Today it seems as if every issue that crops up is one of ultimate importance. For example, Iran is seemingly falling into disarray after disputed election results and Obama is increasingly loosing hold on his Democratic majority. These two issues have been dominating the headlines today and have been on my mind for some time.
Firstly the election results in Iran. This is what happens to a regime with so much contradiction and one that for some time has allowed a tyrant to increase his grip on power. The democratic process for electing the all but insubtantial office of President in Iran is totally contradictory to the basic premise of a Islamic Republic. Laws in that country which are predicated on maintaining Islamic order are completely undemocratic; restrictions on dress, speech, images etc. Today more than ever, after Ahmadanejads "landslide" victory these rules are being tightened as he believes that these "results" are an affimation of his policies. As I stated in an earlier post before the elections he gave his cronies the O.K. to fix election results if the need arose, which it might have. The EU, playing the role of appeasers once again have affirmed the election results without much resistence, the Obama White House has held off judgement and the foreign policy guru Biden has explicitely said he has grave concerns about the results but curiously reaffirmed the party line of engaging Iran at any costs.
If the demonstrations in the streets are any example as are the reports of news report blocking and open beatings of people exercising free speech Iran is tumbling down a path that could unravel a nation. I am not saying civil war as I believe that is highly unlikely but clashes reminicent of 1978 are very possible. Students as in the previous instance are the main catalyst for wanting change in the Iranian government. Putting nuclear ambitions aside Mr. Moussavi shows a clear break from the current status quo in Iran. I am not so sure that his platform aligns with that of the Ayatollah [the head honcho in Iran] which is why he seems apathetic to the clashes in the streets and was so quick to affirm Ahmadinejahds victory. The volitile situation in Iran at an increasingly volitile time for the Middle East peace process is very important. On a side note a very interesting report coming out of Tehran said that some of the secret police beating opposition supporters were actual Lebonese Hezbollah, keep an eye on that story!
The next story is supported by the drudgereport and also by politico the liberal blogosphere. The democrats at this point are either too big and therefore too much of a "catch all party" or some including members of his own party are realizing some of the large blunders that Obama is increasingly having. Not only does Obamacare not look like it will get the support it needs from his own party but also Democrats are beginning to look to run against democrats in not only local but national elections! This is an extreme break from the status quo. My focus is on his increasing inability to get all in his party on board for national healthcare. This afternoon Obama will take his case to his biggest opponents the AMA, and these are the guy who should know best! One step that Obama seems willing to support is protecting doctors against some of the frivilous malpractice suites that cost them millions every year...they are here to save lives and sometimes if they cant that doesnt mean that you can sue them!
In a recent post I stated that I support finding some way to cover all people 21 and under, either through the public sector or through subsidies which allow for private options. My gripes with total healthcare reform start with this. The GOVERNMENT wants to take over 1/6 of the American economy! 1/6! The largest economy in the world, 1/6 is bigger than a lot of countries. They say that they want efficiency but every person knows that with government oversight comes Red tape, inefficiency and lack of competition which breeds complacency. The private sector is our saving grace it is what broke us out of bondage. Today as i watched a movie I heard a pretty poinent quote "All the world's great civilizations have followed the same path. From bondage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy back to bondage. If we are to be the exception to history, then we must break the cycle, for those who do not remember the past are condemned top repeat it". Our forefathers broke us out of bondage to England, from "taxation without representation". They fought against big government and their hand dipping into our pockets. They fought for free markets, for choice, for open competition which bred this great country we have today. With the growth of government comes control, complacency, apathy which all lead to even more control or bondage. We have to learn from the past keep ourselves free. This is not a conspiracy theory and I am not against progress in fact I am for progress. I BELIEVE that all Americans need coverage but do I think that it should just be given? NO! To those 21 and under yes! We need to develop again a sense for what is important, what it is to work for these things, work hard, just like those who came before us to establish our nation as the creme of the crop just as our grandparents did. We need innovation, new ideas, competition and a race to the highest rung on the world stage. This cant be done with government subsidies or mandates but by market forces which drive us to strive for something better, to squeeze that extra buck out of the smallest margins. My problem with universal healthcare has less to do with principle than it does with what it says about our change in core values and what it would do to our economy. Because yes in a perfect world everyone would be covered, but we dont live in a perfect world. Scores die every day from disease, famine, violence and hatred. I am happy to live in a land where I am free to fail or succeed by my own initiative to pull myself up by the bootstraps. Apathy and complacency will never have a place in the America I know and I hope the same goes for you.
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Monday, June 15, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Healthcare Reform....
I interrupt what was to be a couple more postings on foreign relations to comment on the increasingly fervent talk about reforming health care. There are two polarizing sides of the health care debate, Ted Kennedy and Rusch Limbaugh. President Obama seems to be more heavily leaning toward the Ted Kennedy side of things. My questions are about how this affects our freedoms and ability to live freely in American, the way our forefathers believed. First problem with this plan is that today, with the economy in a free fall and Washington printing money like its going out of style how does Obama plan to pay for this. Along with paying for this why does he believe that now is the time to do this. There is a enormous deficit to be repayed and now is not a time for our country to fall deeper into debt. True to form Obama seems to have a solution to this, tax the top 5% of our ecnomy even more, and not allow for the same deep deductibles for this bracket. What has our free market economy thrived on for the past couple decades? Consumerism. This consumerism has been the basis for both our problems and our prosperity. The credit crisis was created because people wanted to buy too many things they couldnt afford and washington lowered interest rates so money was cheaper to buy than it was actually worth. On the flipside this consumerism has provided companies with bloated profits allowing for unprecendented growth both at home and abroad. We have become the shoppers of the world. How do we restore both growth and prosperity to the country without sending us into a tailspin of debt, inflation and subsequently conflict.
Healthcare reform is not the answer. My own qualms with universal healthcare put aside we have to realize that before Obama's social initiatives should be even drafted the economy needs to be stabilized and a coherent and transparent plan for solving the DEEP deficiet needs to be aggreed upon. Onto my specific concerns with universal or social healthcare [despite Obamas assertions that it is not social healthcare, yet many of his committees are based off of a British model; Britain meets the definition of social healthcare]. Universal healthcare with a government option will ultimately lead to the downfall of the majority of private healthcare. Other than the uber uber rich, hundreds of millions of dollars, there will be no where else to turn for the ordinary citizen. There will be a set formula with very little choice if any [think an expansion of medicare]. Isnt ththis against the natural tenants and democratic philosophy of the United States? I believe so. Without market competition in this instance for both the private and public sector there will be no market forces to lower costs or increase the quality of health care. The private companies that remain will only cater to a select few. Their costs will be astronomical with no competition to drive costs down and their services will be little if any better. The public plans will not encounter any compeition and will run just like all other government run programs. Miles and miles of red tape, long waits, lack of choice and controlling and restricting regulations that will finally pervade into our most personal of information - medical and personal choices. The long hand of the government will finally be able to ask us questions that they were not previously allowed to ask. Once they employ the doctors, nurses, oncologists, pediatricians and etc. their reach will be ever extended. This doesnt sound to appealing to me.
Obama used the example of fat people and once the government has a healthcare plan having those people lose weight so that they dont develop diabetes and become a drain on the healthcare system with a chronic illness. President Obama I say this to you, NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WANTS DIABETES. But yes there are some people out there without enough common sense to do anything about their weight, but that is their fault. We have to, under the law provide them with help when they need it and they are covered under government health benefits. But look at the state of Californias economy, they are months away from defaulting. They have the most expansive and expensive social programs in the country. They pay for everyone including people who are here illegally. Why should we pay for deadbeats and people who just dont work. I understand that there are people out there who work 3 jobs and still cant make ends meet and we need to find a way to rectify that situation but I believe that their numbers are overstated.
One group who we do need to find a way to ensure are children. There is a vast number of uninsured children in the system. 80% of healthcare costs are for chronic preventable things 20% of this number are chronic chronic, now what age group do you believe that is in? They are mostly the elderly. Maybe we should focus on spending a little less on elderly healthcare and a bit more on providing healthcare to children and uninsured veterans [people who risked their lives for our freedom, the freedoms which are now under threat again]. Kids who are covered under some sort of plan should be required to work at the age of 16 and contribute into the tax pool to help pay for their own free health care up until 21. This will give them work experience and get them in good environments setting themselves up for success. The private sector should be able to cover elderly care and elderly care should be more focused on prevention rather than solutions if you get what I am saying. Back to those who are caught in between. I am from Mass the state which is just rife with swindlers cheats liars and all those who are covered by the long arm of the Mass establishment. People are not honest which makes me wonder about all these uninsured.
Nothing should be free, welfare is a tragedy as it rewards many for being sloth's. Healthcare cannot follow in these footsteps. Why should my parents or me when I get into the real workforce pay for both my private and good working healthcare and then pay also for some deadbeats, I just dont get it. The problems for me with universal health care other than the ones stated above. The waits, the restrictions on care and malaise of working for the government. Today the best of the best are attracted to high paying doctoral jobs. Tomorrow with universal healthcare just like with CEO salaries these will be capped, what does that mean for the influx of minds to now a government job? It will stop healthcare will suffer. Us all on the same plan, the red tape, the covering of asses the restriciotions questions and no competition? LONG WAIT TIMES, LONG WAITS FOR APPOINTMENTS, UNINTERESTED UNRESPONSIVE PHYSICIANS. People come to the United States to recieve health care, you walk into Mass General or the world class Mayo Clinic, all private hospitals with no government interference and you see people from all over the world. People who in Britain or Cananda or France would have to wait months for a procedure they can get in weeks here. It is unappealing to me.
Ultimately the question lies in our basic principals as a nation. The only things that we should be forced to do for the federal government are listed right there in the US consitution [including not paying an income tax but thats for another time]. Healthcare is for us to decide on, yes all should have it in a perfect world, but we dont live in one. Some people will always skimp out and some will always complain. The current system now serves most Americans much better than the rest of the world despite UN or WHO rankings. Our hospitals are the best, both in care and in innovations. The government likes a sure thing, the government likes to know whats going on and have control. This is another form, this will get them more money. Ultimately my biggest problem lies in this the 10th amendment. Healthcare is NOT for the FEDERAL government. I didnt gripe when my own state passed a increasingly failing mandate on health insurance, because it was within the right of my state. You will hear otherwise from me because ultimately this is unconsitutitonal.
Healthcare reform is not the answer. My own qualms with universal healthcare put aside we have to realize that before Obama's social initiatives should be even drafted the economy needs to be stabilized and a coherent and transparent plan for solving the DEEP deficiet needs to be aggreed upon. Onto my specific concerns with universal or social healthcare [despite Obamas assertions that it is not social healthcare, yet many of his committees are based off of a British model; Britain meets the definition of social healthcare]. Universal healthcare with a government option will ultimately lead to the downfall of the majority of private healthcare. Other than the uber uber rich, hundreds of millions of dollars, there will be no where else to turn for the ordinary citizen. There will be a set formula with very little choice if any [think an expansion of medicare]. Isnt ththis against the natural tenants and democratic philosophy of the United States? I believe so. Without market competition in this instance for both the private and public sector there will be no market forces to lower costs or increase the quality of health care. The private companies that remain will only cater to a select few. Their costs will be astronomical with no competition to drive costs down and their services will be little if any better. The public plans will not encounter any compeition and will run just like all other government run programs. Miles and miles of red tape, long waits, lack of choice and controlling and restricting regulations that will finally pervade into our most personal of information - medical and personal choices. The long hand of the government will finally be able to ask us questions that they were not previously allowed to ask. Once they employ the doctors, nurses, oncologists, pediatricians and etc. their reach will be ever extended. This doesnt sound to appealing to me.
Obama used the example of fat people and once the government has a healthcare plan having those people lose weight so that they dont develop diabetes and become a drain on the healthcare system with a chronic illness. President Obama I say this to you, NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WANTS DIABETES. But yes there are some people out there without enough common sense to do anything about their weight, but that is their fault. We have to, under the law provide them with help when they need it and they are covered under government health benefits. But look at the state of Californias economy, they are months away from defaulting. They have the most expansive and expensive social programs in the country. They pay for everyone including people who are here illegally. Why should we pay for deadbeats and people who just dont work. I understand that there are people out there who work 3 jobs and still cant make ends meet and we need to find a way to rectify that situation but I believe that their numbers are overstated.
One group who we do need to find a way to ensure are children. There is a vast number of uninsured children in the system. 80% of healthcare costs are for chronic preventable things 20% of this number are chronic chronic, now what age group do you believe that is in? They are mostly the elderly. Maybe we should focus on spending a little less on elderly healthcare and a bit more on providing healthcare to children and uninsured veterans [people who risked their lives for our freedom, the freedoms which are now under threat again]. Kids who are covered under some sort of plan should be required to work at the age of 16 and contribute into the tax pool to help pay for their own free health care up until 21. This will give them work experience and get them in good environments setting themselves up for success. The private sector should be able to cover elderly care and elderly care should be more focused on prevention rather than solutions if you get what I am saying. Back to those who are caught in between. I am from Mass the state which is just rife with swindlers cheats liars and all those who are covered by the long arm of the Mass establishment. People are not honest which makes me wonder about all these uninsured.
Nothing should be free, welfare is a tragedy as it rewards many for being sloth's. Healthcare cannot follow in these footsteps. Why should my parents or me when I get into the real workforce pay for both my private and good working healthcare and then pay also for some deadbeats, I just dont get it. The problems for me with universal health care other than the ones stated above. The waits, the restrictions on care and malaise of working for the government. Today the best of the best are attracted to high paying doctoral jobs. Tomorrow with universal healthcare just like with CEO salaries these will be capped, what does that mean for the influx of minds to now a government job? It will stop healthcare will suffer. Us all on the same plan, the red tape, the covering of asses the restriciotions questions and no competition? LONG WAIT TIMES, LONG WAITS FOR APPOINTMENTS, UNINTERESTED UNRESPONSIVE PHYSICIANS. People come to the United States to recieve health care, you walk into Mass General or the world class Mayo Clinic, all private hospitals with no government interference and you see people from all over the world. People who in Britain or Cananda or France would have to wait months for a procedure they can get in weeks here. It is unappealing to me.
Ultimately the question lies in our basic principals as a nation. The only things that we should be forced to do for the federal government are listed right there in the US consitution [including not paying an income tax but thats for another time]. Healthcare is for us to decide on, yes all should have it in a perfect world, but we dont live in one. Some people will always skimp out and some will always complain. The current system now serves most Americans much better than the rest of the world despite UN or WHO rankings. Our hospitals are the best, both in care and in innovations. The government likes a sure thing, the government likes to know whats going on and have control. This is another form, this will get them more money. Ultimately my biggest problem lies in this the 10th amendment. Healthcare is NOT for the FEDERAL government. I didnt gripe when my own state passed a increasingly failing mandate on health insurance, because it was within the right of my state. You will hear otherwise from me because ultimately this is unconsitutitonal.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Obamas Foreign Policy
Since Obama has been in office for close to 6 months now I feel it is finally O.K. to say that his foreign policy is coming into form. Before his foreign policy was just a bunch of words but with the number of trips Secretary of State Clinton has made and after Obamas recent trip to the Middle East and Europe I believe now is an appropriate time to comment on his foreign policy as we have started to see action. I believe that this, after the economy is the most important issue facing the United States.
Today we face, in my time, unprecedented hostilities from around the world. As those around the world believe that our standing and resolve is weakening, they have begun to ramp up their rhetoric against us and also their willingness to defy some commonly held beliefs between democratic freedom loving nations. These countries include most notoriously North Korea and Iran but more covertly Russia, China, Venezuela and the renegades in Mexico not associated with the government. Obviously there are more examples especially in South Eastern Asia and Southern and Central America but these are the countries that come to mind.
On the issue of North Korea they have consistently tried to provoke the international community. Most recently they have directly challenged the United States by detaining and subjecting American citizens to a concentration camp style labor camp. What has been Obamas response? Diplomacy...how can this be? The headlines in the paper are "Obama urges North Korea to release prisoners" "Secretary Clinton threatens putting North Korea back on the state sponsors of terror list". Why was this carrot even offered in the first place by the last administration, it is not like they suddenly stopped sponsoring terror or even terrorizing their neighbor Japan constantly. Democrats and Republicans policies alike have all failed on North Korea. From day one we have not known how to deal with this "rougue regime". Carrots have failed and force has failed with China backing them up on most occasions. My solution, extradite the prisoners anyway possible, i.e. special ops, navy seals and isolate the regime more. See who blinks first the South Koreans and our thousands of troops will continue to live in fear unless something is done. If they decide they want a fight let them be the ones to start it and then do what we do best...bring freedom to an oppressed people.
Iran is part of a bigger problem. The Middle East is a mess predicated on racism and age old hates. Actually Iran, like Lebanon just did seems to be close to sorting itself out. The nation has allowed for limited democratic freedoms which were heartwarmingly displayed a couple days ago in the streets of Tehran with freedom of speech and demonstration. The scary reports are though that Ahmadinejad has told his directors of elections that they have the go-ahead to rig the elections in his favor. Commenting on this situation until the elections are over is pointless but heres the deal. If Ahmadinejad wins Obamas plan of diplomacy will not work as his and others idea of a Uranium database. He is too unstable and loves his populist image as much as his own image in the mirror to ever lower himself to negotiating away his largest bargaining piece. If his opponent, the reformist wins all bets are off and Obama and Secretary Clinton just might succeed. He seems willing and embarrassed by the past couple years of relations between our two nations and he is a ray of hope. In terms of the larger Middle East no movement will be made until Netenyahu and the Israeli people feel completely secure. 3 Hamas horses marching toward the Gaza border this week loaded with explosives will not expedite this process. Yet Lebanons democratic victory this week will lessen the pressure Israel feels from its norther border and will allow their government to focus more on the Palestinian issue. The only resolution lies in a two state solution, which was first rejected by the Palestinians when they had the chance and now is less hopefull with a Netenyahu led government. The crux of the problem is the Palestinians accepting that ultimately Israel has the right to exist, without this there will be no more peace and no more bloodshed.
Obamas stance on the Palestinian Israeli conflict has been confusing at best. He seems, just as most things do with our current President, to be comepletely politically motivated. First he makes a some would say controvertial speech in Egypt, citing what he called our overreaction to the tragic events of 9/11 and then likening the Palestinians plight to that of African slaves. Too rectify this he visited Buchenwald concentration camp after which his controvertial comments seemed to melt away. Either way harping on this is no use, he confirmed the US's unwavering committment to the state of Israel and also reaffirmed that we have common interests. Yet he demanded that Israel stop settlements and agree to a two state solution. He also criticized the Palestinians citing some of their and their Arab counterparts accusations and comments as racist and that they had no place in todays world. He spoke in generalities and offered no real concrete solutions just the same as past presidents. Thank God he didnt try and pull a Jimmy Carter on us. Here his foreign policy seems to be muddled other than trying to reign in the hawkish new Netenyahu government while denouncing the Palestinians but also supporting their wishes for a state. Israel for the time being can still feel safe in the fact that the United States will not stop supporting their biggest ally in the region but the rhetoric seems to have softened. I have no solution just like the rest of the world other than cooperation on both sides. Yet the violence must stop against innocent civilians and the Israelis must feel secure enough to embark on the path towards peace.
That is all for now, more on the rest of his foreign policy soon.
P.S. David Ortiz may just be coming back into form....Go Sox!
Today we face, in my time, unprecedented hostilities from around the world. As those around the world believe that our standing and resolve is weakening, they have begun to ramp up their rhetoric against us and also their willingness to defy some commonly held beliefs between democratic freedom loving nations. These countries include most notoriously North Korea and Iran but more covertly Russia, China, Venezuela and the renegades in Mexico not associated with the government. Obviously there are more examples especially in South Eastern Asia and Southern and Central America but these are the countries that come to mind.
On the issue of North Korea they have consistently tried to provoke the international community. Most recently they have directly challenged the United States by detaining and subjecting American citizens to a concentration camp style labor camp. What has been Obamas response? Diplomacy...how can this be? The headlines in the paper are "Obama urges North Korea to release prisoners" "Secretary Clinton threatens putting North Korea back on the state sponsors of terror list". Why was this carrot even offered in the first place by the last administration, it is not like they suddenly stopped sponsoring terror or even terrorizing their neighbor Japan constantly. Democrats and Republicans policies alike have all failed on North Korea. From day one we have not known how to deal with this "rougue regime". Carrots have failed and force has failed with China backing them up on most occasions. My solution, extradite the prisoners anyway possible, i.e. special ops, navy seals and isolate the regime more. See who blinks first the South Koreans and our thousands of troops will continue to live in fear unless something is done. If they decide they want a fight let them be the ones to start it and then do what we do best...bring freedom to an oppressed people.
Iran is part of a bigger problem. The Middle East is a mess predicated on racism and age old hates. Actually Iran, like Lebanon just did seems to be close to sorting itself out. The nation has allowed for limited democratic freedoms which were heartwarmingly displayed a couple days ago in the streets of Tehran with freedom of speech and demonstration. The scary reports are though that Ahmadinejad has told his directors of elections that they have the go-ahead to rig the elections in his favor. Commenting on this situation until the elections are over is pointless but heres the deal. If Ahmadinejad wins Obamas plan of diplomacy will not work as his and others idea of a Uranium database. He is too unstable and loves his populist image as much as his own image in the mirror to ever lower himself to negotiating away his largest bargaining piece. If his opponent, the reformist wins all bets are off and Obama and Secretary Clinton just might succeed. He seems willing and embarrassed by the past couple years of relations between our two nations and he is a ray of hope. In terms of the larger Middle East no movement will be made until Netenyahu and the Israeli people feel completely secure. 3 Hamas horses marching toward the Gaza border this week loaded with explosives will not expedite this process. Yet Lebanons democratic victory this week will lessen the pressure Israel feels from its norther border and will allow their government to focus more on the Palestinian issue. The only resolution lies in a two state solution, which was first rejected by the Palestinians when they had the chance and now is less hopefull with a Netenyahu led government. The crux of the problem is the Palestinians accepting that ultimately Israel has the right to exist, without this there will be no more peace and no more bloodshed.
Obamas stance on the Palestinian Israeli conflict has been confusing at best. He seems, just as most things do with our current President, to be comepletely politically motivated. First he makes a some would say controvertial speech in Egypt, citing what he called our overreaction to the tragic events of 9/11 and then likening the Palestinians plight to that of African slaves. Too rectify this he visited Buchenwald concentration camp after which his controvertial comments seemed to melt away. Either way harping on this is no use, he confirmed the US's unwavering committment to the state of Israel and also reaffirmed that we have common interests. Yet he demanded that Israel stop settlements and agree to a two state solution. He also criticized the Palestinians citing some of their and their Arab counterparts accusations and comments as racist and that they had no place in todays world. He spoke in generalities and offered no real concrete solutions just the same as past presidents. Thank God he didnt try and pull a Jimmy Carter on us. Here his foreign policy seems to be muddled other than trying to reign in the hawkish new Netenyahu government while denouncing the Palestinians but also supporting their wishes for a state. Israel for the time being can still feel safe in the fact that the United States will not stop supporting their biggest ally in the region but the rhetoric seems to have softened. I have no solution just like the rest of the world other than cooperation on both sides. Yet the violence must stop against innocent civilians and the Israelis must feel secure enough to embark on the path towards peace.
That is all for now, more on the rest of his foreign policy soon.
P.S. David Ortiz may just be coming back into form....Go Sox!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
