CONSTRUCTIVE PROPOSALS IN THE PPACA HEALTH LAW

Here we are in another manufactured crisis.  Unfortunately, it has developed into a situation where neither side can budge, it appears.  The Republicans could have done some good if instead of trying to destroy Obamacare (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or PPACA or just ACA), they tired to fix parts of it.

I would have suggested they propose elimination of the Employer Mandate that liberal economists like Paul Krugman thinks shouldn't have been in the bill in the first place.  Among other things, it only applies to companies with more than 50 full-time employees and even then only those that work more than 30 hrs a week.  Most restaurants need a lot of employees during rush hours, say two hours at lunch and two hours at supper which is 28 hrs a week.  I suspect the Republicans could have gotten this elimination.  A lot of companies will provide health care even if the Employer Mandate is repealed because it is in their interests to do so.  It provides for a more stable workforce, and they can eliminate the expenses by laying off employees.  Also they will probably have to pay employees more if they discontinue health coverage as there is less reason to stay in a low paying job.

I think Republicans could have gotten elimination of the Employer Mandate because Obama has already pushed implementation off for a year (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/05/white-house-releases-proposed-new-rules-for-obamacare-employer-mandate-after/).  this delay is estimated to cost the government $12 billion (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324809004578638282900414410.html).  The administration wants to ease the reporting requirements and the IRS has recently released reporting rules (http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/healthcare/320565-irs-issues-reporting-regs-for-obamacares-employer-mandate). Something employers are not taking into account will be that the employer mandate will be a level playing field which is something companies have always said they want.  If one chain will have to raise prices, other chains will have to also.  Only mom and pop places will not have to pay it.  There are big restaurant chains that provide health plans now, Cracker Barrel is one (and they also provide for paid vacations).  I believe Olive Garden doesn't and they have trouble filling positions that leave a whole dining room vacant while maybe 30 customers wait to be seated.  I, for one, will not go there because of this though I like their menu.

They feel more concerned about the Medical Device Tax (2.3% on hip replacement pieces, heart stents, etc., but not eyeglasses or hearing aids).  the Congressional Budget Office estimates that this tax will raise only $29 billion over a decade (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/28/how-obamacares-medical-device-tax-became-a-top-repeal-target/).  The tax will apply to medical device imports but not exports which should discourage some importation of devices but encourage exports.  Some 260 co-sponsors in congress have signed on to a bill eliminating the tax, and the industry has spent $150 million lobbying against the tax.  But with all the screwing around, Harry Reid now has said that eliminating the tax will not be considered in the Senate.

So I think the Republicans have missed doing some good on the PPACA, but , who knows, maybe in the end one or both of these proposals might be implemented.

EMPLOYEE REDUCTIONS AND THE ACA: CLEVELAND CLINIC

I am confused by reports of hospitals letting go employees.  The latest is the Cleveland Clinic.  Here is what I have found out:

David Graham of The Atlantic Magazine (September 20, 2013) Obamacare Isn't Really Taking Away Jobs: Cleveland Clinic Edition

When I reached [Eileen] Sheil* on Thursday, she seemed a bit confused by the emphasis on Obamacare in reports. "We've been working on reducing costs for years," she said.

"We felt health-care reform was absolutely necessary," Sheil said. "This is the new normal. This is where hospitals have to focus to be viable in the long run. This is not doomsday for the clinic. We're still growing — we're still hiring. The hardest thing is when it affects people."**

U.S. News Citing Obamacare, Cleveland Clinic to Cut $300M, Warns of Layoff ***

An early retirement package will be offered to about 3,000 employees by late October, Sheil told the Beacon Journal. Any possible layoffs will be considered after January, she added.

"We can do as much as we can to not affect the work force, but that's a difficult thing to do," Sheil said. "We've scrutinized the non-employee costs first, but it's just not going to be possible to meet this with those cuts alone."

I seem to recall that hospitals agreed to lowering fees because they expected more business so I don't know what is going on now.

* The Cleveland Clinic's Executive Director of Corporate Communications.
** http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/09/obamacare-isnt-really-taking-away-jobs-cleveland-clinic-edition/279834/
*** http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/18/citing-obamacare-cleveland-clinic-to-cut-300m-warns-of-layoffs

ON AGE 82 (Poem)

I do not text
And do not tweet.
I’m 82 years old
Feeling kind of beat.


Things supposed to run, don’t
Things supposed to stop running, won’t.
I’m 82 years old
And can't remember when to vote.

I don’t know the month or day.
A touch of Alzheimer’s is what they say.
I’m 82 years old,
And I'll eat some of that, if I may.

But every morning when I awake
I wonder what kind of day I’ll make?
I’m 82 years old
And feel life’s a large “piece of cake.”

Every day I have lots of fun,
Like finishing this poem I’ve begun.
I’m 82 years old
And thinking of the day just won.

September 20, 2013
Bruce R. Doe

WHAT INDUSTRIES GET HOTTER?

Back when the calendar turned 1990, there was a rash of activity on what will the new millennium bring. I felt I couldn't even project the 1990s much less the next century; however, I was invited to participate in one on geology.

I thought back to 1890. Suppose I lived then, what would I have guessed? After all X-rays and the atomic nucleus were yet to be discovered. Radioactivity had only been discovered 5 yrs before. What I decided was that I should think of problems I would like to see solved and chances are in the next 110 years, something will turn up to solve them. For example, what the age of the Earth is was still a hot topic in 1890. Radioactivity solved this question, albeit well into the 20th century,  and it is a problem no more. Well here goes with three suggestions of hot industries for the future:

Railway Tank Cars. It looks like the Keystone XL pipeline will not be built although it is the cleanest and least expensive way to bring oil down from Canada and South Dakota. Through twisted logic environmentalists oppose the pipeline and lobbying by Saudi Arabia (our 2nd largest importer after Canada) seem to have killed it. So it will apparently have to be brought down by railway. What is the railroad most likely to benefit from this - BNSF. Unfortunately this company is wholly owned by Berkshire Hathaway.

So what about railway tank cars. The order backlog is immense. Various producing and refining companies are buying their own tank cars. A favorite of mine is Valero Energy (VLO) though we currently do not own any stock in it.  It is also one of the only refiners to be able to handle sour oil. They have ordered 2,000 tankers as has Phillips 66. Greenbrier Companies (GBX) has orders for 1,250 tankers. They also have orders for over a billion dollars of railway cars (tankers plus others). They are a small cap company selling near their 52-week high of $25.33 but earlier this year, you could have bought the stock for $17/sh. They are currently experiencing a loss of earnings. They pay no dividend so by my own rule at age 82, I cannot buy them.

Well, Googling the topic turned up five companies (http://wire.kapitall.com/investment-idea/tank-car-manufactur...) Of course do your own due dillegence before investing in any of these.

Next up is Robotics. Yes, robotics are making the news, and you can find all sorts of places to buy materials to make your own robots. But, ladies and gentlemen, the robot revolution is only starting. You ain't seen nothing yet. So lets look at 10 companies (http://www.fastcompany.com/most-innovative-companies/2013/in...). And if you Google this, you will come up with -- Google and their automated car which is not even in production yet. I believe this field will become so big that it can even move a stock like Google (again no dividends). And don't forget robotic surgery and military uses that have already begun but I expect to grow substantially.  As before, do your own due diligence.

And I wouldn't discount Solyndra. What, you say? Solyndra went bankrupt year's ago and was a big waste of government investment. Maybe so, but they are still in business as 360 Degree Solar Holdings (SOLY:US). The advantage of this technique is that it doesn't use solar glass. They were put out of business by China slashing the price of solar glass that served one nice purpose. Photovolaics are dropping in price and my guess is that electricity production by this means is only in its infancy. Even if you don't like Solyndra, here are companies involved (mostly foreign): http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-22/solyndra-wins-court-approval-of-bankruptcy-exit-plan.html Here are three suggestions of solar energy companies: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-20/trina-joins-sunpower-and-jinko-in-solar-turnararound.html (Note: Solyndra is # 13 among thin film producers.) I expect that some year, solar panel will be the common form of roofing.  Before investing in any of these companies, do your own diligence, of course.

Well, I'm exhausted, kiddies, and I can't get involved in any of these at age 82, but maybe some of you whippersnappers can take a chance, so enjoy!

IT WAS THE MOVIE TRAILER AFTER ALL

Well here we are on September 12.  What did Al Qaeda do yesterday to celebrate the 9/11/2001 attack on the U.S.?  The only thing I heard was there was a bomb set off on the streets of Benghazi.  Where were the hoards of inflamed Muslims attacking U.S. embassies and consulates, skyscrapers and famous bridges in our home land, sporting events, or attacking some weak foreign government?  I didn't hear of anything - nothing, nothing.

So now we know.  The attack on Benghazi on September 12, 2012* was promoted by the inflammatory video "Innocence of Muslims" after all.  After all last year "... eight other diplomatic missions in the Middle East, Asia, and Europe were subject to protests and violent attacks in response to an inflammatory video..." This year there have been no inflammatory actions against Muslims so, surprise, no attacks.  Oh, I'm sure that there are those that wanted to attack the consulate in Benghazi as they had done once before and blew a hole in the wall.  But it took the video to inflame enough people in Libya to mount the big attack that the organizers hoped for.  This year they couldn't do it again, not in Libya, not anywhere.  Even last year, they couldn't get it up to attack our embassy in Tripoli** and could only mass an attack on a small outpost.  If that is the worst Al Qaeda can do, they are pretty weak.

What happened in Benghazi last year was really a minor event except that now in this country everything is on the political table and the damage in Benghazi was magnified for political purposes, but as attacks by Muslims radicals have been, Benghazi was a minor event, only unusual because an ambassador was killed.  At that more than 30 people survived the attack.  It is kind of humorous that there are still those politicians stuck in a time warp and can only talk about Benghazi even when the subject is Syria. Hey, fellas, the public has moved on.

A Quick Summary Of  Attacks On Diplomatic Missions***  Since the embassy burning in Tripoli in 1979, in 1983 our embassies in Beirut, Lebanon, (63 killed) and Kuwait City, Kuwait, (6 killed) were bombed when Reagan was president along with the Marine Barracks bombing (241 American deaths) plus attacks on U.S. Embassies in Jakarta (1986) and Rome (1987) by the "Red Army" and a failed attack on the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv (1990).  In 1998, U.S. Embassy's in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed in which hundreds died when Clinton was president.  George W. Bush had seven attacks on U,.S. facilities including the 2002 attack on the U.S. Center in Kolkata, India, (5 killed) and the U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan (12 dead), 2004 the embassy bombing in Tashkent, Uzbekistan (2 killed), Jeddah Consulate bombing (6 killed), 2006 embassy attack in Damascus,Syria (1 killed), 2007 attack on the embassy in Athens, Greece, (no deaths), 2008 attacks on the consulate in Ankara, Turkey, (3 deaths), and on the U.S. embassy in Yemen (16 dead).  Under President Obama, our consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was attacked (4 killed) along with 8 other facilities and our embassy in Ankara, Turkey, was bombed in 2013 (1 killed).

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack

** Our embassy in Tripoli was burned in 1979 when Carter was president, for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_U.S._Embassy_Burning_in_Libya

*** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_on_diplomatic_missions

LET ME SEE IF I'VE GOT THIS RIGHT

Colorado, which is known far and wide for gun massacres, after the Columbine High School (1999) and the Aurora movie theater (2012) disasters, got around to passing a modest gun control law earlier this year.*  Were guns outlawed?  No.  Were semi-automatic weapons outlawed.  Well, that depends. the law states that a shotgun can't contain more than 8 shells, but the current pump semi-automatic shotgun is said to hold more than this.  So one of the disputes is that gun manufacturers probably won't build a semi-automatic shotgun that holds "only" 8 shells.  What happened to the wild west days when a double barreled shotgun was the norm?  Other guns can hold up to 15 rounds, an upgrade from the Wild West when the six gun was the standard.  What would the modern age be if we haven't learned how to build guns to kill more people quicker?

Well, it turns out that the President of the State senate and a State senator from Pueblo (locally pronounced Pee-ebb-low) who voted for the gun legislation were subjected to a recall election, the first recall election ever in the state, and lost!  Where is the high crime and misdemeanor?  The bill was passed into law and signed by the governor.  It hasn't been overturned by the state Supreme Court.  It is still the law of the land in Colorado.  Please boys and girls tell me that this is a Saturday Night Live skit and that we are about to go into a commercial.  I'm waiting for someone on the religious right to say that the flooding going on in Colorado*** is God's punishment for the recalls.  I'm waiting but not holding my breath,

Then there is Missouri where both state legislatures passed a law that would have stopped Federal enforcement of gun laws more severe than state laws.**  This obviously unconstitutional law (Or is it?  The Federal Supreme Court ruled that companies are people.  A body that can do that can do anything.) was vetoed by the Governor.  So the state House promptly voted to override the veto by a vote of 109-49, and it went to the state Senate where it lost by (Are you ready for this?) one vote (22-12).  Please folks, tell me this is a Saturday Night Live skit and that we are about to go into a commercial?

Also consider that state that recently passed a law that every citizen of the state over the age of 5 must own three guns of which one must have been bought within the last year.  Anyone caught not in compliance is subject to be thrown into jail.  Actually, this is not true -- yet.  It may be even too wild for Saturday Night Live.

Aslo see "May The Saints Preserve Us" (http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2013/08/may-saints-preserve-us.html)

* http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/11/politics/guns-debate/
** http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/12/us-usa-guns-missouri-idUSBRE98B03U20130912
*** http://www.weather.com/news/weather-severe/flash-flood-swamps-boulder-northern-colorado-20130912

IN MEMORY OF SERGEANTS KILLED IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN ON 9/11/2013

With two more sergeants (and not others) killed last week, I repeat here a short poem I wrote honoring all the sergeants killed in Iraq and Afghanistan (December 11, 2011).  I find it strange that there have been far more sergeants killed than corporals or privates (http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2011/12/sergeants-poem.html).  Iraq and Afghanistan have been a different sort of war.

THE SERGEANTS (Poem)

Who are these sergeants, mostly men,

Dying in such numbers in far off lands?

Iraq, Afghanistan.

More than corporals,

More than privates.

Our top heavy military?

Some sergeants in their 50s.

More in their 40s.

Many in their 30s.

They must have been surprised

To be called at such ages

Into a savage war.

You might be interested in seeing: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22452.pdf or http://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol23/2/23-2.pdf.  I am unable to find up to date figures.

MOST IMPRESSIVE PRESIDENT - RIGHT OR WRONG

Here I will cover only the post WW-II period.  Of course, Lyndon Johnson was impressive because he had to get the votes from the opposing party, Republicans, to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  At that time the South was the Solid South of the Democratic Party and they voted against the Acts.  Perhaps Johnson got some help because it was in the aftermath of the shocking assassination of Present Kennedy, but it was still impressive.  He also initiated the Wilderness Preservation Act of 1964.  Surprisingly he had positive cash flow in the last year of his term.  Of course, Johnson ruined his presidency by massively escalating the war in Vietnam, but that should not detract from the huge importance of the two Acts.

Richard Nixon was impressive for his landmark trip to China that led to resuming diplomatic relations,  finally disengaging our troops in Vietnam in January of 1973, forming the EPA in 1970, and getting the Clean Air Act passed in 1970.  Also it took someone like Nixon to continue that Apollo Program after the near disaster of Apollo 13 on its trip to the moon.  Nixon does not get much credit for these things because it is felt that he only did them to distract the American public from the Vietnam War.  Liberal commentator Mark Shields has called Nixon that last liberal president.  Of course Nixon is the only president to resign the presidency as a result of the so-called Watergate coverup.

Jimmy Carter was impressive for finally settling the Panama Canal issue, forming the Department of Energy, starting the deregulation of the airline (1978) and trucking industries (1980), and the massive Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 that led to more than 107 million acres being being under the protection of wilderness laws.  He lowered the annual Federal deficit to near zero, but never has a positive cash flow.  The amazing thing is that all this was done in one term as President.  The conservative nature of Carter was unpopular among members of his own party (Democrats)  Unfortunately his presidency was ruined by the Iranian hostage crisis that wasn't settled until after the presidential election and assumption of Ronald Reagan to the presidency.

I conclude the most impressive president was George W. Bush - for better or worse.  Though he ignored warnings of an attack by a group known as Al Qaeda, when it occurred on September 11, 2001, he initiated the Afghanistan War in October of 2001, to eliminate Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda and to dismantle the Taliban.  I felt we had to do something for better or worse although I didn't know that the war was going to last more than a dozen years.  Though Bush's economic policies drove the U.S. into a deep recession, to his credit when he realized what had happened, he did force passage of TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) to curb the fiscal crisis.  Perhpas Bush's greatest accomplishment was to get Medicare D, a prescription drug program against his own party's  wishes (Republicans).  Likewise he managed to get the Clear Skies Act of 2003 against considerable opposition.

The amazing thing was the repeated ability of Bush's team to bully the opposing party as well as members of his own party's congressional members into voting for things they didn't believe in.  In addition to what has been mentioned above, there are the huge tax cuts for the wealthy (The biggest part of the Federal deficit today.),* and to go to war with Iraq under false pretenses, a country that was no threat to the U.S. but has a lot of oil.  I stand in awe of these accomplishments, some good and some bad.

But Bush's influence had limits.  He unfortunately failed to get approval from congress on a trade pact with Vietnam, failed to get immigration reform done,  and fortunately he failed to begin converting Social Security into an investment program from an entitlement,

* Figure from: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/news/2011/06/07/9785/the-bush-tax-cuts-are-the-disaster-that-keeps-on-giving/
Also see article by conservative commentator Bruce Bartlett: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/are-the-bush-tax-cuts-the-root-of-our-fiscal-problem/

NO LEAST BAD CHOICE

I think our president is at a loss as to what to do about the use of poison gas in Syria now that the Brits have backed out from any type of military action.  Curiously the news programs don't mention why the President has changed his mind on military action in Syria.  The President definitely has backed off on his call for regime change, for now anyway.  After the Arab League sounding as it they are on board of some punishment of Assad, they have backed off.  The United Nations is not on board.  So it seems like it is just the French and now maybe us to do something about Assad's use of poison gas..

So now it appears like our president has cold feet about his "red line" over the use of poison gas and has turned the matter over to Congress.  Although Technically, poison gas is outlawed in war by the Geneva Protocol of 1925 (not signed by Syria), as if you can make war humane, it overlooks President Reagan's overlooking the poison gas used by Saddam Hussein on several occasions in the Iraq-Iran War and on his own people as well.*  In spite of a stronger prohibition by the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention (also not signed by Syria), most of the world does not seem to care if poison gas is used.

So what will Congress do?  It seems like a limited attack on Syria as punishment may be approved by the Senate, but what about the House? (1)  The House seems to oppose anything the President proposes. (2) There seems to be a drift among Republicans back toward isolationism (led by Rand Paul), something missing since the Solid South of the Democratic Party joined the Republican Party as the Southern Strategy. (3) The President's own party is not keen on an attack. Therefore my guess, and it is only that, is that the House will not approve any action against Syria.  Time will tell.  If this is the case, the prohibitive actions against the use of poison gas against your own people and probably in war in general will be null and void.  As C. Northcote Parkinson once said about the League of Nations, "The buildings of the League of Nations were  finished in 1938 and so was the League of Nations." (Not an exact quote.)

Although there are non-sectarian forces fighting against Assad, the el Qaeda forces seem to be more effective.  I guess the thought is that if there is a regime change, then there will be another war between the non-sectarian forces (Free Syrian Army) and al Qaeda.  And what role will Hesbollah play in such a circumstance?

* (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran); http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/09/01/world/poison-gas-viewed-as-uniquely-horrible/#.UiUT09uF9rw