Obamacare ruling

My initial reaction is the Chief Justice John Roberts probably just handed the Republicans the White House and possibly the Senate.

Why? 

First: He defined the individual mandate as a TAX, which it is. Even if the Obama Administration and the Congressional Democrats want to try to deny it, now they can’t. How they are going to run away from that is beyond me.

Second: By upholding the law, Roberts put the onus back where it properly belongs: On CONGRESS. It is up to Congress to realize it is crappy law and change it.

Third: The decision puts a brake on using the “commerce clause” to justify everything. That is a good thing.

Fourth: The decision tells Congress that it can’t just threaten to withhold funds if the states don’t do its bidding. HOORAY. Too many federal mandates have been forced on the states that way.

Fifth: Most people, at least according to opinion polls, think the Affordable Care Act goes way beyond what they want. This just pisses them off. Pissed off voters usually vote, and rarely do they vote for the incumbent  or the party in power. So by handing down a decision that narrowly tailors the constitutionality of the legislation, Roberts, and the four liberals, have done the country a service by pissing off the majority.

Now, that may not be what happens, but that is my initial reaction, for what it is worth.

Random thoughts

SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM

Background: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/30/pennsylvania-public-defenders_n_1556192.html

I have got the solution. We all know that money talks when it comes to the law. Buy yourself a good attorney who is better than the other guy, and you win. Just like the the medical system. If you have good enough insurance, you win.

SO, I think the solution should be the same.  Those who think that a single-payer system (i.e. Government provided) for health care is the right way to go, should have no problem in eliminating all private attorneys. Lawyers should all work for the government and be paid by all of us, and we all get to use the same pool of  lawyers. Nobody, no matter how much they make or have, can hire a private lawyer … nope, they can only use lawyers approved and paid for by the government.

Great solution to providing defense attorneys, as well as attorneys for all the other things … and just think, we can cap their salaries as well.

IMMIGRATION

I am not sure I understand this, but it bothers me a lot. The news this week is that President Obama issued an executive order directing U.S. immigration agencies to stop deporting people here illegally who are 16 to 30 and who came to this country while they were underage.  They will now be issued work permits and be allowed to stay.

I am not sure, but does that not bother others? Not so much that the policy recognizes a million or so people who are of the age to contribute to the lower income sectors of the economy, but the fact that:

A. it was done by executive order, which, if we were going to follow what the founding fathers envisioned, is not the way to create the law of the land (but we abandoned that long ago with the creation of the plethora of federal agencies to regulate innumerable aspects of the American economy with barely a nod toward congressional concurrence)

B. That this creates a special class of residents (I hesitate to call them citizens yet) in the US for special treatment under the law. Again, I would differ with this policy because I think that immigration law should, in general apply equally to all. I know it doesn’t but that should be the goal.

Our goal should be “equality before the law” and not divided by what age we are. Those who came here illegally should follow the rules, as we all are asked to follow the rules. Those who violate the rules, should be asked to pay a cost and not be rewarded.

But, no, we have to have exceptions to the rule, so we can reward various and sundry special interests.  Well, remember my view on special interests.

Anyway, just thinking.

The sky is falling, the sky is falling

http://www.windsorstar.com/technology/Biosphere+nearing+state+report+warns/6742910/story.html

 

I love stories like this.

Summary: Man is ruining the world and it is going to cause the environment to change if we don’t stop man.

Ah … and the solution is? Oh, yes, stop technology. Stop having babies. Stop everything.

Sorry, that ain’t gonna happen. Besides, who gets to decide who lives and who dies? Who get to procreate and who doesn’t?

I am not saying it won’t happen, nor am I not saying that future can get pretty ugly. I am saying that these people don’t have a clue as to what to do about it.

Pay me!!!!

I must be dumb or something, but I have never quite understood the role of government in setting private sector pay scales, at least not in a supposedly capitalist, free enterprise economy.

The latest is an apparent effort to get the government to guarantee that women get equal pay as men. I assume that is for equal work, but I am not sure these days.

I think it is idiotic not to pay women who do the same job as men the same rate of pay. You are paying for the job, not the person, but I guess a lot of people don’t look at it that way. Still, where – in the American scheme of things – did it become the job of the government to set private sector pay scales. Oh, I know, when it began setting minimum wages and requiring union scale on federally funded projects.

Still, minimum wage is a cruel hoax and is used for partisan political propaganda. For one thing, it should not be designed to be the sole source of income for a family of four. That proposition is economically unsustainable. Second, every time you raise it, you penalize those who have progressed forward through merit and experience by throwing them backwards … but that is another argument.

But gender equity is another thing. It is one thing to say that people should be paid the same for doing the same work. I can buy that, but don’t even start down the path of trying to claim equal  pay for equivalent work. That argument goes no where with me. So, even though the government should not be involved, I think business people should pay the same rate for whatever the same work is. That is logical. But when you start trying figure out if  this person puts in the equivalent time and effort as another at a dissimilar job, you lose me.

Anyway, something to think about