Author: webuiltitblog

MUNICH AND IRAN.

Many observers see striking similarities between the recent US-Iranian nuclear weapons agreement and the treaty between England and Germany in 1938? Who can forget Neville Chamberlain’s delusional declaration of “Peace in our time.” Students of history will recall that England’s appeasement of Nazi Germany failed miserably and exacerbated the climate that led to WWII. One can argue that this deal is worse. To be sure, England sold out Czechoslovakia, but Mr. Obama has sold out Israel, Saudi Arabia, and, perhaps, us as well. No wonder the Israelis are wary of Mr. Obama. Regarding Saudi Arabia, although we cannot always trust their motivations, technically they are our allies in the region, and they rely on us for security in return for their maintaining an ample supply of oil.

We gave up our strongest weapon against Iran – economic sanctions, which were having a significant effect, and got very little in return. Iran will still be able to continue its uranium enrichment program, although at a reduced level. Moreover, there appears to be ample opportunity for Iran to cheat, and does anybody doubt that they will? Supposedly, the deal is for 6 months after which time a final agreement is to be struck. Good luck with that.

The nuclear threat posed by Iran still remains. Iran has sworn to destroy Israel, and there is a good chance it will attempt to do so as soon as it is feels it is able. Israel knows this, and may, at some point decide to protect itself by launching a pre-emptive strike. A regional war would surely destabilize the Middle East and disrupt our oil supply.

CONCLUSION AND PREDICTION

Once again, Mr. Obama has been outsmarted by a foreign government, first the Russians, then the Chinese and now the Iranians. This has further degraded the level of respect for the US throughout the world. It seems that Mr. Obama is willing to appease everyone, except for the Republicans in Congress.

A cynic would say that Mr. Obama agreed to this deal because he needed a perceived victory to offset the Obamacare fiasco and his falling approval rating in the polls. In addition, he is no doubt counting on the apathy and disengagement of a large segment of voters who are unaware of the dangerous situation unfolding in Iran or don’t see how it will affect them. (I bet many Americans could not even find Iran on the map.) In this, he may be right.

My prediction is that, despite this deal, or maybe because of it, tensions in the region will ratchet up in the coming months. At some point, we will have to consider reinstating sanctions. Furthermore, we will have to reassure Israel to dissuade them from acting unilaterally. That should be an interesting conversation.

Americans are about to have a rude awakening with respect to the (un) Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. Over the past year or so, many, including me, have warned of the many inadequacies, inefficiencies, inequities and unintended consequences of this law. There is no need to rehash them here, but virtually all of those predictions are or will be coming to pass.

The Obamacare website one is supposed to use to sign up became available on October 1. To date, it has been an unmitigated disaster. The overwhelming majority of applicants have been locked out, and the site has crashed repeatedly. The situation is so dire that Kathleen Sabelius, the Cabinet Secretary in charge, has been heavily criticized by the public and the press and has been compelled to testify before Congress. Her responses to questions have been inadequate to say the least. Bad as this is, it is only the appetizer. The main course will be served on January 1, 2014, when the law becomes effective. Suffice to say that the apathetic, inattentive populace is about to receive a giant wake up call. It is one thing to ignore previous scandals, such as Fast and Furious, Benghazi and the IRS politically-motivated investigations; it is quite another to expect people to ignore Obamacare, which affects their finances and healthcare directly.

Below please find some of the highlights (or, if you prefer, lowlights):

1. A recent CBS News poll reported that 12% of people surveyed thought the sign up process was “going well” compared to 49% who thought it was not and 38% who didn’t know.

2. A NY Medical Society survey of 414 NY doctors reported that 44% stated they will not participate in OB care, 33% reported that they “may,” and only 23% reported that they will. An increasing number of doctors have been or plan to establish boutique (cash only) practices. This will mean that you may not be able to afford to continue seeing your current doctor and/or the waiting time for a visit or tests will increase substantially. Since the advent of “Romneycare,” the waiting time to see a doctor in Massachusetts has doubled. In addition, one must wait up to 50 days, on average, to see an Internist. The Boston Herald has reported that healthcare costs consumed approximately 41% of Massachuusetts’ budget in 2013 compared to 23% in 2000. This can be viewed as a forerunner of life in the US under OB care.

3. Many individuals and families have had their private insurance cancelled. California-Kaiser Permanente has cancelled 50% of its policies with individuals. Blue Shield (CA) has cancelled 60%. Independence Blue Cross (PA) has cancelled 45%. Florida Blue Cross has cancelled 80%. The Director of Health Policy at UCLA estimates that overall 50% will be eliminated.

4. I have warned that it was simple common sense and simple mathematics that those who work and who currently have insurance will be paying for those who don’t. Well, it is estimated that the Medicare payroll tax will be increased from 2.9% to 3.8% on wages and business profits of up to $200,000. This will be a significant hit on middle class workers and small businesses with all the attendant economic and social consequences. Healthcare insurers will be assessed an annual fee of $100 billion over the next 10 years. Any company with over 50 employees that does not provide healthcare insurance for its employees will have to pay a “tax” of $2,000 per employee every year. These fees/taxes, like all other business costs, will be passed on the people in the form of higher premiums and/or prices.

5. Many have seen higher premiums already. To date, they are up approximately 17% for individuals and 19% for families. In addition, since January 2013 Medicare has been charging a new fee called IRMAA to wealthy recipients. This is for Part D (prescriptions) coverage. One is required to pay the fee, which is $50 and up per person per month even if one has his prescription coverage with another carrier.

6. The CBO has estimated that in order to fund Obamacare there will be $1 trillion in new or higher taxes over the next 10 years. When all is said and done, that estimate will likely prove to be on the low side.

7. IT contractors have warned that the personal data one supplies to the Obamacare website is not subject to protection under HIPA laws, and it can easily be accessed by unauthorized persons.

8. President Obama has personally misled, if not outright lied, to the American people as follows:

a. He promised that Americans would be able to keep their present healthcare plans if they wanted to do so. In a speech on 6/15/09 he said “If you like your healthcare plan you will be able to keep your healthcare plan. Period.” That statement is at odds with all the cancellations mentioned above.

b. If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period.” Not true, as many doctors have or plan to set up boutique practices.

c. On 9/20/09: “This is absolutely not a tax increase.” The Supreme Court ruled otherwise, thus paving the way for the law’s passage.

d. And, my favorite: On four occasions during 2008 he stated insurance premiums would be lowered for individuals an average of $2,500. Instead, the Heritage Foundation estimates that they will increase an average of $16,500 per family. Furthermore, this does not take into account the higher deductibles we can expect.

PREDICTION AND CONCLUSION

Obamacare is not just about providing healthcare. Simply put, it is another element of President Obama’s desire for income and wealth redistribution and government control over Americans’ lives. Take from the achievers and give to the non-achievers, and have the government control the process. Karl Marx would be proud.

Hopefully, Americans will now wake up and express their dissatisfaction at the polls in 2014 and 2016. Otherwise, all I can say is “you get the government you deserve.”

HAIL TO THE REDSKINS.

What’s in a name? Apparently, quite a lot. The Washington D. C. National Football League franchise has been called the “Redskins” since its inception 81 years ago. Now, a small, but vocal minority of people are pushing to have the name “Redskins” changed. This issue has arisen on and off since the 1980s, but it seems to have gathered fresh momentum recently.

Other sports teams have bowed to similar activist pressure. In recent years St. Johns changed its name from “Red Men” to “Red Storm;” Stanford University changed its name from “Indians” to “Cardinal;” and Miami of Ohio changed its name from “Redskins” to “Redhawks.” Others, such as the Atlanta Braves and Florida State Seminoles, have resisted.

Not surprisingly, many, if not most, of those advocating change or at least the “consideration” of change,are NOT Native Americans. Such prominent personages as President Obama, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and sports commentators Bob Costos and Mike Francessa come to mind. They claim that the name is offensive on its face, a racial slur against Native Americans, a reference to the history of violence and hatred of whites toward Native Americans. On the other hand, others view the name as a tribute to the honor and bravery of Native Americans. Indeed, the theme song, “Hail to the Redskins,” is played and sung by fans in the stadium to celebrate a score by the home team.

So, what do every day people think? All the polls denote that the vast majority of Americans, native or not, see no problem with the moniker and see no need to change it. A recent USA Today poll reported 79% of Americans are in favor of keeping the name; a 2002 poll commissioned by Sports Illustrated showed that 75% of NATIVE AMERICANS surveyed had no objection to the name. Daniel Snyder, the team’s owner, citing these and other polls as well as the team’s 81 year history is “adamant” that the name will not be changed. Technically, his is the only opinion that matters.

What do most Native Americans think? Aside from the abovementioned poll, listen to Rick Riley, perhaps the most respected sports writer in the country. He quotes his father-in-law, a member of the Blackfeet tribe. “The name just doesn’t bother me much. It’s an issue that shouldn’t be an issue, not with all the problems we’ve got in this country.” Want more? Wellpinit (Washington) High School, with a 91% Native American student body is nicknamed the “Redskins.” The superintendent of the school district states he has discussed the matter with both students and parents in the community The overwhelming majority consider it an “honorable name” that they “wear with pride.” Kingston (Oklahoma) High School has used the name for over 100 years and, to them, it is a source of pride. In fact, the very name “Oklahoma” is Choctaw for “red people.”

PREDICTION AND CONCLUSION

My view is that this is another attempt by the PC crowd to decide what is appropriate for the rest of us and impose their will. Aren’t you tired of other people intruding on your life, telling you what to do, think and say, deciding what is “appropriate,” what is “good for you.” I sure am. These protesters should drop it and move on with their lives. As I stated, by overwhelming numbers, Native Americans, whose opinion should matter the most, are not offended. Let’s focus on the really important issues facing us – the economy, the deficit, Iran, North Korea, Russia, the Middle East, terrorism. My hope and expectation is that this non-issue will die out.