It’s Not About That!

At some point, broader questions are inescapable.  Sorting out wheels within the wheels can lead to more confusion not less.  Sun Tzu’s advice to deflect your enemy’s attention appears to be in play at every turn.  It can feel that the more you know, the more you must know and at the same time something is hidden from view.  Symptoms become the basis for analysis, yet there is always an inherent lack of confidence; judging from symptoms can be a difficult business. 

 Perhaps the only thing that makes some degree of convoluted sense is to simply assume that whatever it is, “it’s not about that”.   

 The stimulus package and the omnibus spending bill were about economic recovery.  Hair on fire, we have a crisis, we have to do it now! Jobs, jobs, jobs!  However, unemployment is 20% worse that predictions.  White House economists admit that we need to resign ourselves to 10% unemployment.  Outside of the stock market and massive gains in productivity based on the need for business to get lean in a hurry there is no significant recovery.  The consumer is the key and yet, we declare a start to the recovery in the absence of consumer spending.  Huh?  Analysis that contends the recovery is not really a recovery is supported by deducting temporary stimulus spending, temporary jobs and government jobs from the calculus.  Massive government job creation was, as you may recall, the very first section of the stimulus bill; permanent jobs to administer a temporary spending program, a symptom perhaps?  Massive amounts of stimulus spending went to bail out states guilty of profligate spending, what about next year?  Conclusion; the stimulus could not have been about recovery, if it was, it would have been structured differently, although that Turtle Tunnel project in Florida was a cute idea.

 Corporate bail outs were about saving jobs, the financial system and the manufacturing base.  However, bailed out auto manufactures continued to send jobs oversees and there was no caveat attached to the funding requiring that set the stage for bringing displaced jobs back to the U.S.  The traditional position of capital in the bankruptcy process was turned on its head in favor of union desires and yet unions still lost jobs under bail out funding.  The precedent applied to car companies puts all capital investment in question where the government stands to assume a role.  We’re we to give in to our lesser angels we might come to the conclusion that government control of the manufacturing base, the credit vehicles that go with that base, the insurance market, banks, investment houses, student loans, compensation and up to 70% of the home loan market was a quick and easy way to potentially exert a massive degree of vertical control the economy.  Just saying!  Whatever it was, it is not about what they said it was about or the results would be different.

 Compensation controls in the bailed out banks was about accountability and paying the taxpayers back.  It’s confusing, banks that did try to pay back TARP funding we’re met with resistance at every turn.  Of late, nothing about the management at Freddy and Fannie and their compensation guidelines; nothing about the Banking Committee’s role in setting policy and their points of accountability.  The argument is well made (Investors Business Daily, Thomas Sowell and others) that Freddy, Fannie and government mandates had more to do with the housing crisis than the banking industry, per se.  So is it really about compensation and accountability or is it about control and intimidation?  The inconsistencies loom large, a symptom perhaps?

 Health care simply cannot be about health care.  If health care was about health care Congress would be focused on making the deal that would deliver the most health care to the most people on the most immediate basis possible; a deal that would deal with issues of general agreement such as pre-existing conditions, availability, permanence and portability.  In the context of a threatened public option, at deal could be made within the regulated private insurance markets.  

 The obvious and ongoing complexity of the challenges inherent in legislating a health care solution is the best of all arguments for taking advantage of existing markets to address the problem.  If health care was about health care the public option would be the logical last resort not the first priority. 

 If the “crisis” in health care was actually about providing health care you would take the quickest road to solutions, not a public option that commences in five to six years when a nearly immediate fix is available in the markets that currently exist. 

 Is health care a slippery slope?  It could be!  As an operations executive I once worked with a Controller who defined his job as “anything that has to do with money and since everything has to do with money, my job is anything and everything I say it is”.  Could the same attitude prevail with a government option?  Food, weight, medication, environmental factors, exercise, stress, child care; these and more are all potentially health care issues.  Should we evolve to a single payer system can you be sure that “by definition”, the bureaucracy does not end up saying to you “since everything effects health our job is anything and everything we say it is?”  The EPA, “by administrative definition” declared CO2 a hazardous gas and now moves to apply their full weight to the control of a naturally occurring, necessary gas.  We do have the guiding light of actual examples to look to for guidance.            

 It is not about recovery, or jobs or health care.  It is about control and a Progressive ideology that glorifies the role of government in the pursuit of a yet undefined utopian ideal. 

 What this is about is who you trust.  Do you trust the individual or do you trust the collective wisdom of a massive bureaucracy?  Do you trust the dynamic of individual freedoms driving the process or must that process, and by extension the people, be controlled and guided at every turn?

 It’s not about what they say it’s about!   The good news is that this equation has two sides because  It’s also about standing against “it”, whatever form “it” may take.

  • Bill Hedges

    Democrat Controlled Congress lead by obama has empathy for the uninsured. He shows he cares by taxing to pay for health plan now, that will kick in 2013-2015. Showing his concern by breaking his promise and taxing even those making under $125,000 a year.

    What greater love can a man show to his Country. A testimony to his fulfillment of his prophecy.

    What ???

    Yes, obama was elected in landslide, hero to the masses.Now with his agenda polls low and this article, he reminds of an American hero. Benedict Arnold:

    “Yet Arnold has gone down in history not as a hero but as a villain, a military traitor who, as commander of the American fort at West Point, New York, in 1780, schemed to hand it over to the British. ”

    http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/fall97/arnold.html

    Whose hands indeed, Landreaux , ‘’THAT IS THE QUESTION“.

    William Shakespeare – To be, or not to be (from Hamlet 3/1)

    http://www.artofeurope.com/shakespeare/sha8.htm

  • JD

    I do wonder about all you people who think they can live thier lives believing that unless it is “Perfect” then we shouldn’t do it.

    Perfection is a process not a starting point.

    This is true from healthcare to our National Deficit. We may not be able to start out with the best healthcare reform but we need to begin and work toward perfection.

    Not starting is not an option, there is no question about that.

  • Bill Hedges

    No one is saying perfect, just be realistic. We know from working examples what happens. Is not what obama is saying. Government health plans worldwide are deep in debt, cutting care, long waits, etc.

    To lower cost of health care, tort reform is easy, unless your soul is owned by lawyers. Your second biggest contributors.

    Open State to State competition is obviously another answer. I won’t repeat all Republican quick helps. And said here many times. Changes presented by Republicans can lower cost now, not 2013-2015.

    Obama said “Not starting is not an option,” or something to that affect. Nobody I know of is saying that.

    Why hasn’t obama cut the prescription drugs already that he worked out with companies. Could help the needy now. No need to wait.

    Yes begin and build, not take over 1200 pages bill. Do baby steps.

    The polls are against obama plan.

    Obama plan is more like a holocaust to Americas health care.

  • Bill Hedges

    I was wrong, 2,000 pages now.

  • Bill Hedges

    “Reverend Jeremiah Wright Praises Marxism” video

    November 2, 2009

    http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2009/11/reverend_jeremi.html

  • Bill Hedges

    Oh yeah JD. What’s wrong with begining to cut out waste and fraud in health care now. You know, start those baby steps now. Not 2013-2015.

    obama can multi-task.

  • “To lower cost of health care, tort reform is easy, unless your soul is owned by lawyers. Your second biggest contributors.

    Open State to State competition is obviously another answer. I won’t repeat all Republican quick helps. And said here many times. Changes presented by Republicans can lower cost now, not 2013-2015.

    Obama said “Not starting is not an option,” or something to that affect. Nobody I know of is saying that.

    Why hasn’t obama cut the prescription drugs already that he worked out with companies. Could help the needy now. No need to wait.

    Yes begin and build, not take over 1200 pages bill. Do baby steps. ” – Bill

    Makes perfect sense there then again that was decided long ago.

    Senator Douglas of Ill. back in the 1850’s 1860’s took a piece of legislation that kept being denied in congress and broke it into its individual pieces and made multiple pieces of legislation and passed them one by one until virtually the entire original piece of legislation was passed that was originally denied. So as Bill said, baby steps work. That legislation I believe was a negotiation of the Kansas/Missouri Territories. The argument was over whether to make the territories a slave states or a free states.

    Chop that giant hunk of crap into individual parts, and see which parts both dems and reps can agree upon and get the ball rolling now.

    What do you say Bill? Sound like a reasonable plan?

  • Bill Hedges

    I personally could agree with that.

    Pass now the things both parties agree to. Have open discussion. Begin those fraud and waste investigations now. Do the things that lower cost of insurance now.

    Then, when all is done, step back and evaluate.

    I believe is better than destroying all we have.

    Sen. Douglas that ran against Lincoln ? I understand he was a great orator. Obviously, he thought like me. Ha-ha.

    I think Republican party would welcome it. I would suggest that you read their plan at official web site. Surely some cost saving measures could be signed quickly.

    I recall Nate said some form of health care would pass. I doubt he was talking about this. What a surprise to both parties, President, and public if such a thing happened.

    We agreed on something and the world is still spinning.

    I have not watched the news. Have no idea how election is going. Guess I should check…. Looks like Republicans are ahead in all but one I think.

    Republican in New Jersey expected to win. A big win for my party. Democrats spent 3 to one more. Plus Obama won the State and came 3 time I believe. Bill Clinton and Biden showed up ??? He is fat like me. Democrat runner called him fat.

    If Republicans do well tonight, our plan could occur in Congress. Rest assured, Blue Dogs are watching. Can’t be helpful for present bill especially with polls showing people against.

  • Yes Senator Douglas that beat lincoln in the Senate election in Ill. Not that it matters, but he was a racist, as most people were in the 1800’s, including abolisionists and good old Honest Abe Lincoln.

    I suppose it is the republicans turn in congress as it appears to go back and forth like that all the time. Honestly I think it is good that it goes back and forth, if any one party has control for too long it’s a bad thing. Just like the early US government went back and forth with the south versus the north in number of slave versus free states and control over the other party in government. (I dont mean one controlled the other, I just mean one party had more votes than the other.)

    I personally don’t vote republican versus democrat, I vote based on “Does this person at least ‘appear’ to share my ideals”

    Anyhoo off to physics class

  • Bill Hedges

    In the 60’s my family had a black man horse ornament. Thing for tying horses in old days. I remember my Father painting man face white. My Dad was affected by that era’s happenings. There were no black people in my town, but Dad did it. I remember that well.

    We moved to Florida. I recall our driving through deep hills of Arkansas and seeing bathrooms.. men, woman, and colored. In Georgia we saw packed streets with black people at night. First time I ever saw a black person in person.

    I was raised to judge the person. To do for myself. My families came over from Britain and Germany. Leaving because of German oppression, I will say slavery. Slavery is lack of freedom. Discrimination. Working for government.