Recently while browsing the channels looking for the weather forecasts as those with breathing difficulties can only know, I came across a new ad by the National Association of Realtors promoting home ownership and its benefits and "responsible" financial reform, and as one who has been burned by a home that in the end owned me rather than having really any ownership of it, was more than intrigued by the ad, its representations and tone.
It began by representing how for every home purchased, there are 2 jobs which result, creating millions of jobs for America. But at whose ultimate cost was left out of the equation.
That's right. The homeowners.
I'd say there are a multitude more all paid for by the home purchaser or seller.
First, of course, the realtor.
Due to ever restrictive state laws and provisions, the freedom to list your home and sell your own property through newspaper ads, "for sale" by owner, and other such economical means has been taken over by "the industry."
Add to those also who earn their incomes from the home buying public are the banks, title companies, lawyers, state (all those property taxes collected) and home repair and construction companies in those repairs also now mandated by state law in many states prior to listing a home for sale.
And don't forget the newest leaches on the eventual equity in your home.
The "homeowners association," which also due to state and federal laws are mandated for all new home construction also in most states throughout the nation.
With lien and seizure rights to your property in the event your standards for upkeep and maintenance don't meet theirs, or even one of your neighbors who just might be a realtor looking instead merely for a new listing.
A British law, the "law of servitudes" is being used in order to legitimize these "nonconsensual" contracts on your home and land many times.
Especially in these economic times.
Forget also selling a property "as is" as in the past, leaving the negotiating on the eventual price and repairs then to the buyer and seller.
The market is clearly speaking regarding the "changes" in the mortgage and home buying process that has occurred within the past several decades, and is clearly affecting the realtors and construction industry big time.
As far as the rest of the ad, representations were made insofar as how much wealth Americans have in their homes (ask the recent foreclosed upon "owners" of those properties where their wealth is now, some of whom in many states were not those that bought to flip those homes, but actually to live in them).
That wealth and home that will never be passed down to their children.
Promoting financial reform in the home buying process means confronting and addressing those escalating interest rates and changing terms due to the fact that the mortgage or loan you have today may not be the same next month, or even next week due to the fact that debt is now defined as a negotiable instrument that can be sold on the open market under different terms and conditions once that loan is "assumed" by another bank or mortgage lender.
Or that your loan may not even be based on the U.S. prime and currency, as many of those in the West and Southwest were but based on the British interbank lending rates or LIBOR.
Talk about risk.
I mean in the Southwest in this boomer's experience, this last cycle was the third simply in my lifetime of the most recent boom and bust cycle.
Home sweet home is not the phrase that comes to mind anymore to the many affected during this last one.
And the lesson was not lost on most of those of their posterity and next generation, I guarantee.
Junk fees, higher and higher utility bills and costs of ownership, escalating and changing mortgage terms and conditions, and a risky investment, not home, at best is the new definition.
Showing posts with label lawyers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lawyers. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
A Personal Story: The Patriot Act, Unemployment And Political Harassment
In this post-911 world, and after passage of the Patriot Act, it has been amazing to this writer just how this Act of Congress is being used also by special interest groups and politicians in order to use as a means and weapon subliminally in order to facilitate their agendas against Average Americans who have been more and more addressing the two party system and also the continued Constitutional violations which have escalated since that time.
I was nothing more than a "retired" legal professional, and also mostly at home employed then "self employed" mother doing her best to raise three children post a divorce in the 90's in a city that I grew up in that was spinning out of control over the border situation, and explosive growth which had occurred through the past several decades - Phoenix, Arizona. Adolescence particularly was tough under those circumstances, especially given the area in which we resided post-divorce off a major metro thoroughfare not so very far from the north-south corridor and interstate throughout the State of Arizona.
An area particularly hard hit after the expansion of that interstate from Nogales to Flagstaff in the 1980s for "commercial" reasons.
My costs of ownership on a home I had purchased post-divorce were also spinning out of control, and escalating not merely by the decade, but by the year. And also progressive loss of any and all ownership rights I even had to the property due to special interest legislation that also escalated post my purchase.
I eventually lost the house, or any interest in retaining it since the writing was clearly on the wall and a legal action pretty much "took" my home from me in the end. I, of course, wished to spread my story so that at least some unaware Americans could be spared my fate, also from a historical perspective as one who had almost seen it all through four decades.
What has occurred since that time due to also progressive policies of Washington could be characterized as "subliminal" harassment through both my published articles, and also other means.
My credit rating after what occurred is not "prime," although throughout the first almost four decades of my life received offer after offer of increasing my credit limits, or taking out new credit cards due to the access those credit companies had to my credit scores in the 1970's, 1980's and early 1990's prior to my divorce. With children that had, through my spouse's and my joint income, during their most formative years come to a certain standard of living that I most certainly struggled to maintain post divorce.
And was mostly successful in downsizing quite a bit our housing, and other costs but of course those teen years were trying, and those expenses quite high with new drivers in a state where auto insurance rates for youth, especially, not to mention the general public had gone off the charts primarily also due to the open border situation, accident rates in a city which had quadrupled in size in less than two decades, and as a tourism spot for snowbirds.
I started writing the legislature about what had occurred, and also political matters which had adversely impacted the state, and low and behold started receiving speed dialed "collection" calls on a cell phone which continued even after I discontinued the original service, and started buying some of the cheaper "pay as you go" models due to my lower credit score after the litigation, and losses I had suffered in a business then also going under during that "abuse of process" action based on a small claims action that resulted in an over $17,000 attorney fee award - a great deal of the equity eventually of my home, along with the $16,000 realtors "fee" for handling the eventual transaction. And all those other "closing" costs.
When I say subliminal, here is what occurs.
You begin receiving "collection" calls daily from a lawyer's recorded message that indicate they are looking for someone else, and to call them in order to be removed from their lists after being instructed to "hang up" if you are not the party they are seeking. And usually these calls occur later in the evening. I've had at least three different entities at this point seeking three different individuals with their recorded messages contact me in such a manner during the past four years after leaving my former home state.
And usually right after I publish any article on some of the citizen journalism sites, my own blog or forward any of them to my former legislators.
Since, of course, these collection lawyers have carte blanche to access under that Patriot Act any citizens personal information or phone numbers even through those telecom companies, or their private "homeland security" trained investigators in the name of creditor rights.
And politicians also, who just might be a little peeved at having the public get any information at all on what is truly occurring in this American economic meltdown and national security fiasco from any source other than those which have been deemed "politically correct" which will publish the fiction.
Those credit scores and credit reports, and background checks are being used to politically target quite clearly those citizens who are not simply the "sheep" but were actually educated in American history and government at a time when the federal government had far less power over the state and local schools, and take exception more and more in what is going on in our courts, our schools, and our federal and state government which truly has led to where we are. And America's intended form of Constitutional government revered above all other countries. Not world government, but American government.
And it seems that although what I and many writers who have become more politically active disclose, although the truth and clearly more mainstream than those publishing the spins, the politicians and government leaders still don't get it.
The proof of what we speak is all around them in the fact that the housing market hasn't picked up, the war is costing this country and its future posterity their legacy, and this globalization in this global economy is bankrupting this country by the week, at this point.
Instead, they spend their time harassing the victims and attempting to marginalize them while this scenario gets worse and worse.
And it is quite clear to see, that a Harvard or Yale education clearly isn't worth the parchment anymore it is printed on, and Joe the Plumber (actor though he may be) has a better feel for the pulse of the American people than those serving at the state capitols, or on the Hill.
Fox, BBC Worldwide, and the British Barrister's Association, and Ivy League globalists have contributed to the American economic meltdown far more than those Tories of so long ago.
Plea bargained, even low level felony American citizen prisoners were just denied their voting rights?
Hello, Great Britain circa 1776. And I certainly am not the only one in this country that can now see the forest, for the trees.
I just hope with the next number, I can remember it.
I was nothing more than a "retired" legal professional, and also mostly at home employed then "self employed" mother doing her best to raise three children post a divorce in the 90's in a city that I grew up in that was spinning out of control over the border situation, and explosive growth which had occurred through the past several decades - Phoenix, Arizona. Adolescence particularly was tough under those circumstances, especially given the area in which we resided post-divorce off a major metro thoroughfare not so very far from the north-south corridor and interstate throughout the State of Arizona.
An area particularly hard hit after the expansion of that interstate from Nogales to Flagstaff in the 1980s for "commercial" reasons.
My costs of ownership on a home I had purchased post-divorce were also spinning out of control, and escalating not merely by the decade, but by the year. And also progressive loss of any and all ownership rights I even had to the property due to special interest legislation that also escalated post my purchase.
I eventually lost the house, or any interest in retaining it since the writing was clearly on the wall and a legal action pretty much "took" my home from me in the end. I, of course, wished to spread my story so that at least some unaware Americans could be spared my fate, also from a historical perspective as one who had almost seen it all through four decades.
What has occurred since that time due to also progressive policies of Washington could be characterized as "subliminal" harassment through both my published articles, and also other means.
My credit rating after what occurred is not "prime," although throughout the first almost four decades of my life received offer after offer of increasing my credit limits, or taking out new credit cards due to the access those credit companies had to my credit scores in the 1970's, 1980's and early 1990's prior to my divorce. With children that had, through my spouse's and my joint income, during their most formative years come to a certain standard of living that I most certainly struggled to maintain post divorce.
And was mostly successful in downsizing quite a bit our housing, and other costs but of course those teen years were trying, and those expenses quite high with new drivers in a state where auto insurance rates for youth, especially, not to mention the general public had gone off the charts primarily also due to the open border situation, accident rates in a city which had quadrupled in size in less than two decades, and as a tourism spot for snowbirds.
I started writing the legislature about what had occurred, and also political matters which had adversely impacted the state, and low and behold started receiving speed dialed "collection" calls on a cell phone which continued even after I discontinued the original service, and started buying some of the cheaper "pay as you go" models due to my lower credit score after the litigation, and losses I had suffered in a business then also going under during that "abuse of process" action based on a small claims action that resulted in an over $17,000 attorney fee award - a great deal of the equity eventually of my home, along with the $16,000 realtors "fee" for handling the eventual transaction. And all those other "closing" costs.
When I say subliminal, here is what occurs.
You begin receiving "collection" calls daily from a lawyer's recorded message that indicate they are looking for someone else, and to call them in order to be removed from their lists after being instructed to "hang up" if you are not the party they are seeking. And usually these calls occur later in the evening. I've had at least three different entities at this point seeking three different individuals with their recorded messages contact me in such a manner during the past four years after leaving my former home state.
And usually right after I publish any article on some of the citizen journalism sites, my own blog or forward any of them to my former legislators.
Since, of course, these collection lawyers have carte blanche to access under that Patriot Act any citizens personal information or phone numbers even through those telecom companies, or their private "homeland security" trained investigators in the name of creditor rights.
And politicians also, who just might be a little peeved at having the public get any information at all on what is truly occurring in this American economic meltdown and national security fiasco from any source other than those which have been deemed "politically correct" which will publish the fiction.
Those credit scores and credit reports, and background checks are being used to politically target quite clearly those citizens who are not simply the "sheep" but were actually educated in American history and government at a time when the federal government had far less power over the state and local schools, and take exception more and more in what is going on in our courts, our schools, and our federal and state government which truly has led to where we are. And America's intended form of Constitutional government revered above all other countries. Not world government, but American government.
And it seems that although what I and many writers who have become more politically active disclose, although the truth and clearly more mainstream than those publishing the spins, the politicians and government leaders still don't get it.
The proof of what we speak is all around them in the fact that the housing market hasn't picked up, the war is costing this country and its future posterity their legacy, and this globalization in this global economy is bankrupting this country by the week, at this point.
Instead, they spend their time harassing the victims and attempting to marginalize them while this scenario gets worse and worse.
And it is quite clear to see, that a Harvard or Yale education clearly isn't worth the parchment anymore it is printed on, and Joe the Plumber (actor though he may be) has a better feel for the pulse of the American people than those serving at the state capitols, or on the Hill.
Fox, BBC Worldwide, and the British Barrister's Association, and Ivy League globalists have contributed to the American economic meltdown far more than those Tories of so long ago.
Plea bargained, even low level felony American citizen prisoners were just denied their voting rights?
Hello, Great Britain circa 1776. And I certainly am not the only one in this country that can now see the forest, for the trees.
I just hope with the next number, I can remember it.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Californication: Pelosi and Comrades Announcement Untrue
In the largest display of in- your- face legislation, even more so than the bank bailouts, GM assumption, and Scam & Trade, the House of Misrepresentatives, at the witching hour of 10:49 EST, passed the largest tax increase for all Americans since FDR.
And gave themselves a standing ovation for their efforts.
Nancy Pelosi, that Californicator, hogged center stage for most of the action on Sunday, along with her comrade-in-arms, Mr. Waxman (of the bow-tie).
Ms. Pelosi's final speech diverting and directing attention of what a massive Constitutional violation much of the language contained in this "stimulus" bill for the health care sector to women was just too incredible to believe for this female boomer.
Using women in order to gain future votes, it appears, as the savior of womankind stating that "being a woman will no longer be a pre-existing medical condition?"
Please, Nancy.
Just where in that legislation is there equality or any price controls on those new "health care internet shopping malls" that are going to create new jobs, especially since there is little, if any, regulation of commercial entities on the net at the present time?
Where is it stated that women will not be charged higher rates than men of the same age, living in the same states, with the same risk factors - since at the present time, women are charged higher rates for riders for those that have a history of breast cancer, or for maternity coverage and thus those additional riders that would be again required and those higher costs also do not appear to have been addressed anywhere in this legislation.
Sure, women can't be denied coverage, just as men cannot be denied coverage, but with no price controls over just how these insurers now can "package" these plans, exactly how has this legislation helped the American public in any manner whatsoever, be it men or women?
And with all the state challenges that are now going to be initiated so that those states can now play their part in this fiasco and save face for individual Governors and legislators at the state level, how much are these now challenges that will eventually wind their way up to the Supreme Court so that it, too, can use some politically based bias to legitimate this unconstitutional legislation going to now cost the American people - both at the state and federal levels for these cases (for the legal professions benefits most of all, at the American public's expense for those legal fees and state budgets that will now be affected).
This skewed legislation seems to be a job stimulus most of all for those comrades-in-arms since there is enough garbage in this legislation to provide fodder for the legal profession for decades to come, with all the massive legalese and pages to this legislation, and loopholes.
Were those costs factored into the projections?
It wouldn't appear so.
Congratulations, Ms. Pelosi.
You've screwed single mothers, and the rest of American womanhood in this generation.
And for generations to come.
Since, of course, women do still only make about two thirds of what men make for the same occupations (with the exception of federal legislators, that is, or select other governmental positions), they will be paying a heavier burden for this stimulus for the global financial sector, world bankers and gadget industry also progressively as these "packages" and "shopping malls" become reality based upon their lower salaries and percent of income, and childbearing and cancer risk factors for a substantial number of women in this country.
Mark my words.
I mean the FTC thus far has been ineffective in preventing much internet scamming or assisting citizens who are sold down the river by misrepresented commercial websites at this point at the present time, while Washington continues to feed the out of control gadget sector, and venture capitalists from your home state, along with those rip-off bankers affiliated with the Fed and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
You know, the ones whose creative marketing even went so far as to be selling loans not even based on the U.S. currency to many, many thousands of American citizens throughout the west and Southwest which primarily led to the mortgage and foreclosure disaster which is still occurring today.
And now this.
Way to go, Nancy,
Thanks so much for your care and concern, on behalf of women everywhere across the political spectrum.
Not.
And gave themselves a standing ovation for their efforts.
Nancy Pelosi, that Californicator, hogged center stage for most of the action on Sunday, along with her comrade-in-arms, Mr. Waxman (of the bow-tie).
Ms. Pelosi's final speech diverting and directing attention of what a massive Constitutional violation much of the language contained in this "stimulus" bill for the health care sector to women was just too incredible to believe for this female boomer.
Using women in order to gain future votes, it appears, as the savior of womankind stating that "being a woman will no longer be a pre-existing medical condition?"
Please, Nancy.
Just where in that legislation is there equality or any price controls on those new "health care internet shopping malls" that are going to create new jobs, especially since there is little, if any, regulation of commercial entities on the net at the present time?
Where is it stated that women will not be charged higher rates than men of the same age, living in the same states, with the same risk factors - since at the present time, women are charged higher rates for riders for those that have a history of breast cancer, or for maternity coverage and thus those additional riders that would be again required and those higher costs also do not appear to have been addressed anywhere in this legislation.
Sure, women can't be denied coverage, just as men cannot be denied coverage, but with no price controls over just how these insurers now can "package" these plans, exactly how has this legislation helped the American public in any manner whatsoever, be it men or women?
And with all the state challenges that are now going to be initiated so that those states can now play their part in this fiasco and save face for individual Governors and legislators at the state level, how much are these now challenges that will eventually wind their way up to the Supreme Court so that it, too, can use some politically based bias to legitimate this unconstitutional legislation going to now cost the American people - both at the state and federal levels for these cases (for the legal professions benefits most of all, at the American public's expense for those legal fees and state budgets that will now be affected).
This skewed legislation seems to be a job stimulus most of all for those comrades-in-arms since there is enough garbage in this legislation to provide fodder for the legal profession for decades to come, with all the massive legalese and pages to this legislation, and loopholes.
Were those costs factored into the projections?
It wouldn't appear so.
Congratulations, Ms. Pelosi.
You've screwed single mothers, and the rest of American womanhood in this generation.
And for generations to come.
Since, of course, women do still only make about two thirds of what men make for the same occupations (with the exception of federal legislators, that is, or select other governmental positions), they will be paying a heavier burden for this stimulus for the global financial sector, world bankers and gadget industry also progressively as these "packages" and "shopping malls" become reality based upon their lower salaries and percent of income, and childbearing and cancer risk factors for a substantial number of women in this country.
Mark my words.
I mean the FTC thus far has been ineffective in preventing much internet scamming or assisting citizens who are sold down the river by misrepresented commercial websites at this point at the present time, while Washington continues to feed the out of control gadget sector, and venture capitalists from your home state, along with those rip-off bankers affiliated with the Fed and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
You know, the ones whose creative marketing even went so far as to be selling loans not even based on the U.S. currency to many, many thousands of American citizens throughout the west and Southwest which primarily led to the mortgage and foreclosure disaster which is still occurring today.
And now this.
Way to go, Nancy,
Thanks so much for your care and concern, on behalf of women everywhere across the political spectrum.
Not.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Supreme Court, Obama and Congress Pass The Scepter
The political battle rages on post the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision with respect to campaign financing, and its horrendously unconstitutional new "interpretation" of the First Amendment.
In light of all the commentary that has been made with respect to the decision "rolling back" the campaign finance laws in order to afford unlimited corporate spending by special interests groups in national campaigns, quite a bit has been left out in just what an egregious decision this actually was, in my opinion.
Starting off with truly "rolling back" the campaign finance laws by the Supreme Court would have negated "corporate person-hoods" as having any place in Bill of Rights protections in the first place.
Meaning, that in order to have a truly "representative" government, no political candidate vying for public office should be afforded to be able to accept ANY campaign financing outside his own legislative district, whether corporately or otherwise.
The fact is that in the commentary and published opinion, it appears, there was not even any distinction made between grassroots citizens groups funded primarily with individual contributions, corporate commercial concerns, national domestic corporations with their primary home offices in the United States, or foreign global corporations whose domiciled home offices are outside this country, although of course it WAS a U.S. based PAC organization that brought the action, and thus would seem only applicable to PAC organizations gaining most of their revenues from individual contributions, but already the drums are sounding as the corporate lawyers gear up to broaden now this rendering, which I would imagine was the entire reason those Supreme Court justices selected this case to begin with. (Since this action was simply brought against a federal regulatory agency, the FEC, by a "corporate" PAC grass roots purportedly special interest organization, and most likely the states, as history is replete with examples, will now follow suit granting unlimited special interest contributions also at the state level which also was one of the primary purposes in the Court "selecting" this matter to begin with, I'll bet. That and the feeding frenzy the true agenda of this case was meant to insure, as a job stimulus for the corporate lawyers also throughout the land in all the cases that will be brought due to this "precedent" expanding this rather narrow holding into making it applicable for national and even global "commercial" corporations).
So that it may be used as a "precedent" and expanded, and expanded and expanded. Sort of like Roe.
And then if there are any further appeals, just watch those Supremes in the future, for political reasons, "refusing" then to clarify this broad based travesty of an interpretation of the CITIZENS, and definitely not national or global commercial corporate concerns, right to free political SPEECH which corporate money for campaign expense purposes is not "speech" per se but campaign funding, and only public monies should be used to fund any and all candidates for public office in amounts according to the number of voters in any electoral district.
Just wait until AIG (a London based global insurer) selects our next president, or Goldman Sachs by contributing to key legislative districts with committee leadership positions at stake - alone.
It was bad enough what occurred in those bank paybacks for the 2006 candidates for their donations, just watch now what happens in the years ahead.
Maybe new disclosure laws should quickly be enacted making it mandatory that in the future all candidates for public office should be required to wear patches like those Indy 500 drivers do for all contributions over $1,000, say.
That way those corporations can also get free advertising and more bang for their bucks.
Mark my words, this decision opens the door and will become a feeding frenzy for the lawyers to bring case after case stripping away the narrow holding the Court actually made with respect to a purported "grass roots" citizens group (although with a claimed "educational" focus I'm wondering if this group actually also receives federal grant monies and funding, which would really mean that this case was partially funded by the taxpayers in this country - the actual citizens - in order to strip them basically of their Bill of Rights protections and voice in the election process over the "corporate.")
Which seems to be becoming more and more the case with many of these grassroots organizations with an "educational" focus now, many of them actually nothing more than "liberty as commerce" commercial concerns with conventions, T-shirts and book displays the actual reason for their existence - many of which are actually headed by lawyers or educators in order to divert and deflect the American people from what is truly going on here.
None of these groups are bringing the civil suits or filing the charges necessary against some of these Congressmen and judges for "high treason" as is the actual provision within the Constitution for continuing to undermine its provisions and amend its terms outside Article V and the 9th and 10th Amendments due to this progressive political party agenda on the part of both parties who have actually hijacked the entire election process progressively.
I wonder if the nationally based companies now vying and competing against those foreign based domiciled corporations will be as happy with this outcome as they actually appear to be since it is basically only the "global" Fortune 100 companies, and some of those international unions which will ultimately be benefitting, especially in those countries whose currency is higher than the U.S. dollar due to the currency exchange rates, such as the European countries and China.
Thus, the foreign bankers can use foreign governments and countries in order to influence and reap more and more foreign aid redistributing the wealth once again - global socialism does appear to be the goal here and the United States through that Supreme Court decision appears to be the country that is being "taken over" by those foreign bankers through our misrepresentatives in Washington.
Much like the East India Company and their "sovereign status" with King George that lead to the first American Revolution in this country, so have become the foreign bankers.
In other words, the Supreme Court took a step taking this country actually more and more toward British government once again (since the London banks and bankers are the majority shareholders in our Federal Reserve), and global corporate socialism, not simply in violation of the Constitution, but in violation of the sovereign status of this nation and also its people from foreign governmental or corporate interests and control.
It opened the floodgates to a massive "takeover" of our government and political process by China, Great Britain or any other foreign interest or government through currency manipulation, or a wealthy "immigrant" whose loyalties still may remain with his birth country or due to his family's holdings in other countries, even more so now than what already occurs, such as the buying up of much of our media and print newspapers by an Australian, Mr. Murdoch, and his Fox networks (which is, after all, the national animal of Great Britain).
Our entire Federal Reserve Banking System is funded by the British bankers, by and large, the result of that first unconstitutional public/private partnership under Wilson, and has resulted in our continued financial and military support to foreign nations long past World War II has ended up costing this country a bundle in both blood and treasure also "progressively", fighting on behalf of the British, a country which took in the majority of the Jewish refugees from World War II even though the Balfour Doctrine establishing the Nation of Israel pre-World War I was based on a British accord, and not a U.S. one at all.
It appears the goal is that ultimately the United Nations and their dictates will continue to supercede the true Rule of Law in this country and undermining its national sovereignty in a great many of the war resettlements, and in redefining the boundaries with respect to Israel after the '67 war.
Our federal government actually just sold out this country lock, stock and barrel to foreign interests without a shot being fired, simply the stroke of those Supreme Court justices pen, of course since the federal judiciary I predict will "liberally" construe the Court's holding purportedly in order to "guarantee freedom of speech" protections for not simply individually funded grassroots organizations(?) such as in the case before the Supreme Court, but commercial corporations also.
And would bet this finding was made with that entire agenda in mind, since it will be the corporately owned medias (Fox, CNN, etc.) that will gain a bundle for these ads for their corporate profits and bottom lines. In fact, I wonder if any of those justices just might become "political commentators" when they retire from the bench for one of the mainstream media networks, like Mr. Rove, Mr. Huckabee and Ms. Palin have become? When will we have our first former Supreme Court justice as a political analyst and commentator?
I wonder if Mr. Souter has been approached at this point, and wouldn't at all surprise me at this point.
Wonder where all your premium dollars will go, America, for that mandatory health care and your mandatory auto insurance? I'll bet a major portion will be set aside for their new marketing representatives, their local Congressman's next campaign.
Between the "extra" fees and costs levied on those policies in order to pay off dividends to those shareholders, fulfill those executive bonus contracts outside shareholder approvals, and make donations to candidates throughout the nation - I wonder just how much higher those premium costs will soar, or how much reshuffling now there will be of priorities with those premium dollars Americans will be forced now to pay, much of which will go to candidates that many of those insureds have been calling for true "change" in booting the entire Congressional delegation at this point out of office since approval ratings are at an all time low, and the two mainstream political parties losing their members now progressively.
In fact, in my former home state there actually was an initiative in order to "privatize" voting even proposing that a lottery be instituted with a cash prize awarded from the voting pool simply for voting, turnouts have become so low in non-presidential year elections.
Meanwhile Mr. Obama, one who was foremost in his leadership role during the banking bailouts and crisis, and also government takeover of General Motors and pushing the bankers agendas in the housing crisis focusing on "refinances" and "new home buyers," yells the proverbial foul mostly for his corporate political party for this latest Court unlawful amendment.
Even those two political parties that have also overtaken the U.S. political process and who have "progressively" hijacked our Constitution in the process scored a win in this one, since both are "corporately" also funded by most of those special interest groups in one form or another. Great way to also continue to guarantee that party platforms, rather than the U.S. Constitution, will continue to be the order of the day on Capitol Hill.
You know, the two political parties that more and more Americans have left due to their "corporate" agendas also superceding the Constitution now "progressively."
Now even the sham of a government "of the people, by the people and for the people" has been removed and instead it is now whichever industry or CEO has the most wealth which will be in power, or whichever foreign global special interest - especially those foreign lenders and bankers.
Interestingly, a chastizing by the Service Employees INTERNATIONAL Union has been much publicized in the mainstream media reports.
An international "corporation" that is and will also benefit "corporately" with those excessive union dues it collects, although apparently doing so to save face and present an image that it is, once again, there for their members and not their corporate "global" special interest who spread their members cash from their labors to select candidates whether their dues paying members support some of those candidates generally or their platorms, or not.
The unions, insurers, homebuilders and such really have no chance over any future legislation actually, since the entire wealth of this country is held, when push comes to shove, by those European bankers manipulating and valuing our currency outside Congressional oversight, and which was a major duty and function of our Congress - not a shell corporate entity (the Federal Reserve) for the British banking houses.
It is the bankers since Wilson's Administration that hold our gold, as security for their "debt notes" until, of course, those "debt notes" are eventually called in and our entire currency - and that of the world - will be through interbank transfers using those computer transfers and keystrokes and plastic instead rather than expensive paper, which can then potentially shut down the entire world's economy at the push of a button, or manipulate it really almost at will from country to country in a matter of seconds.
And save the cost of then printing all those dollars, euros and yen.
And while Mr. Obama continues to yell "foul" wasn't he also the candidate that refused to accept public taxpayer monies to fund his campaign, and instead relied on those "corporate" special interests dollars who apparently are now being paid back at the American public's expense in spades.
I'm surprised these guys, in all honesty, can continue to conduct these press conferences, or "townhalls," and look their fellow Americans in the eye. Or read those teleprompters without choking.
Hail, Britainia.
Your "legal" representatives just handed over the scepter. Almost 250 years it took, but just goes to show you that the pen actually is mightier than the sword.
I guess that is why those U.S. Supreme Court justices wear black, and not the red, white and blue. They just don't wear those wigs.
Anyone ready to consider throw throwing their dish satellite into Long Beach Harbor or for those that have cable, at least think about seriously cancelling that subscriptions before the propaganda, ala the Boston Tea Party, because these 2010 elections are going to be chock full of political incorrectness, and promises, promises, promises that none of those unduly elected representatives intends to keep just like the last one and all that redlining, ending the war, flag waving and Joe the Plumber rhetoric.
And just wait until 2012 and the long two years worth of analyzing by those corporate media pundits of the prepared speeches, double speak and propaganda once again for those keys to the White House, and that expense account with the three new presidential jets that have been ordered in this ever downward spiraling depression/recession with more and more becoming jobless and homeless by the day, which began in 2006 as a "stimulus" for the politicians and their political parties platforms and those bankers profits as payback for their "contributions" for the 2006 and 2008 elections.
I wonder what terrorism threat or economic crisis will be manipulated by those bankers and politicians for the next one?
It does seem that such arrogance and political tyranny as what has been coming off the Hill post 9-11 appears that either those in Washington are clueless as to the actual pulse of the American people at this time - since it seems they are attempting to facilitate another war from within with such absolute disregard for the rights of the people over the corporate special interests.
Since that was, of course, the entire reason in addition to taxation (such as the new global warming taxes - taxing even the air Americans breathe at this point) those founders fought that original war due to the British monarchial rulings and favoritism granted to "sovereign subjects" such as this one the Supremes have ruled are "corporately" entitled to under the Bill of Rights which was clearly meant to secure the rights of the people against corporate abuse, governmental or otherwise.
In light of all the commentary that has been made with respect to the decision "rolling back" the campaign finance laws in order to afford unlimited corporate spending by special interests groups in national campaigns, quite a bit has been left out in just what an egregious decision this actually was, in my opinion.
Starting off with truly "rolling back" the campaign finance laws by the Supreme Court would have negated "corporate person-hoods" as having any place in Bill of Rights protections in the first place.
Meaning, that in order to have a truly "representative" government, no political candidate vying for public office should be afforded to be able to accept ANY campaign financing outside his own legislative district, whether corporately or otherwise.
The fact is that in the commentary and published opinion, it appears, there was not even any distinction made between grassroots citizens groups funded primarily with individual contributions, corporate commercial concerns, national domestic corporations with their primary home offices in the United States, or foreign global corporations whose domiciled home offices are outside this country, although of course it WAS a U.S. based PAC organization that brought the action, and thus would seem only applicable to PAC organizations gaining most of their revenues from individual contributions, but already the drums are sounding as the corporate lawyers gear up to broaden now this rendering, which I would imagine was the entire reason those Supreme Court justices selected this case to begin with. (Since this action was simply brought against a federal regulatory agency, the FEC, by a "corporate" PAC grass roots purportedly special interest organization, and most likely the states, as history is replete with examples, will now follow suit granting unlimited special interest contributions also at the state level which also was one of the primary purposes in the Court "selecting" this matter to begin with, I'll bet. That and the feeding frenzy the true agenda of this case was meant to insure, as a job stimulus for the corporate lawyers also throughout the land in all the cases that will be brought due to this "precedent" expanding this rather narrow holding into making it applicable for national and even global "commercial" corporations).
So that it may be used as a "precedent" and expanded, and expanded and expanded. Sort of like Roe.
And then if there are any further appeals, just watch those Supremes in the future, for political reasons, "refusing" then to clarify this broad based travesty of an interpretation of the CITIZENS, and definitely not national or global commercial corporate concerns, right to free political SPEECH which corporate money for campaign expense purposes is not "speech" per se but campaign funding, and only public monies should be used to fund any and all candidates for public office in amounts according to the number of voters in any electoral district.
Just wait until AIG (a London based global insurer) selects our next president, or Goldman Sachs by contributing to key legislative districts with committee leadership positions at stake - alone.
It was bad enough what occurred in those bank paybacks for the 2006 candidates for their donations, just watch now what happens in the years ahead.
Maybe new disclosure laws should quickly be enacted making it mandatory that in the future all candidates for public office should be required to wear patches like those Indy 500 drivers do for all contributions over $1,000, say.
That way those corporations can also get free advertising and more bang for their bucks.
Mark my words, this decision opens the door and will become a feeding frenzy for the lawyers to bring case after case stripping away the narrow holding the Court actually made with respect to a purported "grass roots" citizens group (although with a claimed "educational" focus I'm wondering if this group actually also receives federal grant monies and funding, which would really mean that this case was partially funded by the taxpayers in this country - the actual citizens - in order to strip them basically of their Bill of Rights protections and voice in the election process over the "corporate.")
Which seems to be becoming more and more the case with many of these grassroots organizations with an "educational" focus now, many of them actually nothing more than "liberty as commerce" commercial concerns with conventions, T-shirts and book displays the actual reason for their existence - many of which are actually headed by lawyers or educators in order to divert and deflect the American people from what is truly going on here.
None of these groups are bringing the civil suits or filing the charges necessary against some of these Congressmen and judges for "high treason" as is the actual provision within the Constitution for continuing to undermine its provisions and amend its terms outside Article V and the 9th and 10th Amendments due to this progressive political party agenda on the part of both parties who have actually hijacked the entire election process progressively.
I wonder if the nationally based companies now vying and competing against those foreign based domiciled corporations will be as happy with this outcome as they actually appear to be since it is basically only the "global" Fortune 100 companies, and some of those international unions which will ultimately be benefitting, especially in those countries whose currency is higher than the U.S. dollar due to the currency exchange rates, such as the European countries and China.
Thus, the foreign bankers can use foreign governments and countries in order to influence and reap more and more foreign aid redistributing the wealth once again - global socialism does appear to be the goal here and the United States through that Supreme Court decision appears to be the country that is being "taken over" by those foreign bankers through our misrepresentatives in Washington.
Much like the East India Company and their "sovereign status" with King George that lead to the first American Revolution in this country, so have become the foreign bankers.
In other words, the Supreme Court took a step taking this country actually more and more toward British government once again (since the London banks and bankers are the majority shareholders in our Federal Reserve), and global corporate socialism, not simply in violation of the Constitution, but in violation of the sovereign status of this nation and also its people from foreign governmental or corporate interests and control.
It opened the floodgates to a massive "takeover" of our government and political process by China, Great Britain or any other foreign interest or government through currency manipulation, or a wealthy "immigrant" whose loyalties still may remain with his birth country or due to his family's holdings in other countries, even more so now than what already occurs, such as the buying up of much of our media and print newspapers by an Australian, Mr. Murdoch, and his Fox networks (which is, after all, the national animal of Great Britain).
Our entire Federal Reserve Banking System is funded by the British bankers, by and large, the result of that first unconstitutional public/private partnership under Wilson, and has resulted in our continued financial and military support to foreign nations long past World War II has ended up costing this country a bundle in both blood and treasure also "progressively", fighting on behalf of the British, a country which took in the majority of the Jewish refugees from World War II even though the Balfour Doctrine establishing the Nation of Israel pre-World War I was based on a British accord, and not a U.S. one at all.
It appears the goal is that ultimately the United Nations and their dictates will continue to supercede the true Rule of Law in this country and undermining its national sovereignty in a great many of the war resettlements, and in redefining the boundaries with respect to Israel after the '67 war.
Our federal government actually just sold out this country lock, stock and barrel to foreign interests without a shot being fired, simply the stroke of those Supreme Court justices pen, of course since the federal judiciary I predict will "liberally" construe the Court's holding purportedly in order to "guarantee freedom of speech" protections for not simply individually funded grassroots organizations(?) such as in the case before the Supreme Court, but commercial corporations also.
And would bet this finding was made with that entire agenda in mind, since it will be the corporately owned medias (Fox, CNN, etc.) that will gain a bundle for these ads for their corporate profits and bottom lines. In fact, I wonder if any of those justices just might become "political commentators" when they retire from the bench for one of the mainstream media networks, like Mr. Rove, Mr. Huckabee and Ms. Palin have become? When will we have our first former Supreme Court justice as a political analyst and commentator?
I wonder if Mr. Souter has been approached at this point, and wouldn't at all surprise me at this point.
Wonder where all your premium dollars will go, America, for that mandatory health care and your mandatory auto insurance? I'll bet a major portion will be set aside for their new marketing representatives, their local Congressman's next campaign.
Between the "extra" fees and costs levied on those policies in order to pay off dividends to those shareholders, fulfill those executive bonus contracts outside shareholder approvals, and make donations to candidates throughout the nation - I wonder just how much higher those premium costs will soar, or how much reshuffling now there will be of priorities with those premium dollars Americans will be forced now to pay, much of which will go to candidates that many of those insureds have been calling for true "change" in booting the entire Congressional delegation at this point out of office since approval ratings are at an all time low, and the two mainstream political parties losing their members now progressively.
In fact, in my former home state there actually was an initiative in order to "privatize" voting even proposing that a lottery be instituted with a cash prize awarded from the voting pool simply for voting, turnouts have become so low in non-presidential year elections.
Meanwhile Mr. Obama, one who was foremost in his leadership role during the banking bailouts and crisis, and also government takeover of General Motors and pushing the bankers agendas in the housing crisis focusing on "refinances" and "new home buyers," yells the proverbial foul mostly for his corporate political party for this latest Court unlawful amendment.
Even those two political parties that have also overtaken the U.S. political process and who have "progressively" hijacked our Constitution in the process scored a win in this one, since both are "corporately" also funded by most of those special interest groups in one form or another. Great way to also continue to guarantee that party platforms, rather than the U.S. Constitution, will continue to be the order of the day on Capitol Hill.
You know, the two political parties that more and more Americans have left due to their "corporate" agendas also superceding the Constitution now "progressively."
Now even the sham of a government "of the people, by the people and for the people" has been removed and instead it is now whichever industry or CEO has the most wealth which will be in power, or whichever foreign global special interest - especially those foreign lenders and bankers.
Interestingly, a chastizing by the Service Employees INTERNATIONAL Union has been much publicized in the mainstream media reports.
An international "corporation" that is and will also benefit "corporately" with those excessive union dues it collects, although apparently doing so to save face and present an image that it is, once again, there for their members and not their corporate "global" special interest who spread their members cash from their labors to select candidates whether their dues paying members support some of those candidates generally or their platorms, or not.
The unions, insurers, homebuilders and such really have no chance over any future legislation actually, since the entire wealth of this country is held, when push comes to shove, by those European bankers manipulating and valuing our currency outside Congressional oversight, and which was a major duty and function of our Congress - not a shell corporate entity (the Federal Reserve) for the British banking houses.
It is the bankers since Wilson's Administration that hold our gold, as security for their "debt notes" until, of course, those "debt notes" are eventually called in and our entire currency - and that of the world - will be through interbank transfers using those computer transfers and keystrokes and plastic instead rather than expensive paper, which can then potentially shut down the entire world's economy at the push of a button, or manipulate it really almost at will from country to country in a matter of seconds.
And save the cost of then printing all those dollars, euros and yen.
And while Mr. Obama continues to yell "foul" wasn't he also the candidate that refused to accept public taxpayer monies to fund his campaign, and instead relied on those "corporate" special interests dollars who apparently are now being paid back at the American public's expense in spades.
I'm surprised these guys, in all honesty, can continue to conduct these press conferences, or "townhalls," and look their fellow Americans in the eye. Or read those teleprompters without choking.
Hail, Britainia.
Your "legal" representatives just handed over the scepter. Almost 250 years it took, but just goes to show you that the pen actually is mightier than the sword.
I guess that is why those U.S. Supreme Court justices wear black, and not the red, white and blue. They just don't wear those wigs.
Anyone ready to consider throw throwing their dish satellite into Long Beach Harbor or for those that have cable, at least think about seriously cancelling that subscriptions before the propaganda, ala the Boston Tea Party, because these 2010 elections are going to be chock full of political incorrectness, and promises, promises, promises that none of those unduly elected representatives intends to keep just like the last one and all that redlining, ending the war, flag waving and Joe the Plumber rhetoric.
And just wait until 2012 and the long two years worth of analyzing by those corporate media pundits of the prepared speeches, double speak and propaganda once again for those keys to the White House, and that expense account with the three new presidential jets that have been ordered in this ever downward spiraling depression/recession with more and more becoming jobless and homeless by the day, which began in 2006 as a "stimulus" for the politicians and their political parties platforms and those bankers profits as payback for their "contributions" for the 2006 and 2008 elections.
I wonder what terrorism threat or economic crisis will be manipulated by those bankers and politicians for the next one?
It does seem that such arrogance and political tyranny as what has been coming off the Hill post 9-11 appears that either those in Washington are clueless as to the actual pulse of the American people at this time - since it seems they are attempting to facilitate another war from within with such absolute disregard for the rights of the people over the corporate special interests.
Since that was, of course, the entire reason in addition to taxation (such as the new global warming taxes - taxing even the air Americans breathe at this point) those founders fought that original war due to the British monarchial rulings and favoritism granted to "sovereign subjects" such as this one the Supremes have ruled are "corporately" entitled to under the Bill of Rights which was clearly meant to secure the rights of the people against corporate abuse, governmental or otherwise.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Obama Paints Rosy Picture For AMA Profiteers Of Share Of Health Care Pie
The AP press corp for the White House reported today that Mr. Obama had a meeting in the Rose Garden with 1,000 representatives of the AMA (all wearing their standard issue lab coats) in order to sell the newer versions of ObamaCare once again to the American public.
Although directing his comments to the doctors who were attending, by playing up to their own egos in stating that those present were the ones that "knew the system" the best, and as such, experts on the problems. All wearing their lab coats for this highly produced and staged event.
Rather than the American public that are dependent on that industry and many of whom the victims of these industries, including many of those members of the AMA and their outrageous fees, costs, and overbillings that also have resulted in this progressive "problem."
A profession that also refuses to support legislation at either the state or federal level requiring at least disclosure of fees or costs prior to treatment, or at least ballpark estimates, even on elective procedures in many instances, or various procedures in which more than one course of treatment is available.
The doctors, of course, brought up abusive malpractice suits as their major complaint. But that also has been the fault of the legal profession, Mr. Obama's own, who use "deep pocket" logic and whose advertising now and ambulance chasing has become so routine on prime time television that the practice of law and medicine now have almost a symbiotic and similar reputation with the public. Not to be trusted, by and large, along with those insurers that they both also use as their income streams at the public's expense.
The new plan being now touted as "moderate" and has the backing of one of the doctor members of Congress on the Republican Global Socialist side of the aisle has made one concession, and even the illustrious profiteer of profiteers at the public's expense, New York Mayor Bloomberg put in his two cents in support. Although the only moderation appears to be is in the concession to reduce the mandatory fine amounts to Americans for lack of compliance with Washington's edicts for the health care industry at ther expense once again, but also the amount of Americans that would be covered under any such plan.
Which fines, of course, are then also always subject to modification at any time in the future, or whim of the next senator seeking re-election for future campaign donations from the health care insurance industries. Until they are on par similar to the threats for littering in the "cruel and unusual" then punishment that will be inflicted for an American simply asserting their Constitutional rights which Washington continues to ignore for their own "corporate" gain.
Since there is also still no regulatory control over those insurers, nor any teeth in the provisions with respect to health care providers in their denials of coverage, or practices in then raising rates exceeding the cost of living routinely without explanation, or hiking rates astronomically after any claim is made.
And while the number of Americans then anticipated will be able to then obtain coverage under these new provisions is less than prior measures, those receiving existing Medicare benefits will see those benefits then reduced in the process.
Which also did not make those doctor's happy, since the rest of the public has been actually subsidizing Medicare patients through higher costs and charges.
Which is what the doctors never also state. That those lower benefit patients care costs are subsidized in order to meet their corporate Boards of Directors bottom lines since health care was 'corporatized" under Richard Nixon in the HMO, health care network concept which has affected quality of care tremendously and made hospital visits and health care nothing more now than another assembly line similar to GM, with complex procedures scheduled one right after another.
Which is why those doctors are now facing more of those "abusive" medical malpractice claims. Fast food medicine will tend to lead also to more mistakes, as fatigue sets in on some of those new and older doctors after back to back surgeries. Or drive through mastectomies, which are also becoming more common.
This situation and "deform" is getting more and more laughable as it "progresses."
What's more clear than "unconstitutional," Mr. Obama, and not a federal function in the slightest.
Most of the states have this covered due in various amounts and measures at the discretion of the state citizens, and a little more thus accountable to them than Washington will ever be, that much is more than clear at the elitism running rampant on the Hill with respect to the actual citizens, and not the commercial industries those "misrepresentatives" actually represent. You know, the ones that are supposed to be "regulated" not "catered to" at the expense of the public.
Or did you, due to fatigue yourself, miss Constitution 101 class at Havard?
Although directing his comments to the doctors who were attending, by playing up to their own egos in stating that those present were the ones that "knew the system" the best, and as such, experts on the problems. All wearing their lab coats for this highly produced and staged event.
Rather than the American public that are dependent on that industry and many of whom the victims of these industries, including many of those members of the AMA and their outrageous fees, costs, and overbillings that also have resulted in this progressive "problem."
A profession that also refuses to support legislation at either the state or federal level requiring at least disclosure of fees or costs prior to treatment, or at least ballpark estimates, even on elective procedures in many instances, or various procedures in which more than one course of treatment is available.
The doctors, of course, brought up abusive malpractice suits as their major complaint. But that also has been the fault of the legal profession, Mr. Obama's own, who use "deep pocket" logic and whose advertising now and ambulance chasing has become so routine on prime time television that the practice of law and medicine now have almost a symbiotic and similar reputation with the public. Not to be trusted, by and large, along with those insurers that they both also use as their income streams at the public's expense.
The new plan being now touted as "moderate" and has the backing of one of the doctor members of Congress on the Republican Global Socialist side of the aisle has made one concession, and even the illustrious profiteer of profiteers at the public's expense, New York Mayor Bloomberg put in his two cents in support. Although the only moderation appears to be is in the concession to reduce the mandatory fine amounts to Americans for lack of compliance with Washington's edicts for the health care industry at ther expense once again, but also the amount of Americans that would be covered under any such plan.
Which fines, of course, are then also always subject to modification at any time in the future, or whim of the next senator seeking re-election for future campaign donations from the health care insurance industries. Until they are on par similar to the threats for littering in the "cruel and unusual" then punishment that will be inflicted for an American simply asserting their Constitutional rights which Washington continues to ignore for their own "corporate" gain.
Since there is also still no regulatory control over those insurers, nor any teeth in the provisions with respect to health care providers in their denials of coverage, or practices in then raising rates exceeding the cost of living routinely without explanation, or hiking rates astronomically after any claim is made.
And while the number of Americans then anticipated will be able to then obtain coverage under these new provisions is less than prior measures, those receiving existing Medicare benefits will see those benefits then reduced in the process.
Which also did not make those doctor's happy, since the rest of the public has been actually subsidizing Medicare patients through higher costs and charges.
Which is what the doctors never also state. That those lower benefit patients care costs are subsidized in order to meet their corporate Boards of Directors bottom lines since health care was 'corporatized" under Richard Nixon in the HMO, health care network concept which has affected quality of care tremendously and made hospital visits and health care nothing more now than another assembly line similar to GM, with complex procedures scheduled one right after another.
Which is why those doctors are now facing more of those "abusive" medical malpractice claims. Fast food medicine will tend to lead also to more mistakes, as fatigue sets in on some of those new and older doctors after back to back surgeries. Or drive through mastectomies, which are also becoming more common.
This situation and "deform" is getting more and more laughable as it "progresses."
What's more clear than "unconstitutional," Mr. Obama, and not a federal function in the slightest.
Most of the states have this covered due in various amounts and measures at the discretion of the state citizens, and a little more thus accountable to them than Washington will ever be, that much is more than clear at the elitism running rampant on the Hill with respect to the actual citizens, and not the commercial industries those "misrepresentatives" actually represent. You know, the ones that are supposed to be "regulated" not "catered to" at the expense of the public.
Or did you, due to fatigue yourself, miss Constitution 101 class at Havard?
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
The High Cost Of Health Care: From Then To Now
For Any And All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:
With all the hard sell both the Democrat and Republican Global Socialists on the Hill have been doing and will continue to do this month before they "readdress" Obama's call for health care reform and using it as public forums for re-elections in their "versions" and the revisions they personally have either included or attempted to place in this heinous Big Daddy government again legislation, maybe it might be worthwhile to take a stroll down memory lane to see how we got from affordable health care now to the astronomical rise which has occurred, along with our progressively declining infant survival rates.
First, global and national insurers formed a union of insurance providers and started meeting supposedly in order to increase the quality of health care in the United States. During those meetings, however, they also began standardizing health care coverages and price fixing the policies which were offered to the public.
Initially simply businesses that existed as a "shared pool" for the premium payers, they instead became megacorporations and took on a "business model" mindset in that profit, and profit alone, was their driving force. They then hired lobbyists with their extra premium monies from their policyholders, and began lobbying the federal and state legislatures throughout the country in order to gain more profit at the policyholder's expense.
The politicians, of course after being wined and dined, complied. Instead of regulating those large now "commercial" corporporation, they began to write more and more industry favoring laws which then also afforded these large global and national insurers to invest those premiums in high risk stocks and investments, and then to also to conglomerate and branch out into other areas of the financial sector such as also owning banks, real esate companies, and other forms of commerce.
Hence Prudential Insurance also owned Prudential-Bache Securities, and Prudential Real Estate. All with the policyholder's premiums and then individual shareholders as their main sources of investment capital. Thus, the insurers used the premium payers premiums actually against them in order to gain more.
Congress then passed an Act attempting to negate the provisions of the Commerce Clause with respect to insurance companies forbidding any and all states from effectively also regulating the insurers who were incorporated within their state borders. Although, of course, this was also not within their Constitutional authority to so do, as the federal government actually was intended to work for the states and people and accountable to them, not as their sovereign ruler as it were dictating extra-Constitutional authority at the state level then also affecting the rights of the people, not corporate interests, in the process. An amendment, of course, would be needed for such a "privilege or immunity" with respect to regulation of this now commercial industry being exempt by the feds for any nationwide or global insurer. And could not ban in any event the states from regulating any that were incorporated within their own state borders with respect to policies sold to state citizens as "intrastate" and not "interstate" commerce.
Then, the Trial Lawyers Association progressively also started its own lobbying efforts at the state level in order to remove and rewrite the civil codes under the common law in the states which then removed the "lid" on punitive damages for medical malpractice claims which had been in effect since the Magna Carta and under the British common law at a maximum of three times the amount of the actual damages in any negligence claims on the part of doctors. Doctor's malpractice insurance rates then skyrocketed and went off the charts. Many in high risk fields simply left the practice of medicine, such as obstetrics, or went into other areas where their insurance was more affordable.
Due then to inflation and spiraling costs of college tuition which bore no relevance whatsoever to the cost of living, the cost to train new doctors made most of those who graduated paupers and bankrupt before they even graduated, much less were able then to pay the costs for setting up their private practices. Many ended up filing bankruptcy, and then working for othe physicians as lab assistants or hospitals until their bankruptcy records were cleared and the were able to qualify for loans.
Then, Richard Nixon during his last term of office, also succumbed to more lobbying pressure and afforded the health care providers to "unionize" also in order to spread their risk and costs since the costs of malpractice insurance then continued to climb with each and every outrageous punitive damage award that then came down the pike. Now there are HMOs and health care networks which involve seeing multiple doctors many times in order to simply get a diagnosis, or even your average physical. Boards of Directors of these huge networks then were evaluating and determining patient care rather than the physicians themselves. Factory line operations then became the norm, as did the 24 hour childbirth or mastectomy.
Doctors were "fined" huge sums, but due to the fact that their medical licenses are issued by the states but for which there is also little regulation or procedural statutes addressing consistently negligent doctors for removal of their licenses, many of these awards became even greater still upon successives suits and claims.
Of course, the lawyers got the bulk of the "extra" awards over the compensatory losses, rather than the one third that was also provided under common law for contingency awards. And started factoring in profit margins for their costs for the expert witnesses also needed in such claims for lawyer profit.
So there you have it. The history of the high cost of health care in this country, and why we now are where we are with respect to both the decline in quality of care, and exhorbitant increases in cost.
And Obama and this Congress have been busy little bees this past few months colluding with the very same industries and associations which are responsible now for where we are today due to their huge profits and campaign lobbying efforts. Instead of backing up, and closing the door, and reviewing all the industry favoring statutes and laws which have progressively occurred in their failures to truly regulate commerce and these huge commecial corporations at both the state and federal levels in order to protect the citizens who actually have provided the profits which afforded them this unconstitutional leverage from the wolves. THEY are not their constituents. They are industry.
Somehow, it appears the name and provisions of of this bill as is being reported and presented as any true reform under the title, "The Affordable Health Care Act," smacks of the same mockery and betrayal of the American people on behalf of "foreign" interests and commerce that the "Patriot Act" consisted of.
With all the hard sell both the Democrat and Republican Global Socialists on the Hill have been doing and will continue to do this month before they "readdress" Obama's call for health care reform and using it as public forums for re-elections in their "versions" and the revisions they personally have either included or attempted to place in this heinous Big Daddy government again legislation, maybe it might be worthwhile to take a stroll down memory lane to see how we got from affordable health care now to the astronomical rise which has occurred, along with our progressively declining infant survival rates.
First, global and national insurers formed a union of insurance providers and started meeting supposedly in order to increase the quality of health care in the United States. During those meetings, however, they also began standardizing health care coverages and price fixing the policies which were offered to the public.
Initially simply businesses that existed as a "shared pool" for the premium payers, they instead became megacorporations and took on a "business model" mindset in that profit, and profit alone, was their driving force. They then hired lobbyists with their extra premium monies from their policyholders, and began lobbying the federal and state legislatures throughout the country in order to gain more profit at the policyholder's expense.
The politicians, of course after being wined and dined, complied. Instead of regulating those large now "commercial" corporporation, they began to write more and more industry favoring laws which then also afforded these large global and national insurers to invest those premiums in high risk stocks and investments, and then to also to conglomerate and branch out into other areas of the financial sector such as also owning banks, real esate companies, and other forms of commerce.
Hence Prudential Insurance also owned Prudential-Bache Securities, and Prudential Real Estate. All with the policyholder's premiums and then individual shareholders as their main sources of investment capital. Thus, the insurers used the premium payers premiums actually against them in order to gain more.
Congress then passed an Act attempting to negate the provisions of the Commerce Clause with respect to insurance companies forbidding any and all states from effectively also regulating the insurers who were incorporated within their state borders. Although, of course, this was also not within their Constitutional authority to so do, as the federal government actually was intended to work for the states and people and accountable to them, not as their sovereign ruler as it were dictating extra-Constitutional authority at the state level then also affecting the rights of the people, not corporate interests, in the process. An amendment, of course, would be needed for such a "privilege or immunity" with respect to regulation of this now commercial industry being exempt by the feds for any nationwide or global insurer. And could not ban in any event the states from regulating any that were incorporated within their own state borders with respect to policies sold to state citizens as "intrastate" and not "interstate" commerce.
Then, the Trial Lawyers Association progressively also started its own lobbying efforts at the state level in order to remove and rewrite the civil codes under the common law in the states which then removed the "lid" on punitive damages for medical malpractice claims which had been in effect since the Magna Carta and under the British common law at a maximum of three times the amount of the actual damages in any negligence claims on the part of doctors. Doctor's malpractice insurance rates then skyrocketed and went off the charts. Many in high risk fields simply left the practice of medicine, such as obstetrics, or went into other areas where their insurance was more affordable.
Due then to inflation and spiraling costs of college tuition which bore no relevance whatsoever to the cost of living, the cost to train new doctors made most of those who graduated paupers and bankrupt before they even graduated, much less were able then to pay the costs for setting up their private practices. Many ended up filing bankruptcy, and then working for othe physicians as lab assistants or hospitals until their bankruptcy records were cleared and the were able to qualify for loans.
Then, Richard Nixon during his last term of office, also succumbed to more lobbying pressure and afforded the health care providers to "unionize" also in order to spread their risk and costs since the costs of malpractice insurance then continued to climb with each and every outrageous punitive damage award that then came down the pike. Now there are HMOs and health care networks which involve seeing multiple doctors many times in order to simply get a diagnosis, or even your average physical. Boards of Directors of these huge networks then were evaluating and determining patient care rather than the physicians themselves. Factory line operations then became the norm, as did the 24 hour childbirth or mastectomy.
Doctors were "fined" huge sums, but due to the fact that their medical licenses are issued by the states but for which there is also little regulation or procedural statutes addressing consistently negligent doctors for removal of their licenses, many of these awards became even greater still upon successives suits and claims.
Of course, the lawyers got the bulk of the "extra" awards over the compensatory losses, rather than the one third that was also provided under common law for contingency awards. And started factoring in profit margins for their costs for the expert witnesses also needed in such claims for lawyer profit.
So there you have it. The history of the high cost of health care in this country, and why we now are where we are with respect to both the decline in quality of care, and exhorbitant increases in cost.
And Obama and this Congress have been busy little bees this past few months colluding with the very same industries and associations which are responsible now for where we are today due to their huge profits and campaign lobbying efforts. Instead of backing up, and closing the door, and reviewing all the industry favoring statutes and laws which have progressively occurred in their failures to truly regulate commerce and these huge commecial corporations at both the state and federal levels in order to protect the citizens who actually have provided the profits which afforded them this unconstitutional leverage from the wolves. THEY are not their constituents. They are industry.
Somehow, it appears the name and provisions of of this bill as is being reported and presented as any true reform under the title, "The Affordable Health Care Act," smacks of the same mockery and betrayal of the American people on behalf of "foreign" interests and commerce that the "Patriot Act" consisted of.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
