Our Belle Michelle starts warming up at around the 15 minute mark.
Why is Michelle Obama in Mexico talking to Mexican students about the need for US immigration reform? What is the concern and need for US citizens to change our immigration policy to satisy left wing Mexican students?
Why is the so-called first lady challenging Mexican students to take up the collectivist call?
_________________________________
Wrapping up her first solo foreign trip, first lady Michelle Obama said in Mexico that changes to the immigration system are necessary, but will be politically difficult.USA Today
"It's not enough that the president wants it," Mrs. Obama told CNN in an interview. "We need Republicans and Democrats to support it, as well."
President Obama will continue pushing for major changes to the immigration system because the current one is creating problems on both sides of the border.
"We're seeing young children who are trying to cross the border just to reconnect with their parents, and their lives are in danger," Mrs. Obama said. "They're put in precarious situations. And a strong immigration reform policy would help alleviate some of those challenges."
The Obamas are "Global Free Traders" in the classic Republican sense. They are continuing to break down the barriers to the free movement of both Capital and Labor in the Americas.
ReplyDeleteDefeating the classic Marxist model in North America, with the IBEC model developed by Mr Nelson Rockefeller and the Republicans of his vintage.
Bear in mind that the Republican/Rockefeller model also encompasses a North American Union, which is the course the Bush administration set, re: the I35 corridor, and that the Obama administration seems to be grasping with both sets of hands.
Breaking down barriers to progress, that is the mission set in motion by our conservative political fore fathers, of just a generation ago.
Ronald Wilson Reagan was not afraid of immigration reform.
He'd not be hiding in the rain barrel, now.
The reason for representatives of the US to speak to "leftists", today, is that they will be the "conservatives" of tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteThey also will likely be amongst those that will govern Mexico. To ignore them, foolish.
Remembering that a "New Deal" leftist, in the United States, remained true to his convictions and led US to a period of Global Hegemony by the end of the 20th century.
Amazing what progressive politicos can provide, given the right labeling.
Republican leaders, from GW Bush to John "Maverick" McCain all supported "Immigration Reform" during the governing last cycle.
ReplyDeleteThat Team Obamaerica does so, too, now.
Not shocking.
That "Maverick" McCain will fight Immigration Reform, now ...
Unlikely.
If he does, it'd be proof that the strength of his character is not what it once was.
No, Michelle is talking right from the playbook where service to another, paid for by taxes, is the highest calling.
ReplyDeleteTo Michelle, she, Barrack and her people, victims all, by corollary, were held back by victimizers and she overcame all odds to become who she is.
Narcissism and repressed anger rule Michelle.
There is no hint of recognition of the privilege afforded to her over many others, a privilege based on racial preferences.
No mention of an America that gave her so much, from our Michelle.
Michelle compares Barack to Lincoln, laughable and an analogy barren of truth.
There are no rights that are based on taking the rightful possessions of others.
Mexico has no claim against American citizens that American citizens do not have over Mexicans. Uninvited guests have no claim to clean linens and three hot meals all gratis.
It is not xenophobic to protect our legacy of laws and property and cultural choices.
Immigration reform is not about reform or immigration. It is rewarding law breakers with amnesty. It is a pardon.
It diminishes the rights of legal US citizens and is a financial burden on the public welfare system.
It is an unplanned and unwelcome cultural imposition on society. It is a surrender of territorial rights. It is as absurd as allowing non-stockholders to vote on the running of a corporation and then sending them a dividend check.
I know: "Our strength is in our diversity."
Let's test the theory universally.
Throw away the highway regulations and laws.
Drive diverse. Fly diverse.
Let me know how it works out.
More BS from the Rat.
ReplyDelete"Ronald Wilson Reagan was not afraid of immigration reform.
He'd not be hiding in the rain barrel, now."
Ronnie later saw that his Amnesty was an abject failure.
Being an honest person, not a BS artist, he took responsibility for his mistake.
Fuck Rockefeller and his acolytes!
ReplyDeleteSorry, whit. I dropped the ball.
ReplyDeleteTick inspection is a long and tedious, uh, chore that pays a happy dividend in our overall health and well-being.
Be alert! Be thorough! Be happy.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere are, undoubtedly, better ways to go about incorporating an enormous, illegal foreign laborer population.
ReplyDeleteAnd most countries go the rational route of a guest worker program, which also makes it easier for said workers to RETURN to their states of origin as individual need or desire arise.
"dont worry about test scores".....
ReplyDeleteyep...
She's a nitwit
"And most countries go the rational route of a guest worker program"
ReplyDelete---
Which is what California had with it's Bracero Program.
Living accomadations and wholesome food were provided.
Not good enough.
Now we have illegals living the fields, cardboard shacks, etc.
Being exploited in every possible way.
Progress!
Rockefeller would approve,
ReplyDelete...as long as all the rest of us lived in similar circumstances.
"Now we have illegals living the fields, cardboard shacks, etc.
ReplyDeleteBeing exploited in every possible way."
That's a fact. While at the same time fueling animus and resentment toward same in native populations that would otherwise probably extend them the respect granted any human being who leaves the familiarity of home and family behind in search of more profitable industry.
The fact is the US IS exploiting 25 million illegal residents.
ReplyDeleteDenys them legal services, such as police protections, wage & hour protections, FICA protections, FEMA protections.
Only to exploit them, to fund doug's Social Security program on a positive cash flow basis.
No, legalize these residents, quickly.
Mrs Obama and her ilk have overcome great obstacles on their path to power, learn to appreciate, that.
There is no lie to the story, just the twist of perspective.
Like LSD!
ReplyDeleteSupport your Federal Marxist First Lady of Propaganda!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe only folks claiming "victimhood", here lately ...
ReplyDeleteThe Friends of Israel, as is their normal position.
But, strangely, everyone of the "conservatives", too.
doug and Deuce, victimized by illegals allowed in by Mr GW Bush. These new residents, they are now a threat to our liberty.
Victimizing "real" Americans, that's what Government is all about. It's just that it is your turn, now, to be the victim of Government.
Just like the "War on Poverty" helped the poor. They're doing it for your own good.
"No, legalize these residents, quickly."
ReplyDelete---
So we can herald the arrival of the next wave of illegals.
...as happened after Reagan's Amnesty.
Rockyfeller Uber Alles!
ReplyDeleteKrustylnach!
(Brought to you by your friendly Nazi, Krusty the Klown)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKnown Krusty Klown
ReplyDeleteaka
KKK
The "next wave" could be controlled, if there was any will to do so. doug-o.
ReplyDeleteBut, as there is nothing to stop that next wave, now, your argument is full of holes.
Not legalizing the 25 million already here, is evidence enough that denying them legal status will stop the influx.
Only a sane legal system that recognizes labor and capital realities will work. You advocate for the status que, which is a loser.
"The fact is the US IS exploiting 25 million illegal residents. Denys them legal services, such as police protections, wage & hour protections, FICA protections, FEMA protections."
ReplyDeleteIf the first part that states their presence in the US is illegal, what legal services are they entitled to that they are being denies?
If they commit a crime, they will be given a public defender.
If they get into an auto accident, they will be given medical care.
If their home catches fire, they will get the services of the fire department.
If they are caught in a flood or hurricane they will receive FEMA support.
They do not get wage protection because they are not supposed to be working. They do not need protection as much as their employers deserve sanctions.
No illegal worker pays into FICA. Illegals bargain to work for their net pay. Their employers send in FICA payments to cover their keister.
This shop door at 109 East Palace St. off the plaza was the secret entrance for those working on the Manhattan Project in the 1940s.
ReplyDelete"You advocate for the status que, which is a loser."
ReplyDeleteI advocate a secure border and workplace enforcement, which is a winner.
"The "next wave" could be controlled, if there was any will to do so. doug-o.
ReplyDeleteBut, as there is nothing to stop that next wave, now, your argument is full of holes."
No, the status quo is full of holes.
Including A-Holes
The clock is ticking. May is soon upon us. Elections in Nov. Amnesty Bill this year? No Way, Jose.
ReplyDeleteA democracy is compromised if expanded to include those without obligations and they are permitted to vote to obligate others.
ReplyDeleteMost American elections are within a small single digit percentage. 10-20 million new voters will naturally vote for the party that promises them benefits extracted from the overtrumped minority.
That is a real threat. That is a threat to be fought against.
Protection of the "illegals" protects US all.
ReplyDeleteWe should have 25 million residents afraid to call the police?
Not covered by workplace safety regulations?
Which employers get that bump, in productivity savings?
But the criminal element.
No, two sets of laws in the US workplace, that is not the best way forward for the United States.
There is no way these 25 million will ever be deported, fact of life, that. Best integrate them into our legal system and society.
Paying for our past mistakes, ourselves, not laying the costs on those we have already used and abused.
EMBRACE SERFDOM!
ReplyDeleteRocky and the Rat tell us so!
Those allowed into the US, to work, do not have to become voters.
ReplyDeleteNot all residents qualify to vote, nor should they.
That argument has little validity, except as a debate point in the legislative debate, as to process.
It does not address the reality of what to do, with 9% of our residents.
"Amnesty Bill this year? No Way, Jose."
ReplyDeleteBut the debate remains.
The present system, unbelievably generous on the one hand, is also - Doug said it best - extremely exploitative.
"There is no way these 25 million will ever be deported, fact of life, that."
ReplyDelete---
If their criminal employers are arrested and punished, they will return home.
...to save their country which is being further decimated by the illegal appropriation of, and explotation of same.
These productive Mexican Citizens belong in Mexico, supporting THEIR country.
Well, doug, you have embraced the "Road to Anarchy", while I still plod along, proclaiming that the expansion of human liberty, those universal human rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness to be our primary objective.
ReplyDeleteNot to pick and choose which residents of the United States get to be embraced by the benefits provided US all, by the Creator.
"Those allowed into the US, to work, do not have to become voters.
ReplyDeleteNot all residents qualify to vote, nor should they."
---
Amnesty means citizenship, which means the right to vote.
WTF are you talking about?
Holier than thou New-Age Rodent
ReplyDeleteWhere is the data that they are exploited?
ReplyDeleteI doubt there is one lawn-care company that has non-volunteers cutting grass. The young men cutting grass can work and send enough money home to help their families to build a house.
That is a privilege and an opportunity, emulated by millions, and no such opportunity or privilege is available to them in their home countries.
Our present system COUNTS ON the illegal status of millions to make a profit for industries that otherwise would not.
ReplyDeleteWhich is not to take a pot-shot at profit-earning, but rather the unsavory and, finally, criminal means by which it is sometimes achieved.
Having run the gauntlet and dispensed the relatively healthy chunk of cash required to get here in the first place, the necessity becomes to remain for fear of not being able to return again.
ReplyDeleteReassuring words on Sunday morning:
ReplyDeleteWASHINGTON (AP) - Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner (GYT'-nur) says the economy is growing faster than the Obama administration expected.
He tells NBC's "Meet the Press" that the country is on the way to sustained job creation. But he acknowledges that unemployment may remain high, close to 10 percent.
Geithner says there's more confidence in the business world, and he says the private sector is growing. He also says people are spending more.
He said he sees encouraging signs that should make Americans confident the country will emerge stronger.
The ones that have it right, I think, are the ones that say, "Build the fence, first, then we'll talk."
ReplyDelete"Build the fence, first, then we'll talk."
ReplyDeleteThat fence is never going to be built.
Did we not vigorously debate immigration reform two years ago? I refuse to get dragged back into that black hole. Conservative, God fearing, traditional, American values and expectations were made abundantly clear to the DC crowd. Which is a controlled, systematic, fair process which benefits the nation.
ReplyDeleteThe idiots we elected were unable to address the issue two years ago. What will change with the Dems in charge? Not much.
A pox on all their houses.
Rufus is right, all we wanted to do was build the fence, get control of the inflow and then begin to address the issues of those already here.
ReplyDeleteHalf step measures were faked in regard to border security; a fence here, a virtual fence there, more Border Guards, blah, blah, blah.
Meanwhile the of first things Obama did was to halt construction of the fence even at a time when other less important "jobs" programs were being federally funded.
"Meanwhile, one of the first things Obama did...>
ReplyDeleteWe no longer pick corn by hand. We no longer pick cotton by hand.
ReplyDeleteIt's time for the fruits, and veggie guys to modernize, also.
The technology is there, and the only thing holding it back is cheap labor coming up from Mexico. Works out for the farmer, ok, but it sucks for "society."
Society ends up stuck with the bill for all the "Indirect" Costs of cheap Mexican labor. We can no longer afford it. Time to "move on."
I think it will, Trish. In dribs, and drabs, over many years. A totally unsatisfactory way to do it, but, probably, the only way to get it done.
ReplyDeleteAs has been pointed out here, when one looks at the caliber of our elected representatives in Washington, you begin to think that it could be fairly easy and relatively inexpensive to get elected.
ReplyDeleteOnce elected, the problem is the seduction and corruption of DC politics.
The next Congress will have a whole lot more Republicans, and a lot of scared shitless Democrats.
ReplyDeleteI'm thinking we may not see much on the border for several years.
The fact is, the flow across the border slows, dramatically, during recessions. And, we're in for a loooong recessionary period.
It won't be built, rufus, because of its unwelcome symbolism to both parties. And by that I mean both nations.
ReplyDeleteRemember, it's already a third of the way across. Different locales will request an extension here, a few more miles there, etc.
ReplyDeleteTea Partiers don't have anything to do with it. In the way that you think.
ReplyDeleteThey're going to carry the water of the political establishment, and the establishment doesn't want that fence.
Which is not to get all conspiratorial on you, just acknowledging that their role in this is defending an established Party.
ReplyDeleteYou're behind the curve, Trish. Right Now, the "establishment" just wants to get reelected.
ReplyDeleteYou don't get it. We're in for a looooooooooooong undulating recession. People get really cranky during recessions. We haven't had anything like we've got coming since the "Great Depression."
Unemployed people are going to be mad as hell for awhile. The "establishment" are pretty powerful when everything is running smooth, and the "folks" are fat, and happy. They'll be hunkered down, and trying to appease the hoi polloi as this deal goes along.
You ain't never dreamed of the pissedoffedness that going to be rampant by 2012.
By 2013 the establishment will be willing to shoot wetbacks on sight if that's what the Rabble wants.
"You don't get it."
ReplyDeleteSorry. We're going to have to agree to disagree.
What some people just don't seem to understand (think David Frum, David Brooks, and leftist Dems in general) is that the tea party represents middle-class mainstream America.
ReplyDeleteGrass roots, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" groundswell.
I'm shocked that immigration reform is even being discussed right now. There is a chance though that it is being raised as a wedge issue or a reminder; an irritant if you will.
Trent Lott wanted to vote for amnesty so bad he had tears in his eyes. He knew if he didn't he would lose Most of his "sugardaddies."
ReplyDeleteHe screamed at his fellow Republicans, "Why can't we do this? What's the use of "Being A Senator" if we can't do "This?"
In the end, he voted against it, and retired. The response from the voters was just too overwhelming.
THAT was during a period of relatively "good times."
The next President will be a Republican. And, he/she won't be a "compassionate conservate," either. It will be a cold-blooded "Conservative," Conservative.
ReplyDeleteYou GOT to understand, we WILL be in Recession more than "out of recession" for many years to come. OIL flow Has Peaked. Energy WILL be more, and more expensive. Our economy WILL suck for the next ten years, if not twenty.
The Working Class Will be descending on Washington with pitchforks, and torches. Most of the "establishment" Will be lucky if they don't end up hanging from lightpoles. This ain't gonna be Nothing like you've ever seen before.
You can sell a lot of trash to the electorate when times are good.
ReplyDeleteWhen everyone's fat you can pat'em on the haid, and gently explain to them how it's in the interest of all that's good and kind to keep 100's of thousands of troops in Europe, and Korea, and Japan, and wherethefuckever, and fight that long, tedious $100 Billion/Yr slog in Afpakistan for some, more and more, undefined reason, and get away with it.
After a few years of severe recession with it's 10%+ unemployment, and higher, and higher taxes to pay for it all that house of cards WiLL come crashing down on your "establishment" head.
When a guy with a wife and two kids that's exhausted his unemployment benefits drives by the local meat-packing plant and sees a couple of hundred illegal aliens going to work some shit is about to hit the fan.
In the "Joint Operating Environment" report that I linked the DOD made it clear that 2012 was the "drop dead" year for oil flow.
ReplyDeleteThat's the year when the bullshit artists in Saudi Arabia, and at Exxon, and the EIA can no longer deny the reality of declining oil supplies.
The "market," of course, will move before that, but the obfuscators that are profiting will claim it's them damned "Speculators," again.
Just consider: The Biggest Oil user on the planet, with unlimited eavesdropping ability, that has tens, and hundreds of thousands of people on Every Continent, that, absolutely, positively, MUST have oil to operate says, "The jig is up."
Saudi Arabia says, "nah, we got plenty. You don't need to worry with that alternative stuff."
Who ya gonna believe?
Deuce wrote:
ReplyDelete"Immigration reform is not about reform or immigration. It is rewarding law breakers with amnesty. It is a pardon"
No, immigration reform is acknowledging the obvious and that is that the status quo is dysfunctional.
re 'the fence'. It is a pipe dream. In addition to trishs points it simply won't work. Too many ways to enter the country for a fence to be at all effective. Then there is the cost...
nope, it ain't gonna happen.
"Which is not to get all conspiratorial on you, just acknowledging that their role in this is defending an established Party."
ReplyDeleteI think you have way too simplistic a view of the Tea Partiers. If they don't have one of their own to vote for they will likely vote for the Republican more often than they would for the Dem. But that is hardly because they are carrying water.
The fact is that they are far to the right of the elected
Gop on economic issues while being pretty mainstream on social issues. As such, given a choice between the GOP and Dem candidates they would likely have more affinity to the GOP. However, this would not preclude them from voting for a fiscally conservative Dem over a neocon GOP.
The mood in the country is sour. Eighty percent of the country (according to polls) agree with the Tea Party while the GOP's approval ratings are in the tank. People are fed up that their elected officials are not responsive to their needs. And it is not only on the right.
The head of the SEIU who recently retired was being interviewed the other day and asked why his union was organizing against three Dems in a particular state (In? Il?). He said it was because when they began running for office they had sought labor's support and promised to vote for HC. Yet when the vote came up they had each voted against it.
When asked if he didn't think that would hurt the Dems, he said he didn't care.
People are tired of being lied to and used.
.
"Just consider: The Biggest Oil user on the planet, with unlimited eavesdropping ability, that has tens, and hundreds of thousands of people on Every Continent, that, absolutely, positively, MUST have oil to operate says, "The jig is up."
ReplyDeleteMine is not a comment on the peak oil debate Rufus. I'll leave that for you to sort out. It is merely an observation that this "biggest [and best is implied] oil user" used its vaunted technological prowess to tell us that in fact we were losing the arms race to the Soviet Union right bfore that country hit free fall.
.
Immigration reform ain't going to happen this year, not with 8 million legal Americans out of work, the need for maybe 150,000 new jobs a month over and above that just to keep up with population growth, and the Dems worried about the 2010 election.
ReplyDeleteWhat happens after that will depend on the makeup of Congress and the state of the economy.
I think most people agree that the current system is broken and needs to be reformed. However, based on our past history, I think it's reasonable to assume that when immigration reform passes it will probably be another 30 years before the issue is raised again. So it needs to be done right.
Bush had the best chance to get reform and he blew it. Now with the recession it could be years before something is passed.
Before the recession my view would have been pretty simple. We need immigration loosened up on higher skilled jobs primarily, but we will also need legal recourse established for lower skilled workers. With the baby boomers retiring, we will require immigration through the 2030's just to maintain or increase GDP.
Without GDP growth we will be sucked under by unfunded entitlement spending.
Now with the recession, its more complicated. While my overall view remains the same, you have to bow to realities. You need to put people back to work before you open the floodgates to immigration.
I oppose amnesty for illegal aliens. While Ash would likely say I oppose it because I am xenophobic, I say I oppose it because it is "illegal". It is also "unfair" to the millions of people trying to get into this country legally. The system needs to be changed but you can't screw over (again) the people who play by the rules.
Rat says open the borders. I suspect this is merely a cynical attempt to stir the pot here at the EB by our rodent in chief and that he doesn't really believe it. (I could be wrong). Ash says we have to bow to reality, not the reality I see, but that proffered by the NYT editorial page. However, what else could you expect from our friend from the "Great White North". It is slightly ironic however that most of the advice coming out of Canada these days whether on immigration or climate change or whatever is much stronger on the advising and less so on the self-executing.
.
"I think you have way too simplistic a view of the Tea Partiers."
ReplyDeleteYou mean, as a political vehicle for the Republican Party - one that is neither anti-imperialist nor anti-entitlement but rather merely anti-incumbent?
Could be.
rufus,
ReplyDeleteeven if they managed to build the fence with free labor it still wouldn't keep out illegal immigrants. There are a myriad of routes into the country in addition to going under, over, and through a fence. Mind you, with your mythical free labor, you could build a fence mythical in its impregnability.
Seventy-three straight posts: civilized and on topic.
ReplyDeleteSigns and wonders.
Great job everyone! Keep it up and who knows what could happen at The Bar?
Interesting little factoid of the day:
ReplyDeleteDid you know that Individual - Non Group Premiums have fallen by up to 40% in Massachusetts since the inception of Romneycare?
None of which would matter if Romneycare weren't effective. But it is. Conservatives complain that coverage in Massachusetts is still relatively expensive and that early costs were higher than expected. They're right—largely because Romneycare was implemented immediately, without cost controls in place. As a result, the program experienced an initial budget shortfall and premiums remained steep. But now, as the legislature tackles expenses, the net cost of the plan has stabilized at a little more than 1 percent of the state's budget. And while some rates are still rising, others—like nongroup individual premiums—have declined by as much as 40 percent. Best of all, only 160,000 Massachusettans are uninsured today, down from 600,000 in 2006.
Romneycare
"...one that is neither anti-imperialist nor anti-entitlement but rather merely anti-incumbent?..."
ReplyDeleteThe Tea Party membership are primarily conservative; yet 80% of Americans (by some polls) identify with their main raison d'etre. Though they likely have conservative views on many subjects, those conservative views, except in the economic area, are not what drives the movement. They are not driven by social issues they are driven by economic conservatism.
They are not anti-incumbant unless the incumbant is the typical pol, GOP or Dem, who is willing to spend but not cut. They are not specifically anti-imperialist (kind of a loaded way of phrasing it) unless they are convinced we can't afford another war of choice. They are not anti-entitlement (in general they like both medicare and SS) unless like on HC they think it is a bridge too far.
By far the biggest catalysing factor in the growth of the Tea Party has been the growth in the size of government over the past decade and especially in the past couple of years.
.
Yes, Ash, you can build a nearly impregnable fence. See Churchill's Iron Curtain speech.
ReplyDeleteThe difference, of course, being the earnestness of the Reds on enforcement. Whether Americans have the stomach to tolerate blood letting at the borders (and beyond) is something else.
O, you might also recall how your little friends in "Palestine" used to routinely murder innocent shoppers in the Zionist entity. That has been stopped by a fence/wall and the occasional armed intervention (what you and another here would call a war crime).
While we often hear of XXXXXX apartheid, rarely is a word said about the Judenfrei Muslim neighborhoods of the "Levant". Wonder why?
quirk, you might enjoy, or not, the times article parsing the poll:
ReplyDelete"A breathtaking 92 percent said the country is on the wrong track.
What accounts for this gap between how they are faring and how they feel the country is faring? History offers some lessons. The poll reveals a deep conviction among Tea Party supporters that the country is being run by people who do not share their values, for the benefit of people who are not like them. That is a recurring theme of the previous half-century — conservatives in liberal eras declaring the imperative to “Take America Back.” "
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/weekinreview/18zernike.html
and rufus, you may, or may not, enjoy the times article on the insurance problems in New York:
ReplyDelete"New York Offers Costly Lessons on Insurane
...
New York’s insurance system has been a working laboratory for the core provision of the new federal health care law — insurance even for those who are already sick and facing huge medical bills — and an expensive lesson in unplanned consequences. Premiums for individual and small group policies have risen so high that state officials and patients’ advocates say that New York’s extensive insurance safety net for people like Ms. Welles is falling apart.
The problem stems in part from the state’s high medical costs and in part from its stringent requirements for insurance companies in the individual and small group market. In 1993, motivated by stories of suffering AIDS patients, the state became one of the first to require insurers to extend individual or small group coverage to anyone with pre-existing illnesses.
New York also became one of the few states that require insurers within each region of the state to charge the same rates for the same benefits, regardless of whether people are old or young, male or female, smokers or nonsmokers, high risk or low risk.
Healthy people, in effect, began to subsidize people who needed more health care. The healthier customers soon discovered that the high premiums were not worth it and dropped out of the plans. The pool of insured people shrank to the point where many of them had high health care needs. Without healthier people to spread the risk, their premiums skyrocketed, a phenomenon known in the trade as the “adverse selection death spiral.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/nyregion/18insure.html?scp=1&sq=new%20yourk%20insurance&st=cse
I read the online version of the NYT everday Ash, as well as that of the WaPo, The Economist, RealClearPolitics (and RCW), the Detroit News, and sometimes even the Globe and Mail.
ReplyDelete.
"...the net cost of the plan has stabilized at a little more than 1 percent of the state's budget..."
ReplyDeleteHealthcare has passed Rufus. Quit while your ahead.
I could probably google you a a half dozen articles in the next few minutes talking about the problems associated with Romneycare.
(And please none of the "data" versus "projections" arguments. We all believe the facts we want to believe.)
.
well good for you quirk - I trust you read more than the headlines on the main page.
ReplyDeleteI was struck by the preponderance of Tea Party folk polled who lament the disastrous trajectory of the country. Folk can, and do, project any complaint they have upon the movement and think it represents them leading to the perception of a very broad base.
"The next President will be a Republican."
ReplyDeleteThe current one will be a two-termer. We'll see what happens after that.
The betting money disagrees with you, Trish.
ReplyDeleteBut...if the economy turns around and say, Obama gets us out of Iraq and Afghanistan then it's possible.
ReplyDelete...and if taxes don't bite and the health care/insurance reform isn't as bad as all that.
ReplyDeleteAlso, if the Republicans make huge inroads in the buy year, Obama's base could be reinvigorated.
but, if oil keeps us in the economic dumps and unemployment numbers stay high, hey, hey, goodbye!
"...bi-year election..."
ReplyDeleteI'd bet Obama will get a second term and it'd be an almost certain win if the Tea Party managed to field a candidate (split vote on the right).
ReplyDeleterufus wrote:
"You MUST have individual MANDATES"
You sure do but 1. that is the basis for the court challenges and 2. even with individual mandates there are few controls on costs.
The Tea Party movement is a phenomenon, Ash. One that I am not a part of although I do have sympathy for what appears to be their main goal of controlling the growth in the size of our government. Of course, I've been leaning that way since ealier in the decade when I started turning against the policies of GWB.
ReplyDeleteHow long-lived the phenomenon will be remains to be seen.
However, what I object to are attempts to marginalize the movement with silly stereotypes (usually by the left) or to co-opt the movements message and resources for personal political gain (usually by right-wing pols and pundits) Rush Limbaugh speaking of himself as part of the "us" of the movement is laughable.
.
The Tea Party is a movement; not a political party and I don't believe there are any serious plans to create one.
ReplyDeleteWhy is Limbaugh any less a part of the movement than anyone else?
ReplyDeleteWhy is Limbaugh any less a part of the movement than anyone else?
ReplyDelete"The betting money disagrees with you, Trish."
ReplyDeleteWell, then. Bully for the betting money.
I am, of course, not without deep prejudice on the matter, owing almost entirely to my stubbornly lingering antipathy toward the GOP. As a party I find it revolting and can do little more than light a candle for its eventual rehabilitation into a party I would gladly call my own.
I'll probably get bored with waiting, however, and just become a Democrat.
ReplyDeleteAfter all, I already love NPR. Not much more ground to cover really.
ReplyDeleteThe current GOP actions regarding financial regulation are appalling!
ReplyDelete"The Tea Party is a movement; not a political party and I don't believe there are any serious plans to create one."
ReplyDeleteCorrect. And Tea Partiers themselves don't WANT a third party.
It comes down to choices. Limbaugh is a GOP hack. Given a choice between the Tea Party principles and getting a GOP majority elected which side do you think Limbaugh would come down on?
ReplyDeleteIt reminds me of how Mitch McConnell is now saying what a fiscal conservative he is.
.
Yes, Quirk, it is a phenomena and one of the things that helps give it legs is that it can be many different things for many different people.
ReplyDeleteA Cootie?
ReplyDelete"Limbaugh is a GOP hack.
ReplyDeleteGiven a choice between the Tea Party principles and getting a GOP majority elected which side do you think Limbaugh would come down on?"
Tripe and drivel.
Limbaugh helped elect Clinton because he was so po'ed about 41's tax hike.
That has chastened him a bit.
He regularly ignored repeated personal requests by W to get with the program wrt Amnesty.
"Tripe and drivel."
ReplyDeleteIf you say so Doug.
Truth be told, I stopped listening to him long ago. I only hear him occasionally when I listen to the radio while driving the dog over to the metropark for a run.
To my mind he a populist poseur fat-cat who's main interest is looking out for the interests of all the other fat cats.
Just my opinion of course.
Reminds me, I gots to run the dog over to the metropark.
.
Eighty percent of European airspace remained closed for a devastating fourth day on Sunday, with only 4,000 of the normal 20,000-flight schedule in the air, said Brian Flynn, deputy head of operations for Eurocontrol, which supports the air traffic control network across the European Union's 27 states.
ReplyDeleteI laugh when I hear that Earth is so fragile. I think people who say that have it backwards. Mankind and our civilization are what's fragile. With our dependence on just in time marketing and global trade, we've had a few warnings lately about just how vulnerable we are to interruptions.
John Cleese was stuck in Oslo and paid a taxi driver a few thousand dollars just to get him to Brussels.
ReplyDeleteA Moscow taxi driver is hiring himself out for half that to carry fares anywhere west.
Imagine: Moscow to Paris via Russian taxi driver.
That's a lengthy magazine article that's going to write itself.
And, of course, there is a railway strike in France.
Trish and her husband once had a noteworthy time trying to make it to a departing ferry to Sweden during a German railway strike.
We succeeded.
Comically.
Celine and Elvis
ReplyDeleteInteresting technology Sam.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if they were both actually on the stage together, I suspect Elvis would have overwhelmed her instead of the other way around.
.
Read that the last time that volcano erupted, went on for two years.
ReplyDeleteAs to "open" borders.
I do not favor an "open" border policy, rather a "controlled" one.
As opposed, of course, to the "open" borders we have now. At the peak the Congressional report I read put the number of illicit border transits at over 4,000 per 24 hour period.
The local papers report that the traffic, judged by arrests, is down 25% from the peak.
3,000 individuals arriving illegally per day. 365 days per year.
Over 1 million people per year.
That is, in a word,
"unacceptable".
It seems obvious that the country can absorb these immigrants, or they'd be a greater "problem" on the nightly news.
We should at least know their names, have their fingerprints on file. Rather than the anarchy that prevails, today.
If that is rabble rousing, or stirring the pot, further consideration is due as to the state of the rabble and/or the quality of your pot.
How could any "conservative" advocate continued anarchy, instead of offering a better, realistic solution.
As was stated here, up thread, the "problem" was addressed two years ago, it has therefore been successfully resolved.
3,000 illegal crossing per night, no big deal, to the boys of the elephant Bar.
Steady as she goes!
Did we tip a few brewskis with those bear wrangling cowboys again tonight rat?
ReplyDelete.
Warfarin,
ReplyDeleteI think he had a brain hemmorage.
Certainly something raging in that skull.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHillary Duff
ReplyDelete