An example of how Obamacare makes for worse-care

December 16, 2012

Justin Binik-Thomas’s daughter was born a few months ago with three fingers fused on one hand. The good news is surgery was recently developed that can correct this and that the family has insurance that will pay everything outside the deductible. The bad news?

For children born just a couple of years from now with the same problem, the care won’t be nearly as good:

We have met with various medical professionals to discuss treatment options. There were several possibilities discussed, and we were able to weigh these options for the best fit: Zoe’s surgery is scheduled for the day after Christmas.

We knew that surgery was likely in the near future and chose to select a top-notch full coverage insurance plan this year.

The hospital informed us that this is a fairly new operation perfected over just the last five years. However: this surgery will “cease to be available in two years for insurance patients due to ObamaCare.” This is a quote from the flustered nurse at the hospital.

This plan pays all costs incurred after the deductible, provided the services are provided in-network. The plan goes away in 2014 as a result of the health law. The best new plans to replace this will pay for 90% after deductible, and will cost more. If our daughter was born just two years later we would pay more for insurance, have inferior treatment options, and be triaged (meaning delayed) for treatment. That, in my mind, is regressive. It is not progressive as many would have us believe.

Mr. Binik-Thomas is being kind; this isn’t just “regressive,” it’s downright cruel. Chasing the mirage of free healthcare for all, national Democrats and the Left (but I repeat myself) have foisted on the nation a monstrosity that will only make care worse, even for children.

And what a bitter irony for a party that likes to play the “for the children” card whenever they can.

Be sure to read the rest of Binik-Thomas’s article for examples of how Obamacare, while only partially implemented, is already degrading the quality of healthcare. I imagine that nurse isn’t alone in her frustration. I’m certain the rest of us are in for our own.

Obamacare has got to go.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Leave a Comment » | Health Care, ObamaCare | Permalink
Posted by Phineas Fahrquar

New Evidence Shows States with No Income Tax Grow Faster and Create More Jobs

December 15, 2012

Reblogged from International Liberty:

Click to visit the original post

One of the key ways of controlling state and local tax burdens, according to this map from the Tax Foundation, is to not have an income tax.

But that’s not too surprising. States have just a couple of ways of generating significant tax revenue, so it stands to reason that states without an income tax would have relatively low tax burdens.

Read more… 588 more words

We'll never see this kind of reform in California. Quite the reverse, if the last election is an indication of a trend. Statists never get that, the more one raises tax rates, the more wealth-generating taxpayers will choose to leave and economic performance stagnates.

Leave a Comment » | Taxes | Permalink
Posted by Phineas Fahrquar

IPCC AR5 draft leaked, contains game-changing admission of enhanced solar forcing - as well as a lack of warming to match model projections, and reversal on 'extreme weather'

December 14, 2012

Reblogged from Watts Up With That?:

This post will remain at the top for a few days, new stories will appear below this one

UPDATE1: Andrew Revkin at the NYT weighs in, and semi endorses the leak, see update below – Anthony

UPDATE2: Alternate links have been sent to me, should go faster now.  – Anthony

UPDATE3: The main site is down but a large “all in one” RAR file (and bittorrent) has been created by a readers, see below.

Read more… 2,914 more words

This is huge. Consider this key sentence: "The (climate) forcing from changes in total solar irradiance alone does not seem to account for these observations, implying the existence of an amplifying mechanism such as the hypothesized GCR-cloud link." In other words, an admission that there's likely a solar role in climate beyond direct heating from the sun, such as Svensmark's theory about the relation between the solar wind, cosmic rays, and cloud formation. This should be a body blow to the man-caused global warming crowd. Do read the whole thing.

Leave a Comment » | Global Warming, Reblogs, Science | Permalink
Posted by Phineas Fahrquar

How the U.S. Could Take Out Syria’s Chemical Weapons

December 13, 2012
They laughed me in Vienna, the fools!

This is a job for SCIENCE!!!

Three words: “molten, metallic foam.”

We really do have all the best toys!

3 Comments | Military, Syria, Technology | Permalink
Posted by Phineas Fahrquar

No, the Supreme Court did not hand the 2000 election to George W. Bush

December 13, 2012

tinfoilhat_thumb.jpg

Really, the myth that the Court somehow stole the election is getting up there with 9/11 Trutherism and Kennedy conspiracy theories. Tim Carney, commenting on a Dana Milbank article in The Washington Post that claims the Court denied Joe Lieberman the vice-presidency, sets the record straight:

But the Supreme Court didn’t deny Lieberman Florida. The voters of Florida did.

How do I know?

Because of the media recounts after the election.

If SCOTUS had never taken up the case, or had let the Florida Supreme Court ruing stand, we would have had a statewide recount of all undervotes — and Bush would have won, according to the media recounts.

If Gore had gotten what he was asking for, a hand recount in four counties, Bush still would have won, according to the media recounts.

Some liberals hang their hat on a third, imaginary recount of all ballots, including overvotes. About that imaginary recount (1) it would have been illegal, (2) Gore probably would have opposed it, and (3) which no court had ordered. And even so, only maybe would it have given the election to Gore.

Really, people. Get over it. Gore lost, and he lost because he couldn’t carry even his home state.

Leave a Comment » | Conspiracy Theories, History, Politics, Sore Losers | Permalink
Posted by Phineas Fahrquar

Liberal senators try to avoid consequences of their vote for Obamacare

December 13, 2012

Question for Senators Franken, Schumer, Kohl, et al.: If the medical device tax in ObamaCare is such a job killer that even you clowns tried to water it down (opponents of Obamacare were against it altogether), why in God’s name did you vote for it? Why didn’t you use the clout just one of you had as senators –all 60 of you were needed for passage– to have it removed and spare the workers of your states the risk of layoff and the consumers the certainty of higher prices? And what about all the other “job-killing taxes” hidden within Obamacare?

Guess the “historic moment” was too good to pass up, eh?

Chumps:

Sixteen Democratic senators who voted for the Affordable Care Act are asking that one of its fundraising mechanisms, a 2.3 percent tax on medical devices scheduled to take effect January 1, be delayed.  Echoing arguments made by Republicans against Obamacare, the Democratic senators say the levy will cost jobs — in a statement Monday, Sen. Al Franken called it a “job-killing tax” — and also impair American competitiveness in the medical device field.

(…)

The senators, who made the request in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, are Franken, Richard Durbin, Charles Schumer, Patty Murray, John Kerry, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Joseph Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Robert Casey, Debbie Stabenow, Barbara Mikulski, Kay Hagan, Herb Kohl, Jeanne Shaheen, and Richard Blumenthal.  All voted for Obamacare.

Two other Democrats, senators-elect Joe Donnelly and Elizabeth Warren, also signed the letter.  Donnelly voted for Obamacare as a member of the House.  Warren was not in Congress at the time.

“The medical technology industry directly employs over 400,000 people in the United States and is responsible for a total of two million skilled manufacturing jobs,” the senators wrote in a December 4 letter to Reid.  “We must do all we can to ensure that our country maintains its global leadership position in the medical technology industry and keeps good jobs here at home.”

If I weren’t a softie and sympathetic toward the victims of your stupidity, I’d say I hope the tax stays right where it is and that you then have to answer to angry voters for it.

Sigh. Long ago, legend has it, Pandora unleashed a wealth of ills on the world by opening a box out of curiosity. The same could be said for Obamacare — after all, we had to pass it to find out what was in it. But maybe, again like Pandora’s box, a small bit of hope for the PPACA’s repeal was also released: With all the taxes unleashed and all the regulations engendered by this abomination, maybe people will become so annoyed and angry and frustrated that they’ll demand its repeal.

We can only hope.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Leave a Comment » | ObamaCare, Senate, Taxes | Permalink
Posted by Phineas Fahrquar

Obama administration arms Syrian Muslim Brotherhood?

December 13, 2012
Seal of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Seal of the Muslim Brotherhood.

I recommend reading all of Barry Rubin’s article on the factions in Syria, information that’s becoming more relevant as the civil war there seems to be entering its endgame as the battle for Damascus begins.

It’s this last part that jumps out at me, though:

–The Libyan government gave 50 percent of the funds to finance the budget of the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated Syrian National Council (SNC) budget. Since Libya is very much a U.S. client, it’s reasonable to conclude that the Obama Administration encouraged this generosity. Yet this money was financing a Muslim Brotherhood front. A lot of arms have been flowing from Libya to Hamas and other terrorist groups in the Gaza Strip and to radical forces in Syria. Some claim that the U.S. government was coordinating that traffic though this has not yet been proven. But at least indirectly the U.S. government was helping to arm the Brotherhood by overseeing Qatar and Turkey delivering weapons to the Brotherhood’s militia without making any attempt to identify and arm moderate and non-Islamist forces instead.

This means the Obama Administration was using a barely disguised channel to pay for a revolutionary Islamist movement seeking to take over Syria. The fact that this group was also anti-American, antisemitic, and genocidal toward Jews seems significant.

The rest of the SNC budget came from Qatar (38 percent) and Saudi Arabia (12 percent).

If the administration thinks they can buy influence with Muslim Brotherhood groups –remember, the Brotherhood sees itself as waging “civilizational jihad” against us– then they’re either nuts, naive, or both. If the SNC comes to power, I advise all US Foreign Service staff there to carry weapons at all times.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Leave a Comment » | Foreign Affairs, Jihad, Muslim Brotherhood, Syria | Permalink
Posted by Phineas Fahrquar

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,495 other followers