A slice of pork for the ages

Heard this on Fox Business Channel tonight.

In the stimulus bill:

"Federal coordinating council for comparative effective research." - $1.1 billion

Nobody could explain what exactly that is, who it is, or what they do.

Of course, that's barely 0.1% of the bill so there's no sense in wasting too much time investigating or debating it. Just wishing I could get in on it.

In addition:

1 billion dollars to ensure a successful 2010 census program including 150 million for expanded communications and outreach programs to minimize
under-counting of minority groups.

1 billion dollars to provide federal incentive funds for states to collect child support owed to families.

400 million for climate change research.

650 million for digital converter box rebates, which the date has been pushed back on (and wording added so this money can be discretionary.)

75 million for anti-smoking programs

88 million for new schools in Milwaukee which have dropping enrollment, several vacant schools around, and zero plans in the works to build even one new school.

800 thousand for a new frisbee golf park.

Anybody see any room for.........abuse?

As limited as they may be (at their best,) I thought tax cuts FOR PEOPLE ACTUALLY PAYING TAXES, would be the most effective thing to do at this point. Which there is a generous amount in there for but would appear it could have been a much larger number.

Newt Gingrich said today that if they wanted to, this bill is large enough to where if they had chosen to do it, they could have completely suspended the payment of federal income tax and social security off of every working person's check from now until August.

Maybe extreme and irresponsible when there's obviously infrastructure that needs to be repaired, but think of how much extra disposable income that would have put in people's pockets.

$500? I'll take it, but we're robbing Peter to pay Paul. I wonder at what point they run out of options?

 

There are maybe 250,000,000 adults in the US? 7.6% unemployment rate? So about 19,000,000 unemployed max?

The stimulus package is $780,000,000,000 or about $41,000 per unemployed person.

Now add in the $700,000,000,000 initial bailout. $78,000 per unemployed person.

Now lets take a very conservative estimate that we have spent another $1,000,000,000,000 on this crisis that we will never see again. $130,000 per unemployed person.

Maybe we just should have given every unemployed person $40,000 a year to go around and pick up trash and clear vacant lots and saved ourselves a bunch of money.

 

OK and whats wrong with a Frisbee park I want one too

 

What the heck is a frisbee park anyway. The great thing about a frisbee is that it doesn't require anything but a frisbee and about 20 feet between 2 people? A driveway can be a frisbee park. lol

 

http://www.disclife.com/whatis.shtml

This is sure to fix our broken economy. At least it will give all the people without a job something to do.

Sadly, it sounds like this will pass over the weekend.

 

Good grief. What a way to take a $8.00 game and turn it into an $800,000 game.

 

There's probably far less people in the work force than that. Combine the people who don't want to work, welfare people, people that can't work because of disabilities or injury, kids aged 1-17, the retired and people in nursing homes. That's got to be more than 50 million.

They did reform welfare back in 96 but it looks like there's still around 3.5 to 6 million on welfare alone.

It's interesting watching the news. If you didn't know the figures, you'd think 50% of the population was unemployed. In reality, the vast majority are still working somewhere.

Great analysis. Somehow the rich got richer and we're still left with a huge problem. Obama tells us the best economic minds in the country are on top of this and guiding this stimulus.

What do you want to bet we're not getting the full story?

 

Yep, I just read yesterday that there are about 11 million unemployed so that almost doubles the numbers I posted per unemployed person.

 

I'm pretty sure that there are municipal golf courses arond this country. So why not a frisbee park? And of course the fox news report is very accurate. The converter box rebates were going out before this bill. So to be fair it was a Bush administration thing. A billion so states can get tougher on dead beat dads seems fair. 75 million for anti smoking programs. That should make David happy. 500 hundred dollars for each taxpayer will not boost the economy. 300 hundred didnt. And the 300 hundred before that didnt. Seems the big compliants are about the small dollar programs. Would it be better if states got 27 dollars and 50 cents for collecting child support? I know, lets give the brain trust in this forum the trillion dollars and see what they can do about the economy. But dont touch the frisbee park, ok?

 

I would not doubt it will end up like the tennis courts in the park by my house. They rarely get used, then they fall into disrepair from the elements and then they never get used. Then they resurface them and they are back to rarely getting used and then they fall into disrepair... Wash, rinse and repeat.

I am not against parks but something like a frisbee park or golf course is going to be used by a pretty small group of people. Make a real park where people can go for a picnic, walk their dogs, kids can play on playgrounds, etc.

And I already said how I would have spent it. Zero unemployment and the streets and neighborhoods would at least be clean for the next few years. If we are blowing trillions, we might as well get something out of it. And all those paychecks would be pumped right back into the economy.

 

My streets are already cleaned twice a week by a street sweeper. Which I contribute to through local taxes. Do I understand you as saying give those that are unemployed the trillion dollar bailout? Thats great. Not everyone unemployed was laid off or lost thier job through company collapse. some of them deserved to lose thier jobs(stealing, hostility, drug use, etc.). I'm sure as you do; I work my butt off to make what I earn. And I'll be god err doggone if some dreg is gonna get a free ride. Hey why not hire them as maintainence men at the frisbee park. ''Hi, I'm groundskeeper Whamo.''.......................................................................................................................................................... I bet the budget for defense, if scrutinized, would look pretty wasteful. I mean, in boot camp you get everything you need. Socks, underwear, t-shirts, belts, etc. Do you know how much is charged for underwear in the military? Six dollars each. And they suck. Theyre uncomfortable as hell. You can go into Target and get a six pack of Fruit of the Loom for that much. Four dollars for a pair of those crappy socks that fall down after three washings. T-shirts; seven bucks each. Remember those $100.00 hammers the Pentegon was being charged? What makes you think anything has changed? How come Fox doesnt do a story on that? Maybe Ollie can investigate.

 

It came out today that there's more in this stimulus bill than stimulus. They're trying to ram through a piece of their socialized health care plan and nobody knows about it.

It's a proposal to make everybody's medical records digital. Every single person. Also, doctors will have to comply by a federal mandate and set of guidelines for treating patients. If a person is diagnosed with a certain disease and they are of a certain age, the formula will determine whether this person gets care or not. In other words, if you're too old and an expiremental drug may extend you're life, the formula may tell them it's not worth it and you will not get it. If the doctor doesn't follow the government mandate, they will face penalties which are not specified.

This will save medicare, social security and insurance companies a lot of money if the so-called 'stimulus bill' passes. The rich will be treated. The poor and middle class they'll let nature take it's course. I bet you won't hear about that on the news tonight!

 

Am I the only one who has the feeling that the Obama and the Democrats are using the fear of the economy to promote their agenda just like Bush and the Republicans used the fear of terrorism to promote theirs?

I am just waiting for a snappy catchphrase like the "Global Assault On Recession" or GAOR for short.

 

So tell me where the poor are being treated now? And I doubt that a doctor would be penalized for treating a poor person. Why have a department to collect child support anyway? The money they have now doesnt seem to be working so just get rid of it. Save a whole lot of money. Got a dead beat dad? Tough luck! Oh six hundred dollars. My bad. Is there a municipal golf course in your town? If there is,you should get a petition going to get rid of it. Who needs it? You didnt dispute that the rebate was under Bush. But you didnt mention it either. Dont get me wrong, I dont like this any of this stimulating BS. All we are doing is giving more money to those who have plenty. Oh and yes. I do know how much $800,000 is. Only 1% of $800,000,000,000. Your point?

 

How did you figure that math? I get 0.00001%. 800,000 would be 1% of only 80 million.
You have exactly the attitude that they want. "It's so huge that now it doesn't matter what amount is spent on anything!" "Open checkbook!" Proof being, it's so large many people can't even do the math.

Why don't they just wipe the slate clean for everybody? Why limit the amount being spent at all at this point?

The poor are being treated at hospitals around the country. They can't deny anybody care including illegal aliens. And is bankrupting hospitals in Southern CA.
You doubt that a doctor would be penalized for treating a poor person? No, that's not how it reads. Regardless of wealth, the doctor WILL be penalized if he doesn't follow the new government guidelines that will be given in this bill. As in fines and/or jail time. There is no opposition to it in the senate so it will pass.

This means if you get a rare type of cancer and you're say, 58 years old.... They will use their new formula to calculate your age, your life expectancy, your chances of survival, and the cost of the treatment you need (which can be manipulated) and if it doesn't calculate out in your favor, you will not be allowed to have treatment and the doctor will not be allowed to give you treatment. Regardless of if your insurance would pay it, medicare would pay it, or even if you could pay cash. This IS in the bill. There is NO opposition to it.

This is what Europe has. Until this point, they have looked to extend life in this country. They are now looking to limit it to save cost. Which is why they're trying to help fund abortions worldwide as well, to keep costs down.

To what extreme will this magical formula go? They're asking seniors to accept their conditions and just die. Seriously. In an effort to save costs. If this is what people wanted, I wouldn't have a problem. My problem is that they're trying to sneak this in a stimulus bill and not tell the American public about it. Why keep it a secret? Because it would cost them the entire elderly vote the next two election cycles?

The Clinton's tried to do the same thing and it's been argued that it was a major factor in costing the dems the next two election cycles.

 

I'd love to see that around here where unemployment is high and getttng higher every day. I work five days a week but would gladly add another one and two if need be. My wife could push a broom just as well and we'd welcome the opportunity.

I've seen a lot of skilled tradesman lose jobs in the past year. People that are used to working now just getting by and I'm sure some aren't even getting by at this point. It's gotten real tight for me but I'm still kicking.

Yes, a simple solution SJ so it will never happen. Just too darn simple.

 

I was wrong about the percentage. Oops. And the poor can be turned away from a hospital. And how long do you want to live anyway? 110? 120? 90? Did YOU any of this in the bill? Please post a link to where it reads exactly that. Thanks.

 

You would be willing to give this money to the unemployed? All the unemployed, right? Not just the unemployed you select. I mean even those who got fired by thier own fault. That is still unemployed, ya know. I mean if someone got laid off at Mcdonalds he should get some of the 800 billion bailout? How much should he get? And for how long?

 

Yes. To everyone who is currently counted as unemployed and until the trillions we are spending or going to spend runs out...my guess is at least a trillion or two in the near term is what we are going to spend.

The money is already going to be gone and if it is between Frisbee Golf and more money for government projects and more money to banks and another $500 or whatever to everyone whether they need it or not or will spend it or not vs. paying people who are currently unemployed (and putting them to work doing anything - cleaning up, whatever), then I choose giving the money to the unemployed so they can pump it back into the economy.

 

A strep throat to a minor cut can constitute as an emergency these days and poor or illegal aliens who go to the emergency room with these conditions cannot be turned away.

I hope to make it to 70. Don't know what that has to do with anything.

Here's the story:

Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan

Commentary by Betsy McCaughey

Feb. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Republican Senators are questioning whether President Barack Obama’s stimulus bill contains the right mix of tax breaks and cash infusions to jump-start the economy.

Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handywork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the “tough” decisions elected politicians won’t make.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). (Ah, so that's what it is!) The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt. (Remember everyone, Obama just tried to appoint this guy to head the Health Dept.)

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions

If the Obama administration’s economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration’s health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. “If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,” he said. “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.”

More Scrutiny Needed

On Friday, President Obama called it “inexcusable and irresponsible” for senators to delay passing the stimulus bill. In truth, this bill needs more scrutiny.

The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.

What do you guys want to bet that Daschle will get whatever treatment he wants if needed, at any stage of his life??