A Cynical Look On Competition: Government Style! Part 1

Ahh, time to pass a few more bills through congress before anyone gets a chance to read them.
Actually, this is admittedly part of the strategy being used to pass the new Health Care Bill. The new Health Care bill is "on schedule" to be voted upon during this session of congress. Liberal legislators fear that if it does not pass before Congress goes out of session, the bill may become unpopular.
Hmm, interesting
Perhaps because people will figure out what's actually in the bill?
No, I suppose that wouldn't be good for the bill's popularity.

Evidently, Obama's plan is good because it creates competition. At least, according to advocates of the bill.
"Ahh yes, competition! Now we have the free market cornered! We'll beat them at their own game and prove that capitalism doesn't work!"
Unlike corporation, the government doesn't actually have to play by the rules.
You see, Corporations actually have to make a PROFIT. To say the government is competing when it is allowed to break the only primary rule is just plain stupid.
It's like a race in the ocean between a Tuna fish and a Human, where the finish line is 2000 feet under water. The fish can go down into debt as much as it wants, but the Human is stuck with the lungs of bankruptcy.
On top of that, the Health Care bill unleashes a plethora of new taxes against insurance companies. It's as if the fish get's to break the man's legs before the race starts.
It's not really hard to see who the "winner" of this competition will be. When all is said and done though, the man may have broken legs, and the tuna might swim better, but whom do you trust more to treat your flu.

A Cynical Look on Universal Healthcare Part 2

Universal Health Care (UHC), or socialized health care, some may say, is viable. They could point to countries like Canada and Sweden. I, however, must say that it isn't viable at all. I'm going to use countries like Canada and Sweden, mostly Canada, to disprove the myth that UHC can work.

Yes, I realize that it is possible to opt out of public care. My post is on public care, however, because that is what is recognized as UHC.

In both those countries the wait for medical procedures is far too long for real emergency surgeries, like removing a potentially deadly brain tumor. This wait is prohibitive because UHC guarantees health care to everyone. Since the health care guarantee is there, people can go to doctors for everything from a stubbed toe to a runny nose. Obviously all this essentially meaningless work for the doctors ensures a longer wait for those who actually have problems. Waiting for a potentially deadly illness to be diagnosed because Timmy has a runny nose is something that nobody desires, but UHC promotes.

Canadian health care has a fundamental, to steal Barack Obama's favorite word, problem. Everyone gets health care. That, you may say, is a good thing. It's not. If everyone gets health care, then there must be enough supply to satisfy everyone. There is the problem. The demand is infinite, while the supply is not. Therefore there are dangerous waits, sub-optimal access, and an overarching lack of competition, which causes lack of development. While Canadians enjoy care, they get to wait for it.

Canadians also do not have access to the best doctors in the world in their health care system. The system inherently encourages the best doctors, surgeons, nurses, janitors, and everyone with any possibility to make more money elsewhere, to leave. Therefore, Canadians enjoy mediocre health care with long waits. Do the the fact that a system which forces some people to wait over a year for surgeries, has understaffed emergency rooms leaving patients lying on gurneys, and has doctors and patients opting out of it. It's easy to cynically conclude that Canada does not, in fact, have a great health care system.

A Cynical Look on Universal Healthcare Part 1

Universal Health Care: a topic on the tongues of every politician. Without careful analysis, it seems like a good idea. After all, countries that have socialized Health Care seem to have a longer average life span.
However, there are many issues that arise with socialized Health Care, taxes aside, though taxes and Healthcare will be covered at a later date.
For one, most countries that currently use these systems rely on American's current competitive environment to supply them with the health care technology they need at a feasible price. Sweden, for example, relies very heavily upon the American competitive health care system.

"Where does the health care technology come from that the Swedish hospitals use? Where do the drugs and the medicines come from? Well all of it is, really, invented in the American competitive health care system."
- Johan Norberg, Swedish author of In Defense of Global Capitalism in an interview with Reason.tv
He goes on to beg America not to implement any sort of socialized health care system.

The issue of countries with socialized health care relying on the U.S. is further detailed in this article: Will Socialized Health Care in the US Kill Canadians?

Socialized Health Care guarantees health care providers that meet a certain criteria an inflow of customers. Because there is no competition, providers have no reason to develop better health care technology. The lack of competition also reduces the quality of the the health care. If you had to have your brain operated on, would you pay more for someone who has never done an operation? Or would you pay more for the best neurosurgeon in the country? Under socialized health care you don't get a choice, and the best neurosurgeon will never be available because the pay does not meet his costs.

Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers, was also against socialized health care. He even predicted it before his time. "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." Unfortunately nowadays, a lot more than health care meets this category.



Because universal health care vs private health care is such a large topic, I will continue this blog post on a later date.

A Cynical Look on Welfare

Welfare, a system where money is given to the needy, is a valiant effort to help those in need. It is, unfortunately, an impossible system. For who decides whether the homeless veteran or single mother is more needy? The government, of course! While nearly everyone can agree that some situations offer impossible choices, the government is always there to provide solutions. Horrible misguided solutions that often create a problem bigger than the original one, but solutions nonetheless. Now that the purpose and reason of existence for welfare have been outlined in a manner quick and brutal enough to make Genghis Khan wince, I'll outline the problems that make welfare worse than no help at all.

Welfare encourages continuing to receive money for doing nothing. Why work for minimum wage when you can get a comparable amount of money for doing absolutely nothing? Why try to climb the corporate ladder when that would take work? Why advance yourself when the government is making sure you'll be fine either way? The answer to all of these questions vary depending on who you ask, but the fact that they are serious questions at all is the problem with welfare. Not to mention the drain welfare puts on the government and economy, nor the fact that it's a step towards socialism.

Welfare encourages complacency. It's a well intentioned misguided program. The people who can work obviously shouldn't be on welfare, yet there are literally millions of people on welfare at any given time. The myth that single mothers are the majority of people on welfare, is, of course, false. The fact is that many people from every race and parenting statistic can be found on welfare, and obviously not all of them are unable to work. Those unable to work should be aided, those capable of working shouldn't be. Why reward laziness with your tax dollars?

A Brief Cynical Look at the Economic Condition After the Election

Remember remember the 5th of November...

Today I will focus on the immediate economic implications of the election.
To the surprise of many Obama supporters, and especially to the media which seemed to ignore the connection, the DOW closed 486.01 lower to rest at 9,139.27. Influenced almost entirely by the election, which is evidenced by the inactivity of the past couple days leading up to the election, the market lost an entire 5.05% of it's value.

Oddly enough, even many Eco-friendly businesses that would benefit from an Obama presidency in the form of subsidies took a dive in stock price:

Evergreen Solar, Inc. NYSE: ESLR 4.39 -.90(-17.01%)

SunPower Corporation NYSE: SPWRA 32.99 -17.51(-34.67%)

Solarfun Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (ADR) NYSE: SOLF 7.36 -1.59(-17.77%)



Based on simple economic principals, it would make sense that the market did not like Obama winning the election.

-Raising Taxes In general,harms the Economy.(As agreed on by at least 95% of Economists)

-Capital Gains Tax (It was shown during the Clinton Administration, when the capital gains tax was lowered, that the Capital gains tax has such an impact on how much people invest that when this tax is raised the government actually takes in LESS money. So in addition to harming the economy, the government takes in less in tax revenues: A lose, lose situation)

-Income Tax (Biggest Increments on the Highest Tax brackets)
-Dividend Tax
-Inheritance Tax (I hope you weren't hoping of leaving anything for your family)

Although some liberal media would like to tell you differently, Obama is in favor of the largest tax increases in history since the birth of the income tax. The capital gains tax, income tax, dividend tax, and the inheritance tax are all on his agenda for large hikes. In addition, he would like to propose a few taxes we never had before:
-Extra taxes on any home over 2400 Sq ft.
-New gasoline taxes (this will make gas more expensive)
-New taxes on other natural resource consumption (Heating, Electricity, ect.)
-New taxes on retirement accounts
-Social Medicare Taxes

Based on this, we can cynically conclude that the stock market is in for hard times.

A Cynical Look on the election

Today, America has made a great step in some direction. Where that direction is, many people seem to be confused about. I'm going to take this opportunity to help these poor people clear this confusion up.
One: Obama was elected.
Two: Obama has socialist tendencies.
And therefore, Three: America has elected a man with socialist tendencies.
With these things, it's easy to tell that socialism is on the rise in America. And socialism is going to cause me to actually have money, even though I have the drive of a Lamborghini with all the parts removed. Thank you, everyone who is going to do work to supply me with my unearned money, I love you all.
You might say hey, that isn't fair, and you might be right. It's cynical, and if you don't like cynicism, you may be reading the wrong blog.

McCain has an amazingly well written concession speech for a man who a week ago predicted certain victory. It's like he didn't believe the amazing quantities of worthlessness that came out of his mouth. Though he somehow managed to take more than three minutes to say, "I lost, you're all f'd, Obama is going to doom this country." in a politicians way.

Now for two cynical predictions.
America will drift away from the capitalistic tendencies that have made this country great.
Obama will be a president that helps provide me far more to be cynical about.