Too Good to be True

August 2, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Throughout history, human reaction to anything unknown, unfamiliar is to cast a shadow of doubt and skepticism reminiscent of “Jesus archetype.”

Human nature is to probe and draw conclusions based on the personal understanding or the lack thereof regardless of the consequences from such action. In the earlier days, it’s a collective effort usually orchestrated by a prominent individual or a group using affluence to influence the mass conception.

When a Jewish born shepherd descended upon earth to spread the message from the celestial supreme being on the birth of a new religion called Christianity adding diversity to the religious sphere, it created pandemonium across the social and religious helm.

The preacher then misconstrued as an impostor denied access to public discourse by the presumptuous lords on the earth holding themselves to the highest moral decorum later proven otherwise among many.

What’s the change between the ancient and modern times in the treatment of presumed paranormal events?

In the olden days, they crucified them and in the modern days they vilify them.

It’s important to relate to the contemporary moment and put the hysteria to rest.

When an individual contributes to public affairs as a citizen journalist through blog posts on sensitive topics, the content evaluated to suit one’s own belief, experience, ideology and personal discretions.

It applies to most publications with fewer exceptions.

Although, the recent battery of charges, innuendoes and insinuations are nothing new considering the dramatic 2008 Presidential campaign saga prompting behind the scenes scrutiny of the nuisance ‘blogger’ in the national political arena touted as an ‘unqualified’ and ‘illiterate’ foreigner, a possible liaison of undesirable elements…i.e.

Padmini Arhant, an American of Indian (India) origin, a Californian resident, the author, editor and publisher of the website www.padminiarhant.com. The unquenchable quest for information on the force behind the voice continues until date.

The probable cause related to the absence of Western education particularly the elite institutions, publications (personal or ghost written) CEO of AIG, BEAR STEARNS, WORLD COM, ENRON synonymous… aside from personal characteristics like ethnicity, religion, language, gender and last but not the least detailing to the appearance of shape, size, no glitz or glamor.

Despite releasing the comprehensive personal profile for Universal view on the cyber space, the propaganda and malicious rumors with incendiary comments such as:

‘Why can’t the blogger preparing the political meal with a hot sauce step up and reveal thyself as the masked Zorro rather than a street thug with a truncheon” – The pleasantry from an overarching local beholding himself to the absolute form of transparency in the personal accusation of someone he is clueless about.

“The Corporate Bashing, Anti- Profit Martian and Communist” – Comment from a network specializing in divisive, polarizing demagoguery, otherwise desperate journalism – (Obviously, the compliment resulting from the ‘Corporate mismanagement of health care and economy’ enlightened on the cited website).

Here is a personal tip to the controversy. How about an alien from Mercury – Reference Greek Mythology?

Perhaps might provide a clue to the trivial pursuit.

Besides the flattery from the predictable irate representatives of the ‘so-called’ civil interests, the spotlight craving divas of politico domain with serious credibility issues had similar sentiments in the spirit of camaraderie.

One of them abandoning the electorate and quitting the national scene in breach of ethical laws not to mention the abuse of power berated ‘Hollywood’ with a special reference to a ‘tiny starlet’ implying the subject likely crawling instead of walking upright arousing further suspicion about the alleged alien pretending to be a homosapien.

Likewise, the other proclaimed to be liberal, suffering from distinctive syndrome parading cable and other major networks to promote the re-publishing of ghost written events refreshed with unattributed work from others, remarked about the current ‘ethnic minority’ phase apart from psychoanalyzing the blogger with a possible native accent and therefore not in the public eye. After being disappointed with the false prediction, the diva’s turnaround was the accent is perhaps ‘put on’ improvised, hence not authentic. In all likelihood, not an American.

In addition, the same entity did not fall short of providing the unauthorized blogger’s details on Google map through their official on-line publication political website as a revelation to the national and international community at large. Again linking without prior consent or knowledge. Further, the blogger’s campaign donation to Obama candidacy highlighted as a matter of concern during the election while ignoring the AIG executives’ personal donations to political campaigns listed on the www.padminiarhant.com.

So much for responsible journalism!

The identity politics attack on new voices by the insecure selective media and certain press corps including the on-line publications as mentioned above, signify emulation arising from acute shortage of integrity and ethics.

In light of the ethno phobia environment, it’s poignant to flashback a historical political event involving the then reigning Colonial power of Great Britain and the previously agricultural India represented by the frail bespectacled, yet resilient individual named M.K.Gandhi

During the colonial occupation of India, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, Mr. Winston Churchill, often remembered by the present Western political figures in a positive frame of mind, constantly addressed the representative of the poor and the impoverished millions not only in the Indian soil but around the world, M.K.Gandhi as –

The “Half Naked Fakir” – the Urdu translation of Fakir is beggar.

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was the “half naked beggar’ for the colonialists at that time. Since Gandhiji became the force to reckon with and a menace to the occupiers, he travelled to Britain not by ‘Air Force One’ equivalent, but instead sailed across the treacherous seas for weeks and months at a time. The mocked Indian was exemplary in the interpretation of the Colonial Power rule of law in their native language on their turf.

How did Great Britain receive Gandhiji?

Gandhiji frequently summoned and never seated by the over-lauded Winston Churchill, unabashedly denigrating the native of the occupied land as a ‘Half Naked Beggar.’

What a gargantuan army would not have attained, the iron-willed ‘half naked beggar’ eventually prevailed and achieved a monumental victory against the mighty Imperial power that came crumbling down and forced to quit India with the tail between their legs.

How did he do it?

As the pioneer of Peace and Non-violence, he grieved with the holocaust victims and at the same time bemoaned for the Palestinian rights and homeland. Gandhi as a true humanitarian brought the oppressive apartheid in South Africa to international focus and called for worldwide condemnation amidst Colonial era. He was the first international volunteer to picket against the Dutch Africans regime in South Africa.

Did he discriminate against the people of the Colonial nation, The Great Britain?

On the contrary, Gandhiji was instrumental in improving the conditions in terms of better wages for the ‘all white’ cotton mill workers in Manchester, England by threatening to boycott goods produced at the expense of the poor in England.

Gandhiji went on to become the inspiration and mentor for DR. Martin Luther King, Jr., and DR. Nelson Mandela committed towards freedom, equal rights and opportunities.

Gandhiji did not earn the title Mahatma (the superior soul, also the noble soul) for nothing.

Tragically, today some political figures, corporations, certain journalists, reporters in the press, media and airwaves propagate hatred; provoke thoughts aimed at the President of the United States as well as others selflessly dedicating their entire time towards national progress and humanitarian cause.

The present motto for even few established cable networks is –

Pandering to some by slandering others.

This article would be incomplete without stating the latest bizarre attempt to disparage the office of the Presidency by insisting that President Barack Obama is allegedly a foreigner confirmed through the clairvoyant’s crystal ball per the self-proclaimed prophets in the media posturing to speak nothing but the ‘Gospel’ Truth.

Unfortunately, these agents of divide and diminish policies suffer from selective amnesia as not long ago they were trying to amend the consitution to allow the Austrian born Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger as the Republican Presidential candidate in the foreseeable future. As if, it’s not enough that the State of California’s progress held hostage, they wanted enlarged nationally.

Surely, events change according to the political dynamics for the insular groups shackled within the prism of narrow mind.

Another phenomenal fact pertaining to a foreigner embraced worldwide specifically in the United States is Lord Jesus, born in Bethlehem, a Palestinian City in the central West Bank.

Lord Jesus neither born in the United States of America, nor ever visited the continent.
Nevertheless, millions throng to the holy sons’ place of worship.

I hope that there will not be a time when Jesus’ birth certificate demanded to approve the worship of the savior and the true son of God, here in the United States, since the Lord is the ruler of the kingdom.

Indeed, Too good to be True.

The epitome of discriminatory practices clearly a reflection among the segment unable to distinguish illusion from reality and constantly strive to prove truth as false and falsehood an embodiment of truth.

Too much emphasis on the perishable body and very little concentration on the immortal soul,
only if one can find it within.

Illusion stems from ignorance and ignorance feeds hypocrisy.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant
(Author, Editor and Publisher of www.padminiarhant.com)

Verdict on the Health Care Legislation

July 30, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The health care legislation vigorously contested by the opponents of the economic recovery and the unemployment deterrence. Sometimes, it’s easier to deal with the ‘devil’ you know than the ‘devil’ you don’t. The existing health care crisis contributed by the health care and insurance conglomerate’s profit raking strategy fits in with the metaphor.

When the people strive to make it to the top of the slippery slope titled the sensible health care legislation their harnesses are either tampered with or forcibly pulled off by the groups posing as the ‘rescue guards,’ i.e. the representatives in the House and the Senate obligatory to their financiers – the special interests.

In the interim, the ‘so-called’ bipartisanship in the Senate with some prominent legislators and selective House members from both sides of the aisles holding substantial investments in the health care stocks are focused on safeguarding their investments with assurances to the health industry – ‘your wish shall be my command.’

The House and the Senate version presented thus far is directly contradictory to the populist requirement and the President’s initial plan. The shameful tactic in the twentieth century – apart from paralyzing the health care reform, it’s also instrumental for the status quo and they are indicated in the article below.

Deal with ‘Blue Dogs’ sets up health care vote

Associated Press – 07/29/09

“The House changes, which drew immediate opposition from liberals in the chamber, would reduce the federal subsidies designed to help lower-income families afford insurance, exempt additional businesses from a requirement to offer insurance to their workers and change the terms of a government insurance option.

More problematic from the Democrats’ point of view is a tentative agreement to omit a provision in which the government would sell insurance in competition with private industry. In its place, the group is expected to recommend non-profit cooperatives that could operate at the state, regional or even national level.

Nor is any bipartisan recommendation likely to include a requirement for large businesses to offer insurance to their workers. Instead, they would have a choice between offering coverage or paying a portion of any government subsidy that non-insured employees would receive.”

What is wrong with the classic ‘pro-industry’ proposal to appease the health care enterprise at every insured and uninsured American taxpayer’s peril?

Firstly, the House bill to reduce the federal subsidies designed to help lower-income families afford insurance, instead of demanding the health care system comprising the AMA, health care providers accepting Medicare and Medicaid, Pharmaceuticals, the hospital industry…and the insurance industry mark-down the preposterous profit margins hidden in the superficially inflated costs driving the economy and every citizen to bankruptcy.

If there is any resistance from the groups in this regard, then taxing the expensive insurance coverage ensuring the tax liability on the industry rather than the end-consumer is absolutely necessary. If it was already agreed to by all negotiators then the measure combined with higher taxes on capital expenditures by the industry should adequately cover the increase in federal subsidies to the economically disadvantaged.

The health industry in their defense might argue that the supply and demand market forces drive the costs in a free market system. In this context, the commonly unknown fact being, the health industry unlike other industries are uniquely advantaged to thrive throughout with excessive demand arising from the myriad of sources causing illnesses to a vast population of which an alarming proportion fall in the >‘unhealthy’ category.

In the absence of robust competition from a government provided affordable health care, the industry giants have the expansive field wide open to themselves with a huge demand as the catalyst for the exorbitant profits in products and services.

In addition, the major market-share by the big players lay overcast of monopoly for others to compete effectively with the price factor, notwithstanding the industry protocol on limited choice and coverage of care at disproportionate costs.

The non-profit cooperatives have been recently involved in financial mismanagement as reported in California and severely lack in efficiency, ultimately benefiting the current private care system by default. Therefore, it’s not surprising for the industry groups to lobby for the non-profit cooperatives against the government run program.

The bill doesn’t end there. Ice cream is more delicious when served with toppings.

With respect to the businesses and large corporations exempt from the insurance coverage requirement to their workers and employees, it’s yet another ‘dessert’ moment for the legislators playing gracious hosts to the corporate musketeers.

Obviously, the lawmakers more appropriately the lawbreakers are falling head over heels in their romance with the corporate sponsors by relieving them from the fundamental responsibility to care for their workers and employees with health insurance while leaving the underemployed American workforce to fend for themselves in the profit manifested exclusive private health club.

As for the Blue Dogs, a misnomer to the species iconic for their unflinching loyalty, unequivocally clarify that ‘conservatism’ motto regardless of political factions is to delay, defeat and derail national progress. Clearly, the democratic electorate will be able to overcome the obstacle by replacing the obstructionists with the supportive ones in the 2010 elections.

To summarize, the health care casserole prepared by the House and the Senate in the Congress is palatable to the industry as the primary patrons and the caterer of the special menu. The remaining large starving population having peeked at the menu items forced to fake satisfaction from the aroma of the dish, although meant for the populist but served to win over the mighty health care industrialists.

Seriously, if this health care legislation meant to be a ‘reform’, then the bill must include the public option plan, increased federal subsidies, free health care for the most impoverished and a nondiscretionary business/Corporate health insurance for all workers and employees.

Failing that, it would be a band-aid treatment for a widespread chronic ailment in the industry gorging profits at every opportunity and the ‘so-called’ solution will be a cyclical nightmare for the nation attempting its way out of the quick sand economy.

The proposal funded through compromise from the industry with costs reduction equalizing profit contraction proportionate to market sustainability and tax increases suggested in the earlier House Bill itemized per extraordinary income category is the ideal gateway to true ‘reform.’

Otherwise, under the present deal the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ not found in Iraq would appropriately apply to the millions dependent on the democratic majority controlling all three branches of the government to do the right by the people.

Because the welfare of the people is paramount for the success of corporations in a capitalist or any other economic systems as people are the consumers and workers alias human capital in the economy.

Politically, irrespective of the massive corporate investment earned from the sweat and blood of the workforce, there will be no power without the people’s vote in a democracy.

Again, the health care reform will be truly meaningful and purposeful when the recommended changes addressing the plight of the people are reflected in the lifetime legislative matter.

It’s time for every American to stand up for their rights and claim the authentic universal health coverage favoring them and not the profit oriented health care industry.

Please call your local representatives and the Senators to oblige to your needs and not the special interests. Only you can make it happen this time.

Power is powerless against the will of the people in politics and economics.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Mobilize America on Health Care Reform

July 26, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Given the partisanship in Washington, the special interests and their representatives in the legislature along with the repugnant network, are emboldened more than ever to kill the health care reform simply because they are deluded in their employment security with a premium health care and a handsome reward from the industries hiring them to stomp the process.

This whole hysteria about the government incapable of handling anything right is nothing but a calculated propaganda by the health care conglomerate reluctant to part with the thriving profiteering racket within the industry.

Who is actually responsible for the current economic mess, worsening unemployment, environmental deterioration and fluctuating energy crisis?

It’s none other than the Corporations running the world empire from the financial markets, health care, energy down to the government. The Corporations through enormous funding into election campaigns and beyond successfully force their agenda by proxy in the legislation as currently witnessed in the health care, energy and financial debacle.

A classic example is the ominous California budget – deal struck between the recalcitrant Republican authorities comprising the Governor, the minority group and the special interests at the expense of the nation’s future i.e. everything to do with children from their health, human services to education and the environment.

The rumor on the rising lack of confidence among the American public towards the government performance is due for a truthful and candid explanation to demystify the myth created by the oligarchs.

The handling of Iraq war, Katrina, financial crisis and the gamut of catastrophes in the past eight years referred to as the ‘government’ failure in the present debate targeting the health care legislation
.
ALTHOUGH, THE OPERATIONS SEEMINGLY RUN BY THE GOVERNMENT IN THE PAST EIGHT YEARS, IT’S A WELL KNOWN FACT THAT THE BUSH-CHENEY GOVERNMENT WAS NEVER DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED DURING BOTH TERMS.

IT WAS ESSENTIALLY A CHENEY’S ‘HALLIBURTON’, THE ENERGY CARTELS – EXXON MOBIL, CHEVRON DOMINATED, AND THE CREAM OF THE CROP – HENRY PAULSON’S ALMA MATER GOLDMAN SACHS AND SUBORDINATES IN THE WALL STREET MANAGED À LA CARTE ADMINISTRATION.

During the first term, in the 2000 elections the Supreme Court, the highest Court in the land returning its favor to the political faction by nominating their preferred candidate to the highest office in the land. Never mind about the popular vote and other legitimate factors in a democracy.

In the second term, the pre-meditated premise to invade Iraq besides the precisely calibrated nation unable to reject a wartime President despite the scandals and looming economic crisis camouflaged with color coded national security threat tactics, notwithstanding the deliberate malfunctioning of the electronic voting machines was symbolic in the ‘so-called’ democratic election.

Ironically, the nation particularly the privileged lawmakers with some of them having direct access to the classified information abdicated their constitutional oath to defend the sovereignty from peril, instead followed the historically deceitful administration in droves and completely swept off their feet in the ‘weapons of mass deception’ moment. They not only supported the President George W. Bush leading the nation literally to the Death Valley but also rallied behind the propaganda war machines in the media.

Perhaps, if there were any consideration then for the impact on the national deficit and the long-term economic turmoil, their constituents as the citizens of the United States would not be at the mercy of the corporate power pulling strings on the puppet legislators.

However, now when there is a real opportunity for the people to lead the governance of the nation in the most important issue of health care concerning their own life and the loved ones, the polarization on both sides of the political aisles is not surprising.

If the issue is all about costs then the legislators must earnestly review the prevailing costs driven predominantly by the health industry’s greed in the disproportionate profits draining the economy by the hour, not to mention the precious lives lost due to the partisan procrastination.

As for the Conservative Democrats, aka the blue dog members stalling the issue based on lower payments for the medical providers in the rural communities, the solution would be to set a fair standard with equal pay for all in the medical community to incentivize medical professionals outreaching the poorly served remote country areas.

This might give another reason for the opponents to distract the legislative course as further increase on the costs; again, the reallocation of the existing redundant costs would effectively address the genuine requirement.

Most legislative matters from the stimulus bills to various legislations are subject to unnecessary gridlock by the opponents on the pretext of the ‘volume’ of the information in the bill. It would save time and resources for the democratic majority and the White House administration to concise the enormity of these bills with clear and specific data relevant to all.

For instance, since utilizing technology to the maximum potential is one of the highlights of this reform, demonstrating the historic legislation with facts and figures to the public and the concerned parties would be authentic. The contemporary health care costs featured on –

The National Coalition on Health Care – NCHC Cost Fact Sheet 2009,

Source: http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml is a yardstick for trimming and improvising the macro health care budget.

The presentation must involve categories and important details such as:

What are the deductibles and co-payments under public option?

Is there any variation in costs with respect to the visit to a doctor’s office and the hospital?

Having multiple tiers in the coverage would be beneficial to both the public option plan and the consumers. The healthy population with no health insurance as a result of the current exorbitant insurance cost might be better off with at least a basic coverage for emergencies. Similarly, enabling the population with pre-existing illnesses subscribe to the appropriate insurance coverage and others depending on the personal medical history and conditions purchase the desirable and affordable coverage under public option.

Human Genomics science will enormously aid in this regard.

Certain procedures and treatments are available in private clinics and medical centers. Will the public option cover patients using those facilities for convenience and easy access, if the medical expenses are comparable – being less or equal?

Does the public option parallel with the private sector in the mandatory referrals from the primary care providers and the hierarchy for hospital treatments and procedures?

Or

Public option simplified with the hospital administration electronically verifying and billing the government by eliminating the intermediaries.

Under the exclusively private enterprise health care system, mothers and their new born babies after child birth are regularly forced out of the hospitals within twenty four to forty eight hours only to be readmitted for any complications arising from haste delivery. Thus costing everyone involved more and generating profit for the hospital industry, while the liability transferred on to the ‘supposedly’ safe and satisfied healthy insured clients by the insurance industry.

Relating to a personal experience, despite possessing the best/expensive insurance coverage during childbirth in the United States with one child born in the U.S. under the private health care system, when compared with the similar experience in the public-private medicine in Australia for another childbirth made a world of difference.

In both situations, the problems were identical with the babies developing neonatal jaundice, a common occurrence yet in the U.S.; it involved readmission in the hospital and boarding for the mother to facilitate nursing the baby undergoing treatment for the illness. By contrast, in Australia, the mother and child monitored until complete recovery and were able to deal with the same problem during that course costing less and simultaneously avoiding other health issues.

Does public option cover all aspects of health problems in the realm of modern medicine?

How much will it cost the average citizen and the insurer i.e. the government for the basic coverage?

Laying out the costs for the different tiers and categories from the pediatric to geriatric care would clarify the doubts and skepticism in the public mind. In addition, the Medicare and Medicaid situation needs elaboration under the new plan.

What the healthy insured do not realize with the status quo is, the unreasonable premiums to the insurance industry through employer-employee contributions, and above all the excess costs incurred on others with serious medical issues distributed across the board by default. The insurance industry constantly penalizes the healthy and under-utilized insurance holders by relieving itself from the financial burden created by their own profit-oriented policy.

Other matter related to the pre-existing illnesses and unaffordability is costing the county hospitals tremendously and ultimately paid by the taxpayers rather than the system with a universal coverage.

No matter how hard the opponents try to masquerade the national health care crisis under the free enterprise management, the overwhelming truth is the health care in the United States is in shambles and need urgent overhauling with respect to quality, choice and costs as urged by the President Barack Obama.

The U.S. economy cannot sustain the burgeoning health care costs and allow the health care industry continue with the ‘business as usual’ philosophy that is increasingly becoming a personal health and financial nightmare for every American.

If all fails in light of the numerous accounts and sufferings shared by the millions of citizens, it’s time for every unemployed and underemployed American to consider running for the public office in 2010 elections and remove the stalemate contributors in the state capitols and Washington from the path towards national progress and prosperity.

The uninsured and unemployed citizens as the future office bearers must note that seeking a position in the public office not only assures a job security but also comes with the best health coverage that they are being deprived of now.

Only a political challenge can bring about the real change to the system contaminated by the deadly carcinogens called the special interests.

Please mobilize America by calling the public office holders representing every constituent to honor the oath and safeguard the interests of the people entrusting power to them in a democracy and not the lobbyists financing their campaigns.

The health care reform is a life and death matter. It’s like a wildfire that would burn down the common habitat regardless of its origin.

So, please act immediately for your own survival and rescue your loved ones from the tyranny of
profit seeking multinational free market.

Change is real when it happens from the bottom up rather than the top bottom.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Bush Stimulus Package

July 23, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Presentation of Bush Stimulus Package details

From: Stimuls Package details – Thanks

Source: http://www.stimuluspackagedetails.com/bush.html

Bush Stimulus Packages

In 2008, the Bush Administration handed out a slew of economic stimulus packages.

Under President George Bush’s administration, the Federal government gave

$29 billion to bail out Bear Stearns,

$178 billion to American taxpayers in the form of economic stimulus checks,

$300 billion to bail out American homeowners,

$200 billion to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,

$150 billion to bailout AIG, and

$700 billion to bail out banks (TARP).

Total Bush Administration Bailout – $1.557 trillion dollars i.e. $1 trillion and $557 billion dollars.

Timelines Of The Bush Economic Stimulus Packages

Following is a timeline of the economic stimulus packages, in chronological order.

March 2008 – $29 Billion Stimulus Package – Wall Street Bailout

The Federal Reserve stepped in to prevent the collapse of Bear Stearns (one of the world’s largest investment banks and brokerage firms) by guaranteeing $29 billion worth of potential losses in its battered portfolio. This provided enough economic stimulus for JP Morgan Chase to take over the beleaguered firm.

May 2008 – $178 Billion Stimulus Package – Average American Bailout

The U.S. Treasury provided an economic stimulus package to American taxpayers in the form of $600 economic stimulus checks for individuals and $1,200 economic stimulus payments for couples.

That cost the government $100 billion, and they threw in another $68 billion in tax breaks for businesses, $8 billion to increase unemployment benefits from 26 weeks to 39 weeks, and a $4 billion economic stimulus package to be doled out to states and local municipalities to buy and rehab foreclosed properties.

July 2008 – $300 Billion Stimulus Package – Homeowners Bailout

The Bush Administration committed $300 billion for 30-year fixed rate mortgages for at-risk borrowers, as well as tax credits for first-time homebuyers, who could be eligible to receive up to a $7,500 tax credit.

September 2008 – $200 Billion Stimulus Package – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Bailout

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (privately owned mortgage companies that are backed by the federal government) were about to fail, due to declining house prices and rising foreclosures.

The Bush Administration stepped in with a $200 billion economic stimulus package and placed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their $5 trillion in home loans in “temporary conservatorship,” to be supervised by the Federal Housing Finance AgeSeptember 2008 – $50 Billion Stimulus Package To Guarantee Money Market Funds

When the economic crisis reached a crescendo, Americans began to pull their money out of money market funds – historically considered to be the safest investment. To stop the bloodshed, the U.S. Treasury agreed to guarantee up to $50 billion, for up to a year.

September 2008 – $25 Billion Stimulus Package – Automakers Bailout

In an attempt to stave off bankruptcies for the “Big 3 automakers,” the Bush Administration gave General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler $25 billion in low-interest loans.

September – November 2008 – $150 Billion Stimulus Package – AIG Bailout

With the world’s largest insurance company in dire straits and 74 million clients at risk, the American government chipped in and gave AIG (American Insurance Group) $150 billion in a stimulus package that included: loans, purchase of toxic assets, and purchase of preferred shares.

October 2008 – $700 Billion Stimulus Package – Banks Bailout

The Bush Administration, under the umbrella of the U.S. Treasury, committed $700 billion in economic stimulus money under TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program). By many accounts, if this economic stimulus money hadn’t been injected, credit between banks would have frozen overnight, and not only the American economy, but also the global economy, would have seized up.

———————————————————————————————
Is The Economic Stimulus Package Working?

“Is the economic stimulus package working” seems to be the question on most people’s minds.

But which economic stimulus package are you talking about?

Bear Sterns was taken over by JP Morgan Chase, so maybe that $29 billion economic stimulus plan worked.

We all got our economic stimulus checks in 2008, but we didn’t necessarily put them back into the economy, so that $178 billion might not have been well-spent.

The $300 billion mortgage stimulus, “Hope For Homeowners,” awarded in July 2008 didn’t work very well either, because few people took an interest in the program. While proponents of this particular economic stimulus package estimated that 400,000 homeowners could be helped over a three-year period, in the first month, only 111 had applied.

The $200 billion economic stimulus handout to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage giants, stabilized them enough to prevent collapse.

The $50 billion economic stimulus to stabilize money market funds might have averted a disaster.

The $150 billion doled out to AIG, the insurance giant, prevented their closure, but must not have completely solved the problem since AIG came back for $30 billion more less than six months later, even as they were awarding $165 million in bonuses to their top executives.

The $25 billion given to the Big 3 automakers, Chrysler, Ford, and GM, allowed them to live to see another day, but they remain on the brink of disaster.

The $700 billion bank bailout, given in extreme haste in October 2008, might have kept the banks functioning, but no one really knows where that money went or what was done with it, so it’s hard to judge whether TARP is working.

$700 Billion Bush Stimulus

The $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, (TARP), given out by the George Bush Administration in October 2008. No one can seem to track down any details on this. The money was given to banks with the goal that they would lend it to people. They didn’t seem to do that, but no accountability was written into the hastily concocted plan, which seems to have been concocted in a matter of days, in a “cocktail napkin” format.

And that was just the economic stimulus packages of 2008.

National Unemployment and the Economic Status

July 23, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The ravenous economy has absorbed about $3.7 trillion dollars via bailouts and stimulus plans, (please refer to individual stimulus package topics for breakdown) yet the nation’s jobless rate rising like a tidal wave rather than settling along the shores. Several arguments mounting regarding the precarious job situation across the nation with some fifteen states like California, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio and others experiencing double digit in job losses accumulated over a period of time.

Not surprisingly, criticisms with an ominous prediction such as a possible return of the ‘Great Depression’ from various political and economic factions pouring against the current administration’s level of action and apparent inaction in averting the precipitous decline of the job market.

The irony being, President Obama’s opponents and fierce critics expressing deep concerns over the present generation’s children and grandchildren burdened with the burgeoning multi-trillion dollars national deficit from the ‘supposedly’ bizarre and revolutionary health care reform.

Unfortunately, the pervasive selective memory among the cynics forbids anyone from reminding the junkyard legacy by the previous administration. Nevertheless, it’s important to revisit the situation in order to find a pragmatic and an effective cure for the epidemic unlike a band-aid treatment tactic by the prior administration.

As detailed earlier on many occasions, the wild adventures in the past eight years eroded the fundamentals of the capitalist system. Immediately following the 9/11 attacks, the widespread panic about the United States economic and national security surely had an impact on the American investments ranging from housing to stock market including the exodus of some expatriates selling homes combined with the withdrawal of their investments.

The Bush-Cheney administration laid out the extravagant scheme to trump the situation with yet another war by invading Iraq when the mission in Afghanistan had barely begun. Conservative ideology dictates that wars promote prosperity. Actually, the notion might not be far-fetched because wars are highly beneficial to the nexus group gambling with others’ life and nation’s wealth.

When the administration inheriting a surplus economy engaged in a dubious agenda at the most improper and inconvenient time, the market conditions in 2002 and onwards became more volatile due to enormous speculations surrounding the United States affordability to wage another war.

The Bush-Cheney administration sailed through the storm with false assurances and blatant lies that Iraq war would be self-funded through oil revenues expected to be reaped exclusively by the United States in return for the establishment of democracy.

One must also not forget the administrations’ prophesy on the premature valentine’s day celebration by the cheering Iraqis handing out rose bouquets to the U.S. occupying forces at the expense of their blood and national treasury.

The excessive borrowing commenced at the dawn of the Iraq war with the fiscal conservatives now objecting to their constituents’ health care benefits, then turning a blind eye and signing a blank check to an unarguably a corrupt administration.

Funding two simultaneous wars converted the national surplus to national deficit adversely affecting the Treasury Notes and subsequently the U.S. currency in the international market. In the backdrop of the weakening Bond market, the stock market performance accelerated with investors’ confidence in the growth of different sectors specifically the oil and defense stocks due to the on-going wars, technology sector and the financial sector with hyperbolic balance sheets.

Above all, during that time the Federal Reserve and the Treasury’s overly cautious inflationary measure by reducing the interest rates beyond market conditions and unleashing the free market from necessary regulations in an utter conflict of interest essentially provided a fertile ground for the financial sector to exploit the unique opportunity in the lending activity.

In addition, the conglomerate like AIG and major investment banks extending towards the commercial bank’s activities risking long-term investments for short-term gains induced further competition for the traditional banking sector adopting strategies detrimental to the key components of the economy viz. the housing market, retail and commercial lending.

The financial sector’s unethical and unscrupulous practices in every aspect of lending targeting the nerve of the economic system i.e. the consumer, exacerbated the economic recession.

From the notorious sub-prime mortgages in the housing market now appropriately defined as ‘toxic assets’ bundled into the mortgage backed securities exchanged through international trading, to teaser rates offered on credit card later escalating to atrocious interest rates exceeding market affordability…are primarily responsible for the chronic ailments of the current real estate and the liquidity crisis.

Unequivocally the present woes of the economy are attributable to the overwhelming greed by the financial sector and the defiance for any rule of law until date. As clarified by President Obama during the press conference on date, the financial regulatory reforms are in order.

Since some prominent economists have been recently pushing for more stimulus over and above the total $3.7 trillion dollars, it’s necessary to obtain the facts and details on earlier investments to evaluate the methods applied as a result of the negative economic growth and dismal unemployment rate.

Please refer to stimulus package details followed by careful analysis in the subsequent segments.

Meanwhile, it’s imperative and incumbent on all bailout recipients and the previous administration officials regardless of hierarchy to come forward, testify under oath to Congress as the representatives of the American electorate, and explain exactly where and how the trillions of dollars have been invested.

Is it a coincidence that Goldman Sachs after being assisted by the former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson in gobbling Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, emerges with a bumper profit rewarding its every employee with a despicable amount $700,000 bonus the past week ? – Absolutely not.

It’s about time the criminals of the financial world are brought to justice in order to avoid a twenty first century revolution in the world’s modern democracy.

Congress must act in the interest of the people and abide by the constitutional rule of law with an honest and thorough investigation of the massive bailouts carried out at the expense of the hard working American taxpayers.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Why Health Care Reform must not fail?

July 21, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

People vs. Special Interests, GOP and Conservative Democrats aka Blue Dogs

The opponents to health care reform – the conglomerate with legislators as spokespersons and the conservative media specifically a network dedicated to the hampering of national progress in every respect deserve scrutiny and appropriate response.

It’s no surprise to witness the ‘grandstanding’ against the President by the opposition retaliating to the brutal defeat in the ’06, ’08 and inevitably the 2010 elections.

Last week, Republican Senator Jim DeMint made it pretty clear why the opponents of health care reform are fighting so hard.

As he told a special interest attack group,

“If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him.”

Here’s how the President responded:

“Think about that. This isn’t about me. This isn’t about politics. This is about a health care system that is breaking America’s families, breaking America’s businesses and breaking America’s economy. And we can’t afford the politics of delay and defeat when it comes to health care. Not this time, not now. There are too many lives and livelihoods at stake.”

What does the devious modus operandi mean to the national interest?

In a democracy, the constituents might have elected the health care opponents in the Democratic Party and GOP (The Grand Old Party) more appropriately ‘The Grand Obstructionist Party,’ however, their allegiance clearly sworn to special interests famished for atrocious profits at the expense of national interest.

The health care industry surpasses every other sector in this context.

Such betrayal in the light of naked truth in their face prompts the nation to question the patriotism of these legislators vehemently opposed to the welfare of their electorate representing the democracy.

It’s time for America to reign in on the ideology driven idiosyncrasies of the party that appears to be determined to lead the great state like California and the resilient USA to peril. As though it’s not enough that the once thriving state and national economies now on the brink of bankruptcy due to the failed ‘so-called’ fiscal policies by the fiscal conservatives operating exclusively to benefit their own and the benefactors’ agenda.

Where were the crusaders during the Republican controlled executive, legislative and judicial branches inheriting a surplus economy in 2000 went wild on a safari to a territory called ‘Iraq’ that predominantly led to the national status quo?

Perhaps, if the ‘apparently’ concerned lawmakers and persistent critics of the President Obama then displayed similar passion and emotions through kindergarten ‘Show and Tell’ dioramas to rescue the nation from an economic disaster titled ‘Operation Iraqi Freedom’ by posing the relevant questions currently aimed at the health care reform such as:

1. How much is it going to cost the American taxpayers?

2. Is it self-funded or a dead weight on the taxpayers’ backs, which interestingly rested on the donkey’s back?

3. Is there an exit strategy or earmarked for a golden jubilee?

4. Any consideration for the possible if not imminent loss of lives from the Machiavellian adventure.

5. Lastly, Why should the government indulge in the oil exploration, (the real motive behind U.S. invasion of Iraq) when the private enterprise equipped to flourish through market manipulation of choice, quality and price?

Their ‘die hard’ fiscal sentiments on health care reform would be meaningful and justified.

The irony with the major hooplas on health care reform targeting costs reduction and saving lives rejected by the same ‘pro-life,’ fiscal conservatives otherwise the lobbyists funded loyalists, while each and every one of them are the proud signatories to a reckless mission viz. Iraq that bankrupted the economy besides mass production of corpses.

According to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation data – Combined Iraq and Afghanistan war costs since Fiscal Year 2001 to date – $872.6 billion, of which Iraq’s share alone to national deficit is $661.1 billion and rising, costing more than three-fifths of the proposed trillion-dollar health care overwhelmingly approved and authorized by the fiscal stalwarts.

Meanwhile the U.S. taxpayers and the businesses health care costs in the exclusively private sector run with the insurance industry dominance compared to the industrialized nations’ health care is attention worthy.

Please refer to the sequel on the health care topic literally matter to life and death.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

U.S. Relations with India

July 19, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s visit to the Indian sub-continent is a topic to discuss in different context. It’s obvious that the United States engagement in Afghanistan tied with the success of the Zardari-Gilani government presumably involved in eliminating the mayhem in the northwestern region by the Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces after substantial autonomy from the less credible previous military rule of the President Pervez Musharraf.

Despite the severe domestic economic crisis, the continuation of U.S. financial and military aid to Pakistan is an enormous investment of U.S. trust and resources in the nuclear Pakistan. In return, Pakistan must deliver the long anticipated results terminating not only the major terror organizations like Al-Qaeda and Taliban but also all terror networks in its entirety constituting a menace to its own and international peace and security.

Much to the anxiety of the nuclear neighbor India and the remaining Western nations, United States role in expecting the Pakistani government to co-operate and contribute effectively in the global war against terror is crucial unlike the blind trust and blank checks policy of the Bush administration.

As stated earlier, the United States focus and priority should shift from the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan to the people of these socially and economically disadvantaged nations.

Although, the long overdue transformation depends on the interface with the respective governments, the United States must not squander the leverage it holds against the bureaucratic powers in both Pakistan and Afghanistan denounced for widespread corruption.

Further, given the disproportionate U.S. economic aid and troops commitment in the global cause, it’s incumbent on the international allies and every other nation affected by global terrorism to share the financial and military burden in alleviating the universal security crisis.

With respect to the emerging economic power and nuclear India’s concern over its nuclear neighbor Pakistan’s refusal and non-compliance of the international extradition treaty involving terrorists and terror networks in the Mumbai attacks last year —

The non-committal and disheartening response by the head of the State Department during the Indian press conference in Mumbai do not bode well with the world’s largest democracy in tune with the U.S. relations and pledges towards its allies particularly the closest ally Israel evidenced in the recent rhetoric such as —

“Strike against Israel will be an attack on the United States with a serious retaliation…”

To reiterate, the key representatives of the present White House and some legislators conspicuously favored to double standards are doing more harm than helping the United States in regaining the lost international solidarity and support much required in all fronts ranging from the economy, the environment, to the international security.

Unfortunately, the changing political landscape and economic developments in Asia and elsewhere ignored by the old school of thoughts indicates their ill preparedness of the reality.

The United States interest to take economic advantage of the expanding Indian middle class segment that is impressively political savvy and the U.S. demand seeking Indian input in the environmental issue possibly characterized as an ‘opportunism,’ considering the United States defense of the Zardari government’s inaction towards India’s security matter.

It would add to significant blunders in the U.S. foreign policy if the United States continues to adhere to the conventional strategy of hard line approach towards hypothetical threats yet selectively oblivious to genuine frustration based on real and proven events between the two nuclear nations in the Indian sub-continent.

Needless to state that the dysfunctional U.S. foreign policy due for drastic reform in the world view and understanding of the plight of the nations dependent on the United States to be a trustworthy partner in the mediation process of international peace and security. Otherwise, the status quo reviving the cold war era facilitating the nuclear and conventional arsenal proliferation is imminent.

Leadership thrives with fairness and equal treatment of all.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Saving Grace – California Fiscal Crisis

July 14, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The beautiful Golden State pawned over obstinate leadership and legislature in Sacramento. If the minority representatives and the head of the state confined to their political dictum and ideology, the majority on their part let the myopic view of the state of affairs undermine the social challenges confronting the constituents.

There were too many opportunities aided with pragmatic solutions to resolve the ever-rising budget shortfall (previously at $24.3 billion and now increased to $26.3 billion deficit) without draconian cuts hurting the weak and the most vulnerable in the society.

Sometimes, when there is intellectual deficiency in the leadership to deal with crisis, a wise option for the authority in power is to display humility, heed to genuine concerns and adhere to remedy offered to the problems rather than a Kamikaze approach headed for a disaster. Although, the leadership ignoring sound advice implies personal egocentric satisfaction, the false notions and misguided policies rejecting the population’s misery have led to the status quo.

Sacramento could have averted California fiscal debacle back in November 2008 when the path towards the state budget appeared difficult and beckoning swift reactionary measures to reign in on the economy tumbling downhill.  Instead, the legislature and the leadership stalled action with no respect for the constitutional rule of law mandating the state budget reconciliation by a deadline. The reality being the deadlines have come and gone with no state budget in place.

To reiterate earlier statements, the embarrassing performance by the entire legislative force with the head of the state leading in this respect squandered taxpayers’ valuable resources in political bickering, finger pointing and even assigning the duty to the taxpayers/voters through Special elections on May 19, 2009.

Since Sacramento abdicated their legislative responsibility to approve a functional state budget and a rescue plan for the following year, California is in dire fiscal state with a direct impact on the national economy. The only action from Sacramento seen thus far is the sedative talks to calm anxious residents dependent on social programs and services and the rest of the population eager for the state’s economic recovery.

Contemporary politics seeks comfort in lip service rather than concrete action focused on relief to the victims.  With no end to the on-going tug ‘o war, the ruthless slashing of funds continues with respect to education, health care, environment and the overall economy wounding the present and the future of the society.

In the absence of state budget for the fiscal year, the state treasury forced to issue IOUs declined encashment by the major bailed out banks defaulting on their lending commitment during taxpayer bailout to stimulate the local and national economy. The cumulative effect of the incompetence in Sacramento obvious in the degradation of the once stellar credit rating of the Golden State possibly reduced to junk status in the near future.

As experienced by the national economy, budget financing and legislative funding for reform and economic revival depend on both revenues and savings through spending cuts. The recommendations to raise income taxes from the following sources at the bare minimum slighted when it could have adequately provided for the budget shortfall.

Tobacco and alcohol tax, Vehicle registration fee and most importantly closing loopholes for the Corporations evading state income taxes through tax havens, collecting hefty fines from the environmental polluters i.e. oil, aviation and automobile industry, overhauling of the criminal justice system viz. the state prisons absorbing enormous amount of the budget to name a few.

The administration’s cavalier approach in demolishing the society’s foundation i.e. education, health care, and small businesses…with merciless withdrawal of funds from the budget indicates governance in the barricades, the elitists out of touch with the plight of the populists.

Why California is important for the Naitonal Economic Recovery?

Source: Wikipedia.org – Thanks

Gross domestic product (GDP)

California is responsible for 13% of the United States’ gross domestic product (GDP). The state’s GDP is at about $1.7 trillion (as of 2006).

The GDP increased at an annual rate of 3.1% in the first quarter of 2005.[13]

According to the California Department of Finance, if California were an independent state, it would have had the seventh largest economy in the world.
————————————————————————————————–
California is the epicenter for Science, Technology, and Entertainment besides representing every other sector —
Finance, Manufacturing, Construction, Health, Education, Hospitality, Energy as the pioneer of Green Technology, Environment, Trade, Transportation and Utilities, Information dealing with Motion Picture Broadcasting, Publishing, Internet businesses and Telecommunications to Agriculture and Mining are some of the many core activities creating jobs and contributing to the National GDP.

The impressive growth in California during the Silicon Valley boom stunningly boosted the National GDP with the state experiencing labor capital depletion in many industries. Subsequently the profit earnings in the California technology sector from 2002 to 2007 contributed to the stock market rally with the trend continuing until date. One of the reasons for the current enlarged National Unemployment figures is the double-digit jobless rate in California and the budget crisis exacerbating the national productivity.

With the escalating job losses and the stalemate in Sacramento holding the state budget and the children’s future hostage, the national economy will further deteriorate if the California budget shortfall not met immediately.

The taxpayers’ bailout of the finance sectors and the automobile industry with no accountability or transparency deprived the states like California from receiving generous federal funding to various programs. These bailouts primarily passed to enable liquidity in lending and job protection across the nation. Again, the proof of the pudding reflected in the dismal unemployment figures arising from defaults by the finance sector withholding lending to small and medium businesses as well as the average consumers.

Such violation of trust by the finance sector has attributed to poor consumer spending adversely affecting the retail sector with a ripple effect on the entire economy.

So much for the free market integrity and reliability in turning the economy around through capitalist mechanisms, that is generating job losses rather than job creation.

California on the other hand could emerge out of the existing crisis with federal assistance and approval of $26.3 billion in borrowing at nil interest rate. The amount returned progressively through state bonds over a set period would benefit both the state and the national economy in alleviating the financial meltdown. The Federal Reserve and Treasury could lend the necessary amount to California recovery plan from the residual amounts of the previously approved financial bailouts and TARP funds returned by some Investment banks like Goldman Sachs.

Meanwhile, the citizens of the great Golden State must engage in changing the political system with efficient bipartisan legislature and leadership in Sacramento. When the programs and services restored to benefit the people of the state, the interim relief and long-term stability to the nation’s largest GDP growth state is inevitable.

If the Federal Reserve or the Treasury unable to provide any relief to California then,

Considering the grave fiscal scenario facing the state of California, the SOS from the citizens of this state require urgent action by the Congress, Senate and the White House in the swift approval of the amount – $26.3 billion. Unfortunately, any opposition to the financial aid will have serious political backlash in 2010 and 2012 elections – demonstrated by the electorate during the special elections on May 19, 2009 rejecting both political parties for their insensitivity to the crisis.

As for the head of the state – The actions or the lack thereof until now evidenced in the areas identified below –

Following the electorate dismissal in the Special elections on May 19, 2009, the Governor appointed committee has business representatives with deep pockets favoring their own agenda against the less fortunate citizens to resolve the budget crisis, confirming the authority’s allegiance to the special interests.

The disingenuous remarks on the immigration issue related to the undocumented workers without any progress in issuing drivers license that could have not only generated state revenue but also moved the matter from the back burner is yet another political gimmick.

Recently the Governor’s controversial posturing threatening to fingerprint i.e criminalize the food stamp recipients targeting the disabled, the jobless and the elderly as the means to detect alleged fraud and forgery in an effort to saving costs against above mentioned nominal tax increases is beneath the humanitarian character and deplorable on all accounts.

The opposition minority has no time left to procrastinate by wasting taxpayer dollars to defend the ‘so-called’ fiscal-responsibility when the exercise proven counterproductive.

Similarly, the ruling majority must review and revise the union based workers’ and state employees’ disproportionate employment benefits costing taxpayers excessively, more relevantly in the public safety employment, and other government jobs.

A dilemma for the California voters is, if the right pledged to the appeasement of the Corporations investing thousands of dollars in political campaigns and legislative matter, the left compensated with the Unions and Corporations’ influence on the legislative issues.

Therefore, it is in the best interest of the nation to reform private contributions in political campaigns and promote public financing to implement checks and balances apart from maintaining costs at all levels of the electoral process. Also, the open primaries in the state elections will facilitate moderate representation from the right.

Given the unacceptable partisanship creating gridlocks and a colossal failure to balance the budget, it is appropriate for the State of California to end the term of the administration and those responsible in leading the state from prosperity to an economic ruin.

Effective immediately, the countdown begins for Sacramento to follow the guidelines by sparing the education, health care, energy, environment and all the essential programs and services benefiting the people and enacting the relevant tax increases with the elimination of redundant spending in other areas.

It’s incumbent on Sacramento to finalize on the meaningful state budget in order to settle the debts to different creditors and restore the pre-recession California image and credit ratings.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Health Care Reform

July 11, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The U.S. Senate is reviewing the components of the much-required health care reform bill. Obviously, the free market profiteers represented by the Insurance industry, hospitals, healthcare providers, Pharmaceutical companies and the entire enterprise strongly lobbying against the public option involving federal health care. Simultaneously, a tentative agreement by the hospitals and health care providers to reduce Medicare and Medicaid costs by $155 billion over a decade has been subject to immense speculation.

The opposition minority along with the cynics and the skeptics are vigorously contesting the legislation on the pretext – ‘tax’ and ‘fiscal responsibility’, an all time favorite issue.

Since the national health care estimated to cost over trillion dollars, the debate premised on choice, costs, and quality in accordance with President Obama’s primary objective of this crucial legislation.

Therefore, it’s important to address the concerns and criticisms from the respective quarters in all three perspectives.

Choice or Option:

Evidently, the free market’s resistance via lobbyists against the federal health care confirms the unwillingness to compromise on disproportionate profits at national expense and dominance in the national health care desperately due for major overhaul, even though the opposition minority claims satisfaction with the existing system regardless of the exorbitant costs enforcing the ‘average’ millions to remain uninsured and underinsured.

Unequivocally the present health care is fabulous for the privileged few particularly the lawmakers, the corporate executives and the fortunate healthy population with health insurance in reserve for emergencies. Unfortunately, the same system is neither empathetic nor conducive for those with pre-existing illnesses or children in families with congenital medical conditions and millions simply unable to afford the ‘supposedly’ competitive state of the art health care as declared by the opposition.

The reasons offered by the opposition defending the special interests investing millions of dollars in legislative votes to oppose federal health care, do not correlate with the status quo.

Despite the misnomer that current system is inexpensive without federal health care option, the exclusively private sectors run industry unable to offer any affordable insurance for a sizable population urgently in need of health care.

The real explanation being the system superbly efficient at a premium price, cost effective although draining the national economy predominantly profit driven with an utter disregard for the ethics or economics ultimately hurting the core national base, the vulnerable majority.

It’s clear from the defiance to the public option comprising federal health care viewed as a threat to phenomenal profits by the free market saturating the system with higher costs, limited choice and substandard care through the selection and elimination process leading the other competitors to adapt to similar strategy for survival and success.

Such practices and policies have allowed the free market to override harsh realities experienced by the ailing and dying population deeply affected by the ominous system prioritizing profits over public health.

It’s no surprise that the lobbyists are enabling the selective legislators and the media with the ammunition to curb the federal health care option favoring the entire population wellness against the broken system.

Another form of public option with the co-operatives by non-profit private groups or state run system considered an alternative to the federal health care. Again, it’s not a viable course of action to compete effectively with the health care conglomerate specifically given the dismal fiscal crisis like in the state of California. Nevertheless, the irony in the firm stance against government program is intriguing with the acceptance of states’ operation while rejecting the federal management.

The federal health system foes are fostering ideas and strategies doomed to fail in an effort to prevail in the free market monopoly with some legislators seemingly complicit in the agenda not barring the conflict of interest revealed in the latest disturbing news reports against them.

In the ‘choice’ aspect, the legislators must execute the power granted by their constituents to stand for the people against special interests by enacting the federal health care in public option as an integral part of the health care legislation.

Costs or Funding:

Yet another contentious issue creating huge barriers between the people and the profit seekers supported by the partisans is the trillion dollar costs to fund the program. The self-funding proposal aimed at saving costs from the non-functional system replaced with efficient and innovative techniques along with costs reduction by health care industry should facilitate insurance for the uninsured through federal option.

Conventional wisdom and experience dictates that it’s not possible to derive the trillion dollars funding from savings alone without generating payments from accessible sources – as it is the case in the state or national deficit reduction. Hence, President Obama’s proposal to cap deductions on employee health benefits claimed by corporations is a reasonable approach to health care financing.

Further, costs distribution via nominal tax surcharge applied on avenues earning extraordinary income i.e. over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples, along with employer contribution through a fee or tax based on percentage of worker’s salary to aid health benefits should adequately solve the equation.

It’s necessary to underscore the surtax and employer contribution fee favoring the small business owners with huge savings in providing the necessary health benefits via federal health care to their labor force, a vital capital resource to survive in the competitive cash strapped economy. Something, the free market could have offered in the non-governmental environment instead stayed focused on exploiting the system with mega profits.

Of course, there is going to be outcry with political humor like – nation socialized with ‘Robin Hood’ motto, President Obama please spare us with your “Change” theme as we might all end up asking one another to spare a ‘change’ in the revolutionary health care reform.

Humor apart, the seriousness lies in the lack of robust competition to keep the costs down and provide quality care. Another opposition’s grievance against federal participation deserves attention i.e. legislators perpetually scornful towards anything to do with their own organization viz. government sponsored projects, programs and services, reaction strangely implying self-deprecation of the political power representing the people.

Interestingly though, such entities are surely elected by their constituents i.e. people in a democracy but they swear allegiance to the Corporations funneling money into their campaigns and beyond.

It’s technically a democracy electing officials to protect the interests of the free market triumphant in widening the gap between the haves and the have-nots aside from dragging the nation to insolvency as witnessed in the finance sector and automobile industry.

In the tax issue, the opposition argument targeted at equalization of tax code. What it means is while the corporations claim deductions from health care benefits to their employees, similar tax relief not extended to private individuals presumably forced to purchase health insurance under the impending plan.

Although, the presentation posed as advocating for the people, essentially it helps the Corporations selling insurance in the strictly private run industry by transferring the liability on to the government through tax credit and revolving back to the tax payer funded health insurance only benefiting the profit seeking corporations rather than the taxpayer themselves.

Clearly, there are many opportunities to provide for the long overdue national health care costs and tragically, the legislative matter politicized by the opponents in compliance with the special interests order.

Care/Quality and Quantity:

The major objection from the opposition is the apparent government rationing of the health care and subsequent effects on the quality citing examples such as the Canadian and the British National Health Care system allegedly dysfunctional because of the government engagement with emphasis on the prolonged waiting period having a direct toll on the patients diagnosed for certain medical conditions. In other words, the deterioration in quality linked to the neglect of preventive medicine proven cost effective than treatment care.

The opposition argument might be legitimate; however, it does not transcend reality.

In this context, the Insurance industry dominated free market authored the “pre-existing” illness code apart from emerging as the champion in discounting and dismissal of genuine medical conditions leading to numerous lawsuits and out-of-court settlements. Notably all of them attributed to negligence and excessive insurance company intervention as evidenced in the grueling and agonizing experiences shared by thousands of victims and health care providers through various outlets.

On several occasions, the pro-health care reformers confronted by the anti-reform movement demanding the name of an international system successfully meeting the national requirements in terms of choice, cost and care. In fact, among the many industrialized nations the Scandinavian country Sweden provides excellent national health care from preventive medicine to cure and the achievement made all possible primarily as the world’s highest taxpayers.

Other hypothesis includes the Medicare and Medicaid payments to hospitals escalating beyond the actual costs over the decade calculated on the number or quantity and not the quality. The private groups reflecting the opposition’s sentiments against the federal health care suggested ‘Pay for quality’ in the bill resembling the Obama plan pledged to promote prevention, treatment and cure.

Amidst agreements and fallouts, a common flaw detected in both groups i.e. the federal system consisting federal agencies for approval on minor to major patient care as a stopgap measure to curtail expenses from medical practices shielding itself against malpractice lawsuits and investment recovery on medical equipments through patient insurance. Any form of over-indulgence will drive the costs in this matter.

It’s best for both federal and private health care to remove bureaucracy and intrusion between patients and health care professionals with unnecessary pre-authorizations causing delay in diagnosis and cost increase. Electronic guidelines on standard medical procedures for common illnesses are an ideal cost reduction method.

Finally, as there are many other issues to address in the immediate future, the analysis with solutions in the health care topic concludes strongly recommending federal run health care as a public option competing on even keel with the private sector to accomplish the general mission – universal health coverage guaranteed to heal the frail economy and the suffering citizens.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

U.S. Foreign Policy in the 20th and 21st Century

July 6, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The United States foreign policy in the twentieth and twenty first century viewed by allies and adversaries differently depending upon the U.S. engagement viz. modus operandi in the conflicts of the affected regions.

Throughout the twentieth century, the United States direct and indirect dominant role brought peace and chaos to the world order, ominously the Cuban crisis and the infamous Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos war combined with constant interventions in the Korean Peninsula, the Americas, the Middle East, Africa as well as South and South East Asia.

With the exception of sparing the world from Nazi and fascist rule in Europe and elsewhere – a significant contribution to the birth of democracies in Japan and Western Europe,

Ironically, the subsequent U.S. foreign policy mostly enabled the rise of brutal regimes and totalitarianism particularly in the under developed, poor and impoverished parts of the world.

The colonial British dethroned by the Imperial U.S. foreign policy primarily responsible for the status quo in the Middle East, while other European and Mediterranean colonialists – France, Netherlands, Spain, Greece and Portugal leaving their trademark in Africa, Asia and the Americas.

World witnessed the emergence of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Theocracy in Iran following the overthrow of U.S. backed monarchy Shah of Iran including the predecessors and the successors in the entire Middle East aided by the contrived U.S. foreign policy driven by selective internal and external political interests focused on personal agenda.

Much to the operators’ surprise, their misguided policies led to the formation of terror organization such as Al Qaeda and the coronation of its leader Osama Bin Laden, a former Mujahedeen trained by CIA and the U.S. professional armed forces during the confrontation with the Afghanistan invaders, the former Soviet Union.

Given the track record of military aggression and perpetual violence by the profiteers representing the military industrial complex successfully causing carnage and destruction around the world up until now,

The cold war era might have curbed huge conventional and nuclear clashes between the two Superpowers in the 60’s and the 70’s but certainly facilitated the lucrative arms race specifically the nuclear arsenal between the rich and poor nations.

Late twentieth century comprising the Soviet Union disintegration along with nuclear fragmentation in that politically unstable vast region left the field open for U.S. foreign policy dominance in the world.

The United States foreign policy architects wasted no time in the invasions and occupations on the national security pretext and supporting their ‘ally’ Israel in the highly volatile Middle East or promoting ill-conceived democracies in the Western hemisphere through military coups.

The United States reputation until the 2008 Presidential election, as the leader of the free world and the Superpower tarnished because of the failed U.S. foreign policies for most part of the twentieth century and well into the twenty first century. Again, U.S blunders complemented with Iraqi invasion contributed to the neglect of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan to eliminate the strengthening Al Qaeda and Taliban forces from the northwestern Pakistani turf.

Further in the Middle East, as a defense surrogate the United States’ sworn allegiance to Israel against potential threats and attacks from Iran, Syria, Lebanon through Hezbollah, and Palestinian Gaza through Hamas is another factor for skepticism towards the ‘Western partner, USA’ among the Arab nations controlling the ‘oil’, the world’s most required natural resource.

Although, the strange predicament of U.S. surrogacy towards Israel and platonic relationship with the Arab world defended by declaring energy independence to undermine Arab stance in this matter, the reality of it is at least a decade away if not longer considering the Washington stalemate in the energy bill pending Senate approval.

The existing Israeli illegal invasion and occupation of Palestinian territories through settlements expansion must end to resolve the relic Israeli-Palestinian issue.

Meanwhile, in the Iranian political crisis and nuclear program, the recent rhetoric from the key White House representatives is not helpful as it creates unnecessary obstacles on the path towards democracy and stability in the Middle East such as Iraq and inevitably Iran.

Aside from pursuing the independent Palestinian state free of Israeli control in any form or shape and ensuring Israel’s safety and security as a sovereign state, it is paramount for Iran to free itself from the repressive theocratic regime for long lasting peace in the Middle East.

Fortunately, the current developments by the Iranian dissent galvanizing pro-reformist movements and the moderate clerics’ defiance to validate the rigged June 12 election results are optimistic and encouraging in terms of the possible democratic Iran evolving amidst reprehensible pro-democracy crackdown and human rights violation.

Any assertion by the United States proclaiming Israel’s sovereignty as a precursor for military strikes against Iranian hypothetical nuclear proliferation could be immensely detrimental to the United States, Israel, Iraq, and the remaining international security.

Why United States must refrain from controversial political posturing in an effort to defend Israel against alleged Iranian nuclear threat?

And

Why Israel should abandon any military option against Iran?

1. Firstly, Iran embroiled in the political crisis following the courageous decision by the pro-democratic Iranian population to seek twenty first century governance that guarantees fundamental human rights and economic relief with jobs, distribution of oil revenues through investment in common national growth and development.

2. Iranian theocracy fractured from the political turmoil delineating the moderate clerics from the hardliners with respect to unlawful killings, arrests and clamp down in the wake of forming the theocratic rule with their nominee Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, an unpopular choice even among the
Ayatollahs representing the theocracy.

3. During the political transitioning in Iran any such statements by the United States – “Israel has a sovereign right to strike Iran’s apparent nuclear site and that the United States will not interfere in Israeli mission with the reaffirmation from the State Department that strike against Israel will be an attack against the United States” sever than serve the purpose.
———————————————————————————–

ABC’S SUNDAY TALK ON JUNE 5, 2009: “This Week” Host George Stephanopoulos

Three times, I asked Biden if the Obama Administration would stand in the way of an Israeli military strike. Three times, he repeated that Israel was free to do what it needed to do. “If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice.”

A subsequent interview with the Secretary of State – Hillary Clinton.

“CLINTON: I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHANOPOULOS: Is it U.S. policy now?

CLINTON: I think it is U.S. policy to the extent that we have alliances and understandings with a number of nations. They may not be formal, as it is with NATO, but I don’t think there is any doubt in anyone’s mind that, were Israel to suffer a nuclear attack by Iran, there would be retaliation.

STEPHANOPOULOS: By the United States?

CLINTON: Well, I think there would be retaliation. And I think part of what is clear is, we want to avoid a — a Middle East arms race which leads to nuclear weapons being in the possession of other countries in the Middle East, and we want to make clear that there are consequences and costs.”
————————————————————————————–
Analysis – By Padmini Arhant

President Obama’s candidacy pledged towards relentless diplomacy and peaceful negotiations in all foreign policy matters including the Middle East, assuring a dramatic shift from the Bush administration’s formula involving military action to resolve any political crisis.

The commitment reversal in the Iranian matter would deeply hurt the administration’s credibility in the Middle East as well as among the nations, the President is attempting to outreach for better international relations i.e. Russia and its allies.

United States and Israeli positions could also be misconstrued as provocative and derail the ‘behind the scenes’ progress developing in Iran. Besides fomenting fear and concern among the Iranian population already mortified from the latest violence, it could escalate tension in the neighboring Iraq adjusting to the gradual U.S. troops withdrawal from its cities with the hope of seeing complete timeline withdrawal by 2011.

United States will be officially presenting itself complicit in the catastrophic event with similar overtures not barring double standards in anything related to Israel.

Above all, the economic impact is even greater with respect to crude oil stocks superficially skyrocketing based on the speculative ramifications of Israeli strike against Iran (an OPEC member and one of the leading oil producers) on United States watch.

Moreover, Israel’s unilateral action against Iran would isolate Israel and exacerbate Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s status as a hardliner even though the Prime Minister now appearing to reconcile terms with the two states solutions vital for the Israeli-Palestinian future and,

Notwithstanding the proposed Israeli military action jeopardizing the Arab states’ recognition of Israel as a sovereign state and a viable peace partner in the Middle East.

As for the rest of the world, the terror attacks will substantially increase by default, embolden the weakened Al Qaeda in Iraq and Pakistan with vigorous recruitments through mere propaganda that U.S, and ally Israel preparing yet another military action against an Islamic nation Iran after the prolonged occupation in Iraq.

In light of the projected precarious scenarios, United States being the world leader has a moral responsibility to prioritize diplomacy and non-violence over military attacks either directly or by proxy.

It’s time for the United States to make a conscientious departure from the disastrous old ways proven counterproductive and write a new chapter in history by remaining a trustworthy partner and a reliable negotiator for all nations in the establishment of global peace.

Opportunities are rare and power guided by wisdom produce positive outcome.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

http://youtu.be/wHduddO7ZaU http://youtu.be/IWtj7kr35Ck http://youtu.be/p9QO-http://youtu.be/p9QO-xvkyRY http://youtu.be/bm92_NDdTw4 http://youtu.be/dLT8UjF7ZYY http://youtu.be/EpM49PRu5h4 http://youtu.be/dNoskHbTaOk http://youtu.be/xcfEIsX7t6A http://youtu.be/3fgpJJUGElQ

« Previous PageNext Page »

PadminiArhant.com