STIMULUS NOT WORKING - (YA THINK??)

September 27, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (0)

OUR VIEW: Claims of stimulus success dubious

Spending likely not boosting economy

September 25, 2009 5:25 PM

With the economy showing some slight signs of life, liberal pundits are crowing that the Obama administration’s stimulus package is working. Yet anyone who believes that — as one Internet joke has put it — filling up buckets of water from the deep end of the pool and pouring them into the shallow end will ultimately raise the overall water level betrays a perilously limited understanding of economics.

Here is Washington Post columnist Ezra Klein: “There’s a legitimate argument over how effective it’s been, or whether it’s been effective enough given the expense. But it has been effective. Calls to repeal it are, make no mistake, calls to boost the unemployment rate and slow economic growth.” Liberal pundits are looking at slight uptick in the economy and concluding that it must be the massive $787 billion stimulus package (most of which has yet to be spent) that’s responsible for it.

A look at the data by a group of Hoover Institution economists suggests otherwise. Writing in the Sept. 17 Wall Street Journal, John Cogan, John Taylor and Volker Wieland conclude, “Incoming data will reveal more in coming months, but the data available so far tell us that the government transfers and rebates have not stimulated consumption at all, and that the resilience of the private sector following the fall 2008 panic — not the fiscal stimulus program — deserves the lion’s share of the credit for the impressive growth improvement from the first to the second quarter.”

The bigger issue is the long-term effect of enormous government spending. When government spends hundreds of billions of dollars, that money comes from someplace. There are only three places it can come from, as Ludwig Von Mises Institute economist Shawn Ritenour explains: higher taxation from people who earn the money, which retards capital investment; debt spending, which drives up the cost of borrowing for business owners and average citizens; and inflation, which reduces buying power. None of those choices improves the long-term health of the economy even if dumping money in the economy can provide some temporary and targeted spikes.

Meanwhile, our nation grows ever-more deeply in debt. The entitlement mentality grows. The government continues to consume greater portions of the economy as it pursues dubious economic policies with the apparent aim of keeping unsustainable bubbles inflated. Some day the bill will come due. You can be sure that — in the broader scheme of things — the stimulus is not “working.”

http://www.gazette.com/opinion/signs-62748-liberal-administration.html

HOW WISHFUL THINKERS ARE FORCED TO RECONNECT W/ENERGY REALITY

JosieBee

September 10, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (0)

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?secid=1502&status=article&id=337472964148202&secure=1&show=1&rss=1

How Wishful Thinkers Are Forced To Reconnect With Energy Reality

By PETER C. GLOVER AND MICHAEL ECONOMIDES | Posted Thursday, September 10, 2009 4:20 PM PT

You couldn't make it up even if you tried: One day Energy Secretary Ed Milliband sets out his proposed expansion of the U.K.'s wind power-led alternative energy revolution; the next day, Vestas, the U.K.'s largest wind turbine manufacturer, shuts down a big part of its British operations citing "low demand" and public opposition to onshore wind farms.

Just bad luck or bad PR? Not quite. Simply another blatant example of the ongoing "disconnect" over energy between those suffering from WTS (Wishful Thinker Syndrome) and the hydrocarbon-fueled present and future energy realities.

In 2006, Germany's Angela Merkel was hailed as the "Green Chancellor" for promising to rid her country of coal and nuclear power in its bid to give a clean energy "world lead." Three years on and Merkel's government actively supports the construction of a new generation of 26 coal-fired power plants as well as keeping Germany's nuclear power stations open.

In addition she wants special protection for German heavy industry via free cap-and-trade permits. A powerful German industry, the need to remain competitive and a desire to work with the lights on all combined to help Ms. Merkel "reconnect."

In 2008, Italy, to everyone's surprise, reversed its decades-long "no nuclear power stations" policy in the interest of its power needs. And Italy's Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, along with leaders from Austria, Poland and a rolling bandwagon of other countries, also now demands protection for its heavy industry when it comes time to handing out free cap-and-trade permits.

Across in the U.K., the government has been wriggling out of its "clean energy" commitments for years as the country inches toward building an urgently needed new generation of coal-fired power plants.

To help critics swallow the bitter pill of yet more coal usage, the U.K. government is subsidizing "clean coal" technology strategies via CCS (carbon capture sequestration).

But adding $1 billion to the cost of each plant for a hugely speculative unproven technology has already created a politically paralyzing impasse in the U.K. energy strategy.

The specter of the U.K. facing "South African-style power cuts" and being plunged into "Third World darkness" now looms. Hence the U.K.'s grand wind power plan.

Unfortunately, last December, the British Wind Energy Association was forced to scale down its calculation of harmful CO2 emissions "displaced" from 860 to 430 grams for every kilowatt hour of electricity produced.

In fact, with fewer than 2,400 wind turbines in operation across Britain currently, the U.K. would still require a further 100,000 to meet its targets. Plenty of scope for massive wind turbine growth, we might think. So why the Vestas pullout?

Not that Eurocrats are easily deflated by wind power facts on the ground. Speaking at a key European wind power conference in March 2009, EU Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs claimed:

"Wind energy can replace a large proportion of the polluting and finite fuels we currently rely on. It makes good sense to invest in indigenous sources of power, which hedge against unpredictable fossil fuel prices and in which Europe has a real competitive advantage."

He added: "Wind energy is Europe's contribution to peace, progress and prosperity."

Mr. Piebalgs' claims entirely epitomize the energy disconnect. As University of Toronto law professor Michael J. Trebilcock has shown, wind power is a complete disaster with the much-vaunted "Danish green energy miracle" turning out to be a well-worn myth in an industry that would blow out tomorrow without ongoing and massive public subsidy.

And all this is for an energy source that will, in the next few decades, provide only a tiny amount of the world's power.

"Capitalism and consumerism have brought the world to the brink of economic and environmental collapse," the U.K.'s Prince of Wales ruminates, adding that "the age of convenience is over." As international columnist Mark Steyn comments, "The Prince then got in his limo and was driven to his other palace."

Today, the Obama White House is recycling all the same European political energy rhetoric so familiar to Europeans. Yet, the U.S. has its own instructive case study.

One day billionaire T. Boone Pickens has a Grand Wind Plan for Texas, with further plans to forest the nation with turbines "from Canada to Mexico." The next, T. Boone drops his wind plan in favor of . . . a hydrocarbon (natural gas) solution instead.

As we have seen, however, national leaders will ultimately refuse to impoverish their industries even to "save the planet." The still-"disconnected" flower-power generation and its idealistic offspring would do well to grasp that the energy future is not green. It is hydrocarbon, and will continue to be for another century at least.

Perhaps it's just that we have yet to learn a language they'll understand? Maybe we should run the energy stats past them one more time, make a peace V-sign and (gently) ask: "Reconnected yet, man?"

Economides is editor-in-chief and Glover is Europe associate editor of the Energy Tribune.

I sure do wish we would just get it together long enough to kick these nuts to the curb once and for all and get on with the business of expanding the middle class. Lately, we're a dying breed.

TOP FIVE TAX FIBS FROM OBAMA'S HEALTH SPEECH

JosieBee

September 10, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (3)

http://www.atr.org/top-five-tax-fibsbr-obamas-health-a3834, www.atr.org

1. Middle class tax hikes: “The middle class will realize greater [health] security, not higher taxes.”

This would be a big departure from the House bill and the Baucus draft. The House bill has four tax increases on families making less than $250,000. President Obama himself endorsed another when he called for an individual mandate with a tax penalty. Earlier this week, he again floated the idea of a “soda tax.” The Baucus draft, like the House bill, contains a new tax on over-the-counter medicines purchased with an FSA or HSA

2. Individual mandate tax: “Under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance.”

What the President is not saying is that the “stick” forcing individuals to do this will be a tax increase. In the House bill, the tax penalty would be 2.5 percent of income. Under the Baucus draft, the tax would range from $750 to $3800, based on family size and income. Either way, it’s a new tax.

3. Deficit-neutral is not tax-neutral: “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits—either now, or in the future. Period.”

All “deficit-neutral” means is that taxes will go up at least as much as spending goes up. Under any version of government healthcare, taxes needed to make the plans deficit-neutral would easily exceed $200 billion per year once the plans are fully phased in, according to CBO estimates.

4. Tax code makes healthcare more expensive: “We spend one-and-a-half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren't any healthier for it. This is one of the reasons that insurance premiums have gone up three times faster than wages.”

One of the reasons healthcare inflation is 8 percent a year, while regular inflation is 3 percent a year, is because of the tax code. The tax code prevents most individuals from buying health insurance with pre-tax dollars. Only when insurance is obtained through one’s job or the government is there a tax benefit. There’s also almost no tax benefit to paying for medical expenses out of pocket. These combine to make people think that someone else—not they—are paying for their health care, which drives up the cost.

5. Tax cuts don’t “cost” money: “The plan I'm proposing will cost around $900 billion over ten years…less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration.”

To make an obvious point, taxes are not the government’s money. They are money taken by force of law from the American people. To cut taxes doesn’t “cost” any family anything. In fact, it saves them money. When taxes are raised to increase government spending, that does cost money for families.

Please also note: FYI Obama endorsed HB3200 as his own last night.

HR 3200 - A Line by Line Analysis

JosieBee

July 31, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (3)

Path: div.post-323 post hentry category-health-reform category-universal-healthcare category-health-insurance » div.entry-head » small

HR 3200 – A Line by Line Analysis

Published July 31, 2009 Health Reform , Universal Healthcare , health insurance

Here is a line-by-line analysis of HR 3200 currently under consideration in the House of Representatives. This analysis was prepared by the Liberty Council and, like all parties to this discussion, they have their point of view.

I give anyone who reads this piece of legislation credit. I just hope our representatives are in that number BEFORE making their vote!

Pg 22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Government will audit the books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!

Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC Bill – YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!

Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC Bill – THERE WILL BE A GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get

Pg 42 of HC Bill – The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your benefits for you. You have no choice!

Pg 50 Section 152 in HC Bill – HC will be provided to ALL non-U.S. citizens, illegal or otherwise

Pg 58 HC Bill – Government will have real-time access to individual’s finances and a National ID Health Care Card will be issued!

Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Government will have direct access to your banks accounts for electronic funds transfer.

(NOTE FROM RJ-This really does mean they can take your money at any time. Who will have this authority?—a government bureaucrat.)

Pg 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions and community organizations (ACORN).

Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Government is creating a Health Care Exchange to bring private health care plans under government control.

Pg 84 Sec 203 HC Bill – Government mandates ALL benefit packages for private health care plans in the Exchange

Pg 85 Line 7 HC Bill – Specs for of Benefit Levels for Plans = The government will ration your health care!

Pg 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill – Government mandates linguistic appropriate services.

Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The government will use groups i.e., ACORN & AmeriCorps to sign up individuals for government Health Care Plan

Pg 85 Line 7 HC Bill – Specs of Ben Levels 4 Plans. #AARP members – Your health care WILL be rationed

Pg 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill – Medicaid Eligible Individual will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice.

Pg 124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue the government on price fixing. No “judicial review” against government monopoly.

Pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill – Doctors/ #AMA – The government will tell YOU what you can make.

Pg 145 Line 15-17 An employer MUST auto enroll employees into public opt plan. NO CHOICE

Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for health care for part-time employees AND their families.

Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer w/ payroll 400k and above who does not prov. pub opt. pays 8% tax on all payroll

Pg 150 Lines 9-13 Businesses with payroll between 251k and 400k who do not provide public opt pays 2-6% tax on all payroll

Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn’t have acceptable health care according to government will be taxed 2.5% of income.

Pg 170 Lines 1-3 Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay).

Pg 195 Officers & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans’ financial and personal records.

Pg 203 Line 14-15 HC – “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.” Yes, it says that.

Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor affected.

Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill – Doctors, it does not matter what specialty you have, you’ll all be paid the same.

Pg 253 Line 10-18 Government sets value of doctors’ time, prof judg, etc. Literally value of humans.

Pg 265 Sec 1131Government mandates and controls productivity for private health care industries.

Pg 268 Sec 1141 Federal Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.

Pg 272 SEC. 1145. Treatment of certain cancer hospitals – Cancer patients – welcome to rationing!

(RJ-NOTE: Much cancer treatment will not work unless implemented early, but the waiting time just to see a specialist will likely be months when this plan is implemented. As you can see in this bill, the option of the health care bureaucrat is to deny treatment to those they deem not likely to be helped by it. Watch the cancer death rate skyrocket.)

Page 280 Sec 1151 The government will penalize hospitals for what government deems preventable readmissions. (Incentives for hospital to not treat and release.)

Pg 298 Lines 9-11 Doctors that treat a patient during initial admission that results in a readmission-Government will penalize you.

Pg 317 L 13-20 PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government tells Doctors what/how much they can own.

Pg 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Government is mandating hospitals cannot expand.

pg 321 2-13 Hospitals have opportunity to apply for exception, BUT community input required. Can you say ACORN?!!

Pg335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339 – Government mandates establishment of outcome based measures. Health Care the way they want. Rationing.

Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans (Part B), HMOs, etc. Forcing people into Government plan.

Pg 354 Sec 1177 – Government will RESTRICT enrollment of special needs people!

Pg 379 Sec 1191 Government creates more bureaucracy – Tele-health Advisory Committee. Health care by phone/Internet?

Pg 425 Lines 4-12 Government mandates Advance [Death] Care Planning Consult. Think Senior Citizens end of life.

Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney. Mandatory!

Pg 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Government provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death.

Pg 427 Lines 15-24 Government mandates program for orders for end of life. The government has a say in how your life ends.

Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An “adv. care planning consult” will be used frequently as patient’s health deteriorates.

Pg 429 Lines 10-12 “adv. care consultation” may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from Government.

Pg 429 Lines 13-25 – The government will specify which doctors can write an end of life order.

PG 430 Lines 11-15 The government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life.

(NOTE FROM RJ: The above really does give the government the authority to determine who lives and dies, and when. A government bureaucrat really will be making this decision for you and your loved ones.)

Pg 469 – Community Based Home Medical Services=Non-profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?

Pg 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org. Like ACORN?

Pg 489 Sec 1308 The government will cover Marriage and Family therapy. They will insert government into your marriage.

Pg 494-498 Government will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services.

PG 502 Sec 1181 Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research Established. – Hello Big Brother – Literally.

Pg 503 Lines 13-19 Government will build registries and data networks from YOUR electronic medical records.

Pg 503 lines 21-25 Government may secure data directly from any department or agency of the U.S., including your data.

Pg 504 Lines 6-10 The “Center” will collect data both published and unpublished (that means public and your private info).

PG 506 Lines 19-21 The Center will recommend policies that would allow for public access of data.

PG 518 Lines 21-25 The Commission will have input from Health Care consumer reps – Can you say unions and ACORN?

PG 524 18-22 Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund set up. More taxes for ALL.

PG 621 Lines 20-25 Government will define what quality means in health care. Since when does government know about quality?

Pg 622 Lines 2-9 To pay for the Quality Standards, government will transfer money from other government Trust Funds. More Taxes.

PG 624 “Quality” measures shall be designed to assess outcomes and functional status of patients.

PG 624 “Quality” measures shall be designed to profile you including race, age, gender, place of residence, etc.

Pg 628 Sec 1443 Government will give “Multi-Stake Holders” Pre-Rule Making input into Selection of “Quality” Measures.

Pg 630 9-24/631 1-9 Those multi-stake holder groups include unions and groups like ACORN deciding health care quality.

Pg 632 Lines 14-25 The Government may implement any “Quality measure” of health care services as they see fit.

PG 633 14-25/ 634 1-9 The Secretary may issue non-endorsed “Quality Measures” for Physician Services and Dialysis Services.

Pg 635 to 653 Physicians Payments Sunshine Provision – Government wants to shine sunlight on doctor but not government.

Pg 654-659 Public Reporting on Health Care-Associated Infections – Looks okay.

PG 660-671 Doctors in Residency – Government will tell you where your residency will be, thus where you’ll live.

Pg 676-686 Government will regulate hospitals in EVERY aspect of residency programs, including teaching hospitals.

Pg 686-700 Increased Funding to Fight Waste, Fraud, and Abuse. You mean like the government with an $18 million website?

(NOTE FROM RJ—Can you actually imagine empowering the government to fight waste, fraud, and abuse????)

PGs 701-704 Sec 1619 If your part of health care plan isn’t in Government Health Care Exchange but you qualify for Federal aid, no payment.

PG 705-709 SEC. 1128 If Secretary gets complaints (ACORN) on health care provider or supplier, government can do background check.

PG 711 Lines 8-14 The Secretary has broad powers to deny health care providers/ suppliers admittance into Health Care Exchange. Your doctor could be thrown out of business.

Pg 719-720 Sec 1637 ANY Doctor who orders durable medical equipment or home medical services MUST be enrolled in Medicare.

PG 722 Sec 1639 Government MANDATES doctors must have face-to-face with patient to certify patient for Home Health Services.

PG 724 23-25 PG 725 1-5 The same government certifications will apply to Medicaid and CHIP (your kids).

PG 724 Lines 16-22 Government reserves right to apply face-to-face certification for patient to ANY other health care service.

Pg 735 lines 16-25 For law enforcement, proposes the Secretary-HHS will give Attorney General access to ALL data.

PG 740-757 Government sets guidelines for subsidizing the uninsured (That’s your tax dollars people).

Pg 757-762 Federal Government will shift burden of payments to Disproportionate Share Hospitals (DSH) to States. (Taxes)

Pg 763 1-8 No DS/EA hospitals will be paid unless they provide services without regard to national origin.

Pg 765 Sec 1711 Government will require Preventative Services including vaccines. (Choice?)

Pg 768 Sec 1713 Government – Nurse Home Visitation Services (Hello union paybacks).

Pg 769 11-14 Nurse Home Visit Services include economic self-sufficiency, employ adv, school-readiness.

Pg 769 3-5 Nurse Home Visit Services – “increasing birth intervals between pregnancies.” Government ABORTIONS anyone?

Pg 770 SEC 1714 Federal Government mandates eligibility for State Family Planning Services. Abortion and State Sovereign.

(NOTE FROM RJ—Can you believe that in America you will be told how many children you can have, and when? Does this mean we can expect the government to impose mandatory abortions? How else can this be interpreted?)

Pg 789-797 Government will set, mandate drug prices, controlling which drugs brought to market. Bye innovation.

Pgs 797-800 SEC. 1744 PAYMENTS for graduate medical education. The government will now control doctors’ educations.

PG 801 Sec 1751 The government will decide which health care conditions will be paid. Say RATION!

Pg 810 SEC. 1759. Billing Agents, clearinghouses, etc. req. to register. Government takes over private payment system.

Pg 820-824 Sec 1801 Government will identify individuals ineligible for subsidies. Will access all personal financial information.

Pg 824-829 SEC. 1802. Government sets up Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund. Another tax black hole.

PG 829-833 Government will impose a fee on ALL private health insurance plans including self-insured to pay for Trust Fund!

PG 835 11-13 fees imposed by government for Trust Fund shall be treated as if they were taxes.

Pg 838-840 Government will design and implement Home Visitation Program for families with young kids and families expecting kids.

PG 844-845 This Home Visitation Program includes government coming into your house and telling you how to parent!!!

(NOTE FROM RJ—If you think this sounds like “Big Brother” actually coming into our homes, we really need to think about what comes after Big Brother. The scenario being set up by the government to control people through this, with the technology now available, is beyond what the science fiction horror works about this could conceive of.)

Pg 859 Government will establish a Public Health Fund at a cost of $88,800,000,000. Yes that’s billion.

Pg 865 The government will MANDATE the establishment of a National Health Service Corps.

PG 865 to 876 The NHS Corps is a program where doctors perform mandatory health care for two years for part loan repayment.

PG 876-892 The government takes over the education of our medical students and doctors.

PG 898 The government will establish a Public Health Workforce Corps to ensure supply of public health prof.

PG 898 The Public Health Workforce Corps shall consist of civilian employees of the U.S. as Secretary deems.

PG 898 The Public Health Workforce Corps shall consist of officers of Regular and Reserve Corps of Service.

PG 900 The Public Health Workforce Corps includes veterinarians.

PG 901 The Public Health Workforce Corps WILL include commissioned Regular and Reserve Officers. HC Draft?

PG 910 The government will develop, build, and run Public Health Training Centers.

PG 913-914 Government starts a health care affirmative action program thru guise of diversity scholarships.

PG 915 SEC. 2251. Government MANDDATES Cultural and linguistic competency training for health care professionals.

Pg 932 The Government will establish Preventative and Wellness Trust fund- initial cost of $30,800,000,000 billion.

PG 935 21-22 Government will identify specific goals & objectives for prevention & wellness activities. Control YOU!!

PG 936 Government will develop “Healthy People and National Public Health Performance Standards” Tell me what to eat?

(NOTE FROM RJ—This is no joke—the government will be able to actually mandate what you can eat or not eat. This could be helpful for some, but do we want the government doing it? What is the most fat and out of shape entity on the planet? The Federal Government. What kind of shape do you think the bureaucrats will be in who mandate such for everyone else?)

PG 942 Lines 22-25 More government? Offices of Surgeon General -Public Health Svc, Minority Health, Women’s Health

PG 950- 980 BIG GOVERNMENT core pub health infrastructure including workforce capacity, lab systems, health info sys, etc.

PG 993 Government will establish school based health clinics. Your kids won’t have a chance.

PG 994 School Based Health Clinic will be integrated into the school environment. Say government brainwash!

PG 1001 The government will establish a National Medical Device Registry. Will you be tracked?

LONG TERM BUDGET OUTLOOK - CBO

JosieBee

July 17, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (0)

Budget Projections, Long-Term Budgetary Issues.

We're so flush with dough in the Treasury that we just have to keep bailing out the banks and corporations and others who simply were too stupid to manage their entities profitably. Read it and weep. I do have a question though, is America too big to fail?

The Long-Term Budget Outlook

Today I had the opportunity to testify before the Senate Budget Committee about CBO’s most recent analysis of the long-term budget outlook.

Under current law, the federal budget is on an unsustainable path, because federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run. Although great uncertainty surrounds long-term fiscal projections, rising costs for health care and the aging of the population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly under any plausible scenario for current law. Unless revenues increase just as rapidly, the rise in spending will produce growing budget deficits. Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress economic growth in the United States. Over time, accumulating debt would cause substantial harm to the economy. The following chart shows our projection of federal debt relative to GDP under the two scenarios we modeled.

Federal Debt Held by the Public Under CBO’s Long-Term Budget Scenarios (Percentage of GDP)

Keeping deficits and debt from reaching these levels would require increasing revenues significantly as a share of GDP, decreasing projected spending sharply, or some combination of the two.

Measured relative to GDP, almost all of the projected growth in federal spending other than interest payments on the debt stems from the three largest entitlement programs—Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. For decades, spending on Medicare and Medicaid has been growing faster than the economy. CBO projects that if current laws do not change, federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid combined will grow from roughly 5 percent of GDP today to almost 10 percent by 2035. By 2080, the government would be spending almost as much, as a share of the economy, on just its two major health care programs as it has spent on all of its programs and services in recent years.

In CBO’s estimates, the increase in spending for Medicare and Medicaid will account for 80 percent of spending increases for the three entitlement programs between now and 2035 and 90 percent of spending growth between now and 2080. Thus, reducing overall government spending relative to what would occur under current fiscal policy would require fundamental changes in the trajectory of federal health spending. Slowing the growth rate of outlays for Medicare and Medicaid is the central long-term challenge for fiscal policy.

Under current law, spending on Social Security is also projected to rise over time as a share of GDP, but much less sharply. CBO projects that Social Security spending will increase from less than 5 percent of GDP today to about 6 percent in 2035 and then roughly stabilize at that level. Meanwhile, as depicted below, government spending on all activities other than Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest on federal debt—a broad category that includes national defense and a wide variety of domestic programs—is projected to decline or stay roughly stable as a share of GDP in future decades.

Spending Other Than That for Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and Net Interest, 1962 to 2080 (Percentage of GDP)

Federal spending on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will grow relative to the economy both because health care spending per beneficiary is projected to increase and because the population is aging. As shown in the figure below, between now and 2035, aging is projected to make the larger contribution to the growth of spending for those three programs as a share of GDP. After 2035, continued increases in health care spending per beneficiary are projected to dominate the growth in spending for the three programs.

Factors Explaining Future Federal Spending on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security (Percentage of GDP)

The current recession and policy responses have little effect on long-term projections of noninterest spending and revenues. But CBO estimates that in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, the federal government will record its largest budget deficits as a share of GDP since shortly after World War II. As a result of those deficits, federal debt held by the public will soar from 41 percent of GDP at the end of fiscal year 2008 to 60 percent at the end of fiscal year 2010. This higher debt results in permanently higher spending to pay interest on that debt. Federal interest payments already amount to more than 1 percent of GDP; unless current law changes, that share would rise to 2.5 percent by 2020.

This entry was posted on Thursday, July 16th, 2009 at 4:43 pm and is filed under Budget Projections, Long-Term Budgetary Issues.

MICROCOSM OF HOW STIMULUS DOLLARS ARE BEING SPENT

JosieBee

July 13, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (1)

As you know, I'm from New Hampshire and here is a little background on how the stimulus money is being spent. The amount of jobs being created and the revenue from them being generated is outstanding! I have ocean front property for sale for you in Peoria, Ill. if you're interested, too.

Take notes - this type of thing is happening in your neck of the woods too.

New Hampshire stimulus: $8.32 million per jobposted at 2:57 pm on July 13, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

With the entire nation wondering at the effectiveness of a stimulus package that has resulted in not saving 2 million jobs thus far, the data on job creation has finally begun to arrive. I

In New Hampshire, which got $416 million dollars, officials have proudly announced that the money has created jobs — 50 of them, to be exact. Only 34 of them are full time:

More than $400 million in federal stimulus money has come to New Hampshire this year, and more is on the way.

The Office of Legislative Budget Assistant reported last week that $413.6 million made its way to the state under a list of programs that involve education, highways, environmental, health and human services, energy and law enforcement. …

So far, a total of 50 jobs have been created by the funding, 34 of them full time.

The OES will be headed by a director whom Gov. John Lynch has not yet appointed. All five OES jobs are described as full-time temporary positions that will go out of existence in September 2011, the end of the federal fiscal year.

You read that right. The stimulus package in New Hampshire has created 50 temp jobs, apparently all of them bureaucrat positions, and none of them permanent. The Office of Economic Stimulus (OES) employs five of those people, and when the governor appoints the director, that position will pay a $110,000 salary, plus benefits.

Roughly speaking, those 50 jobs cost the American taxpayer $8.32 million per position. If we calculate part-time positions as one-half of a full-time job, the cost per full-time job would be $9.9 million. At that rate, the $787 billion Porkulus package should generate about 79,495 jobs across America — or about what we lose today by 1:37 pm in new unemployment claims.

And of course, all of those would last only as long as the stimulus money kept coming to fund them.

Patrick Hynes at Now Hampshire points out the fallacy of transparency even on these pathetic returns on the stimulus:

NowHampshire.com has repeatedly asked the state’s “stimulus czar” Orville “Bud” Fitch for up-to-date tallies of stimulus jobs created in New Hampshire. At the end of May, Fitch did not know. On June 26th, Fitch told Nowhampshire.com, “We are just now rolling out a reporting system to gather information from grant fund recipients.”

According to stimulus backers, accountability and transparency were to be hallmarks of the historic spending measure.

Jazz Shaw follows up on this weekend’s report on the waste of stimulus funds in New York:

When Route 17 began work two years in the Southern Tier to expand to four lanes and convert it to a continuation of I-86, not only did the state hire many new workers in the area, but local businesses reported significant benefits as well, all of which resulted in more jobs and increased prosperity in the region.

The same could be happening right now on major pending projects around Syracuse, Rochester and Buffalo if the money had been quickly and properly targeted, since the plans for those projects have been drawn up and waiting for years.

Instead, federal stimulus funds are being shunted to cover up the holes and warts of a dysfunctional state government, with the taxpayer left to pick up the check. And, as the Syracuse Herald article points out, the long range effect of this will be virtually [nil]. …

When this stimulus money was first dished out in titanic proportions, a bit more time and effort on the part of Congress could surely have targeted for real job creation and long term benefits. Using it as a “stabilizing” stop-gap patch for failing state governments is resulting in it having roughly the same benefit as pouring golf balls down a gopher hole.

And the Obama administration is considering an encore.

THE CAP AND TAX FICTION

JosieBee

June 28, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (3)

The Cap and Tax Fiction

Democrats off-loading economics to pass climate change bill.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has put cap-and-trade legislation on a forced march through the House, and the bill may get a full vote as early as Friday. It looks as if the Democrats will have to destroy the discipline of economics to get it done.

Despite House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman's many payoffs to Members, rural and Blue Dog Democrats remain wary of voting for a bill that will impose crushing costs on their home-district businesses and consumers. The leadership's solution to this problem is to simply claim the bill defies the laws of economics.

Their gambit got a boost this week, when the Congressional Budget Office did an analysis of what has come to be known as the Waxman-Markey bill. According to the CBO, the climate legislation would cost the average household only $175 a year by 2020. Edward Markey, Mr. Waxman's co-author, instantly set to crowing that the cost of upending the entire energy economy would be no more than a postage stamp a day for the average household. Amazing. A closer look at the CBO analysis finds that it contains so many caveats as to render it useless.

For starters, the CBO estimate is a one-year snapshot of taxes that will extend to infinity. Under a cap-and-trade system, government sets a cap on the total amount of carbon that can be emitted nationally; companies then buy or sell permits to emit CO2. The cap gets cranked down over time to reduce total carbon emissions.

To get support for his bill, Mr. Waxman was forced to water down the cap in early years to please rural Democrats, and then severely ratchet it up in later years to please liberal Democrats. The CBO's analysis looks solely at the year 2020, before most of the tough restrictions kick in. As the cap is tightened and companies are stripped of initial opportunities to "offset" their emissions, the price of permits will skyrocket beyond the CBO estimate of $28 per ton of carbon. The corporate costs of buying these expensive permits will be passed to consumers.

The biggest doozy in the CBO analysis was its extraordinary decision to look only at the day-to-day costs of operating a trading program, rather than the wider consequences energy restriction would have on the economy. The CBO acknowledges this in a footnote: "The resource cost does not indicate the potential decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) that could result from the cap."

The hit to GDP is the real threat in this bill. The whole point of cap and trade is to hike the price of electricity and gas so that Americans will use less. These higher prices will show up not just in electricity bills or at the gas station but in every manufactured good, from food to cars. Consumers will cut back on spending, which in turn will cut back on production, which results in fewer jobs created or higher unemployment. Some companies will instead move their operations overseas, with the same result.

When the Heritage Foundation did its analysis of Waxman-Markey, it broadly compared the economy with and without the carbon tax. Under this more comprehensive scenario, it found Waxman-Markey would cost the economy $161 billion in 2020, which is $1,870 for a family of four. As the bill's restrictions kick in, that number rises to $6,800 for a family of four by 2035.

Note also that the CBO analysis is an average for the country as a whole. It doesn't take into account the fact that certain regions and populations will be more severely hit than others -- manufacturing states more than service states; coal producing states more than states that rely on hydro or natural gas. Low-income Americans, who devote more of their disposable income to energy, have more to lose than high-income families.

Even as Democrats have promised that this cap-and-trade legislation won't pinch wallets, behind the scenes they've acknowledged the energy price tsunami that is coming. During the brief few days in which the bill was debated in the House Energy Committee, Republicans offered three amendments: one to suspend the program if gas hit $5 a gallon; one to suspend the program if electricity prices rose 10% over 2009; and one to suspend the program if unemployment rates hit 15%. Democrats defeated all of them.

The reality is that cost estimates for climate legislation are as unreliable as the models predicting climate change. What comes out of the computer is a function of what politicians type in. A better indicator might be what other countries are already experiencing. Britain's Taxpayer Alliance estimates the average family there is paying nearly $1,300 a year in green taxes for carbon-cutting programs in effect only a few years.

Americans should know that those Members who vote for this climate bill are voting for what is likely to be the biggest tax in American history. Even Democrats can't repeal that reality.

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A12

CAP AND TRADE FLOOR VOTE FRIDAY - TAKE ACTION!

JosieBee

June 24, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (0)

freedomworks.org

Cap and Trade Floor Vote on Friday: Take Action!

This is an urgent message from FreedomWorks. By now you’ve probably heard that leaders in the House have cobbled together enough compromises late Monday night to get the dreaded “Cap and Trade” bill to the floor this Friday. More accurately referred to as “Cap and Tax,” the Waxman-Markey climate legislation is an enormous energy tax that would deal a severe blow to our already shaky economy.

It is vital that you Take Action now. We are asking that you take some time to do three things.

1. Click here to send an email to your Representative.
2. Call (866) 928-3035 for the House switchboard where you can be transferred to your Representative’s office. Try (866) 928-0525 if you get a busy signal. (Find your Representative here.)
.

The positive effects of the Waxman-Markey bill on the climate are negligible, by some estimates, almost impossible to measure. On the other hand, the effects it would have on our economy and way of life are devastating.

At the same time many are losing jobs and struggling to get by on less, the Cap and Trade plan would raise energy rates across the board. That means sky-high electricity rates, and more pain at the pump. The CBO has estimated the bill could mean another 77 cents per gallon of gasoline. Higher electricity and fuel prices add to the over-all cost of everything, like food from farms where growers depend on fertilizers, tractors, and transportation. It’s one thing to conserve, but getting to work for the millions who don’t live near public transportation, and lighting and heating our homes are essentials people can’t avoid.

Independent estimates say that families could pay $3,000 more a year on energy and the entire plan would take $2 trillion from our economy in just over eight years. Numbers like these come at a very real cost, not just in terms of your wallet but in terms of the many, many jobs this legislation gambles with. If you would like more information, please click here to read our Top 10 list.

Waxman-Markey’s Cap and Trade is a plan that shoots us in the foot. We can’t afford this bill, especially when it means nothing in return. Please email and call your legislators now.

Sincerely,

Dick Armey
Chairman
FreedomWorks.org

Note: Can we stop this hemmorhaging of money out of the people's pockets into government's? This is nonsense, absolute nonsense and an economic buzz kill if we're ever going to get out of this economic malaise. How is this going to create jobs and move the economy?

PERPLEXED

JosieBee

June 24, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (2)

There's something that has been bothering me ever since the Federal Government seized ownership of two automobile manufacturing companies. It wasn't just because the Federal Government totally negated Contract Law to bully their way into ownership nor was it because they lacked fealty when giving the UAW (note, that is UNION, not workers) shares of these same companies in payment of their votes and fund raising efforts.

I didn't find it this perplexing when the mandate from the Emperor to build electric econo boxes was decreed. The government in the guise of the Emperor owns these entities and can do what it wants with them because - he can. If the Emperor has an agenda, that agenda will be obeyed.

Some people gush at the prowess of this masterful Emperor who took away the ill gotten gain from those who earned it and confiscated it for himself so that he may do good things for the people. That the people are unemployed and living precariously day to day as a result is just unintended consequences of this great and wonderful leader's masterful plan of taking away from one to give to another but giving only just enough to keep the people drooling in anticipation for more.

The Emperor has decreed that the automobile companies he owns will make electric cars. He has even established a program that pushes money (that we don't have) onto automobile manufacturers that he doesn't own: Nissan and Ford so that they too may make electric cars according to his desire.

Meanwhile, his lackeys and employees and sycophants in and outside of Congress are pushing forward the Cap and Trade tax. The simplest way I know of to explain cap and trade is to explain it as a tax on every single aspect of our daily lives because it is a tax on energy.

Energy is needed to pump and filter water. Water bills will go up whether you have municipal water or you depend on a water pump from a well. Sewerage charges will go up because it takes energy to filter, condense, purify before pumping. If you have a septic system and a leech field, your sewerage charges will go up as well, when it's time to pump.

Electricity will sky rocket.

Food will go up because food of all kinds grown and manufactured takes energy and energy to produce the raw product all the way through to its final form and delivery to the supermarket for purchasing.

Add the extra costs of the power to keep the lights on, the automatic doors working, the refrigerators and freezers keeping food cold and frozen, etc..

Municipalities will have to increase taxes however imprudent because traffic lights will cost more, the use of municipal facilities will cost more, road maintenance will cost more (oil based products are needed to run trucks, cars, mowers, etc).

Health care will cost more because the manufacture of the drugs and equipment needed to perform the simplest tasks will increase not to mention the buildings that require power and the entities that pay for that power will have to charge more.

I think you get the general idea of just what we are about to do to ourselves if we say nothing.

That the great Emperor is either so out of touch with what is about to befall onto the people, or his actions are with a purpose, the great Emperor is imposing even MORE of a burden on our energy needs by making the automobile companies he owns and coercing the ones he doesn't own into making plug in electric cars.

With the unemployment rate reaching double digits and by the end of the month that is a given that it will increase from the current 9.4% it is now, and with no other industry on the horizon to pick up the economy, that unemployment rate will only go higher.

There isn't another industry coming up the pipeline to retrain for like there was with telecommunications and the finance industries.

The cap and trade tax spells disaster beyond anything our small imaginations could come up with.

It's perplexing that there aren't riots in the streets of every single village, town and city against it.

The hammer and cycle is about to fall and no one seems to be paying attention.

The Iranians protesting (and dying) in the streets of Tehran demanding their freedom are acting as the canaries in the mines and we still don't pick up on what is about to happen here.

I'm perplexed.

DR. RON PAUL: NO LONGER THE LONE RANGER

JosieBee

June 22, 2009 by JosieBee Comments (0)

http://getliberty.org/

Dr. Ron Paul: No Longer the Lone Ranger
Justin Williams

In 1983, largely due to the policies of the Fed Chairman Paul Volcker and President Ronald Reagan, the American people were finally rid of the burden of astronomical inflation. The policy of the Carter Administration attempting to offset unemployment with having the Federal Reserve print money was at last at an end.

At the same time, a fresh-faced congressman named Ron Paul (R-TX) decided that because of this, it was a good opportunity to investigate the very institution that had helped wreak havoc on the economy with runaway inflation. That same year, he proposed H.R. 877 a bill that would allow the General Accounting Office (GAO) to audit the Federal Reserve Board, the Federal Advisory Council, the Federal Open Market Committee, and the Fed banks and branches themselves.

Dr. Paul was able to garner only 18 co-sponsors on that bill, which died with little to no support. Like many of his bills, supporting liberty and transparency, it was sent to committee were it ultimately met its slow and unheralded death.

But, that was then and this is now. With the Federal Reserve, loose monetary policy, and impending inflation making headlines in the mainstream media, more attention is finally being paid to a near identical bill—H.R. 1207—that Congressman Paul reintroduced in February of this year.

Already, just four months later, H.R. 1207 has a staggering 237 co-sponsors. And now a full-blown audit of the shadowy, secretive, bureaucracy Wall Street Journal writer Steve Moore, in an interview with the Washington News Observer (WNO) calls, “a threat to representative government,” appears imminent.

The fact is, the history of the Federal Reserve is one that can be easily summarized with a foggy picture of Soviet-style central planning causing major booms and busts since the entity’s inception in 1913. For example in a recent WNO interview, Dr. Paul characterizes the Federal Reserve as being the creator of “the inflation of World War I, the depression of 1921, the inflation of the 1920s, and the Depression of the 1930 and on and on.”

Paul compares these events—each caused at least in part by the Fed’s loose money policies—to the current situation with the credit and housing crises, which have put the nation into a deep recession.

The purpose of the Paul bill, now gathering support, is to help Congress and the American people prevent another financial disaster due to the Fed’s constant policy of offering loose credit and encouraging bad lending practices. Plus, it will enable Congress to keep an eye on the current bailout money in order to prevent abuse and fraud.

One issue the bill’s sponsors on either side of the aisle seem to be in lockstep agreement on: the government-granted monopoly over one of the most important units of currency is way too much power to leave to an unelected body that, in one swift action with the printing press, could destroy a nation.

Now the former 2008 Presidential candidate, who was characterized in the media as being insane for bringing up reform in the area of monetary policy, is finding plenty of support. Or as Dr. Paul said in his interview, all of a sudden more than a quarter century after he first proposed it, “…now it is popular to get transparency of the Fed.”

It is as if “everything old is new again”—only this time, with teeth in it.

Justin Williams is a Contributing Editor of ALG News Bureau.