constituted with and against each other, and how these constructions operate in discourses, institutions, politics, societies, and individual lives past and present. The academic minor can be tailored toward an international or domestic emphasis, but topics are likely to include the changing boundaries of race, gender, and nation; differential relations among nations; histories of imperialism, colonialism, and globalization; and postcolonial resistance and theory.
Tuition alone (for lower division undergraduates- in state rates) at the public University of Michigan will set you back $12,634 for the 2012-13 fall / winter session alone. What a bargain.
But, if you really want a meaningful education, sign up for Critical Theory and Social Justice program at Occidental College where you you can learn from the likes of Associate Professor, Jeffrey Tobin. A few topics of study at Occidental’s Critical Theory and Social Justice program include:
210. MOTHER GOOSE TO MYSPACE: CHILDREN’S LITERATURE AND POPULAR TEXTS
Why did the London Bridge fall down? Is Rub-a-dub-dub really about bath time? Why didn’t an old man live in a shoe? Who is more imperialist, Babar or Peter Pan? Is Tinky Winky gay? Is South Park a children’s show? Is Harry Potter a Hero? How tired was Rosa Parks? Using different critical approaches, this course will examine children’s poetry, picture books, novels, cartoons, feature films, and music videos. Analysis will include topics related to gender, race, culture, and nation, as they play out in the aesthetics, images, and poetics of children’s texts.
And…
342. THE PHALLUS
A survey of psychoanalytic theories of gender and sexuality. Topics include the signification of the phallus, the relation of the phallus to masculinity, femininity, genital organs and the fetish, the whiteness of the phallus, and the lesbian phallus. The authors we read include Freud, Riviere, Lacan, Irigaray, Kristeva, Grosz, Gallop, Silverman, de Laurentis, and Butler. Prerequisite: a 200-level CTSJ class. Emphasis topic: Feminist and Queer Studies.
Looking at only a small slice of the nonsense being taught at “not for profit” colleges and universities today, it seems that Obama’s latest executive order is a bit of pandering to his supporters in the halls of “higher” education.
Heaven forbid that ”not for profit” colleges face a little competition for tuition dollars.
Oh, by the way, didn’t Obama attend Occidental College?
Although the headline number for the nation’s gross domestic product – the sum of goods and services produced in the U.S. economy – came up short of expectations, the report’s component parts offered rays of hope. They showed consumption remaining strong in a recovering private sector, while a slowdown in government spending dampened overall growth.
As pointed out previously here at MCT, all government is OVERHEAD and does not add value (grow) the economy.
Only liberals can call confiscating (or borrowing) money from one group of people then transferring it to another group and call it economic growth.
Via CNBC:
Worried? Americans should be.
Still, acknowledging the problem is perhaps the easiest step. Much more difficult is the question of what to do about it. Not surprisingly, young, heavily indebted grads are calling for forgiveness in full or in part of their student loan burdens. Petitions on advocacy website Change.org include calls for federal student loan interest rates to be capped at 3 percent or eliminated altogether. (Indeed, President Obama is currently among those urging Congress not to allow the interest rate on federally subsidized Stafford loans, which are aimed at low — and middle-class borrowers, to double to 6.8 percent on July 1, matching the rate for unsubsidized loans.)
And yet the trouble with those initiatives, or with forgiving student loan debt in whole or part, is threefold. For starters, the straight mathematics: the losses from any such debt reduction scheme will have to be borne by someone, most likely taxpayers, at a time when government finances are already stretched.
Second is the issue of “moral hazard,” that is, rewarding and implicitly encouraging imprudent behavior rather than punishing it. (Of course, it is easier for the public at large to demand that over-leveraged banks be punished for imprudence than 24-year-olds trying to further their education.)
And third is the question of how to keep future graduates from accumulating a mountain of student loan debt just as large, if not larger, than the one just leveled.
It is this third issue which perhaps is most pressing — and most vexing —and which also offers the most opportunity for innovation. Levying an “education tax,” making college free and assigning students to institutions based on a lottery system? Abolishing “college” altogether for more specialized trade institutions instead, while at the same time requiring a “gap year” of liberal arts prior to entry? Offering high-school grads the choice between student loans or business loans to fund new ventures? These all seem ridiculous, but then so too is our current state of affairs.
Lib’s are constantly tinkering, pandering and promising rather than embracing basic economics. The only way to bring down tuition costs is to stop advocating policies (i.e. easy student loans & grants) that artificially increase demand for college. Any high school student can tell you when demand increases, prices will increase.
As pointed out previously here at MCT:
One way to drive down the cost of college tuition is getting the government out of the business of student loans. Every time government becomes involved in an economic activity, it becomes more expensive. If government student loans are severely limited and Universities see fewer students attending their hallowed halls of higher learning, cost of tuition will drop in a hurry.
Otherwise, tuition will keep climbing and people like Mary Sue Coleman will continue laughing all the way to the bank.
Of course, it’s tough to pander to college student votes if politicians can’t pull the strings when it comes to student loans.
The upcoming London Olympic games are driving up property values in the surrounding areas. And, with the increase in property, comes an increase in rent.
Low-income people who live near London’s Olympic Stadium may have to move to other parts of the country due to rising rents, the borough’s mayor said Tuesday.
Newham Mayor Robin Wales said a new U.K. government policy limiting rental subsidies means that many people can no longer afford to live in the east London borough that now includes the sprawling Olympic Park.
Newham has long been one of the country’s poorest boroughs, but the newly built Olympic Stadium, a large new shopping mall and public parks have regenerated parts of the borough and caused rents to rise.
Predictably, this is a due to the policies of evil conservatives.
In Britain, people with low incomes can apply to have all or part of their housing costs subsidized by local authorities, but the Prime Minister David Cameron’s Conservative-led government last year introduced a controversial benefit cap that limits rent subsidies.
The maximum is now around 400 pounds ($646) a week for a four-bedroom house. Most people are only eligible for much smaller properties with lower benefit caps.
And, children are hardest hit.
“People are being driven out of their homes, their kids are being ripped out of schools, because they can no longer afford their rents,” he told The Associated Press. “These are people’s lives we are dealing with.”
Unreal.
“The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.”
Vaclav Klaus (one of my all time favorite Presidents) said this not too long ago:
I see the third main threat to individual freedom in environmentalism. To be specific, I do understand the concerns about eventual environmental degradation, but I also see a problem in environmentalism as an ideology.
Environmentalism only pretends to deal with environmental protection. Behind their people- and nature-friendly terminology, the adherents of environmentalism make ambitious attempts to radically reorganize and change the world, human society, our behavior, and our values.
There is no doubt that it is our duty to rationally protect nature for future generations. The followers of the environmentalist ideology, however, keep presenting us with various catastrophic scenarios with the intention of persuading us to implement their ideas. That is not only unfair but also extremely dangerous. Even more dangerous, in my view, is the quasi-scientific guise that their oft-refuted forecasts have taken on.
Since the wheels have fallen off the global warming / climate change hoax, and the environmentalists are not going away, what is the next eco-fad catastrophe that can only be solved by limiting our freedoms and further trashing our economy?
Sustainability.
According to the UN Rio+20 objectives outline, the upcoming conference will be all about wealth transfer… Sorry… Sustainability.
The objective of the Conference is to secure renewed political commitment for sustainable development, assess the progress to date and the remaining gaps in the implementation of the outcomes of the major summits on sustainable development, and address new and emerging challenges
The Conference will focus on two themes: (a) a green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; and (b) the institutional framework for sustainable development.Rio+20 Issues Briefs
The UNCSD Secretariat together with its partners has prepared a series of Rio+20Issues Briefs. The purpose of the Rio+20 Issues Briefs is to provide a channel for policymakers and other interested stakeholders to discuss and review issues relevant to the objective and themes of the conference, including a green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication, as well as the institutional framework for sustainable development.
Prepare for an onslaught of stories and propaganda urging you to use less and do less because we all have to worry ”sustainability.”
“It is true that liberty is precious – so precious that it must be rationed”
Vladimir Lenin must be kicking himself (while dodging flaming pitchforks) asking “why didn’t I think of this?”