Rebane's Ruminations
September 2013
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

[Representaive McClintock made the following speech on the floor of the House today 28 September 2013.  It is here reproduced in its entirety.  gjr]

Tom McClintock (R-CA4)

Mr. Speaker:

            A crisis is not a good time for inflammatory rhetoric and ad hominem attacks.  I will simply say that yesterday, the President missed an opportunity to bring both sides together.  That responsibility now rests solely with us.

            Nobody on the Republican side of the aisle wants to see a government shutdown or a credit default.  And I am confident that nobody on the Democratic side wants to see millions of Americans lose the health plans they were told they could keep; or see their healthcare costs skyrocket, or lose their jobs or work hours because of the unintended consequences of Obamacare.

            But these events — that nobody wants to see — are now unfolding.  They will do great damage to our nation that nobody on wants to see happen. 

            If we agree on these fundamental issues, our course should be clear and is only blocked by the kind of partisan division that we heard yesterday from the White House. 

            We can avert these calamities and redeem this institution if we can put aside the name-calling for a few days and get down to business.

            The good news is that we have a process of government that has evolved over centuries that is very good at resolving differences of opinion within and between the two houses of Congress. 

            And in this case, there shouldn’t even be much to resolve: ALL OF US want to see the government stay open; ALL OF US want to see the government’s credit preserved; ALL OF US want to see Americans protected from losing health plans they want to keep; or from being socked with crushing premium increases; or from losing their jobs or having their hours cut back.


            If we are all agreed on these objectives, isn’t the appropriate course self-evident?  Senator Manchin seems to have laid it out very clearly the other day:  a temporary Continuing Resolution to keep the government open; a temporary increase in the debt limit while we complete the normal appropriations process; and a temporary delay in Obamacare until the unintended consequences of its mandates can be corrected.

            Is that so unreasonable?  After all, this Administration has already exempted big corporations and more than a thousand politically-connected groups from the Obamacare mandates. 

            More revealingly, the Administration has protected members of Congress from its crushing costs.  That ought to be the ultimate wake-up call: if members of Congress can’t afford to meet Obamacare’s costs, how do we expect the average American to do so?   Why not give EVERYBODY the same relief by delaying these mandates until the law can be replaced with provisions that actually fulfill the promises made to the American people when it was enacted?

            I don’t like Continuing Resolutions at all.  Congress has a responsibility to superintend the nation’s finances, and it has developed an appropriations process that requires painstaking review of every expenditure of this government.  That review involves countless hours of committee work, scores of hours of floor debate and hundreds of individual amendments.

            Continuing resolutions cast aside this work and abandon Congress’s responsibility over the nation’s finances.  They shift enormous authority to the executive branch that the Founders never intended.  

            I had hoped to be done with continuing resolutions.  Those who enacted Obamacare no doubt hoped it would lower health care costs and help the economy.  Sadly, events in this imperfect world can often disappoint and transfigure our fondest hopes.  We have not completed the appropriations process; we need additional time to do so and we need to correct the damage being done to existing health-plan holders and employees by Obamacare.  

            If we all agree on these objectives our course should be clear to us all.  We should fund the government long enough to complete the normal appropriations process and we should delay Obamacare long enough to preserve the jobs, working hours, and existing health care policies of the millions of Americans who are now losing them. 

            So let’s cool the rhetoric and do what this institution is designed to do: come together in support of the objectives upon which we all agree — for the good of our nation and the people who have trusted us with its care.

Posted in ,

185 responses to “Rep McClintock on Resolving the Healthcare and Fiscal Dilemmas”

  1. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    I love this line, “What other forced “insurance” does your side have in store for us Steve?”
    You see Fish, we live in society, with systems and laws, and all of our elected representatives voted on those laws, and followed the prescribed procedures to implement them, adjudicated by the SCOTUS.
    In short “my side” has nothing in store for you that you are not doing to yourself, by being a part of this society. If ‘your side’ wants to change the law the same mechanisms are available to them to do so.

    Like

  2. fish Avatar
    fish

    I could go on, but hardly see the point–
    Me too!

    Like

  3. fish Avatar
    fish

    I love this line, “What other forced “insurance” does your side have in store for us Steve?”
    My “side” as you put it (even though you really have no idea what side I’m on) doesn’t espouse compulsory insurance. Your “side” does and has enacted legislation to that end. That legislation has been signed off on by the Supreme Court. My question stands.
    What else does the “side” that thinks almost every activity under the sun needs government involvement (your side from the general tenor of your posts here and in other forums) have planned for their next regulatory accomplishment?
    You see Fish, we live in society, with systems and laws, and all of our elected representatives voted on those laws, and followed the prescribed procedures to implement them, adjudicated by the SCOTUS.
    Atta boy Pontificus Maximus….did you practice in front of the mirror before typing that.
    In short “my side” has nothing in store for you that you are not doing to yourself, by being a part of this society. If ‘your side’ wants to change the law the same mechanisms are available to them to do so.
    Again….my question stands, what does a guy who champions government at every turn hope to see next? And Steve it’s a very simple question if your not afraid of it.

    Like

  4. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    Fish, first, you are the one who defined the discussion by ‘sides’, not me. The case I am making is that we are both on the same ‘side’. We are members of the same society, and have equal stakes in it running efficiently.
    Second, the premise of the question is flawed. I do not champion government at every turn, nor do I think every activity needs government involvement, I am actually quite suspicious of government and think it should be used as the solution of last resort. But if the economic system does not internalize its external costs of production, then I am forced, as George would say “at the point of a gun’, to pay for them. There is absolutely no difference between you being forced to pay taxes and me being forced to pay externalized social and environmental costs, other than how each of us values those things in society.
    I don’t want to pay for those costs, you don’t want higher taxes; thus the necessity of government as an arbiter. NO pontification there..it is what governance is…it is fact of life…and by denying it you merely appear unrealistic and out of touch.
    And I guess I will take a shot at the question; if we don’t regulate risk in financial instruments better we are going to have an economic collapse some day that makes the French Revolution look like a Tea Party!

    Like

  5. fish Avatar
    fish

    Fish, first, you are the one who defined the discussion by ‘sides’, not me. The case I am making is that we are both on the same ‘side’. We are members of the same society, and have equal stakes in it running efficiently.
    Most days I would dispute we are members of the same society. We happen to live in the same general vicinity but we couldn’t be further apart.
    Equal stakes in it running efficiently? Again, I’ve seen your posting history you are pro more government in everything. I know, I know you want people left alone in their bedrooms and to indulge in their minor vices….no argument from my “side” on this. You would like a “streamlined CEQA process….well you are a developer aren’t you? It’s funny how CEQA and other regs suddenly aren’t as important when it’s something you want. You seem to be intensely interested in commanding the resources of others and filtering them through horribly efficient and frequently ineffective government structures for the things you want.
    Your marketing phrase “internalize the externalities”…. has no real meaning other than we need money for things we think are important even when the evidence contradicts your position.
    Government as impartial arbiter…..? Don’t make me laugh!

    Like

  6. George Rebane Avatar

    The game of shutdown poker is getting more interesting. Various sources are now reporting that the House would back down to adding only the repeal of the medical devices tax to the ‘clean’ Senate version, and then return it to the Senate. Ol’ Harry, full of vim and vigor, is telling the Repubs publicly ‘up yours’ with that alternative. Meanwhile, the lamestream is laying it on heavy today that it’s still the Rupubs who are hell bent on shutting down the government. And the sheeple don’t have clue.

    Like

  7. Walt Avatar

    Your going to love this one. “O” has drawn another “red line”. I sure with I was in the room to hear that line used.
    ” People attending a House Rules Committee hearing on Saturday evening burst into laughter when Rep. Jim McGovern (D.-Mass.) affirmed to House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R.-Ky.) that President Barack Obama, by threatening to veto a continuing resolution to fund the government past Monday if it includes a House amendment to delay Obamacare, has thus “drawn a red line” on the CR. ”
    The ensuing exchange between Rogers and McGovern on Obama’s veto threat caused the committee chamber to burst into laughter. Rogers: “Would the gentleman yield? McGovern: “I happily yield.” Rogers: “You say the president has threatened to veto the bill?” McGovern: “No, he hasn’t threatened. He said he absolutely will veto.” Rogers: “He’s drawn a red line has he?” McGovern: “Yep.” At this point, the small hearing room—which was largely filled with committee members, other members of Congress who had come to testify and congressional staff—burst into laughter.
    The full story, PLUS the video.
    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/house-hearing-room-bursts-out-laughing-obamas-red-line-cr
    We know how well those red lines worked out in the past.
    And did you hear the one about the cost of “O”care will be about the same as your cable bill? Or cell phone bill?
    Great job electing a used car salesman.
    ” Just call BS549,, and we can set up a plan no matter what your income. No money? NO problem…. We will just take more from the next guy… Operators are standing by!”

    Like

  8. Gregory Avatar

    “There is absolutely no difference between you being forced to pay taxes and me being forced to pay externalized social and environmental costs, other than how each of us values those things in society.”
    -Frisch
    Except when those “externalized social and environmental costs” are entirely theoretical and not expected for years at best, or never at the even better. Non existent global warming, for example. Actual political science, or at least politicized science. Kill people now with schemes to force energy and food prices through the roof just in case the sky really does start falling in 40 years.

    Like

  9. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    The reason there is little “bipartisanship” on Ocare and almost any other issue is the side in power is practicing politics as founded by the caveman. He who has 51-49 prevails. The dems showed the country how to get their “victory” on Ocare by having the majority and for the dems who were squeamish, they bribed them into a “proper” vote. Interesting isn’t it that a “law” or a “tax” can be so far reaching and complex. Chief Justice Roberts really screwed the very countrymen he was sworn to protect by making the argument that a 3000 page “entitlement” is somehow legal simply because he decided its funding source was a tax (and not the law itself). How he connected the dots (which I say are nonexistent) between a “tax” and a”system” of government and its underlying regulations and rules is beyond a rational free human’s comprehension. This is why their is little respect for the “justice” system today.
    Republicans have tried as long as I have been alive to reign in the legal system with tort reform. They have been defeated at every turn. Even George H.W. Bush and his signature good intentioned legislation, the American With Disabilities Act was almost instantly abused by cutthroat lawyers and shysters looking for easy money. Why, because the “law” said they could be a concerned citizen with standing when they went to a Ma and Pa restaurant with no ramp.
    Then we have NEPA and CEQA which on their face were good ideas. Then the eco nuts and their lawyers (Earth Justice/Sierra Club have mastered this) saw another place to make money. Each law was intended to mitigate issues but the eco’s and the lawyers could care less. They saw the words in the “laws” that said any American has standing and the right to sue and if successful on one count out of a thousand, the taxpayers pick up the bill for their costs and attorneys fees.
    These attempts made to fix these things were done by Republicans and were not successful. Fixing the abuse we saw as the unintended consequences was made impossible by the democrats with the campaign donations they received from the trial lawyers. Billions exchanged hands between them.
    Ocare was shoved down the throats of the people. Republicans submitted amendment after amendment in 2009 to fix what they saw as the unintended consequences and they were cast aside by POWER of the majority. So you libs and democrats can go pound sand when you complain about partisanship. When we on the right regain the power, we will go fix the messes made by the left.
    Regarding Bob’s wife and the $400,000 to help her. I have always supported catastrophic care but I also want the government out of the insurance business. My dad had private insurance and when he got pancreatic cancer in 1982 it paid. There was no Ocare. He paid for his premiums and he was not a rich man. He made it five months and it was not a pretty sight as he weighed 80 pounds at death.
    So I am glad Mary got her help, but if government had kept its paws off our insurance companies and were unable to mandate them, she may have had a reasonable priced policy and the outcome would have been the same. God Bless.

    Like

  10. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    Greg Goodnight. Could you tell us all what the cost of a heart transplant in Singapore is? Then the cost here in America?

    Like

  11. Gregory Avatar

    No idea Todd, I haven’t needed one.

    Like

  12. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    “Except when those “externalized social and environmental costs” are entirely theoretical and not expected for years at best, or never at the even better. Non-existent global warming, for example. Actual political science, or at least politicized science. Kill people now with schemes to force energy and food prices through the roof just in case the sky really does start falling in 40 years.”
    Posted by: Gregory | 29 September 2013 at 03:20 PM
    OK, lets take this one on. My contention would be that combinations of the market, consumer behavior, scientific research and regulatory policy have already set the price for air pollution. Cost of mitigating pollution at the source through manufacturing process, plus proven cost to public health, plus cost of complying with or fighting regulation, plus loss of brand value when actors act badly equals the market price of air pollution.
    It is easier to think about the issue of allocating costs if we talk about specific instances, so I propose we use air pollution, such as NOX, Ozone, PM 2.5 and PM 10 pollution as proxies for whether or not the ‘market’ can determine costs.
    For the purposes of the example, I will discount the link between air pollution and AGW, because the entire AGW debate is actually a separate issue.
    Air pollution is regulated under the California Clean Air Act, which pre-dated AB 32 and pre-dated the US Clean Air Act. Governor Ronald Reagan created the California Air Quality Resources Board in 1967 to regulate California’s air quality. PM, NOX and Ozone were major targets of that regulation.
    We have collected data on air pollution since roughly 1970 through a series of regional air quality control boards, permitting of commercial and industrial processes, and on the ground monitoring, so we have good long-term data sets. We also have 30 years of health care research data, where studies have shown that the health care costs of air pollution are roughly $5 billion per year in California, largely due to increased incidents of respiratory diseases, asthma, heart disease, (an increasingly clear link to autism) and premature death. We can even allocate what portions of the costs are attributable to which specific air pollutants because we can measure which portion of the total air pollution burden each pollutant is and know which ones have more effect on which health risks.
    Now lets add the cost of the regulatory burden, which needs to be split into 2 components, the regulatory cost and the business burden. Cost of managing the regulatory agencies in California is roughly $1.4 billion per year. Depending upon which studies you look at the cost of complying with California’s air quality regulations, if you added all sectors together would be between $8.5 -$11 billion per year.
    So if one were to add the 3 together we have a total cost of roughly $14.9-$17.4 billion per year.
    So the ‘social cost’ of air pollution, which we carry every year in the price of goods and services is roughly $16 billion. I ask you, if we were to invest just a portion of that $16 billion on reducing air pollution at the source, through research and development, new technologies, capture processes, product improvements and whole life cycle analysis of emissions how much better off do you think we would be?
    The ‘market’ has set a price…just as it does with almost every other ‘externality’, it just requires that we learn how to measure externalities and make wise choices about how to reduce them. I would argue that competition and market forces are always better ways to achieve the goal, but if market processes won’t calculate social cost, people will, through government, and we will all pay the price, its just some will pay a higher price than others. We pay the cost through regulation and subsidy now as it is. It would be wiser to plan the internalization of external costs.

    Like

  13. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Consumer behavior is very easy to predict. That is why the term “unintended consequences” exists. Human nature being what it is simply messes with projections. People climb out of those pigeon holes and won’t stay put. They will find the angle to work the game. The Matrix is not perfect.
    I wish I had a dollar for every time someone on the left says “we pay, we all pay the cost, we all pay…” That is code for some pay and it is usually not the one speaking. It is also a buzz word for we don’t pay a dime now, but “we will all pay” for some additional thing/expense to be announced at a time and date uncertain. Its these add-ons coming down the pike that just keep coming that “we will pay for” I don’t like.

    Like

  14. Gregory Avatar

    Nice sidestep, Steve. The issue as I framed it was the redefinition of what was always seen as a non-polluting gas as a disastrous pollutant worthy of major regulation and trading. CO2 is key in the carbon cycle and, in fact, at 300ppm was so far below prehistoric levels at which the biosphere evolved that plants were essentially starved as a result.
    Mammals evolved in about a 2000ppm CO2 atmosphere. 400ppm isn’t a killer. The latest IPCC report is nicely summarized by MIT’s Lindzen:
    “I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence. They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase.
    Their excuse for the absence of warming over the past 17 years is that the heat is hiding in the deep ocean. However, this is simply an admission that the models fail to simulate the exchanges of heat between the surface layers and the deeper oceans. However, it is this heat transport that plays a major role in natural internal variability of climate, and the IPCC assertions that observed warming can be attributed to man depend crucially on their assertion that these models accurately simulate natural internal variability. Thus, they now, somewhat obscurely, admit that their crucial assumption was totally unjustified.
    Finally, in attributing warming to man, they fail to point out that the warming has been small, and totally consistent with there being nothing to be alarmed about. It is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going.”

    “OK, lets take this one on.” Nice start but then you just sidestepped; reading the body of your response, the following libretto comes to mind:
    Give ’em the old razzle dazzle
    Razzle Dazzle ’em
    Give ’em an act with lots of flash in it
    And the reaction will be passionate
    Give ’em the old hocus pocus
    Bead and feather ’em
    How can they see with sequins in their eyes?
    What if your hinges all are rusting?
    What if, in fact, you’re just disgusting?
    Razzle dazzle ’em
    And they’ll never catch wise!

    Like

  15. George Rebane Avatar

    stevenfrisch 545pm – Let’s just posit that the results of your cited studies are correct. For openers (and that’s really as far as we need to go) the problem with all such central planning solutions of attempting to pay for the ‘externalities’ through taxing, fees, forced auctions, etc is that there is presumed one point of payment, one point of receipt, and one responsible agent for remediation. Unfortunately, with government that is never the case. What you do have is open-loop agencies acting out their own models of how society is supposed to work, co-ordinating not at all, and staffed with people who know that government is their employer of last resort, which dictates their MO.
    The real world doesn’t work like that, no matter what the planners’ books tell them. For almost (not all) things that an ordered society needs, government is the least efficient way of filling such needs, and demonstrably almost always does it wrong. We have but to look at our education system and the panoply of welfare programs that have mis-served generations of Americans. But we can always sway the voters (easier every year) by citing anecdotes about how SNAP fed a hungry mother with ten children, and now Obamacare is saving lives and family fortunes here and there. What we don’t see or debate well are alternative ways of doing such things sustainably.
    I’ve given a rigorous definition of sustainability. The only way we have been able to hide our unsustainable programs is by borrowing more and more to make up for the shortfall of government revenues, a federal government which already has a footprint of almost a quarter of our economy (more if you include state spending). And all which means that most of that money is taken from people who earned it and spent by functional idiots for societal needs they think are important.

    Like

  16. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    Posted by: Gregory | 29 September 2013 at 06:15 PM
    Jeez Greg, you are such an idiot…I did not sidestep anything, I stipulated that air pollution was regulated long before AB 32 and did not count any of the post AB 32 costs…..kind of simple really. You are just so blinded by needing to divert attention to climate change that you can’t see the forest …

    Like

  17. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    Posted by: George Rebane | 29 September 2013 at 06:18 PM
    Absolutely does not posit one point of contact, the point of contact is the interface with the consumer or user…

    Like

  18. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    By the way George, there are hundreds of businesses measuring social and environmental costs of production, piloting the use of at least 4 very well developed measurement tools just in the US, right now. There are also international measurement tools being tested. I actually think that given the right circumstances this will reduce government, because if developed appropriately and monitored it will be a part of doing business, it just like supply chain management or cost management are.

    Like

  19. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Mr. Frisch. I hear what you are saying. Good argument. But, do you hear what opposing views are saying?
    Ok, I will speak only for myself. I don’t trust THEM. Them being the ones who are the arbitrators of my life, my eventual lords and masters. Big Brother if you will.
    Ideas are fine. Many I can stomach. But, always there will be the “ruling class” that has the force of law behind it and I better do this or else. This ruling class are the regulators, or as Dr, Rebane described in too kind of words as takers of people’s resources and spenders by “functional idiots for societal needs they think are important.”
    Yes, quality of life issues such as having a fire department on the ready, clean air and water, and health issues are important to every single person here.
    Its the delivery system that I don’t care for. I don’t care for the package it comes in.
    My trip to the USSR before the fall was quite eye opening. The subway stations were free of litter and beautiful. Museum quality art hung from marbled walls. Stunning. Yet, nobody owned a car or could afford one. Parts took 6 months to get, No Reibe’s to run down to to pick up a water pump. People walking around with wooden teeth in this day and age. free dental. Police officers standing outside each and every grammar school. No crime and no homosexuals.
    The working stiffs would save for a month to buy a bottle of vodka for special occasions. Free housing, but that means an apartment was one room for a family of four. No bedrooms, even for the white collar types I visited.
    Yet the ruling class were driving Mercedes and living off the sweat of their subjects. The ruling class were the regulators, the ones who oversaw and cared so deeply for societal needs. They were the oppressors. And they did not give it up without a fight.
    Mr. Frisch, do you “actually think that given the right circumstances this will reduce government,”? Are you off your rocker? Name one time our government “actually” reduced itself voluntarily, got smaller by its own decision or anything close to that remark. Name one. Not some small sacrificial obscure department, but THE government. Go back through history. Maybe Atlantis? Those that get a taste of power lust after it.
    Authority is for the good of the people, like stop signs. Authority is corrupted by power. Power enriches only the self through pride, position and prestige. Its human nature to like sitting on the throne, feeling the power, I don’t trust “them”, period. Therefore, I don’t trust the inevitable results of your good intentions.. Love, Bill.

    Like

  20. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Todd got right to the point: “Ocare was shoved down the throats of the people.”
    And this is truly what the grief against PPACA is really all about. It’s about losing. And losing in a way that doesn’t seem fair. The ump made a bad call. We didn’t get a fair shake. Life’s not fair.
    Well, the grownups have the wheel, and the righty readers of this blog are in the back seat, whining a mewling like snotty four-yr.-olds. It’s kind of pitiful, actually. Dad’s getting pretty fed up with all of it, and he’s gonna start swattin’ hineys if you don’t all pipe down back there.
    Here’s some more whining and mewling for your enjoyment:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7cRsfW0Jv8

    Like

  21. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    “Yes, quality of life issues such as having a fire department on the ready, clean air and water, and health issues are important to every single person here. Its the delivery system that I don’t care for. I don’t care for the package it comes in.”
    I TOTALLY agree, we need a system that values quality of life and changes the delivery system…and government is not the best delivery system, it should be the delivery system of last resort…but to do that we need the marketplace to value quality of life, and INCORPORATE IT INTO THE COST BENEFIT calculation…when consumers demand it the equation will change…that is how we will eventually shrink government….so tell me who is the “THEM” in this equation…THEM is the millions of businesses and hundreds of millions of citizens (and consumers) making these decisions consciously, and when we do that government becomes almost irrelevant. You don’t need to ‘trust’ my good intentions, you act on your good intentions and my intentions are equally irrelevant…. I don’t want to own you..I don’t want the responsibility…..I don’t even want a friggin’ lawn!

    Like

  22. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Mr Anderson, I presume. Thunder Dome has put you back in fine form. I want to see more of Creepy Uncle Sam!
    “Winning isn’t everything. Its the only thing.” Vince Lombardi

    Like

  23. Gregory Avatar

    “Jeez Greg, you are such an idiot…”
    That would hurt if I didn’t consider the source.
    “I did not sidestep anything, I stipulated that air pollution was regulated long before AB 32 and did not count any of the post AB 32 costs…..kind of simple really.”
    You continue to sidestep the point; phony externalities are harmful, and have throttled the US economy for no good reason.
    “You are just so blinded by needing to divert attention to climate change that you can’t see the forest …”
    The AR5 report dropping sure hit with a dull thud, didn’t it? Not even a dead cat bounce despite your palpable excitement leading up to it.
    Face it, climate change is dying as an organizing principle and CO2 indulgences will not be a source of income outside of California. We were an alpha and will be the omega, one of the first to jump in and will probably be the last to regain sanity, thanks to cheerleaders like you.

    Like

  24. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    Jesus H. Christ Greg, I INTENTIONALLY did not count any externalities related to climate change because I know you don’t believe in them. All of the externalities I counted were JUST the air pollution effects.
    Even when I TRY to be nice to you you are an asshole!

    Like

  25. Gregory Avatar

    Don’t “TRY to be nice”, Steve. You just don’t have the knack.
    My point was the fake externality, and you sidestepped it, time after time. Bravo.

    Like

  26. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    The health impacts of air pollution are not “fake externalities”. Nothing to do with ‘climate change’ Greggy, just plain old fashioned science.

    Like

  27. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Better to be an asshole that be a whole ass.
    Back to the original subject matter, I fail to see any radical or extreme position taken by our elected Representative Tom McClintock (R-CA4)
    And in this case, there shouldn’t even be much to resolve: ALL OF US want to see the government stay open; ALL OF US want to see the government’s credit preserved; ALL OF US want to see Americans protected from losing health plans they want to keep; or from being socked with crushing premium increases; or from losing their jobs or having their hours cut back.
    If we are all agreed on these objectives, isn’t the appropriate course self-evident? Senator Manchin seems to have laid it out very clearly the other day: a temporary Continuing Resolution to keep the government open; a temporary increase in the debt limit while we complete the normal appropriations process; and a temporary delay in Obamacare until the unintended consequences of its mandates can be corrected.
    Is that so unreasonable? After all, this Administration has already exempted big corporations and more than a thousand politically-connected groups from the Obamacare mandates.
    Quote unquote. Ok. Not bad. Why do only the taxpayers have to pay the shared responsibility payment? I can see letting the Amish opt out. They pay cash at the doctors office and do not sue a doctor ever. Against their morals. And they pull their resources and that care of their own for big bills. Doctors really like the Amish.
    Why do those who make so little they are not required to file a tax return not subject to Obamacare? They are exempted from paying the share responsibility payment as well.
    Mr. Anderson is correct. I am whining like the ex when I fired two of the maids and she was left with only one. You would have thought I took away her Tiffany Card the way she carried on. Very unladylike like I tell ya.
    A good conversation always involves a certain amount of complaining. I like to bond over mutual hatreds and petty grievances.”
    ― Lisa Kleypas, Christmas Eve at Friday Harbor

    Like

  28. George Rebane Avatar

    stevenfrisch 646pm – Government reducing itself through the reasoned use of the capitalists’ measurement tools? That would reverse the whole progress toward global governance. How would wealth be transferred to the tens of millions of systemically unemployed and unemployable? Is this analogous to what Marx taught, that government would disappear when the altruistic communist man was perfected? Please tell us that you have another way to that glorious day when government starts reducing itself – who are the elites who will deign to pursue this, have they been born yet?

    Like

  29. Gregory Avatar

    “The health impacts of air pollution are not “fake externalities”. Nothing to do with ‘climate change’ Greggy, just plain old fashioned science.”
    Not that you would recognize plain old fashioned science if it bit you in the ass. “Plain old fashioned science” has little in common with the “your friend the amoeba” course you took to fulfill the general ed science requirement for that unscientific Political Science degree at Frisco State.
    Tell me, do you actually know when you’ve constructed a straw man, or can you not tell the difference? No one I know of is for air pollution, but CO2 isn’t air pollution, is it? It’s politically defined pollution (in the same vein as politicians a century ago declaring pi to be 3.0) so the EPA can regulate it as if it was pollution.
    Dr.Judith Curry, chair of the climate department at Georgia Tech, has hardened immensely since the AR5 hit the fan on Friday:
    “The diagnosis of paradigm paralysis seems fatal in the case of the IPCC, given the widespread nature of the infection and intrinsic motivated reasoning. We need to put down the IPCC as soon as possible – not to protect the patient who seems to be thriving in its own little cocoon, but for the sake of the rest of us whom it is trying to infect with its disease. Fortunately much of the population seems to be immune, but some governments seem highly susceptible to the disease. However, the precautionary principle demands that we not take any risks here, and hence the IPCC should be put down.”
    http://judithcurry.com/2013/09/28/ipcc-diagnosis-permanent-paradigm-paralysis/

    Like

  30. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Bravo Mr. Gregory.

    Like

  31. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    Yeah, Greg, Bravo, you think you managed to divert people to climate change.
    Of course the point I was making had absolutely nothing to do with climate change, it had to do with the specific effects of air pollution, regardless of how other pollutants are defined for other public policy purposes. Long before CO2 was defined as a pollutant, NOX, PM and Ozone where defined as pollutants, and their health affected are well known and measurable. Are you denying that basic fact?
    My observation is that your psychological problems have made you an intellectual cripple.

    Like

  32. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Mr. stevenfrisch:
    Your first 3 words started out just fine….but then…lol. My Bravo was for the article Mr. Gregory posted. It nut shelled what I had been puzzling over. Of course you were talking about the stuff we breathe, a noun called air. Air is nice cause it is free and my big snout puts it to good use.
    My good man, of course you were talking about air pollution measured by things called instruments, a plural use of a noun. Yet, somehow this is all related to the bigger issue of man made global warming. Like, go put a Yule log on the open fire to roast chestnuts and it is releasing carbon, which is considered a component of dirty air and humanoid made global warming. Or is it? Or is it is part of the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy? Hmmmm.
    Well, Mr. Frisch, you have scolded Mr. Gregory over and over again until you are blue in the face. Or, perhaps red in the face.
    I see your frustration level has gone up. Your temperature is rising and it is caused by man made posting. No need to take a chill pill. The atmosphere is cooling. Cooling so fast that winter is coming.
    So, I am all ears. Tell me again how an air pollutant known as C02 is causing global warming and affecting the Dreaded Dutch’s nationalized health care as put forth in McClintock’s speech to the Lady’s Auxiliary.
    Mr. Frisch, you really need to put this Global Warming stuff on the back shelf for a few hours and talk about something different for once. 🙂

    Like

  33. Gregory Avatar

    There’s a 3:44AM timestamp for the last Frisch obsessive-compulsive, fallacious argumentum ad hominem missive.
    I think someone needed a nap.
    Sorry, Steve, it’s the whole issue of CO2 being artificially defined as a pollutant, as opposed to actually being a pollutant, that you’re continuing to dodge.
    Finally, a winner of the diss-the-IPCC sweepstakes, attributed to Markus Somm, editor-in-chief of the Basler Zeitung (Basel, Switzerland): “It is a masterpiece of dosed prophecy. Had Moses taken the same approach, he would not have convinced a single Jew to leave Egypt”
    It’s apparently enough for the single party State of California which continues to throttle our economy in the name of The Global Warming Solutions Act and the vision that, with state alternative energy directives, we’ll once again be leading the world when we get it right and the rest of humanity is playing catch-up.
    What would Moses do?

    Like

  34. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Best post to this article: “You have to enroll in Obamacare to find out what is in it.”
    http://watchdog.org/107421/pay-more-get-less-introducing-obamacare-in-illinois/

    Like

  35. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    From the Great State Of California, this finally makes sense. Obamacare money goes to community organizers, not the hundreds of thousands dying in our streets paved with gold. It never rains in California, man it pours.
    CA ACA is tied to get out the vote campaign by CA law. Makes sense to me.
    http://calwatchdog.com/2013/09/24/ca-obamacare-implementation-funds-actvist-groups/

    Like

  36. George Rebane Avatar

    BillT 840am – Mr Tozer, be sure that at least half the RR readers appreciate your informative finds on the web that illuminate these posts and attendant comment streams. The significance of such links are heralded by the crickets sent by the Left to acknowledge your efforts. Rejoice.

    Like

  37. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    TM is a fine representative. Just imagine if we had elected him Governor instead of the terminator. We would have none of the mess Arnie and Jerry have foisted on us.

    Like

  38. TheMikeyMcD Avatar

    Andy Swan ‏@AndySwan
    “the federal government will begin closing down non-essential operations and send hundreds of thousands of workers home.” Let that sink in.
    https://twitter.com/AndySwan/status/384709025239011328

    Like

  39. fish Avatar
    fish

    Well, the grownups have the wheel, and the righty readers of this blog are in the back seat, whining a mewling like snotty four-yr.-olds. It’s kind of pitiful, actually. Dad’s getting pretty fed up with all of it, and he’s gonna start swattin’ hineys if you don’t all pipe down back there.
    Thought you were on hiatus tuff gai? I’ve been waiting by the phone Gladys….where’s my call from your friends.
    ….and Michael anyone who for even an instant considers the troika of stupid (Reid, Pelosi, and Obama) to be “adults” forfeits the argument. Just how high up in the hills do you live….and what the hell is the percentage of O2 that allows you to think this?

    Like

  40. fish Avatar
    fish

    “the federal government will begin closing down non-essential operations and send hundreds of thousands of workers home.” Let that sink in.
    Why would the government engage in any services that weren’t essential?

    Like

  41. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    Fish, so true. Shut er down, except the military of course.

    Like

  42. fish Avatar
    fish

    Fish, so true. Shut er down, except the military of course.
    Truth be told Todd I’d cut huge chunks of their funding too……including that which pays my salary!

    Like

  43. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Where my Obama phone??

    Like

  44. fish Avatar
    fish

    Where my Obama phone??
    It’s my understanding that they aren’t hard to get….maybe more than one!

    Like

  45. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Harry Reid and his band of disowned defeats HOR bill 54-46. The press is saying the R’s are to blame. Too funny.

    Like

  46. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    There is no joy in Mudville tonight. For Casey, Mighty Casey, has struck out.
    https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1375068_10151662973800911_59216827_n.jpg
    https://scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1376578_10151664422510911_1434826068_n.jpg
    Ok, Gooberment shut down starts at Midnight. The time it shut down under Clinton, they closed the hay rides at Jellystone National Park. It was devastating, beyond tragic. Plus they closed the Passport Office. I was just getting to renew my passport that very day as something bad came up.
    This time I am prepared. If something bad comes up today or tomorrow, my bags are packed and I am ready to take a trip on a moment’s notice for a “change of scenery.” The Feds have no sense of humor. What I call change of scenery, they call “unlawful flight to avoid prosecution”. Whatz up with dat?

    Like

  47. fish Avatar
    fish

    Good links Bill!

    Like

  48. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    for stevenfrisch – “or merely attribute loss of medical care for an ill aunt to Obamacare without really knowing what the cause is.”
    Nice of you to assume I’m wrong when you don’t know anything at all about the situation. Maybe you could fill us in on the ‘real’ reason. Oh, that’s right – you can’t. Because you don’t know squat. I do know exactly why she lost her health care. The reason is called Obamacare. And she is hardly the only one. There are tens of thousands already in the same situation. And my aunt is suffering because of it.
    But her reality screws up your narrative, so you decide to disbelieve it because it’s the ‘wrong’ information. That’s how the lefties roll.

    Like

  49. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Bill at 1:58 – and all other good citizens out there – ‘the government’ is not shutting down. Obama will make sure that little Suzie’s dream vacation to go to the National Zoo is ruined, but most everything else is in full swing. Some fed workers get extra paid vacation days, but the IRS is still collecting and I’m sure Jay Carney will be flapping his lips for the evening news. In other words, the parts of the federal government that should shut down, won’t and vice versa. Oh well – I just hope I can manage to make some coffee in the morning without the aid of the govt.

    Like

  50. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    “I do know exactly why she lost her health care. The reason is called Obamacare.”
    Prove it.

    Like

Leave a comment