The Republican Opposition To Immigration Reform

Immigration

I’m not entirely clear on either side of the debate, but most especially with the republican argument.  Best I can tell, the idea is that granting amnesty to existing aliens is bad.  I don’t know why republicans think that’s a bad idea, but I know why I think it is.  And that reason is that I know, am friends with, a number of foreign nationals that are on a multi-year waiting list to obtain a simple green card.  THEY want permanent resident status and to eventually become a citizen.  These guys are paying taxes, buying homes and even contributing to social security.  All with no assurance that they will be allowed to remain here in the States.

I think I’m pretty libertarian in my thinking that while borders are important, they should be made to cross as easily as possible.  A simple check for legal status in native country, terrorist watch list and potentially dangerous disease.

Other than that, I’m for letting anyone and everyone in.

But this insistence on “no amnesty”…what does that mean?  Do republicans feel that the folks already here, with families often 2 generations deep, cannot become a citizen ever?  Or until they return home to their native country and apply?  Is THAT what we really want?  Is that good for the nation?

I don’t think it is.  And I’d bet that most folks would agree with me, even the republicans.  So why this insistence on no-amnesty if they can’t even articulate what that means and why they support the position?

I don’t know.

Insurance vs. Pre-Paid Medical Plan

I may have posted this before but it’s worth repeating.

Virtually no one in America has a true medical insurance program.  Rather, they have a pre-paid medical plan.  And the thing that we call Obamacare most certainly is NOT insurance.

Insurance is an asset that mitigates risk for a cost.  In the best scenario, you never file a claim and the only thing you are out is the premiums that you pay.

Contrast this to a pre-paid medical plan which allows an individual to contribute some set amount of money and then entitles that individual to a set group of medical procedures.  Things like primary care check-ups, eye exams and routine physicals.  Perhaps even a trip to the doc for jr. now and then.

Unemployment Benefits to End In North Carolina

Unemployment

The most recent recession has seen massive amounts of folks joining the ranks of the unemployed. Compounding that problem is that it is hard to obtain a new job in this economy.  In an effort to alleviate, or help alleviate, some of the pain, benefits have been extended.

But it doesn’t come cheap:

The new law is a response to the more than $2 billion the state owes the federal government, money that was borrowed to cover state-funded unemployment benefits after unemployment soared beginning in 2008.

While the state does get help from the federal government, they have to pay that money back.  And if that money isn’t paid back in time, there are penalties.

So what is North Carolina doing?

About 70,000 people will stop receiving federal extended unemployment benefits June 30 – the result of a state law that goes into effect July 1. (See the state and Triangle jobless rates, and the rates for all 100 counties, in the interactive graphics at the bottom of this story.)

The law, one of the first passed by the legislature this year, reduces the maximum state benefits a laid-off worker can receive by roughly one-third. It also reduces the maximum weeks of benefits funded by the state.

Those changes triggered the end of the federal extended benefits because federal law requires states to maintain current benefit levels. Extended benefits, which kicked in after the unemployed had exhausted their 26 weeks of state-funded benefits, have provided as many as 47 additional weeks of benefits for those unable to find a job.

We’re reducing the unemployment benefits.

This, of course, is one of the reasons for Moral Monday protests here in Raleigh.  It’s an example of an extremist legislature dominated by republicans to wage a war on the poor and middle class of North Carolina.

Never mind the fact that this money is going to have to be paid back.  Never mind the fact that, at some point, the benefits are going to end.  Never mind the fact that data suggests that people begin to look in earnest for their next job 2 weeks before their benefits end.

It’s time.  It’s long past time to return to a state of things where benefits are a simple and short bridge to the next job.  No one envisioned nearly two full years of unemployment benefits when the program was instituted.

Gender Pay Gap- 2013

Gender Pay Gap

The news from a few weeks ago remarked on the 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act.  Predictably, much of the reporting focused on the fact that women only earn 77 cents for every dollar that a man earns:

Unfortunately, five decades later, women still earn an average of 77 cents for every dollar earned by a man. For African-American and Hispanic women it’s even lower: 64 and 54 cents, respectively.

And just as predictably, democrats rushed to submit new legislation:

The disparity led Sen.r Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., to co-sponsor an update to the law, called the Paycheck Fairness Act, along with a number of other female senators.

“We believe this is an economic issue. It’s not only about women but the middle class, and if you’re not paying a woman dollar for dollar for the exact same work you’re not really tapping the full potential of the economy,” said Gillibrand on “CBS This Morning.” “And why wouldn’t you tap the full potential of 52 percent of the resources of the women of this country? “If you paid women for dollar for dollar, you could raise the GDP by up to 9 percent.”

But is it true?  Are women really paid 77% of a man’s salary?

Data says no:

Payscale controlled for a variety of factors and found that the pay gap is far narrower among men and women who have similar levels of experience, work in the same fields and locations, have the same skills and certifications and are otherwise workplace clones. Among non-managerial workers, Payscale found no pay gap at all, on an apples-to-apples basis. At more senior levels, women do earn slightly less than men, but the biggest gap was only 8.5% — far lower than the frequently mentioned 23%. And that gap may exist because top male executives put in more hours, travel more and spend more time with clients than their female counterparts, which is hard to measure among salaried employees.

In certain sectors there is no gap.  In other sectors where there is a gap, it can be explained by other factors including the amount of time put in at the office.  Or a requirement that an individual travel.

Other reasons exist:

As other pay experts have pointed out, women tend to earn less overall because they are more likely to work in fields such as health care, education and social work that pay less than male-dominated fields such as vocational trades, engineering and financial services. But women don’t go into the workforce blindly, and they often know the tradeoffs.

“Women consider a lot of factors and not just monetary benefits,” points out Katie Bardaro, lead economist for Payscale. “Many women choose jobs with a certain level of flexibility.”

Women work different jobs than men.  A sure sign that this is true?  Check the workplace mortality figures one day.  Try to explain why men are dying on the job at rates significantly higher than women.

Finally, if you really wanna see a proponent of legislation akin to Ms. Gillibrand squirm, ask them for legislation that would create equality in college.  Women are earning significantly more college degrees.  Not just bachelor degrees, but advanced degrees as well.  Ask them to explain the inequity there.

And listen to their answer.

Unintended Consequences

Unitended Consequences

I understand and resonate with the noble intentions of the left as they enact legislation that is the entitlement culture we find ourselves in.

Who doesn’t wanna help those in need, those who are hungry, homeless and cold.?

The problem is that you cannot change human nature.  And until we as a human race turn a corner, we are going to be faced with the fact that people, in general, look out for their own self interests.  Further, people generally resent having their money spent by someone else.

Which is why we continually see this:

Would you like to have a “skinny” health insurance policy? Probably not. But if you’re employed by a large company, you may get one, thanks to ObamaCare.

That’s the conclusion of Wall Street Journal reporters Christopher Weaver and Anna Wilde Mathews, who report that insurance brokers are pitching and selling “low-benefit” policies across the country.

Wonder what a “skinny” or “low-benefit” insurance plan is? The terms may vary, but the basic idea is that policies would cover preventive care, a limited number of doctor visits and perhaps generic drugs. They wouldn’t cover things such as surgery, hospital stays or prenatal care.

You might ask how ObamaCare could encourage the proliferation of such policies. It was sold as a way to provide more coverage for more people, after all. And people were told they could keep the health insurance they had.

As Weaver and Mathews explain, ObamaCare’s requirement that insurance policies include “essential” benefits such as mental-health services apply only to small businesses with fewer than 50 employees. But larger employers “need only cover preventive service, without a lifetime or annual dollar-value limit, in order to avoid the across-the-workforce penalty.”

Low-benefit plans may cost an employer only $40 to $100 a month per employee. That’s less than the $2,000-per-employee penalty for providing no insurance.

“We wouldn’t have anticipated that there’d be demand for these type of Band-Aid plans in 2014,” the Journal quotes former White House health adviser Robert Kocher. “Our expectation was that employers would offer high-quality insurance.”

Health Insurance Acting Like Insurance – Not A Prepaid Medical Plan

Health Care

It’s long been a plank that we need healthcare reform due in part to the number of medical related bankruptcies:

A study released Thursday [pdf] by the American Journal of Medicine finds a huge increase—nearly 20 percent—in medical bankruptcies between 2001 and 2007. Sixty-two percent of all bankruptcies filed in 2007 were tied to medical expenses. Three-quarters of those who filed for bankruptcies in 2007 had health insurance.

I’ve often wondered about those numbers but haven’t taken the time to dig further into ’em.  For example, if I break my leg, incur $7,000 in medical debt but can’t work, did I really declare for protection because of the 7k or because of all the other bills mounting up as a result of no income?

Be that as it may, I was reading an NPR article when I came across these numbers:

According to an analysis by eHealthInsurance.com of one large insurer’s 2012 claims, just under 11 percent of people with a $2,500 deductible met the deductible for that year. For those with a $5,000 deductible plan, the figure dropped to just under 4 percent. Only 3 percent of people with a $7,500 deductible had that much in claims, and at the $10,000 deductible level the figure was just over 2 percent.

Just 11% of people with a deductible of $2,500 hit that amount.  That means that the remaining 89% of the folks who had such a policy didn’t have bills more than $2,500.  At least qualified bills that high.

The story is the same for the plans that have $5,000, $7,500 and $10,000 caps.

In any event, I was struck by the fact that it seems deductibles are doing their jobs.  Individuals are covering themselves for what might be described as normal day to day bumps and bangs.  Only when significant illness or injury strikes does the plan step in.

Just like insurance should.

How A Libertarian Government Would Care For People

It wouldn’t:

Raleigh, N.C. — Three Raleigh roommates, inspired by the generosity of their neighbors, are paying it forward in a big way, using digital media to connect people with community needs.

The trio was burned out of their rental on Boylan Avenue in January, and then good things started to happen.

“The Hampton Inn on Glenwood South took us in for a week, and they said stay as long as you need to,” Sarah Styron said. Then a couple they had never met before took them in.

Gift cards for food and clothing seemed to fall from the sky. Sarah Styron and her roommates gathered with friend Will Hardison to celebrate this shower of kindness.

“We just started talking about how great the Raleigh community had been to us,” she said. “It is really cool. Raleigh is cool.”

Hardison, a marketing expert, liked the concept and loved the name. He decided to spread the word.

“It was really just one of those light bulb, a-ha moments,” he said.

He purchased the domain name RaleighisCool.com and is using it to help other local individuals and businesses with their struggles.

“I have been blown away by how much people want to help you out,” Hardison said.

“Emails have flooded in saying, ‘How can I help?’ and ‘How can I get in on the next thing that you do?'”

RaleighisCool.com is selling T-shirts with 70 percent of the proceeds to benefit Nation Hahn, a politically connected young man whose wife was murdered last week. The money raised will help pay for medical treatments for injuries Hahn suffered in the attack that killed his wife.

Hardison wrote on the website, “Nation and Jamie were both heavily involved in the Raleigh community and were seen as a ‘power couple’ at the young ages of 29 and 27.  When I found out the news that he and his wife were the victims, my heart just sank.”

So far, Raleigh is Cool has sold 350 shirts, raising almost $5000 for Hahn

The Calls For Prosecution

It’s telling of our current political stalemate that the Irish beat American liberals to the punch:

President Obama’s visit to the Group of Eight summit has created a political row in Ireland after an outspoken liberal lawmaker on Wednesday denounced the U.S. president as a “war criminal” for his drone use and his decision to arm the Syrian rebels.

If only the liberal left here in America would attack Obama in the same way they attacked Bush for the same crimes.

Breaking News – NSA Phone Records

This just in:

The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.

The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren’t suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews.

Think that this is a recent story?  Check the date on the tag line:

Updated 5/11/2006 10:38 AM ET

Youth Unemployment – Unfinished Story

The Atlantic

The Atlantic had me at hello, but lost me at, “wanna dance”:

Europe’s unemployment inequality is simply astonishing. Germany’s jobless rate for young people is 8.2 percent. In Greece, it’s 54.2 percent.

Elevated and lasting unemployment is an awful thing, anywhere, and for anyone. But it is awful in a special way for young people, cutting them off from networks and starting salaries at the moment they need to forge connections and begin to cobble together a career.

A truly honest take on the impact of youth unemployment.  The first rung of the employment ladder doesn’t contain money so much as “stuff”.  Things like speaking to customers, showing up on time, meeting other people in your field and developing a work ethic that is rewarded by promotion.

Money is nice, but at age 16, 17 and 18 is largely unimportant; parents and all.

Yet we never remember this as we craft legislation, minimum wage laws anyone, that punish our youth mercilessly.  In fact, if you wanted to purposely handicap a nation, enforcing a minimum wage law that results in youth unemployment, would be near the top of the list.

But The Atlantic never goes any further than reporting on the symptom, never mentioning the cause.

So close.