Showing posts with label Chained CPI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chained CPI. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

This and That



Intense
The marketplaces would intensify competition, she said, adding, “When plans have to compete side by side and it’s very transparent, that in and of itself drives prices down.” (NYT, 4/12/2013)

HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius tries to explain how capitalism works...and gets it wrong.

Capitalism does NOT work when the government gets involved, dictating who insurance companies should cover (everyone, for example), what services they should provide for free (lots of them), and how much they should charge (not too much). 


Chain Chain Chain
First, the proposal — “chained CPI,” a change in the way inflation is measured — is very small. It reduces Social Security by a quarter of a penny on the dollar — a $2,000 check reduced by a five-dollar bill.

Second, the change is merely technical. The White House itself admits that the result is simply a more accurate measure of inflation. It’s not really cutting anything. It merely eliminates an unintended overpayment. (Charles Krauthammer, Washington Post, 4/11/2013)

It is always good to quantify things. Here Krauthammer tells us the impact of the chained CPI proposal which will wreak untold havoc on the well being of the poor....according to Liberals. 


Proportionality
Consider out-of-wedlock births. In 1980, about 18 percent of births were to unmarried women; by 2009, the proportion was 41 percent.  (Robert J. Samuelson, Washington Post, 4/14/2013)

What shocks you more, dear reader? That the illegitimacy rate is now 41%....or that 30 years ago it was almost 20%?!?!

Monday, April 15, 2013

Divinely Inspired



The Pervs
As he considers a potential mayoral run in the wake of an online sex scandal, former Representative Anthony D. Weiner has won a vote of confidence from a politician who can identify with his predicament: Eliot Spitzer.

Mr. Spitzer, who resigned in 2008 as governor of New York amid revelations that he had solicited prostitutes, said in a radio interview that Mr. Weiner “will make it as a serious candidate if he plunges in, as I think he will.” (NYT, 4/13/2013)

We won't even make this a partisan issue because we would include South Carolina's Mark Sanford: politicians are among the lowest forms of life on the planet. Whore-monger Spitzer endorses Trench-coat flasher Weiner. That is priceless!


Soda Break
It had been building since mid-2011, when the president, in private negotiations with Speaker John A. Boehner, tentatively agreed to the new formula for calculating cost-of-living adjustments in Social Security; economists recommend the formula as more accurate, but it would mean smaller increases for Social Security beneficiaries. Even so, Democrats in Congress and the White House agree that the party would have supported Mr. Obama back then if a compromise deal had come to a vote. (NYT, 4/13/2013)

Here is what the proposed formula tweak for Social Security will do: it will slow the rate of future cost-of-living adjustments. That's it. It won't reduce any current recipient's payment one nickel. That is what has Liberals and Oregon Republican Greg Walden so outraged. 


Grossly
President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama paid $112,214 in federal income taxes for 2012 on adjusted gross income of $608,611, an effective rate of 18.4%, the White House said. (WSJ, 4/12/2013)

We just had an national election which centered almost entirely on Mitt Romney's tax rate (14%). Now we find out that Obama paid 18%. Are Liberals satisfied with that? Is the Legitimate Media outraged?


Armed
As federal and state legislators continue to debate gun control and school safety measures in the months after the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., communities around the country are wasting little time taking safety issues into their own hands. Some schools have hired armed guards. Others have implemented buzzer systems at their doors. (NYT, 4/14/2013)

At last, some common sense on guns and school safety. Liberals proudly proclaimed their schools as "gun-free zones" thus giving free reign to mass murderers. Let's try it a different way and see what happens.

The article is remiss in not mentioning the many cities (Houston, St. Louis, Los Angeles) where armed security is already in place. 

From the same article we get the following excerpt which reminds coastal Liberals of how things are in the rest of the country:

By the time they are 6, many young boys and girls already have learned how to safely handle a weapon and have shot their first deer. Some live in homes where guns are not under lock and key, or on vast prairies where they shoot skeet with their families. (NYT, 4/14/2013)