Update from the
Heartland
No.617
7.10.13 – 13.10.13
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
The follow-up news items:
-- There was no visible movement in the passage of H.J. Res.
59 – the continuing appropriations bill [615,
616]. The federal government (USG) remains selectively closed,
except for entitlements, and selective funding or promises to favored segments. There have been some discussions about
a short-term, six-week extension of the debt ceiling. The Tea Party minority faction of the Republican Party decided
to make the PPACA their focus and hold the USG hostage since they failed to
prevent the original passage and failed in the Judiciary review as well. Again, the stress and uncertainty
belongs to the House majority leadership, but now they must save face. Those representatives in the House who
brought We, the People, to this place will not feel the pain they are
inflicting on the rest of us but they should.
-- As noted in the Comments Section, the funding of the USG
and the existence of the PPACA are separate issues. A number of Republican representatives have suggested a
compromise to PPACA [432, 512, 553] for “opt-in” rather than “opt-out.” Toward the objective of PPACA, I do not see the difference;
both options would allow individuals to remain outside the health care system. Neither will work unless we can ensure they
will NOT become an uncollectible expense to the medical system. As I have voiced my opinion previously
[616], I would support an “opt-out”
choice, and I will also throw in the “opt-in” approach as well, if and only if,
there are provisions to ensure those individuals choosing to remain outside the
PPACA objective are not allowed to seek medical treatment without paying in
cash in advance. Without such
provisions, neither option will work and would ultimately destine PPACA to
failure. I appreciate the desire
for choice, but we are well past the threshold of ridiculous tolerance. We have got to reduce the overhead
costs of uncollectible debt attached to every medical service dollar spent. I simply do NOT understand why it is so
hard for those Tea Party Republicans to appreciate we are paying for the uninsured
who seek medical treatment and there are American citizens who do not seek
medical treatment when they should because they do not have a means to pay for
the treatment they need. Once
again, I must say, PPACA is certainly not perfect; it has plenty of flaws; but,
it has a worthy objective. Let us
make it better rather than hobbling it or trying to kill it.
-- Four American so-called “whistleblowers” traveled to
Moscow to meet with Edward Snowden [599],
his first visitors since he was granted temporary asylum by Russia in August.
The group was composed of prominent whistleblower advocates, including Coleen
Rowley (FBI), Jesselyn Alicia Radack née Brown (DoJ) [340. 343], Thomas
Andrews Drake (NSA) [436, 492], and Raymond “Ray” McGovern (CIA),
who presented Snowden with an award for truth-telling. So, I guess the message is there is no
such thing as secret information.
Sources will not want their information on the Web, so let see how long
we can collect valuable intelligence information without human sources.
In an interesting punctuation on the
Snowden visitors above, Director-General Andrew Parker of the Security Service (MI5) publicly condemned
intelligence leaks and the associated Press coverage regarding how the intelligence agencies intercept
voice and internet communications as a “gift” to terrorists, and causing
“enormous damage” to the fight against jihadists.
Then, we have this interesting and
relevant Press perspective:
“Edward Snowden, MI5, The Guardian: who are the bad guys? –
States must be able to spy on terrorists – the new head of MI5, Andrew Parker,
is right to point out that to do so requires secrecy”
by Alan Judd
The Telegraph [of
London]
Published: 09 Oct 2013; 8:33PM BST
In a comparable message, the Director of
the National Security Agency (DIRNSA) General Keith Brian Alexander, USA [USMA
1974] made the public portion of his case against restrictions on the NSA’s
surveillance capability.
“N.S.A. Director Gives Firm and Broad Defense of
Surveillance Efforts
by David E. Sanger and Thom Shanker
New York Times
Published: October 12, 2013
We need to pay attention to the professionals who protect
us, like Parker and Alexander, as we grapple with the thresholds of our
fundamental right to privacy. At
the end of the day, we cannot allow terrorists and those who would harm us to
hide behind the Constitution.
News from the economic front:
-- Various Press reports indicate there are tense
negotiations inside the Federal Reserve as the central bank struggles with a
U.S. economy still showing signs of weakness and faced with new risks on the
horizon. The Fed still maintains
their intention to wind down their US$85B-per-month bond-buying program by year
end.
London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (LIBOR)
Debacle [552]:
-- Well, it looks like we might actually have a contest
before us in the LIBOR debacle. Thomas
“Tom” Hayes [574, 576], the former UBS and Citigroup
trader accused of orchestrating a scheme to manipulate interest rates, appears
to be gearing up for a fight. He faces criminal fraud charges in the U.S. and
U.K. The Wall Street Journal reported that Hayes has dismissed the London
law firm that had been representing him as he cooperated with the U.K.’s
Serious Fraud Office over the past several months, and has hired a pair of
high-profile U.K. lawyers with reputations for mounting aggressive defenses in
financial-fraud cases. If the case
goes to trial, we should learn more about how this scandal occurred.
-- So we don’t lose focus . . . the infamous 16, involved,
international banks are:
· Barclays [UK] – US$454M fine [550];
Singapore sanctions [600]
· Bank of America [U.S.]
– Singapore sanctions [600]
· BTMU [Japan] – Singapore sanctions [600]
· Citigroup [U.S.]
– Singapore sanctions [600]
·
Credit Suisse [Switzerland] – Singapore sanctions [600]
· Deutsche Bank [Germany] – US$654M LIBOR profit [578]; set aside €500M (US$641M) for
LIBOR liability [589]; Singapore sanctions [600]
·
Lloyds TSB [UK]
· HSBC [UK] – Singapore
sanctions [600]
· HBOS
[UK]
· JPMorgan Chase [U.S.]
– Singapore sanctions [600]
·
Norinchuckin [Japan]
· Rabobank
[Netherlands]
· RBC
[Canada]
· RBS [UK] – £390M (US$612.6M) in
fines, 21 employees involved [582]; Singapore sanctions [600]
· UBS [Switzerland] – US$1.5B fine, two charged [575]; Singapore sanctions [600]
· West
LB [Germany]
Added to the list by the Monetary Authority of Singapore [600]:
·
ING [Netherlands] – Singapore sanctions [600]
· BNP Paribas [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]
· Crédit Agricole [France] – Singapore sanctions [600]
·
DBS [Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
·
Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation [Singapore] –
Singapore sanctions [600]
·
Standard Chartered [UK] – Singapore sanctions [600]
·
United Overseas Bank
[Singapore] – Singapore sanctions [600]
·
Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. [Australia] –
Singapore sanctions [600]
·
Macquarie [Australia] – Singapore sanctions [600]
·
Commerzbank [Germany] – Singapore sanctions [600]
Others involved:
·
ICAP [UK] – fined US$87M + three executives charged [615]
I trust none of us will lose sight of what these banks have
done. Lest we forget!
Comments
and contributions from Update no.616:
Comment to the Blog:
“I know nobody who is willing to defend either political
party in the government shutdown. I keep hearing recommendations that they all
grow up, but that day is not coming soon enough. Personally, I am out of
sympathy for the Tea Party. I have come to see them as the biggest bunch of
babies Americans have somehow elected since at least Reconstruction. The
Democrats are not the aggressors here, but they have not had a backbone among
them for quite some time, and Obama is a far bigger disappointment to me than
Carter. (Clinton was basically his own creature. Most of his accomplishments
were stolen Republican issues.)
“I see PPACA as a separate issue. The Tea Party has tried to
overturn that law around 40 times with no success. “Sore losers” is too kind a
description for them.
“As far as giving people an out if they agree to pay cash
“up front” for medical treatments, I expect that human nature would defeat that
one because medical people would be unwilling to let large numbers of people
die because they fail to think rationally.
“The Republican Party, as with the Democratic Party as well
as the Whigs and the Federalists before them, has done what brought votes to
its candidates. After all, the Tea Party aroused emotions that brought the
Republicans votes. The fact that the votes now seem to be lost in the face of
reality did not concern Republican leadership until it became blindingly
obvious. The notion that political parties act from moral motivations and/or
foresight is not quite as unsound as believing that corporations have those
things but still will not serve as a predictor of their actions.
“Mr. Justice Thomas’s racist and irrational argument (“the
protections harm those they protect”) in the 14th Amendment case bolsters the
case for him as the most embarrassing Justice of our time. I have no idea why
he remains silent most of the time and I do not know why his conflicts of
interest have not been pursued by others, but he should make good entertainment
for future generations of legal scholars.
“Christine Legarde works for the International Monetary
Fund. She could hardly avoid making some statement about our political
self-destruction, and there is nothing positive she could say about the debt
ceiling issue without becoming an international laughingstock on the scale of
Rand Paul.”
My response to the
Blog:
We,
the People, vote these yayhoos into office. Imagine the statement we would make if we voted every last
one of them out of office. Oh my,
I’m quite the opposite re: Obama v. Carter.
Re:
PPACA. The mindlessness of Tea Party
Republicans is political parochialism at its worst; it just happens to be their
focus, i.e., against anything and everything President Obama has done. As I’ve said before, I have my concerns
and misgivings regarding PPACA.
The genesis and codification were rushed through Congress in less than
two years, when the Democrats controlled both the political branches &
chambers. I believe in that rush
they hatched some premature concepts that may not work. The influence of the insurance
companies on the process should be a concern to all of us. Yet, as I said, the objective was good
and noble. I would be far more
supportive of the Republican initiatives, if they offered ideas for improvement
rather than this foolish “let’s kill the whole thing” nonsense, made even more
stupid by their use of blackmail and extortion to achieve their political aim.
Re:
opt out. Yes, of course, you are
correct. The medical profession
works under the Hippocratic Oath, and it says nothing about money or the
ability to pay. OK, so my
tongue-in-cheek solution is a non-starter. I do not wish to opt out. Medical & dental insurance (through my employer –
military & commercial) has served me well. That is exactly the PPACA model, which is precisely why I
have no fundamental objection to PPACA.
Yet, I can also understand why some folks do in fact object to being
told they must obtain medical insurance coverage. The Tea Party Republicans should be concentrating their
energies on solving that part of the problem rather than attempting to kill
PPACA for everyone.
Before
condemning Justice Thomas’ reasoning in Fisher, I would suggest you read all
of his concurring opinion, at least.
He makes a reasoned and compelling case that reverse discrimination is
discrimination of another color and inconsistent with the Constitution. My concluding question in last week’s
Update was not rhetorical; it was serious. At what threshold of diminished racism is affirmative action
no longer necessary?
Re:
“Legarde’s statement.” Yes, of
course. Although this current
debacle is a purely political issue, not economic or financial, the outcome
could have profound economic impact on the entire World economy, thus her
concern. The Tea Party Republicans
may not give a damn about the economic impact on the rest of the World, but I
am fairly certain their investment advisers are.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment