Showing posts with label Else. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Else. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Does Anyone Else Find This Funny?

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Does Anyone Else Find This Funny?

Saturday, March 8, 2014

Record Jobs For Old Workers; Everyone Else - Better Luck Next Month

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Record Jobs For Old Workers; Everyone Else - Better Luck Next Month

Sunday, December 29, 2013

The UN Says the Ukrainian People Must Decide their Fate, NATO wants something else


eu-ukraine


On December 8, 2013, United Nations Secretary General Ban-Ki moon telephoned Ukrainian President Yanukovich to discuss the deteriorating and destabilizing situation in Kiev, as Ukrainian demonstrators, in an action some described as vandalism, smashed and beheaded a public statue, a symbolic action foreboding violent civil conflict, ostensibly protesting Yanukovich’s government’s refusal to sign, according to the New York Times, “sweeping political and free-trade agreements with the European Union.”


The NYT’s statement was a gross misrepresentation of the reality of the agreement which the US and NATO countries were virtually coercing Ukraine to sign.  But to its credit, on December 12, the NYT acknowledged, “For months, the International Monetary Fund has refused to sign off on a nearly $ 15 billion dollar bailout loan that Ukraine needs by March to refinance its external debt.  The IMF wants Ukraine to accept harsh conditions including raising domestic gas prices,  and imposing strict budgetary austerity.  These conditions could also lead to more political upheaval.”


 


In an act of supreme hypocrisy and cynicism, the former US Ambassador to NATO, Victoria Nuland attempted to bully the Ukrainian government into signing the EU agreement which would have dragged Ukraine into the economic crisis plaguing Western European countries, and transformed Ukraine into a puppet state, completing NATO’s military encirclement of Russia.  Like the wolf disguised in granny’s clothes, luring gullible Ukrainians to their doom, Ms. Nuland arrogantly hectored the Ukrainian President:  “I made it absolutely clear to him that what happened  last night, what has been happening in security terms here, is absolutely impermissible in a European state, in a democratic state. We also made clear that we believe there is a way out for Ukraine , that it is still possible to save Ukraine’s European future,”’  Ms. Nuland said. The European accords were expected to be accompanied by a rescue package from the IMF, but Mr. Yanukovich had already rejected that because of the conditions attached.”


Granny Nuland also presumed to lecture the infinitely more sophisticated Russian President Putin, “urging Russia to use its influence to press for peace, human dignity and a political solution, and emphasized Ukraine’s need for ‘a return to economic health with the support of the International Monetary Fund.’” This gross insult to the Russian President’s intelligence suggests that the former US ambassador to NATO is dangerously out of contact with reality, or dangerously cynical, or both, and in a photograph published December 12, Ms. Nuland is  presented offering a bag of food to Ukrainians, who are unaware that the food she is proffering is laced with the arsenic of economic austerity measures that will plunge their already ailing economy into the catastrophic abyss of economic and social injustice caused by those  austerity measures, imposed by the IMF, which have devastated the societies in the European Union, including Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, France and the United Kingdom.


The Association Agreement is a Doorway to NATO Expansion


But this is the “prettier” side of the US and EU seduction which will culminate in merely ravaging the Ukrainian economy and society. In reality, the Ukraine-EU Association Agreement is part of a military arrangement which will enable NATO to completely split Ukraine from Russia, and place it in the perilous position of being in the middle of any east-west confrontation. Eastern Ukrainians are fiercely opposed to Ukraine’s signing this inherently military document of incorporation into the EU, and the West’s provocative encouragement of Kiev’s demonstrations against Yanukevich risked inciting a civil war.


The proposed “Association Agreement” between the Ukraine and the European Union is in fact a dangerous NATO military agreement disguised as a customs and economic agreement.  Even if the treaty does not pass, it reveals the truly continuing aggressive goals of the NATO leadership and their willingness to use all means of deceit to achieve their ends.  Clearly in order for the military elements of this proposal to have reached this stage of development, Ukraine-NATO military discussions and commitments must already be intensive and advanced.  This explains the extraordinary anger on the part of the NATO countries when Ukraine withdrew from this agenda.


The treaty was surrounded by a propaganda campaign which fraudulently tried to convince the Ukrainian people and the world that it was an economic agreement bringing prosperity and no visa requirements for travel within the EU.  The military component of this ‘economic agreement’ is actually the first substantive part of the document (see Title II Articles 4-16).


 


NATO’s plan under the Agreement is accomplished by integrating Ukraine into the EU’s military structure (the European Common Security and Defense Policy-ESDP or CSDP – which is dominated by powerful NATO states, and the text makes it clear that association with the EU military structure includes its coordination with the US military and NATO.


The goal is to incorporate Ukraine into NATO’s continuing drive east against Russia and Belarus, the targeted regions to the east and south of the Black Sea, and even “global” challenges (see Article 4, Sec.2(c)).


 


The Treaty calls for a “political dialogue” to promote “convergence on foreign and security matters with the aim of Ukraine’s ever deeper involvement into the European security area (and) strengthen cooperation and dialogue between the Parties on international security and crisis management, notably in order to address global (!) and regional challenges and key threats” (Article 4, Sec. 1, Sec. 2(c))


 


This political military dialogue is coordinated at various levels in several structures:


 



  • The EU’s Political and Security Committee (which coordinates both (1) the EU Military Committee, where the Defense Ministers coordinate operations, as well as (2) the Political Military Group) (Article 5 Sec. 3 (a))



  • “all diplomatic and military channels between the Parties, including appropriate contacts in third countries (United States) and within the United Nations, the OSCE, and other international fora (ie, NATO)” (Article 5 Sec. 3 (b).  “Cooperation…shall aim at increasing policy convergence and effectiveness, and promoting joint policy planning.  To this end, the Parties shall make use of bilateral (ie, including US-Ukrainian), international (ie NATO) and regional fora” (Article 7, Sec. 1)

  •  And “regular meetings both at the level of high officials and of experts of the military institutions of the Parties,” (Article 5, Sec. 3(c));

  •  And the European Defense Agency (Article 10 Sec. 3) which reports to the European Commission.


 


 The Treaty calls for “increased participation of Ukraine in EU-led “civilian and military crisis management operations as well as relevant exercises and training” (Article 10, Sec. 1).


 


Article 10 Sec. 3 specifically mandates the kind of military technological cooperation necessary for the degree of interoperability critical for unified command and control and combat efficiency;  anticipating that Ukraine would sign onto this agreement, on June 24, 2013 the EU-Ukraine Cooperation Council which was established to implement the agreement published the “EU-Ukraine Association Agenda to prepare and facilitate the implementation of the Association Agreement” including: “increase interoperability where appropriate between Ukrainian peacekeeping units and EU Member States forces through lessons learned from relevant EU crisis management operations to which Ukraine participated, and through involvement of the units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine into the formation of EU Multinational Tactical Battle groups.”


 


This issue has been framed between the 2008 Bucharest summit where NATO declared that Ukraine will become a member of NATO whenever it wants and when it meets the criteria for accession and June 3, 2010 when the Ukrainian parliament rejected, with 226 votes, the goal of “integration into Euro-Atlantic security and NATO membership” from the country’s national security strategy.


The European Union and US are Inciting a Revolt in Ukraine to Expand NATO 


 


The US and NATO “support” – in reality, incitement – of the protesters in Kiev who violently smashed and decapitated the statue of Lenin bears an alarming similarity to the US NATO approach to civil disorder in Syria .  One can only wonder how many of the “demonstrators” in Kiev were spontaneously and authentically opposed to Yanukevich’s government. Certainly, IMF imposed austerity measures have nothing to do with the “dignity” and democratic rights of Ukrainian citizens, who would be degraded by the imposition of IMF austerity measures which would further demolish their sparse living conditions.


 


Of course, the separation of Ukraine from Russia was a paramount goal of “The Grand Chessboard.”  It is also imperative to question the motives of US-NATO support for the Ukrainian Svoboda party, whose Nazi sympathies and affiliation are notorious – and well documented.


This attempt to incorporate Ukraine into NATO garishly highlights the violation of the promise given by James Baker to Gorbachev, that “NATO will not expand one inch east of Berlin.”


 


The United Nations daily press briefing of 13 December, 2013 affirmed:  “It’s for the people of Ukraine to decide their own future.  Everybody’s watching very closely what is happening on the streets and through dialogue, which is the most important aspect of all this;  it remains to be seen what the outcome will be.  But it is for the people of Ukraine to decide and, of course, many countries are concerned about the tensions there are.  The Secretary-General has expressed his own concerns about those tensions and has spoken to President Viktor Yanukevich about the need for dialogue and the need for restraint on all sides.  But, ultimately, it’s for the people of Ukraine to decide.”




Global Research


Reprinted with permission from the source



The UN Says the Ukrainian People Must Decide their Fate, NATO wants something else

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

US to Karzai: Sign deal or else troops will leave



New statements from Hamid Karzai, president of Afghanistan, are putting the new security pact between U.S. and Afghanistan keeping American troops in the country for more than a decade from being implemented.



By Aarne Heikkila and Alastair Jamieson, NBC News


KABUL, Afghanistan –The White House threatened to withdraw all U.S. troops from Afghanistan next year, after President Hamid Karzai refused to sign a new bilateral security agreement.


The two countries remain deadlocked over future military involvement after an unsuccessful working dinner between Ambassador Susan Rice and Karzai at his palace in Kabul on Monday night.


In a statement, the White House said Karzai had outlined new conditions for a deal “and indicated he is not prepared to sign the BSA promptly.”


S. Sabawoon / EPA



Afghan President Hamid Karzai speaks to the Loya Jirga on Sunday.




“Ambassador Rice reiterated that, without a prompt signature, the U.S. would have no choice but to initiate planning for a post-2014 future in which there would be no U.S. or NATO troop presence in Afghanistan,” the statement said.


The dinner meeting came at the end of Rice’s three-day trip to Afghanistan to visit American troops and civilians and to assess conditions in the country.


On Sunday, a grand council of Afghan tribal leaders – the Loya Jirga – voted to accept the BSA, but Karzai has since indicated he may not sign it until Afghanistan has elected a new president in March. 


The White House statement added: “Ambassador Rice conveyed the overwhelming and moving support she found among all the Afghans with whom she met for an enduring U.S.-Afghan partnership and for the prompt signing of the BSA.


“In closing, Rice highlighted the American people’s friendship and support for the people of Afghanistan as embodied in the extraordinary sacrifices of our service-men and women and the unprecedented investment Americans have made in Afghanistan.”


In Afghanistan, there are still 47,000 American forces. The U.S. has been in discussions with Afghan officials about keeping a small residual force of about 8,000 troops there after it winds down operations next year.


U.S. officials, including Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, have said the BSA must be signed by year-end to begin preparations for a post-2014 presence.


Karzai spokesman Aimal Faizi said the Afghan leader laid out several conditions for his signature to the deal in the meeting, including a U.S. pledge to immediately halt all military raids on, or searches of, Afghan homes.


The agreement includes a provision allowing raids in exceptional circumstances – when an American life is directly under threat – but it would not take effect until 2015.


“It is vitally important that there is no more killing of Afghan civilians by U.S. forces and Afghans want to see this practically,” Faizi said, according to Reuters.


Karzai also called on Washington to send remaining Afghan detainees at the U.S. military detention center in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, back to Afghanistan, saying that the Loya Jirga had endorsed the pact with this condition.


Alastair Jamieson reported from London. Reuters contributed to this report.


Related


This story was originally published on






US to Karzai: Sign deal or else troops will leave

Friday, September 13, 2013

Wall Street Banks Obtain Market Data Ten Minutes Before Everyone Else


A news scandal shows the markets are rigged.


TRANSCRIPT:


JESSICA DESVARIEUX, TRNN PRODUCER: Welcome to The Real News Network. I’m Jessica Desvarieux in Baltimore. And welcome to this edition of The Bill Black Report.


Matt Taibbi of the Rolling Stone magazine has reported that media company Thomson Reuters has been providing sensitive market information to certain financial institutions before everyone else, allowing them to front run the markets.


Now joining us to discuss all this is Bill Black. Bill is an associate professor of economics and law at University of Missouri-Kansas City. And he’s also a regular contributor to The Real News.


Thanks for joining us, Bill.


BILL BLACK, ASSOC. PROF. ECONOMICS AND LAW, UMKC: Thank you.


DESVARIEUX: So, Bill, can you just explain for our viewers what exactly is front running? And can you give us a bit of background to this story?


BLACK: Front running can be either that you’re trading and you know that your clients are going to be buying or selling something, and you trade ahead of them to take advantage to what’s going to happen to prices, or in this case you get market information before everyone else does and you get to trade in advance on that specialized information, in which case you have an enormous advantage.


DESVARIEUX: And what did Thomson Reuters do?


BLACK: Thomson Reuters partnered with the University of Michigan, which is where I spent seven years studying and got two of my degrees. And the University of Michigan has been famous for 50 years for its research in a particular area, and this particular subset is a survey of business confidence. And this survey of business confidence is used all over the world as one of the leading indicators of what’s going to happen economically. So places like the Federal Reserve, in deciding how to move interest rates and such, look very heavily at this Michigan report.


And what we know that Michigan agreed to do in its contracts with Thomson Reuters was to give certain clients who paid extra money a two-second advantage in how soon they would get that information. Now, that might not sound like much, but these are for folks who are engaged in what is known as hypervelocity trading or hyperfrequency trading. So they actually trade in under a millisecond, under a thousandth of a second. So this is like two years’ worth of, you know, advanced information in terms of how fast these guys operate. That’s the part we know.


What Matt Taibbi’s story reveals is that other people have been studying trades just before that two seconds kicks in. And what they find is an extraordinary volume of trading just before that two-second advantage would kick in.


And that means one of two things is happening. One could be that somebody is leaking the number from the University of Michigan or from Thomson Reuters to somebody who is using that information to out front run the front runners. And the second thing that could be happening–and this is the one that the article says they believe is happening–is that there is a group of 16 banks that are even more–you know some pigs are more equal than others. Well, these are the hogs that are even more unequal. And they get the information potentially as much as an hour before. And the reason they would wait is, of course, things might change, so that they would wait just before the broader group of front runners who’s about to operate, and they can go in and make a killing there.


And we’ve just discussed front running, but front running isn’t the only way the hyperfrequency traders operate. The recent studies from people who have been in the business say that they deliberately create congestion to block other people’s trades and to deliberately send false price signals to distort the market. So this is a form of market manipulation. So it’s presumably some combination of this front running and this deliberate shafting of your competitors through market congestion and false price signals that is going on.


Now, when Thomson Reuters was discovered to have been selling this insider information to favored clients–this is the two-second advantage–the New York attorney general said that this is outrageous, it will, you know, harm the markets, and threatened to take action. Thomson Reuters stopped selling the information on the two-second advantage, but asserted that it had a legal right to do so.


So I’ve done a follow-up to the University of Michigan and said, why are you still doing business with people like this who are creating a system that is designed to aid and abet people who are front running and who are manipulating the market? Well, why would a public university do these things? You know, I just sent in that request today. I certainly haven’t gotten any response.


But Thomson Reuters is threatening to do this again. And other entities were doing it. And so, for example, the United States government has ceased to give the press heads-up that–it used to give them a half-hour heads up on certain things, because that information was leaking into the markets, presumably, again, because somebody was bribing the reporters to get the information early, and they were trading on that information. So other groups, like the U.S. government, are cleaning up their act, and it’s certainly time for Thomson Reuters and the University of Michigan to clean up their acts as well.


DESVARIEUX: Okay, Bill. Just really quickly, can you name some of these favored clients and those 16 banks that you mentioned? And also, how does this affect everyday people? You mentioned market manipulation. How is this going to play into people’s pensions, for example?


BLACK: Well, first, we don’t know who was doing it, because that’s kept secret. And that’s one of the problems. The rumor, as reported in that Matt Taibbi’s article, is that the sweet 16 are the ultralarge financial institutions and big players in the market.


Why is this apparently for the two-second advantage people were paying about $ 6,000 a month? Now, I don’t know if that sounds large or not to viewers. It’s actually–compared to how much money you can make, it’s trivial. In other words, Thomson Reuters and University of Michigan not only sold their integrity; they sold it dirt cheap. So they’re really moronic in what they were willing to do.


What does it mean for the rest of us? Well, the rest of us aren’t traders, and we shouldn’t be traders. This is one of the reasons why daytraders is insane practice and you should not do it. But this high-frequency trading is now vastly bigger than the regular traders. And very bad things happen in this. Some people may remember the flash crash, which was driven in part by this. But more generally, there’s a very suspicious series of activities where most of the bids that they make make no sense in terms of normal economics, and then they just get canceled immediately. And this is why market participants say they’re using them to manipulate the markets by causing congestion. That will make the markets less efficient, and it will make them more vulnerable to crashes and such. So it’s bad for all of us in terms of deteriorating the markets and exposing us to more crises.


DESVARIEUX: Very, very interesting story. Thanks so much for joining us, Bill.


BLACK: Thank you.


DESVARIEUX: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.




Truthout Stories



Wall Street Banks Obtain Market Data Ten Minutes Before Everyone Else

Sunday, August 4, 2013

America: Where Hard Working, Productive Members Of Society Pay For The Health Care Of Everyone Else


Michael Snyder
Economic Collapse Blog
August 4, 2013


Everybody in America wants health care – but most Americans seem to want someone else to pay for it. In the United States today, the way that our system works is that the hard working, productive members of society pay for the health care of everyone else. At least under socialism everyone gets the same benefits. Our system of health care is a very twisted version of socialism where millions upon millions of very hard working people are forced to pay for the health care of others, but often can’t afford to purchase decent health insurance for themselves. Personally, I don’t have a big employer paying for my health care so I have to buy it myself, and I just got a letter from my health insurance company telling me that I have another massive rate increase coming up. Have you gotten a similar letter? Health insurance premiums are going up all over America, and this is just the beginning. In fact, the CEO of Aetna says that health insurance rates for many Americans will double when the major provisions of Obamacare kick in next year.


It would be bad enough if hard working Americans just had to pay for their own health insurance. But no, they are also expected to pay for the health care of members of Congress, employees of the IRS and other federal agencies, state and local government employees, their adult kids (because they can’t afford health insurance), the elderly, the poor, and now under Obamacare they will also be expected to subsidize the health plans of tens of millions of other Americans that are not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid.


When you add it all up, the hard working, productive members of society are at least partially subsidizing the health care of well over half of all Americans while having to pay for their own health care at the same time.


Needless to say, it isn’t too hard to see who is getting the raw end of the deal.


Members of Congress certainly don’t want to pay for their own health care. There was panic in the halls of Congress recently when they started realizing that due to certain provisions in Obamacare they may soon be forced to pay for their own health insurance plans. There was widespread moaning and complaining about how they would be facing “thousands of dollars in additional premium payments” every year.


Things got so bad that Barack Obama got personally involved in the effort to find a solution. Thankfully, members of Congress can relaxbecause a ruling is being issued that will allow the federal government to continue to subsidize 75 percent of the cost of their health plans…



Lawmakers and staff can breathe easy — their health care tab is not going to soar next year.


The Office of Personnel Management, under heavy pressure from Capitol Hill, will issue a ruling that says the government can continue to make a contribution to the health care premiums of members of Congress and their aides, according to several Hill sources.


A White House official confirmed the deal and said the proposed regulations will be issued next week.



And the IRS, which has been put in charge of imposing the rules of Obamacare on all the rest of us, is freaking out about the fact that some members of Congress would like to force them to personally participate in Obamacare



The union that represents IRS employees is urging its members to write to their congressmen to help get the union out of Obamacare.



The following are some excerpts from a letter that the union that represents IRS employees sent to members of Congress…



“H.R. 1780 would put federal employees in a special class where they would be prohibited from receiving health insurance through their employer. It would treat federal employees differently from state and local government employees and most employees of large private sector companies who receive health insurance benefits through their employer. The primary purpose of the Affordable Care Act was to provide a marketplace for the sale and purchase of health insurance for those who do not have such coverage – not to take coverage away from employees who already receive it through their employers,” the letter reads.


“I work hard and am proud of the services that I provide to your constituents every day. One of the main benefits I receive as a federal employee is the ability to purchase health insurance coverage through the FEHBP with an employer contribution towards those benefits. Please let me know your views on this legislation. I look forward to hearing back from you,” the letter concludes.



This is just shameful. If the IRS is going to impose Obamacare on the rest of America, then it should be good enough for them too.


Just check out acting IRS chief Danny Werfel begging for employees of his agency not to have to go on Obamacare…


But we have always had to at least partially subsidize the health plans of federal, state and local government workers.


The big change under Obamacare is that we will soon be subsidizing the health plans of tens of millions of our fellow Americans.


CNN says that 26 million Americans will be eligible for health insurance subsidies, but others believe that the true number is far, far higher than that.


For example, according to CNBC, a family of three in New York that earns $ 78,120 a year would be eligible for a subsidy of more than five thousand dollars…



In New York, a family of three whose annual income totals $ 78,120, would pay $ 12,784 for the second-lower-priced silver plan on that state’s insurance exchange. After getting a $ 5,363 tax credit, the family’s net cost for the insurance would be $ 7,421.



So who pays for that?


You and I do through our tax dollars.


And if you can believe it, Obamacare actually provides an incentive to not work too hard, because if you make too much money you could lose your health insurance subsidy…



Working more could ultimately mean thousands of dollars less for you under a quirk in the new health-care law going into effect this fall. This could prompt some people to cut back on their hours to avoid losing money.


“Working more can actually leave you worse off,” the price-comparison site ValuePenguin.com notes in anew analysis.


“It’s sort of an absurd scenario,” said Jonathan Wu, ValuePenguin.com’s co-founder. “It’s something for people to be aware of.”


In that scenario, an individual or family whose annual income surpasses maximums set by the federal government—if only by $ 1—will totally lose subsidies available to buy health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.



What a perverse system.


And of course Obamacare will allow young adults to stay on the health insurance policies of their parents until they reach 26 years of age. As I mentioned the other day, 36 percent of all young adults in the 18 to 31 age bracket are currently living with their folks. In most of those cases, the parents have to end up footing the bill for health care because the kids simply cannot afford it.


  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t



Medicaid continues to expand as well. Certainly helping the poor is a very good thing, but unfortunately the number of poor just continues to explode.


Back in 1965, only one out of every 50 Americans was on Medicaid. Today, one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid, and things are about to get a whole lot worse.


Right now, there are more than 56 million Americans on Medicaid, and it is being projected that Obamacare will add 16 million more Americansto the Medicaid rolls.


It is going to take a whole lot of money to support 72 million Medicaid patients.


And then of course there is Medicare.


When Medicare was first established, we were told that it would cost about $ 12 billion a year by the time 1990 rolled around.


Instead, it actually cost the federal government $ 110 billion in 1990, and it will cost the federal government close to $ 600 billion this year.


But if you think this is bad, just wait until all of the Baby Boomers retire. It is being projected that the number of Americans on Medicare will grow from a little bit more than 50 million today to 73.2 million in 2025. By then, we would be spending well over a trillion dollars a year on Medicare.


As you can see, under Obamacare the vast majority of all Americans will have their health care at least partially subsidized.


And it expected that our tax dollars will somehow be enough to pay for all of this.


The truth is that we have a deeply broken system. Costs are spiraling out of control and nobody is quite sure how to fix things. The following statistics come from one of my previous articles entitled “50 Signs That The U.S. Health Care System Is A Gigantic Money Making Scam“…


-This year the American people will spend approximately 2.8 trillion dollars on health care, and it is being projected that Americans will spend 4.5 trillion dollars on health care in 2019.


-The United States spends more on health care than Japan, Germany, France, China, the U.K., Italy, Canada, Brazil, Spain and Australia combined.


-If the U.S. health care system was a country, it would be the 6th largest economy on the entire planet.


-Back in 1960, an average of $ 147 was spent per person on health care in the United States. By 2009, that number had skyrocketed to $ 8,086.


The sad thing is that many hard working Americans in the private sector are being forced to subsidize the health care of others, but they can’t even afford decent health care for themselves.


For example, I know of one hard working couple that has a health plan that has a $ 1,000 deductible. Even with that deductible, their health insurance premiums are absolutely ridiculous. Their health care strategy is simply to avoid going to the hospital or visiting a doctor as much as possible.


And of course health insurance companies make money by providing as little health care as possible. Many Americans have discovered that when you need them the most, some health insurance companies will try to get out of covering you any way that they possibly can.


The reality is that just because you have health insurance that does not mean that you are “covered”.


According to a study that was published in The American Journal of Medicine, medical bills are a major factor in more than 60 percent of all personal bankruptcies in the United States. Of those bankruptcies that were caused by medical bills, approximately 75 percent of them involved people that actually did have health insurance.


So what is the bottom line?


The bottom line is the system stinks, and Obamacare is going to make things a whole lot worse.


This article was posted: Sunday, August 4, 2013 at 4:31 am









Infowars



America: Where Hard Working, Productive Members Of Society Pay For The Health Care Of Everyone Else

Monday, May 27, 2013

Hedge Fund Performance Update: Dan Loeb Is Crushing It In 2013, Everyone Else - Not So Much

Just like last year, when it was the turn of Europe-focused crushed and battered hedge funds to generate outsized returns due to some brief ECB-inspired euphoria, if only for a brief period, and then promptly fall back into obscurity, so now it is the time of the “Japan” strat. As the latest HSBC hedge fund performance report confirms, the best YTD returns are, as expected, those for Japan-focused funds at least until the already fading Abenomics euphoria reverts them back to the mean.



So how are the legacy titans of the hedge fund world doing? The answer is in the table below: of the vast majority of hedge funds, only a handful are outperforming the market year to date. This is becoming a major concern for an industry that has underperformed the S&P for the fifth year in a row, and which has to fight tooth and nail to justify its exorbitant fees in a world in which there is no need to hedge any risk any more: after all, Ben Bernanke has everyone covered. One fund that has nothing to worry about is Dan Loeb’s Third Point as it continues its juggernaut of crushing both returns and competition without pause.



Full HSBC report:







    


Zero Hedge



Hedge Fund Performance Update: Dan Loeb Is Crushing It In 2013, Everyone Else - Not So Much