10.03.09
“Vapor bill” . . . what an interesting term
You could also say it refers to the way fog obscures a transparent surface – or process.
Or another hopeful interpretation is that it denotes the wispy, ephemeral hopes of Freedom-Haters, who are aware they still face a challenge from Blue Dog Dems who don’t want to be out of a job thirteen months from now, as well as an American public that overwhelmingly – as in 92 percent – is satisfied with the way its health is cared for.
Mr. Dings said,
October 3, 2009 at 2:32 pm
What was the #1 domestic issue in the 2008 Presidential campaign? That is, before the Bush economy tanked? So now 92% are satisfied with what they had? What a difference a year makes….
Bentnotesmanhisself said,
October 3, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Ain’t that the truth? Seen the federal deficit projections lately?
Mr. Dings said,
October 3, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Don’t confuse effects with causes.
Mr. Dings said,
October 3, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Seen the FDIC Failed Bank list lately?
http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html
Normally, the FDIC would assess a special onetime fee to banks to raise the money it needs for its fund. But bank executives have been saying that any additional payments they have to make to the FDIC above their normal quarterly bill would force them to cut lending. Special assessments have to be recorded as a cost when they are paid to the FDIC, which reduce bank earnings and capital. It was a capital crunch that caused the financial crisis in the first place. The FDIC’s second option is to borrow money from the Treasury Department. This is well within the rules of the FDIC. The agency has a credit line with the Treasury to tap as much as $500 billion in emergency capital through the end of next year. But the FDIC is worried that if the agency, which has always been privately funded through bank assessments, borrowed money from the Treasury, it would look like a new bank bailout, eroding the sliver of confidence the public has regained in our nation’s banking system in the past few months. (from http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1926877,00.html)
I know this is off-topic of the post, but you brought up the deficit. And, the FDIC is insurance.
Mr. Dings said,
October 4, 2009 at 12:12 am
But, please explain again how the primary domestic issue in the presidential campaign a short 11 months ago is now a dead issue since, as you claim, 92% of Americans are satisfied with their health care? It was on every candidate’s of each party’s plate and tongue in every debate.
Now here’s a stat, for ya, let’s play stat for stat:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/26/BAB719DL29.DTL
Ninety-four percent of participants in San Francisco’s unique universal health care program are at least somewhat satisfied with it, and 92 percent would recommend it to a friend and think other cities should create similar programs. Four in 10 participants said their care was considerably better since joining the program.
Bentnotesmanhisself said,
October 4, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Let’s get clear abolut the premise here. I never said health-care costs weren’t a pressing problem for our society. What I have said is that free-market principles will solve that problem quickly and elegantly. You start with lower taxes on everything (which would solve a great many other of our problems, too). Then you allow health insurance to be purchased across state lines. Then you convince the business community to stop offering it as part of compensation packages. You repeal the 2005 drug-prescription benefit that was added to Medicare (conclusive proof if there ever was any that W was no conservative). You enact tort reform so doctors aren’t so skittish about being sued. And, along with all this, you convince individual citizens that their time and money are better spent elsewhere than running off to the docror’s office or the ER for every little sniffle they come down with.
Bentnotesmanhisself said,
October 4, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Oh, and re: San Francisco: That city, and the whole Bay Area generally, is hardly a representative cross section of America. This is the area that has given us Gavin Newsom, Nancy Pelosi, Berkeley’s banning of Marine recruiters, gay “marriage,” preoccupation with “green” hooey, ubiquitous homeless types, and further back, hippies and beatniks.
Bentnotesmanhisself said,
October 4, 2009 at 7:54 pm
Re: the FDIC running low on funds: what would you have them do?
Here’s a question for you to chew on: Is it really a bad thing if many more banks fail? Some institution will buy up their assets, such as they are. I still have a bank account, with the same account number and everything, at the new company that bought up IUB.
Mr. Dings said,
October 4, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Where do you think the money comes from, trees? The insurance funds are bust. They are going to have to borrow from the treasury. How is that different from a bail-out? If they don’t borrow from the Treasury, they are going to have to assess all the remaining solvent banks. What effect do you think this is going ot have on investment returns? Savings and Loans (1988-89) and banks are not supposed to go bust. You continue to blame government for the problems. The bankers brung us here, bloggie! If it weren’t for the FDIC, you would hae lost all your money. As it is, it appears a lot of the same mismanagement will get to mismanage the new entity that is now your bank. The new bankers got a bargain and none of the liabilities. There’s probably some good money in it for the purchasers. We must prevent this from happening again. We blew deregulation big time!
Bentnotesmanhisself said,
October 4, 2009 at 10:07 pm
If my new bank goes kabust, I can just move my money to a different bank.
Sure, this will have an effect on investment and returns. Do you think there’s any entity that can shelter us from the downside of risk?
Bentnotesmanhisself said,
October 4, 2009 at 10:09 pm
What kind of regulation do you recommend? Come on, now. This is your big chance to put your own thoughts on the subject in your own words.
Mr. Dings said,
October 4, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Thanks for what you say is a chance. I do that a lot too. I read to learn what’s going on? You? I suppose you have experience in all this. I have talked many times about regulation and you about de. My son thinks it’s kinda strange that I am the only blogger here.
Mr. Dings said,
October 4, 2009 at 10:35 pm
You can just move money into a different bank until there’s no FDIC $$$ behind the money the bank lost. Sometimes I wonder if you have a clue.
Mr. Dings said,
October 4, 2009 at 10:38 pm
Anyhow, I’ve been spending too much time on what is wrong with the world rather than concentrating on what is wrong with me and my attitudes. Time for a break. I do enjoy this forum as a means to solidifying my ideas and inspiring my reading and learning about and reacting to current domestic and world affairs. And the ladies in my life appreciate the heat being off of them. For now, I will try to tear myself away and let the rest of the world have at this blog.