You are browsing the archive for 2014 November 12.

Avatar of admin

by admin

Bad Month for Obamacare

November 12, 2014 in Economics

By Michael D. Tanner

Michael D. Tanner

Believe it or not, it might be neither President Obama nor the Democratic party that has had the worst month in Washington so far. That dubious honor may actually belong to Obamacare.

Start with the election itself. Every winning Republican senatorial candidate campaigned on the idea of repealing the health-care law — not refining, amending, or improving, but repealing. Exit polls showed that a quarter of voters saw health care as nearly the most important issue in the election, second only to the economy. Roughly half of voters overall felt the law went “too far,” and in many key states the proportion was much higher. With Republicans taking control of the Senate and expanding their majority in the House, we can expect an onslaught of bills to repeal the law or cut out important parts of it. While the presidential veto will likely prevent full repeal, the law’s supporters can expect to spend the next two years fighting a defensive war.

The elections didn’t work out much better for Obamacare at the state level. With a few notable exceptions, such as John Kasich in Ohio, most of the Republican governors elected or reelected last week are opposed to Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion. If Democrats were counting on time and special interests to eventually wear down opposition by governors, they are likely to be disappointed.

The law’s supporters keep painting a rosy scenario, but voters didn’t buy it.”

The ballots had hardly been counted when the Supreme Court announced that it would hear a case that even the law’s supporters call an “existential threat.” In accepting the case of King v. Burwell, even before the D.C. Circuit Court had completed its en banc hearing on a related case, the Court signaled that a number of justices have significant concerns about how the Obama administration has disregarded the law’s plain language that limits subsidies to “exchanges established by the States.” If the Court rules against the administration, not only will it mean an end to subsidies in 37 states, it will also effectively kill both the employer mandate and the individual mandate in those states. At that point, the administration would have no choice but to open up the law to wholesale revision.

Just a few days after the Court delivered its blow, Jonathan Gruber, considered one of the architects of Obamacare (as well as its Massachusetts predecessor, Romneycare), went public with an admission that Obamacare advocates …read more

Source: OP-EDS

Avatar of admin

by admin

Labor Market Fluidity and Economic Performance

November 12, 2014 in Economics

As measured by flows of jobs and workers across employers, U.S. labor markets became much less fluid in recent decades. International comparisons suggest that the large, secular decline in U.S. job reallocation is somewhat unusual. New research from Stephen J. Davis and John Haltiwanger demonstrates that there are beneficial and benign aspects of reduced labor market fluidity, but also strong reasons for concern about harmful consequences of reduced fluidity for productivity growth, real wages, and employment.

…read more

Source: CATO HEADLINES

Avatar of admin

by admin

Not Only Did Obama Lose (Hooray Constitution), but so Did Abortion

November 12, 2014 in Economics

By Nat Hentoff

Nat Hentoff

In addition to rescuing the Constitution from Barack Obama, there was another vitally essential issue addressed in the midterm elections. Last week, Carol Tobias, National Right to Life president, triumphantly explained:

“As we witnessed Tuesday, in election after election, National Right to Life and its network of 50 state affiliates and more than 3,000 local chapters helped provide the margin of victory for pro-life candidates” (“Polling Shows Impact of Abortion Issue in Mid-Term Election,” nationalrighttolifenews.org, Nov. 6).

For example, National Right to Life, which describes itself as working “through legislation and education to protect innocent human life from abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide and euthanasia,” summarizes the midterms as such: “Despite being vastly overspent by pro-abortion organizations such as Planned Parenthood and EMILY’s List, pro-life candidates won … by significant margins. There were 26 races in which a candidate supported by National Right to Life was running against a candidate supported by the pro-abortion (and pro-Obama) PAC EMILY’s List. Nineteen (73 percent) of the National Right to Life candidates won.”

Readers who were heretofore unaware should know by this point that I’m a pro-life atheist, and I’ll explain how I came to have these views as we go on.

Now dig this, which was largely unreported by the media covering the midterm elections: “National Right to Life’s political committees were actively involved in 74 races. In those races, 53 (72 percent) pro-life candidates prevailed, including pro-life Senate candidates in Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Montana, North Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia.”

Connecting abortion with the ending of “innocent human life” describes why pro-lifers throughout America have opposed Obama from even before he was elected president.

When he was a member of the Illinois Senate, Obama voted three times against versions of the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act, which did not pass until 2005. This legislation mandated that if a live baby fully emerged as a result of a failed abortion, its life would be saved.

I am convinced that disobeying that law is tantamount to infanticide, and I have been writing about it in this column and other publications over the past few years. As I reported in the Winter-Spring 2009 issue of Human Life Review about Obama’s unyielding support of abortion, including the high percentage of abortions among black women (“President Obama and ‘Black Genocide’ ”), I spoke with a registered nurse who worked in the Labor and Delivery Department at Christ Hospital in Oak …read more

Source: OP-EDS

Avatar of admin

by admin

An Analysis of the Swiss Gold Initiative

November 12, 2014 in Economics

By Ryan McMaken

If you read German: Thorsten Polleit has written a rather detailed analysis of the Swiss gold initiative and how it would be implemented if passed.

…read more

Source: MISES INSTITUTE

Avatar of admin

by admin

Thorsten Polleit on the Negative Interest Rate

November 12, 2014 in Economics

By Ryan McMaken

polleit

Thorsten Polleit wrote the “con” side of a debate over whether or not the negative interest rate in Germany is a good thing. Dr. Thorsten’s contribution is in opposition to the “pro” side authored by Ulrich von Suntum (Universität Münster). This all appears (in German) in Wirtschaftswoche (tr: Economy Week) magazine.

…read more

Source: MISES INSTITUTE