C'mon, Do The Marxist Shuffle

Marxist is as Marxist does

Henry Lamb calls Obamacare most dramatic step for socialism in a generation
Posted: March 27, 20101:00 am Eastern
By Henry Lamb
People who believe that health care is a right instead of a privilege embrace a fundamental principle of Marxism. This philosophy is built on the idea that workers are the source of productivity and must not be exploited by kings or capitalists; that workers must control their own destiny. This is the foundation of socialism. The Democrat Socialists of America admit that:
We are not a separate party. Like our friends and allies in the feminist, labor, civil rights, religious and community-organizing movements, many of us have been active in the Democratic Party. We work with those movements to strengthen the party's left wing, represented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
This belief system, articulated eloquently by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in their Communist Manifesto, envisions the perfect society to be one in which everyone shares equally in work and wealth, coordinated by a hierarchy of representatives chosen from the workers. The Democratic Party considers its leaders to be that hierarchy, empowered to do whatever it takes to redistribute society's wealth more equitably.

Despite the ridicule and denials that spew forth from the Democrats, the enactment of Obamacare is a victory for Marxism in the United States, recognized and publicly acknowledged by Al Sharpton. What Democrats have done is absolutely consistent with Marxism; the way it was done provides a course in this Marxist principle: The end justifies the means.
Marxists, Socialists, Communists and Democrats have been trying for most of the century to advance a Marxist agenda. Woodrow Wilson implemented two major Marxist principles: the central bank and the income tax.
Germany, in particular, and Europe in general, were much more successful in advancing a Marxist agenda, including universal health care. The influence of Marx and Engels, and other collectivists, was much greater in Europe than in the United States early in the 20th century.
Franklin Roosevelt pushed the Marxist agenda quite hard and was partially successful. Social Security, enacted in 1935, was a major step. While the goal of creating a mechanism to ensure that senior citizens had retirement income was laudable, the Marxist notion that government could do it better than free enterprise condemned the program to constant shortfalls, ever-increasing taxes and eventual failure. How much better would it be now, if Congress in 1935 had chosen to simply allow the creation of individual retirement accounts in which untaxed principle and interest would be the property of the citizen for use after retirement?
Roosevelt and the Democrats believed the time was right in 1943 to introduce the first real legislation to create a universal health-care system. A bill, known as the Wagner-Murray-Dingell Bill (H.R. 2861), launched a congressional debate that continued until the 1964 election of Lyndon Johnson. He brought an overwhelming majority of Democrats to Washington: 66 to 34 in the Senate and 295 to 140 in the House.
Medicare and Medicaid were highlights of his "Great Society" in 1965. Originally, the plan cost each beneficiary $3 per month. In 2009, Medicare Part A cost 2.9 percent of payroll, and Part B cost $96.40 per month. This program, combined with Social Security shortfalls, faces unfunded liabilities totaling $106.8 trillion – that's TRILLION with a capital T. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that to meet this liability, the range of income-tax rates will have to increase from the current 10 to 35 percent, to 26 to 92 percent.
Marxists, Socialists, Communists and Democrats are unfazed by this reality. They believe it is their moral duty to take whatever is necessary from the rich, to give to the poor whatever they consider to be a civil right. Like Marxists around the world, Democrats have always believed that universal health care is a right, not a privilege. Just as the cost of Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid have exploded way beyond the projections promised at the time of enactment, the real cost of Obamacare will make a mockery of the published estimates. Democrats couldn't care less because, like all Marxists, they believe in the second principle from the Communist Manifesto: that government should impose "a heavy progressive or graduated income tax" to pay the costs of their agenda.
(Column continues below)
The Marxist agenda being advanced by the current Washington majority will not stop with Obamacare. Another principle from the Manifesto is the "centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the state." The new push to create a federal ID card is the means toward controlling transportation, and Obama's choice for the FCC diversity czar, Mark Lloyd, is on the record supporting the Marxist principle of government-controlled communications.
The first principle of the Communist Manifesto, the abolition of private property, has been high on the Democrats' priority list for most of the century. They continue to use tax dollars to buy private property when necessary, take it whenever possible, or control it through regulations when all else fails.
Passage of Obamacare is the most dramatic step forward for the Marxist agenda in more than a generation. It must be undone. The U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to force people to purchase insurance – unless the people allow it. The people must not allow it. This Marxist agenda must be stopped, and the only way to stop it is to remove the Marxist advocates from Congress and the White House.

Democrat admits health care's socialist aims

Democratic Senator: Health Care Law to Address 'Mal-Distribution of Income'
FOXNews.com
After the Senate passed a "fix-it" bill Thursday to make changes to the new health care law, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the influential Finance Committee, said the overhaul was an "income shift" to help the poor.

As Democrats tout the moral underpinnings of the federal health care system overhaul -- ensuring health care coverage for nearly all Americans -- one senator appeared to go off message when he said the legislation would address the "mal-distribution of income in America."
After the Senate passed a "fix-it" bill Thursday to make changes to the new health care law, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the influential Finance Committee, said the overhaul was an "income shift" to help the poor.
"Too often, much of late, the last couple three years, the mal-distribution of income in American is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy and the middle income class is left behind," he said. "Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America. This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America."
That contrasted with the arguments Democrats have been making in the past year for reinventing the health care system: to expand health care coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans and tighten regulations on insurance companies while reducing the federal deficit.
But some Republican critics have suggested the overhaul is taking the country down the path to socialism. The nearly $1 trillion legislation pays for itself in large part through new taxes on the wealthy -- Americans who make $250,000 and more.
A spokeswoman for Baucus did not respond to an e-mail seeking more information on the statement.
Baucus' statement could give Republicans ammunition as they seek to repeal the law and regain control of Congress in the November elections.
Democrats have rejected Republican charges that they are trying to take over the health care system.
In Iowa this week to trumpet the benefits of the legislation, President Obama said, "We made a promise. That promise has been kept."
"From this day forward, all of the cynics, all the naysayers -- they're going to have to confront the reality of what this reform is and what it isn't," the president said. "They'll have to finally acknowledge this isn't a government takeover of our health care system."
GOP strategist Matt Schlapp, the White House director to former President George. W. Bush, told FoxNews.com that Baucus' statement reflected the "duality" of a responsible Democrat who understands the ramifications of tax policy on Americans but has a "foot in the camp of the most radical and rabid big government activists that are advocating for some breathtaking policies."
"It's interesting," he said. "He's not the senator I would use as the poster boy for radical and misunderstanding of market dynamics."
But Schlapp said he's not surprised by anything said by a member of a political party that, he said, seeks "to take money away from people who are achieving and give it those who aren’t."

(The HEIGHT of hypocracy, it's the middle-class paying all the taxes for this boondoggle yet they're trying to "save" us? Comrade Stalin would be proud of this effort "for the people!")

20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms

If some reports are to be believed, the Democrats will pass the Senate health care bill with some reconciliation changes later today. Thus, it is worthwhile to take a comprehensive look at the freedoms we will lose.
Of course, the bill is supposed to provide us with security. But it will result in skyrocketing insurance costs and physicians leaving the field in droves, making it harder to afford and find medical care. We may be about to live Benjamin Franklin's adage, "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."
The sections described below are taken from HR 3590 as agreed to by the Senate and from the reconciliation bill as displayed by the Rules Committee.
1. You are young and don't want health insurance? You are starting up a small business and need to minimize expenses, and one way to do that is to forego health insurance? Tough. You have to pay $750 annually for the "privilege." (Section 1501)
2. You are young and healthy and want to pay for insurance that reflects that status? Tough. You'll have to pay for premiums that cover not only you, but also the guy who smokes three packs a day, drink a gallon of whiskey and eats chicken fat off the floor. That's because insurance companies will no longer be able to underwrite on the basis of a person's health status. (Section 2701).
3. You would like to pay less in premiums by buying insurance with lifetime or annual limits on coverage? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer such policies, even if that is what customers prefer. (Section 2711).
4. Think you'd like a policy that is cheaper because it doesn't cover preventive care or requires cost-sharing for such care? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer policies that do not cover preventive services or offer them with cost-sharing, even if that's what the customer wants. (Section 2712).
5. You are an employer and you would like to offer coverage that doesn't allow your employees' slacker children to stay on the policy until age 26? Tough. (Section 2714).
6. You must buy a policy that covers ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services; chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.You're a single guy without children? Tough, your policy must cover pediatric services. You're a woman who can't have children? Tough, your policy must cover maternity services. You're a teetotaler? Tough, your policy must cover substance abuse treatment. (Add your own violation of personal freedom here.) (Section 1302).
7. Do you want a plan with lots of cost-sharing and low premiums? Well, the best you can do is a "Bronze plan," which has benefits that provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 60% of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan. Anything lower than that, tough. (Section 1302 (d)(1)(A))
8. You are an employer in the small-group insurance market and you'd like to offer policies with deductibles higher than $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families? Tough. (Section 1302 (c) (2) (A).
9. If you are a large employer (defined as at least 50 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employee, then you will pay a $750 fine per employee (It could be $2,000 to $3,000 under the reconciliation changes). Think you know how to better spend that money? Tough. (Section 1513).

10. You are an employer who offers health flexible spending arrangements and your employees want to deduct more than $2,500 from their salaries for it? Sorry, can't do that. (Section 9005 (i)).
11. If you are a physician and you don't want the government looking over your shoulder? Tough. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to use your claims data to issue you reports that measure the resources you use, provide information on the quality of care you provide, and compare the resources you use to those used by other physicians. Of course, this will all be just for informational purposes. It's not like the government will ever use it to intervene in your practice and patients' care. Of course not. (Section 3003 (i))
12. If you are a physician and you want to own your own hospital, you must be an owner and have a "Medicare provider agreement" by Feb. 1, 2010. (Dec. 31, 2010 in the reconciliation changes.) If you didn't have those by then, you are out of luck. (Section 6001 (i) (1) (A)).
13. If you are a physician owner and you want to expand your hospital? Well, you can't (Section 6001 (i) (1) (B). Unless, it is located in a country where, over the last five years, population growth has been 150% of what it has been in the state (Section 6601 (i) (3) ( E)). And then you cannot increase your capacity by more than 200% (Section 6001 (i) (3) (C)).
14. You are a health insurer and you want to raise premiums to meet costs? Well, if that increase is deemed "unreasonable" by the Secretary of Health and Human Services it will be subject to review and can be denied. (Section 1003)
15. The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry. If you are a pharmaceutical company what you will pay depends on the ratio of the number of brand-name drugs you sell to the total number of brand-name drugs sold in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the brand-name drugs in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2.3 billion, or $230,000,000. (Under reconciliation, it starts at $2.55 billion, jumps to $3 billion in 2012, then to $3.5 billion in 2017 and $4.2 billion in 2018, before settling at $2.8 billion in 2019 (Section 1404)). Think you, as a pharmaceutical executive, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 9008 (b)).
16. The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers. If you are a medical device maker what you will pay depends on your share of medical device sales in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the medical devices in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2 billion, or $200,000,000. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for R&D? Tough. (Section 9009 (b)).The reconciliation package turns that into a 2.9% excise tax for medical device makers. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 1405).
17. The government will extract a fee of $6.7 billion annually from insurance companies. If you are an insurer, what you will pay depends on your share of net premiums plus 200% of your administrative costs. So, if your net premiums and administrative costs are equal to 10% of the total, you will pay 10% of $6.7 billion, or $670,000,000. In the reconciliation bill, the fee will start at $8 billion in 2014, $11.3 billion in 2015, $1.9 billion in 2017, and $14.3 billion in 2018 (Section 1406).Think you, as an insurance executive, know how to better spend that money? Tough.(Section 9010 (b) (1) (A and B).)
18. If an insurance company board or its stockholders think the CEO is worth more than $500,000 in deferred compensation? Tough.(Section 9014).
19. You will have to pay an additional 0.5% payroll tax on any dollar you make over $250,000 if you file a joint return and $200,000 if you file an individual return. What? You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9015).That amount will rise to a 3.8% tax if reconciliation passes. It will also apply to investment income, estates, and trusts. You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Like you need to ask. (Section 1402).
20. If you go for cosmetic surgery, you will pay an additional 5% tax on the cost of the procedure. Think you know how to spend that money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9017).

The Tax Man Killeth

Obamacare: Taxing The American People Into Oblivion
“Death and taxes may be inevitable, but they shouldn’t be related”
Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010
H.R. 3590, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, to give it its full title, is rammed full of tax increases which will further economically cripple Americans already laboring under the worst financial crisis since the great depression.
The partnering Reconciliation Act, currently in the Senate, also contains a raft of pork barrel and tax hikes, there to fund the trillion dollar cost of nationalizing medicine.
As reported by Bloomberg News today, analysis by the nonpartisan congressional Joint Committee on Taxation reveals that the bill will generate $409.2 billion in additional taxes by 2019.
In addition, the Congressional Budget Office states that the bill also levies almost $69 billion more in penalties for those who fail to meet mandates to buy insurance.
The Journal of Accountancy boils down some of the tax hikes and penalty fees in H.R. 3590 and the Reconciliation Act – the highlights include:
Excise Tax on Uninsured Individuals – Individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage will be subject to a penalty equal to $750. The fee for an uninsured individual under age 18 is one-half of the adult fee.
Excise Tax on High-Cost Employer Plans – The federal government would impose a 40% tax on the value of employer-sponsored health coverage exceeding certain thresholds. Those levels are projected to be $8,500 for self only and $23,000 for any other level by the year 2013. This excise was announced with fanfare by the White House and labor unions in January and remains in the final bill.
Increase in additional tax on distributions from Health Savings Accounts and Archer Medical Savings Accounts not used for qualified medical expenses – An increase from 10% to 20% on taxes of money in a health savings account not used for qualified medical expenses. For Archer medical savings accounts, an increase from 15% to 20%.
Additional Hospital Insurance Tax on High-Income Taxpayers – High income tax payers, making on a joint return over $250,000 and a standard return over $200,000, are required to pay an additional 0.5% of wages. This applies to both self-employed, and regularly employed individuals.
Fees on Health Plans – A fee applied to all health insurance providers based upon net premiums and any third party fees associated with the administration of those programs. The fees will total $6.7 billion annually. This figure begins at $8 billion in the Reconciliation Act and rises to $14.3 billion by 2018.
Tax on Indoor Tanning Services – The act imposes a 10% tax on amounts paid for indoor tanning services. Like a sales tax, the tax will be collected from the person tanning when payment for the tanning services is made.
Business Insider boils down 15 more tax hikes here – highlights include:
Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage – A 2.5% income tax on individuals who do not have health care coverage, limited to a cost less than the average national health care premium.
Excise tax on elective cosmetic medical procedures – A tax of 5% is levied upon the am mount paid for any cosmetic surgery. This does not include the need for such surgeries created by trauma or a disfiguring disease. If the tax is not collected by that professional completing the procedure, their business is still liable for the requirement.
The Reconciliation Act also legislates for the following surcharges: 1% surcharge on individuals making more than $350,000, 1.5% surcharge on individuals making more than $500,000, 5.4% surcharge on individuals making more than $1 million.
Yet more tax provisions in the bill are highlighted by INvestors Business Daily in their piece titled 20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms – highlights include:
Taxes On Employers – If you are a large employer (defined as at least 101 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employee, then you will pay a $750 fine per employee (It could be $2,000 to $3,000 under the reconciliation changes) (Section 1513).
Taxes on Pharmaceutical Companies – The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry (Section 9008 (b)).
Taxes on medical device manufacturers – The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers (Section 1405).

As a candidate and President, Barack Obama has had one core message for middle class Americans: I won’t raise your taxes.
By putting his name to the health care reform bill today he has swiftly put to bed any pretence that he would uphold that pledge (multi-trillion dollar bailouts aside).
While the new taxes on individuals are bad enough, the penalties imposed on pharmaceutical corporations, health insurers and employers are will inevitably serve as a double whammy as the hikes will undoubtedly be passed on to the general public in the form of higher costs.
“Simply, you have nationalized healthcare by proxy.” writes Jonah Goldberg of the LA Times.
“Insurance companies are now heavily regulated government contractors. Way to get big business out of Washington! They will clear a small, government-approved profit on top of their government-approved fees. Then, when healthcare costs rise — and they will — Democrats will insist, yet again, that the profit motive is to blame and out from this Obamacare Trojan horse will pour another army of liberals demanding a more honest version of single-payer.”
“The Obama administration has turned the insurance industry into the Blackwater of socialized medicine.” Goldberg concludes.
A swift dose of propaganda is sure to silence some critics. However, if the softly softly approach fails, the myriad of new taxes and regulations contained in the Obamacare bill will be aggressively enforced by no less than 16,500 new “combat trained” IRS agents armed to the teeth with shotguns, who will also closely scrutinize Americans’ income tax returns and be waiting to pounce should they find evidence of anyone trying to avoid paying for mandatory government health care.
Even if you agree with socialized health care in principle, the fact is that this will only benefit the insurance companies who wrote it. Meanwhile millions of Americans will be subjected to more taxation, harassment, and oppression at the hands of a federal government run amok. An out of control leviathan, hell-bent on an agenda to control every aspect of your life, as they lay in wait to exploit the momentum achieved through the passage of Obamacare by ramming through nightmare cap and tax levies to further financially castrate already beleaguered Americans.

Sir John Templeton's Words Will Echo Through Economic Eternity

( If you don't know who he is, you're reading the wrong blog.)

Sir John Templeton’s Last Testament: Financial Chaos Will Last Many Years
Tuesday, 09 Mar 2010 06:48 PM

By: Christopher Ruddy
When Sir John Templeton passed away in July of 2008, we lost one of the greatest investment minds of our time.But with great lucidity, in June of 2005, Sir John penned a memorandum to friends and family that is uncanny and prophetic in its vision of what would happen to the U.S. and global economy.The first two words — so pithy yet so powerful — are bolded and highlighted on his original document. They read, simply: “Financial Chaos.”Recently, Sir John’s son, Dr. John Templeton, or “Jack” to his friends, shared with me the memo that has never seen public light.As Jack relates, his father wanted the memo to be widely circulated. Unfortunately, it was not; instead it was discovered in a file cabinet only after Sir John’s passing.Now, before you read Sir John’s memorandum below, let me share with you some background information, information that Sir John would have insisted you know.On two occasions Sir John invited me to his home-base in Lyford Cay, a small enclave of Americans and Europeans who live in Nassau in the Bahamas.I was among the last journalists to interview the man Money magazine described as “arguably the greatest global stock picker of the [20th] century.”Sir John had become famous, first, as a trendsetter in equity investing by becoming the foremost American expert in global investing, which he began in the 1940s.As he explained to me, just after graduating Yale, he was almost dumbfounded that Americans rarely invested abroad. For a long time, he recounted, it was almost considered unpatriotic for an American to buy foreign securities.He eventually launched the Templeton Funds for such global investing, which was later bought out by Franklin investments and is now called the Franklin Templeton Funds.Investors who took his advice did extraordinarily well. Though of very humble means, Templeton himself became a billionaire.When I met with Sir John for the last time, for the purposes of an interview that would appear in Newsmax’s Financial Intelligence Report, our investor newsletter, Sir John made a deal with me.He would offer his views on the stock market and investment advice if I were to make sure to include his views on spirituality and faith. I agreed.After officially retiring from the money management world, Sir John’s main focus was to advance spirituality to improve the human condition. His vehicle for doing so was his John Templeton Foundation, based in West Conshohocken, Pa., run by his son Jack, a former surgeon.The foundation is perhaps best known for its annual award, the Templeton Prize, described as honoring “a living person who has made an exceptional contribution to affirming life’s spiritual dimension, whether through insight, discovery, or practical works.”For Sir John, and his son Jack, faith and spirituality are not mutually exclusive with economic prosperity. They have argued, and the Templeton Foundation has continued to advance their belief, that religious values are basic and intrinsic to the ideas of human liberty and the free enterprise system.For sure, Sir John was a visionary in many ways. His wisdom gave him tremendous insights into the human condition and the practical effects of that condition on society and the economy as well.Sir John had accurately predicted the dot-com crash of 2000 and 2001. When I met him again for the last time in December of 2004, he was warning that the housing bubble would eventually crash, with home prices falling by as much as 50 percent or more from their highs in some markets.He predicted a fall-off of the stock market after that.Both predictions were not widely accepted at the time, yet they eventually came to pass.In his last memorandum on the markets and the economy, he elaborated on these same themes, warning of dire economic “chaos” — which he predicted would last many years.Still, he was optimistic on equity investments, specifically in globally diverse companies with high growth patterns and wide profit margins. He suggested such stocks would remain “valuable” for investors to preserve and grow one’s wealth.As you read this memo, please remember that Sir John has left an important legacy, not just here in his “Last Testament” to investors, but in his writings and in the important work of his foundation, so ably led by his son, Jack.The memo of Sir John Templeton follows, punctuation is his own:
John M. Templeton
Lyford Cay, Nassau, Bahamas
June 15, 2005
MEMORANDUM
Financial Chaos – probably in many nations in the next five years. The word chaos is chosen to express likelihood of reduced profit margin at the same time as acceleration in cost of living.
Increasingly often, people ask my opinion on what is likely to happen financially. I am now thinking that the dangers are more numerous and larger than ever before in my lifetime. Quite likely, in the early months of 2005, the peak of prosperity is behind us.
In the past century, protection could be obtained by keeping your net worth in cash or government bonds. Now, the surplus capacities are so great that most currencies and bonds are likely to continue losing their purchasing power.
Mortgages and other forms of debts are over tenfold greater now than ever before 1970, which can cause manifold increases in bankruptcy auctions.
Surplus capacity, which leads to intense competition, has already shown devastating effects on companies who operate airlines and is now beginning to show in companies in ocean shipping and other activities. Also, the present surpluses of cash and liquid assets have pushed yields on bonds and mortgages almost to zero when adjusted for higher cost of living. Clearly, major corrections are likely in the next few years.
Most of the methods of universities and other schools which require residence have become hopelessly obsolete. Probably over half of the universities in the world will disappear quickly over the next thirty years.
Obsolescence is likely to have a devastating effect in a wide variety of human activities, especially in those where advancement is hindered by labor unions or other bureaucracies or by government regulations.
Increasing freedom of competition is likely to cause most established institutions to disappear with the next fifty years, especially in nations where there are limits on free competition.
Accelerating competition is likely to cause profit margins to continue to decrease and even become negative in various industries. Over tenfold more persons hopelessly indebted leads to multiplying bankruptcies not only for them but for many businesses that extend credit without collateral. Voters are likely to enact rescue subsidies, which transfer the debts to governments, such as Fannie May and Freddie Mac.
Research and discoveries and efficiency are likely to continue to accelerate. Probably, as quickly as fifty years, as much as ninety percent of education will be done by electronics.
Now, with almost one hundred independent nations on earth and rapid advancements in communication, the top one percent of people are likely to progress more rapidly than the others. Such top one percent may consist of those who are multi-millionaires and also, those who are innovators and also, those with top intellectual abilities. Comparisons show that prosperity flows toward those nations having most freedom of competition.
Especially, electronic computers are likely to become helpful in all human activities including even persons who have not yet learned to read.
Hopefully, many of you can help us to find published journals and websites and electronic search engines to help us benefit from accelerating research and discoveries.
Not yet have I found any better method to prosper during the future financial chaos, which is likely to last many years, than to keep your net worth in shares of those corporations that have proven to have the widest profit margins and the most rapidly increasing profits. Earning power is likely to continue to be valuable, especially if diversified among many nations.

Dollar Savaging Via Obamacare

The Real Cost of "Obamacare"
(Or, Obama's Coming Massacre on the U.S. Dollar)
By Sean Hyman
Get ready for the latest attack on the U.S. dollar, courtesy of our Commander in Chief.
Or maybe I should say “Surgeon General” considering he wants to be personally responsible for our health.
Let me back up for a second. On March 23rd, President Obama signed into law a sweeping rewrite of U.S. health-care policy.
At first glance, it initially seems good.
After all, it supposedly gives an additional 32 million Americans access to basic health insurance by 2019. (We’re all hoping that most aren’t illegal aliens.)
One thing is for sure. It's the biggest change to the American health system since Medicare was enacted in 1965.
Again, that’s all well and good. But there are a few unintended consequences coming from this groundbreaking bill.
First of all, this healthcare revolution will cost $938 billion. That’s almost $1 trillion on top of the 12.67 trillion the U.S. already owes.
Now, if you ask the average person where that's going to come from, they don't know and probably don't care.
However, you have to remember that the government's income comes from the taxes that we all pay. So if they've got greater expenses, guess what that means? Greater taxation...and not just for the wealthy either (even though that's the way Obama pitched his plan to middle-income America who couldn’t care less if a few wealthy fat-cats pick up the bills).
But some may say, well wait a minute...most of these health care changes won't even start to take effect until 2014. So we've got a while before they start taxing us, right?!? Wrong!
One New Tax Went into Effect As Soon As Obama Signed the Bill!
Many increased costs will kick in next year. But did I mention that some taxes have already started as a result of this? Yeah, starting on March 23rd, any American who uses a public tanning bed will have to fork over a 10% tax for the privilege, starting IMMEDIATELY.
Yeah, Obama is not wasting any time.
Of course, it’s not just wealthy Americans who use tanning beds. Plenty of average Joes and Janes use tanning beds, especially in the dead of winter. That’s just one more example of how we’re all picking up the tab for this new health care bill.
But once these changes start, you can bet that employers will do more layoffs and will be inclined to hire fewer people. Why?
Companies with more than 200 workers will be required to automatically enroll their employees in whatever insurance plan they offer. When these corporations have these higher costs, they'll make cuts in payrolls in order to preserve their profit margins.
Obamacare Will Create 17,000 Jobs,But Did I mention Those Are All IRS Jobs?!
However, there will be one bright spot. Yes, one segment of our economy will be robust. Which is it? It's the Internal Revenue Service. They are hiring 17,000 new agents.
Wonder why they are doing that? Hmmmmm...
Could it be because they are going to need that many more bodies to help them rake in all of the additional tax money that Obama needs to pay for this? I think so.
Oh, but it gets better. Companies with 50 or more employees will have to pay a fine if their workers receive government-subsidized coverage.
Next on the "Obamacare loser list" is the wealthy.
Now perhaps you’re on that list. Perhaps you’re not. But regardless, this new “tax the rich” policy still affects you. Here’s why…
As you may have noticed, poor people don’t hire employees! No it’s wealthy entrepreneurs who need more workers. If you tax these rich business owners harder, they won’t have the cash they need to continue hiring.
These "rich folks" make about $200,000 - $250,000 a year, and they’re about to pay 0.9% more for Medicare Payroll Taxes.
(By the way, calling someone who makes $200,000 a year “rich” is only fair if you live in a place with a low cost of living. Tell a Californian he’s "rich" because he makes $200,000, and he'll laugh at you!).
Also, "these rich people" will have an additional tax of 3.8% on investment income like dividends and capital gains beginning in 2013.
Okay, but that's all of the "losers" right? Wrong! I'll not go into great detail on the rest but here are a few other groups that will get hammered:
Believe it or not, within the health care reform, banks will lose the government backing/ guarantees on education loans. So schools will have to go directly to the Department of Education for funding.
"The Insured" will also lose out. Experts say we could see "double digit" increases in some places like California (and that's just for people who make above $88,000 a year).
Add it All Up, and You Have an ExpensiveProgram We’re All Paying for
So when you put all of the pieces of this together, you're going to see higher taxes coming (and not just on the rich), higher unemployment and lower new employed rates, increased health care costs, etc.
All of this will be yet one more weight and hurdle placed upon corporate America.
So if you think these companies are struggling now, wait until all of this comes to a head in a few years. You haven't seen anything yet.
In the Long Run, "Obamacare" Spells Trouble for the Buck!
This will all take a huge toll on the U.S. economy. It will likely make our economy even more sluggish.
Think about it. If consumers and corporations are taxed more and have higher costs, then they are not going to spend as much. When spending is restrained, the economy struggles.
So this long-term "ankle weight" that's being placed upon the U.S. economy will end up eventually taking a long-term toll on the dollar as well.
Oh it probably won't affect the dollar immediately.
In fact, in the short run, if stocks, bonds or commodities were to fall it would actually help the buck for now. But over longer periods of time, there's no way that the dollar can prosper when the entire nation is hurting from the extra yoke placed on both consumers and businesses. So take this as yet one more warning to get the heck out of the dollar! Use rallies in the dollar to get some long-term positions into foreign currencies and “hard currencies” like gold and silver.

Obama Administration was caught funneling $6.4 bilion in stimulus money to 440 Congressional districts across the country that do not exist.

Obama Sends "Stimulus" Funs to Phantom Congressional Districts
March 18, 2010
By Thomas A. DeWeese
To promote bragging rights for how much good the stimulus money was doing for America, the Obama Administration set up a website called “Recovery.gov.” Recorded on the site were details by zip code and congressional district as to how much money was sent there and how many new jobs were created as a result. It was a great piece of public relations where news reporters and politicians could find and quote the latest “good news for the economy.”
However, there was one small problem. The Administration didn’t count on a group called New Mexico Watchdog, a project of the Rio Grande Foundation. While researching the site, the Foundation’s investigative research journalist Jim Scarantino noticed something strange. It seems the site was reporting money going to several New Mexico congressional districts that do not exist.
The website reported that $26.5 million went to ten New Mexico Congressional districts. The site credited that money with creating a whopping 61.5 jobs. That, in itself, should be a crime – spending more than $430,000 per job crated. However, that wasn’t the big story. The fact is, those ten Congressional districts do not exist. New Mexico only has three – not thirteen.
As New Mexico Watchdog broke the story, investigators from other states took up the hunt, finding a total of 440 phantom congressional districts receiving nearly $6.4 billion to “create or save” just under 30,000 jobs – almost $225,000 per job. The “99th” District of North Dakota, a state which has only one congressional district, received more than $2 million.
Mississippi’s 5th District and Oklahoma’s 6th District, and Pennsylvania’s 21st District each received $1 million. But none of them exist. All three were eliminated as a result of the 2000 census. Money also went to 35 congressional districts in Washington, DC and the four American territories, all of which have no congressional districts.
Then it got worse. Not only did the site almost double the size of Congress with its phantom districts, further examination showed money also going to zip codes that don’t exist. The site reported that $373,874 went to New Mexico zip code 97052 – but no jobs were created. $36,218 was credited for creating five jobs in zip code 87258. $100,000 went into zip code 86705 – but no jobs were created. None of these zip codes exist.
Again, the nationwide search showed the same results. West Virginia – $28 million in non-existent zip codes; Nebraska – millions more in non-existent zips; Washington state – more stimulus funds in non-existent zip codes; Virginia - $9.5 million in phantom zip codes; Colorado – millions more; Oklahoma - $11.5 million – phantom zips.
And the excuse from the Obama Administration? Clerical error. Ed Pound, director of communications for the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board blamed the problem on an oversight by the fund recipients. He said it appeared that some of those filling out the reports just didn’t know their congressional districts (or zip codes apparently), and therefore listed an inaccurate number.
But the Administration is quick on its feet and in its transparency. The problem has been solved. All of the reports from non-existent Congressional districts and zip codes have been removed and re-listed under “unassigned congressional districts.” No one, of course, has bothered to investigate where the money actually went.