To The Daily Sun,
Many who think they know about money, business and debt often contend that "the federal government should be run like a business or a balanced family budget." This belief is not only simplistic and uninformed, but also wrong. Many of these self-described "experts" even go so far as to want to bring back the gold standard.
Do you know any business or family that is still paying for the Civil War, World War II or every other war in the past 150 years? How about a business or family that operates its own navy, coast guard, disease research or air traffic control?
Anyone familiar with economics and credit should know that federal debt is an economic positive that establishes government credit and gives value to the U.S. dollar while maintaining our standing in the world. It's ironic that those in Congress who talk about the evils of debt are doing their best to destroy the "full faith and credit" of the U.S. government. They desire to take away the taxing ability of the executive branch and the regulatory power of the Federal Reserve.
When Alexander Hamilton, our first Secretary of the Treasury, assumed all the war debts of the original (13 bankrupt) states after the Revolutionary War, this established our credit in the eyes of the world. The new government showed it was able to pay its bills through taxation and established one, strong currency where before every state printed its own money. This gave the federal government the ability to establish a central money supply giving investors faith in government bonds. Ironically, Thomas Jefferson and those who later started the original Democratic Party were against Hamilton's plan and wanted the states to maintain control over the financial system.
Businesses and families cannot print money. That is the responsibility of the Federal Reserve through the Treasury. When President Lincoln was faced with the staggering costs of the Civil War, he ordered the Treasury Department to print as much money as was needed to pay the bills. People should realize that the nation can never go bankrupt as long as it can print money and purchase its own bonds, which the Federal Reserve does through "quantitative easing".
The misinformed who contend we should go back to the gold standard and tie the dollar's value to physical gold in government possession are totally misguided. Every billionaire in the world would want to redeem his dollars for gold bullion, causing a world-wide financial disaster where all governments would lose credit worthiness.
Citizens must realize that a modern government has past, current and future obligations that can never be paid off. Unlike business, that is the nature of government. Business exists to make a profit while government exists for the common good. Compensating immediate relatives of fallen soldiers going back to the Civil War, as well as victims of future disasters in all 50 States, can only be the responsibility of the federal government.
Last Updated on Thursday, 14 November 2013 10:53
To The Daily Sun,
I would first like to inform The Daily Sun that the purpose of my last letter was not about (i f Bush lies,does that mean its okay for Obama to lie also?). I hope this will answer your question. The letter using this headline was addressed to Mr. Siden, and he wanted L.J. to prove that Earle's LIES are LIES, while offering no proof, only opinions of others, that he's telling the truth.That is like, "What do you call a person who carries a sack of quarters"? Which has many answers.
The purpose of my letter was to acknowledge the leading GOP candidates were lower than whale waste, as is the credibility of Mr. Earle. That was the part of my last letter that didn't get mentioned. I hope the CBS report on Benghazi helped answer some of the questions Earle has on the Benghazi scandal.
Last Updated on Thursday, 14 November 2013 10:51
To The Daily Sun,
Nancy Parsons needs another Obamacare lesson. It seems her mind overloads easily, so I will deliver the instruction in segments maybe even she can grasp. Honestly, I think Nancy has the capacity to learn new things. I am going to keep shoving it down her throat until she gets it. The same method Obama uses with people — she seems to like that approach.
Today's lesson Nancy: How the young fare under Obamacare.
I assume Nancy must be particularly interested because the young represent the future of our country. Nancy professes her concern for people. So lets find out if Nancy has emotional feelings for the YOUNG people who are getting their chestnuts blackened under the Unaffordable care act...
A few general facts:
1. The young, identified as the 18 to 40 age group represent the LEAST wealthy quintile of people in all of America. Any person concerned with income INEQUALITY would be doing their best to help this age group before all others.
2. We have managed to saddle our YOUNG with a bone crushing, record setting, TRILLION dollars in college debt. Universities REFUSE to control costs or become more efficient in the delivery of their product because these places are controlled by labor unions. Unions see improved education efficiency as a reason to cut labor, that cuts professor ranks. Democrats decided it is far better to placate labor unions and screw the YOUNG to the rafters with life crippling debt. Student loan defaults are now at record highs, and the job market for the young under Obama is more than DISMAL.
3. The age 18 to 36 group is the lowest user of health care and the least costly to insure. Their insurance rates have reflected this. Under Obamacare, the average 27 year old will experience a 90 percent INCREASE in health insurance costs under Obamacare. These are astronomical price increases. Some young person should cut the word AFFORDABLE out of plywood and tell Obama to stick it where the sun don't shine.
4. The new law limits insurers from charging the old and sick more than THREE TIMES what it charges the youngest and healthiest customers. The old, use SIX times the health care than the young, but will be charged 50 percent less while the young will be FAR OVERCHARGED for the amount of health care they consume (which is little). The POOREST quintile of America, the YOUNG will be SUBSIDIZING the old, who have three to four times the wealth. Obamacare puts a GUN to the head of the poorest among us (the young) to pay the health costs of those with far more money. Nancy Parsons LOVES IT. Why? Because she only takes instructions from OBAMA. She has lost the ability to think critically and independently for herself. This is no accident, the objective of donkeyism is to accomplish exactly that ending. A brain dead voter who only takes instruction from government central, high command out of DEPENDENCE.
5. Wealth inequality doesn't just happen randomly or because the rich are more successful. It happens because DEMOCRATS keep as many people POOR as long as possible with their policies for THEIR DEPENDENT VOTE. Obamacare is just the latest rendition of how this happens. Social Security with its miniscule 3 percent or less return on assets is another way. It is TOTAL FRAUD and invisible, that is why Democrats like it. Tens of millions of beneficiaries are ripped off for trillions by Social Security and they do not even know it. Why? Brain DEAD.
Last Updated on Thursday, 14 November 2013 10:46
To The Daily Sun,
As a vendor who participates in many craft fairs, large and small, throughout the year I'd like to publicly thank The Future Business Leaders of America at Belmont High School and their advisor, Ben Hill, for the outstanding job they do with their annual Belmont High School Holiday Fair. This past Saturday was their 7th annual event and my sixth year as a participant in it, and I can only say it gets better and better each year! It is the best organized and best promoted non-profit event in which I have ever participated. The students solicit and thoughtfully use the feedback of their participants in order to ensure that it is a successful event not just for their own interest/organization, but also for their vendors. They also exhibit excellent customer service to their vendors during the event by helping us unload/load our inventory, watch our booths if we need a break, and deliver lunch/drinks to us throughout the day — all of which is very much appreciated.
As a business owner and taxpayer of Belmont, I am happy to see firsthand that our students are being well taught solid principles of business and marketing that will certainly qualify them as Future Business Leaders of America. Kudos to Mr. Hill and the Future Business Leaders of America at Belmont High School for a job well done!
Independent Team Leader
Usborne Children's Books
Last Updated on Thursday, 14 November 2013 10:43
Look, I've done my best to support the poorly nicknamed "Obamacare." Funny, we don't have Roosevelt Security or Johnson Care, but that's another column.
These cancellations were 100 percent predictable. Honestly, they were more than predictable; they were required.
Absent Obamacare, there is no guarantee that you get to keep your insurance. Individual policies, the kind that are getting canceled, tend to be one-year deals. They are subject to cancellation. Period. So that's not the president's fault, and he never should have suggested that Obamacare would stop the practice.
But Obamacare doesn't just leave the status quo intact. It establishes minimum requirements for health insurance policies, expanding the coverage people get (whether they want it or not). Many of the canceled policies were cheaper than the new ones because they covered less — less than the law now requires and less than any insurer would provide without charging more.
So, if you had one of those cheap policies that only covered you in the event of a catastrophe, with high deductibles, no preventive care, no pregnancy coverage, no prescription drugs, if you had a cheap policy that provided minimal benefits and you were happy with it, then guess what? You were going to lose your policy. No rocket science required.
Of course, the answer is: But now you will get a better policy, and you might even get a subsidy to help you pay for it. And that is a very good thing — if you get sick. If you don't get sick, it just means you pay more.
That's why people are angry. They don't plan to get sick, and they don't want to pay more.
Again, guess what? Many of those people who don't plan to get sick are actually right. That's because they're young and healthy right now. And the reason they need to sign up for policies that are more expensive than they want (and likely need) is precisely because they aren't going to get sick and require expensive health care. But some of us (older and sicker) are, and so we need them to subsidize us.
That is how the system works. People who don't get in accidents subsidize people who do. People who don't get sick subsidize people who do. If you get rid of the exclusions for pre-existing conditions (which is certainly a very good thing for anyone with pre-existing conditions), then you need a whole lot of healthy people to subsidize the sick people who otherwise would either not get coverage or have to pay a large fortune for it.
I'm not saying President Obama was wrong to insist that everyone get better coverage. Actually, I think it's a good idea. One way or another, all of us end up paying for the people who didn't plan to get sick but did. Prevention is a good thing.
The problem is that the president had to know that when he told people they could keep their policies, he wasn't including the people who had cheap plans that didn't cover as much as the new law requires. He had to know this. So why did he say otherwise? Why did it take so long for him to own up? This is a mess of the administration's own making, and for all the talk about fixes, it's not the least bit clear that it can be fixed.
(Susan Estrich is a professor of Law and Political Science at the University of Southern California Law Center. A best-selling author, lawyer and politician, as well as a teacher, she first gained national prominence as national campaign manager for Dukakis for President in 1988.)
Last Updated on Wednesday, 31 December 1969 07:00