Death Panel

What is this "Death Panel" we've all been hearing about lately? Don't take my word for it. Don't let other people tell you what it says. Read the actual text of America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 for yourself.

The Act is 1,018 pages long, so give the 1.7 MB Portable Document format (PDF) file a couple of minutes to download. Then go straight to SEC. 1233. ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION starting on page 424. This is the section that addresses the issue that somehow came to be known as the "Death Panel." It's about seven pages long but it's double-spaced with big letters and wide margins, so it won't take long to read.

When you're done, please post a comment and tell America the specific page number and lines of the Act which trouble you. It's simple; every page and line is numbered for easy citation. Be sure and explain how those lines legislate anything like what the Act's opponents say the "Death Panel" is. The first one to comment gets to show off how well informed they are, so hurry up.

The finest in resort living: Camp Delta

The GOP is sticking to its guns on Guantánamo Bay. The party maintains that the detention facility at the base there, Camp Delta, is better than home for the detainees.

Former congressman Duncan L. Hunter (R-CA) has long been an outspoken proponent of holding alleged terrorists at Guantánamo Bay. As far back as 2005, he was claiming that detainees were actually leading better lives at Camp Delta than they were in their native homes:

The inmates in Guantánamo have never eaten better, they've never been treated better and they've never been more comfortable in their lives. ... And the idea that somehow we are torturing people in Guantánamo is absolutely not true, unless you consider having to eat chicken three times a week is torture.

Granted, most people would agree that eating chicken three times a week is not torture (as long as it's not from KFC). But to assert that Camp Delta detainees "are treated exceptionally well" based on what they're fed is either disingenuous or Hunter demonstrating that he's a simpleton. FBI memos dating as far back as 2002 document widespread use of "highly aggressive" interrogation tactics at Guantánamo Bay that most reasonable Americans would deem torture.

Now that President Barack Obama has ordered the closure of the detention facilities at Guantánamo Bay, the GOP is back at it. This time they're trotting out senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) to make a case for the continued operations at Camp Delta. Inhofe asserts:

Anyone, any detainee over 55 has an opportunity to have a colonoscopy. Now none of them take 'em up on it because once they explain what it is none of them want to do it. But nonetheless its an opportunity that they have.

What more could any self-respecting detainee ask for in life? With a menu of "honey glazed chicken" or "lemon baked fish," served with whole-wheat pita, various vegetables, and fruit, along with the fresh smell of ocean air, it's hard to distinguish Camp Delta from a cruise ship. Meanwhile, their captors provide them with copies of the Koran, prayer rugs, beads and oil. They broadcast the call to prayer five times a day and the cells have signs pointing toward Mecca. But the cherry on this sundae of resort life that the detainees look forward to with the greatest anticipation is the colonoscopy they get if they can reach the ripe old age of 55.

My impending retirement

What a way to start a weekend! I found the following email with the Subject "FUNDS NO:35460021 UM09" in my Inbox this morning:

Payment Reference No.-35460021
U.S. Department of Treasury
West African Foreign Remittance Payment Department.
WASHINGTON DC, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.


Attention Dear Beneficiary,

We the entire members of Top Management of the U.S. Department of Treasury West African Foreign Remittance Payment Department. washington D.C, on behalf of the Government of the United States of America, under the auspices of the US Treasury Department held a meeting this week concerning your payment, both foreign and local contractors and some inheritance funds which were not released to the right benefactors.

Mr. Henry M. Paulson, Jr. Executive Secretary, United States Treasury Department, has just informed our Department here in El Monte California that All the listed contractors and Inheritance funds benefactors which their CONTRACT PAYMENT SUM AND INHERITANCE FUNDS were not paid to should be released to them with immediate effect.

We discovered that your payment listed to us has accrued up to $5.7 Million (Five Million, Seven Hundred Thousand United States Dollars), you are advised to respond with effect so that we will process your payment to be made in any form you wish to receive your funds.

Kindly respond to this office so that your payment will be processed and transferred under 72 hours of receiving this email.

On going through files yesterday, we discovered that your file was dumped untreated, so at this juncture, we apologize for the delay of your payment and please stop communicating with any office now and attention to the appointed office below for you to receive your payment accordingly.

Now your new Payment Reference No.-35460021, Allocation No: 674632 Password No : 339331 , Pin Code No: 55674 and your Certificate of Merit Payment No : 103 , Released Code No: 0763; Immediate Telex confirmation No: -1114433 ; Secret Code No: XXTN013, Having received these vital payment number, therefore You are qualified now to receive and confirm Your payment with the United Bank of Africa immediately within 72 hours.

However, I wish to inform you that your payment is being processed and will be released to you as soon as you respond to this letter. Also note that from the records presented to the bank your outstanding inheritance contract payment has accrued up to the sum of US$5.7 Million (5 Million, Seven Hundred Thousand United States Dollars).

NOTE THAT YOU WILL HAVE TO RECONFIRM THE BELOW INFORMATIONS TO ENABLE US RECONFIRM THAT IT IS SAME AS WE HAVE HERE IN OUR OFFICE:

1.Full Name:
2.Phone Number:
3.Residential Address:
4.Legal Occupation and Position

BE SURE TO PROVIDE THE ABOVE INFORMATIONS CORRECTLY.

As soon as this information is received, your payment will be made to you, As a result of the on-going drive of the United States National Treasury Department to update our books and clear overdue payments to all rightful beneficiaries / heirs, I strongly recommend that you promptly and humbly respond to this notification letter immediately.

NOTE: We have mounted our security network to monitor every in-coming call, if we still find out that you are still dealing with all those fraudsters that have been frustrating you, I shall stop and cancel your payment immediately.

Thanks and God Bless you.
Mr. John Mensah
West African Foreign Remittance Payment Department.
WASHINGTON DC, USA
Office Fax: (202) 622-6415
Personal E-mail: westafricaonustreasury@yahoo.com.hk

I can tell the email is official because they were notified by Mr. Henry M. Paulson, Jr. Executive Secretary, United States Treasury Department (otherwise I might be suspicious that the West Africaon Treasury uses a Yahoo! email address). It must be important considering the entire members of Top Management of the U.S. Department of Treasury West African Foreign Remittance Payment Department bothered to address my inheritance. I already promptly and humbly responded, providing the above informations correctly immediately.

I did note that he writes that if he still finds out that I am still dealing with all those fraudsters that have been frustrating me, he shall stop and cancel my payment immediately. So please keep this confidential -- they have mounted their security network to monitor every in-coming call. As directed, I stopped communicating with any office now and attention to the appointed office above for me to receive my payment accordingly. I gave them my bank account number and PIN so they can deposit the funds directly into my account.

The upshot of the email is that I have an outstanding inheritance contract payment of $5.7-million coming to me! That should be plenty of money for me to live off of for the rest of my life without working anymore. It says my payment will be processed and transferred under 72 hours of receiving this email, so I might as well retire now.

The fallacy that the tax increase hurts business

Ever since President Obama first said he would increase taxes on those earning over $250,000 per year (which was when he was still only a candidate), Republicans have been parroting the claim that doing so would harm American business. They claim that many people who earn over $250,000 per year own small businesses and that to increase their taxes would stifle the growth of their businesses.

There’s a fatal flaw to this logic. The President's tax increase on people earning over $250,000 per year is a personal income tax, not a business tax. If the owner of a business (whether it is large or small) has a $250,000 salary, the owner’s salary was already an expense of that business before the tax increase. Adding to the tax does not increase the expenses of the business one penny; it only decreases the amount of the salary that the business owner gets to spend.

In fact, it could be said that the business owner earning over $250,000 per year was already stifling the growth of the business himself before the tax increase. Taking such a large salary reduces the amount of the business’s earnings that gets put back into the business. If the business owner is truly concerned about the tax increase, he could simply reduce his salary down below $250,000 per year. Then the business owner avoids the tax increase and his business retains more earnings, providing it with greater assets to grow on (or to use to weather this recession). That’s a win-win solution.

Republicans also claim that the tax increase on the wealthy discourages Americans from pursuing the American dream of building wealth. If that were the case, it would mean that when the tax increase is enacted, those earning over $250,000 per year would suddenly resign their high paying jobs or cut back to part time. The truth is they might have to actually work a little bit harder since they have a little less discretionary income to sustain their wealthy lifestyles. At the other end of the wealth spectrum, there is not a single average wage earner in this country who will now cease aspiring to earn over $250,000 per year. That tax increase is a problem 95% of Americans would love to have.

Tax cuts won't do the heavy lifting this time

The GOP believes that tax cuts are the best way to stimulate the economy. Republicans would say that tax cuts are preferable to government spending because the American people know best how to spend their money and that the government has a poor track record for effectively spending tax dollars. But Daniel Gross makes a strong case that the traditional wisdom doesn't apply in this recession.

The whole idea behind tax cuts stimulating the economy is that Americans will spend the newfound discretionary income they have when their taxes are cut. It seems logical that if there are less withholdings, she'll buy that new pair of shoes she's had her eye on with the extra money she finds in her paycheck. Or if his income tax refund is unexpectedly large next year, he'll finally buy that widescreen HD TV that's been tempting him lately. Maybe the simultaneously increasing take-home pay and price of gasoline will convince you to finally buy that hybrid car you've been considering (as long as the desperate Big Three are offering so many incentives nowadays).

It makes sense, right? After all, we Americans love instant gratification and we're certainly not savers. Well, maybe it does not make so much sense this time. There are some factors that make this recession unique.

First of all, there is less job security than ever in today's workplace. There are now fewer career employees than ever and we have the highest rate of unemployment in many years. Worse yet, it's plummeting faster than it has in recent recessions:
(Click chart above to see in full-size from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office)
With the large number of unemployed Americans, there are fewer tax payers to spend the tax cuts. This alone reduces the impact the tax cuts will have on the economy.

Add to that the fact that Americans that are still employed lack confidence that they will stay that way long term. Not knowing how long it would take them to find a replacement job in this tight job market, American's feel that they need a larger safety cushion than usual right now. If they would want to have health insurance should they become unemployed, COBRA would be a substantial additional expense that they don't have while employed. Subsequently, Americans are much more likely to save their tax cuts for a rainier day than they are to spend them. While that's fiscally healthy for the individual, it's not stimulating to the economy.

To further exacerbate matters, the housing market is at the root of this economic downturn. During the housing boom, Americans were spending Bush's tax cuts hand over fist on their homes. They improved their homes to accelerate its appreciation. With home values falling like a rock in this recession, homeowners will not be spending their tax cuts at Home Depot because to do so would just be throwing good money after bad. Many homeowners are seeing their ARMs reset, so they will just spend their tax cuts on their higher mortgage installments (to banks likely to go bankrupt anyway). Renters will not likely spend their tax cuts on buying a home because of the concern that their mortgage would just be underwater a few months later.

Finally, there are Americans' retirement accounts to consider. The shrinking Dow reflects Americans' IRAs and 401(k)s. Losing 45% of their nest egg in less than a year, Baby Boomers are postponing the retirement they planned. Instead, they will just have to plow their tax cuts back into their retirement accounts to make up for their recent losses.

Of course, these factors will not completely eliminate the stimulative effect of tax cuts. Nonetheless, they will certainly significantly diminish the tax cuts' impact on this recession. The economic stimulus bill that just passed congress this weekend was the right recipe for this recession. Although it has some tax cuts, it's more heavily weighted to investments in America's future -- monies that we know will be spent.

Maybe the sky really is falling

When Secretary Hank Paulson started running around like Chicken Little telling everyone the sky is falling, I thought it was just hyperbole. After all, former president Bush had been employing scare tactics to control the American people for years. So when the Fed came to the rescue with a $700-billion economic rescue plan, I questioned if it really was necessary.

Then I saw the video of Representative Paul Kanjorski, a Democrat from Pennsylvania, talking about the events that led up to Paulson's histrionics (below). It made me think twice about just how bad things might really have been. Kanjorski said of the day that Paulson visited congress with his dark news:

On Thursday, at about eleven o'clock in the morning, the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the United States to the tune of $550-billion being drawn out in a matter of an hour or two ... We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to ... close down the money accounts, and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn't be further panic ... If they had not done that, their estimation was that by two o'clock that afternoon, $5.5-trillion would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed.

Why didn't Paulson tell us about this activity then? Well, obviously because it probably would've scared investors even worse than they already were right in the middle of what turns out was a significant run on the investment banks. But what were these people thinking? Didn't they realize that money market funds don't evaporate in value like the bank securities were doing and that their investment accounts were insured by the feds in the event of a bankruptcy like Lehman Brothers?

Apparently, they didn't. Just watch this video, listening up sharp at 2:10 in, to hear a little told story about what was happening during those days:
Go to source web page>>

California steals from its taxpayers

I visited the Franchise Tax Board's website to check on the status of my state income tax return today. Imagine my surprise to see their reply was "your refund cannot be issued at this time." How would they respond if I owed them money but instead of paying, I told them that their payment cannot be issued at this time? They would charge me penalties and interest.

The Franchise Tax Board passed the buck. They went on to say:

Due to the state's persistent cash and budget problems, the State Controller has directed FTB to stop sending refund requests to the State Controller's Office for payment. Refund payments will resume when the State Controller indicates there is enough cash available to make refund payments.

That excuse is not good enough. If I owed it taxes, the state wouldn't accept a claim by me that I don't have enough cash available to pay them as an excuse. I shouldn't have to accept it from them.

My refund (and I don't call it a "tax" refund because it's not taxes -- it's my earnings) is not the state's money and it never was. I didn't want the state to have my money in the first place. The only reason they have it is because they forced my employer to withhold it from my paychecks.

Since it's not the state's money, the controller shouldn't have spent it. They should have secured it in a trust fund or some kind of escrow account. After all, that's what the state requires of businesses that hold their clients' monies. Apparently, the state does not believe that 'what's good for the goose is good for the gander.' So I won't bother charging the state a penalty for not refunding my money in a timely manner.