Monthly Archives: February 2010

Coyote Blog » Why Obamacare 2.0 is Like Cap-and-Trade

This was the trick behind cap-and-trade: Politicians know that the only real way to reduce energy usage is to raise its price much higher.  They also know that doing so would lose them their jobs, so instead of passing a simple carbon tax, they created a cap-and-trade system that would force private companies to be the bad guys.  They then try to hide this basic fact with a lot of distracting arm-waving about green jobs and wind power.

The new Obama health proposal, which looks a heck of a lot like the old Obama health proposal (same basic features, same lack of detail) plays a similar game.  Do you remember all that Obama talk about mysterious brilliant ways to reduce health care costs?  Where did they all go?  It turns out that the only real idea they had for reducing health care costs was to deny people care.  They just try to hide this with a lot of distracting arm-waving about gold-plated insurance and electronic medical records.

via Coyote Blog » Blog Archive » Why Obamacare 2.0 is Like Cap-and-Trade.

A good article with links to other good articles; read on.

It is illegal for the federal government to get involved in the healthcare business, so of course anything thy do with it will be corrupt and misleading.

Obama Rejects Socialist Tag But Would Tax Health Plans If More Than People ‘Need’ |

Two quotes:

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” — Karl Marx, 1875

“It’s a tax on insurance companies that offer Cadillac, or quite frankly, Rolls Royce policies that in essence people don’t need.” — Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs, 2-25-10

Perhaps Obama really isn’t a socialist; perhaps he is actually a communist!

Obama Rejects Socialist Tag But Would Tax Health Plans If More Than People ‘Need’ |

I’m a total stud muffin

Yep, because my comment to yesterday’s 5-Minute Forecast was published in today’s at 4:47.

Go me!

I also wanted to share this bit from today’s forecast, about China.  One thing citizens of the US tend to forget is that our Constitution was designed to prevent tyranny.  Everything that the government is doing above and beyond what is defined in the Constitution (EPA, OSHA, SEC, IRS, Dept. of Education, and so on and so forth) are all tyrannical measures that wanna-be tyrants have been able to force on us.  Perhaps they haven’t thought of themselves as tyrants, but rather as benevolent caregivers or as helpful meddlers in other people’s business, but nevertheless, we are now in the odd situation of having less economic freedom than communist China!

All of this weighs on our mind as we evaluate something we encountered on a private message board we belong to from someone who’s lived in China for 12 years. “What people fail to grasp,” this individual writes, “is this place is much more capitalist than the States now:

· No capital gains tax

· No property tax

· No local or state taxes

· A reasonable 35% tax rate for the highest earners

· Corporate tax rates of zero percent for 3 years and 15% per year after that.

“Also, most importantly, it’s not a casino economy like the States. China will sell 30% more vehicles this year than in the U.S. 93% of those vehicles will be purchased cash upfront.

“For a home loan, you need 30% down. As a private business, to get a loan you have to put up the assets of the company, i.e., plant and equipment. There are no leverage games here.

“It’s a one-party state, but at least it is focused on its own people. We have a two-party system that has sold us down the river. All the Asian Tiger economies needed a strong central government to launch themselves out of poverty. Not a good system for our culture, but it works for them.

“High-speed train systems going on line, 50 new airports in that last five years — you must see this place to believe it.”

GOUtah! Alert!

I was pleased as punch to get this e-mail update from Gun Owners of Utah today, and I am very happy to now be enjoying  Utah’s lax gun control laws instead of California’s.  Man, it sucked being a gun owner trying procure and bear arms in California.


Every year, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (formerly known
as “Handgun Control, Inc.”) releases grades for all 50 states.  Each
state’s grade is based on the Brady Campaign’s assessment of the
strength of that state’s gun-control laws.  The Brady folks grade on a
scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being the lowest possible score (the weakest
state gun-control laws) and 100 being the highest possible score (the
strongest state gun-control laws).  The Brady Campaign recently
released its scorecard for 2009.  This year, Brady used a “star”
rating system in addition to a numerical score.  States with a
numerical score from 0 to 10 get zero stars.  11-24 is one star.
25-49 is two stars.  50-74 is three stars.  75-100 is four stars.

You can read the latest Brady scorecard for all 50 states here:

You can read Brady’s scorecard for Utah here:

It should be noted that the Brady scores don’t take into account
federal gun-control laws.  Furthermore, many types of state gun laws
apparently don’t count in Brady’s formula.  Utah, for example, has
pages and pages of state gun-control laws, but the Brady folks
apparently don’t count these laws in their scoring formula.

This year, 28 states received a score of zero stars (meaning that they
had numerical scores below 11 out of a possible 100), but only one
state received an actual numerical score of 0 from the “Brady Bunch”.
That state was Utah.

We at GOUtah! are pleased as punch that the Beehive State received the
lowest possible Brady score for 2009.  The last time we checked, a
couple of years ago, Utah was tied for last place with another state.
We now proudly occupy that slot all by ourselves.  Of course, despite
the big goose-egg score from Brady, Utah has lots of state gun-control
laws, and we hope to repeal or weaken some of these laws in the coming
years.  Perhaps we can earn a negative numerical score from the Brady
Campaign at some point.  We can at least dream, can’t we?

The state with the highest score (four stars and a numerical score of
79) is (drum roll, please)….. California.  California was the only
state to receive a four-star rating from the Brady folks.

A curious person might want to compare the violent crime rates for the
state with the highest Brady score and the state with the lowest Brady
score, to see whether there’s a correlation between the crime rates
and gun laws of those two states.  Unfortunately, we couldn’t find
this sort of information on the Brady Campaign’s website, so we looked
on the FBI’s website instead.

The FBI hasn’t yet released its state-by-state crime report for 2009,
but you can find the 2008 report here:

Here’s a comparison of the violent crime and murder rates in Utah and
California for 2008, derived from the FBI report:

California Violent Crime Rate:  504 per 100,000 population per year
Utah Violent Crime Rate:  222 per 100,000 population per year

Thus, in 2008, the average Californian was more than twice as likely
to be the victim of a violent crime as was the average Utahn.

California Murder Rate:  5.8 per 100,000 population per year
Utah Murder Rate:  1.4 per 100,000 population per year

Thus, in 2008, the average Californian was more than FOUR TIMES as
likely to be murdered as was the average Utahn.

Ergo, there is indeed a correlation between state gun laws and violent
crime rates.  But it probably isn’t the kind of correlation the Brady
gang was hoping for.  California has much stricter gun laws than Utah,
and it also has much higher rates of violent crime in general and
murder in particular.