Apparently the HuffPo has learned, by way of a Freedom of Information Act request, that the OLC prepared a memo assessing the legality of the infamous Trillion Dollar platinum coin. However, the DoJ won't release the memo:
The Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which functions as a sort of law firm for the president and provides him and executive branch agencies with authoritative legal advice, formally weighed in on the platinum coin option sometime since Obama took office, according to OLC's recent response to HuffPost's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. While the letter acknowledged the existence of memos on the platinum coin option, OLC officials determined they were "not appropriate for discretionary release."
Although Laurence Tribe delivered leg tingles to the left by casually opining that the coin idea passed muster, I dissented. My gist - the relevant passage of the statute is this (my emphasis):
(k) The Secretary may mint and issue platinum bullion coins and proof platinum coins in accordance with such specifications, designs, varieties, quantities, denominations, and inscriptions as the Secretary, in the Secretary's discretion, may prescribe from time to time.
Matt Yglesias provided a lovely example of the sort of ignorance at work. What he didn't realize is that the concept of a "bullion coin" has a clear meaning in the nummismatic world. Let's cut to the US Mint:
A bullion coin is a coin that is valued by its weight in a specific precious metal. Unlike commemorative or numismatic coins valued by limited mintage, rarity, condition and age, bullion coins are purchased by investors seeking a simple and tangible means to own and invest in the gold, silver, and platinum markets.
So the Mint sells one ounce gold coins worth (roughly) $1,200 dollars with a face value of $50, but not the opposite. That would be an example of a bullion coin, which is what the statute authorized. Matt was having a 'har de har' about the ninnies at Fox News who thought that a trillion dollar platinum bullion coin would actually need to have a trillion dollars worth of platinum; if words have meaning, they were right.
Ahh, but what about the coins jingling in your pocket? Surely their value as molten metal is less than their value as a coin? No doubt; the excess value is known as "seignorage", and Matt was helpful enough to illustrate the ignorance at work there as well, with this headlined claim:
The Platinum Coin Was Intended To Generate Seigniorage
Wrong again, but thanks for playing! The US Mint makes 'seignorage' profits on the circulating coins it distributes to banks. It makes the same sort of manufacturing profits GM or Apple makes when it competes in the global market for bullion coins by offering gold, silver, and platinum coins at a cost-competitive basis. I hope Matt does not believe that when the US Mint converts an ounce of gold into a $50 American Eagle and sells it for $1500 that there is a seignorage profit. Let's see what the Mint says about their platinum coin:
All American Eagles are legal tender coins, with their face value imprinted in U.S. dollars. Although their face value is largely symbolic, it provides proof of their authenticity as official U.S. coinage. The one-ounce platinum coin displays the highest face value ($100) ever to appear on a U.S. coin.
With platinum near $1,400 an ounce there is no seignorage there (OK, "largely symbolic" as a description of the $100 face amount works a a clue, too).
So if the Mint can't issue a trillion dollar platinum bullion coin without that much platinum, can it offer a "proof platinum coin"? Conventional usage would say not - a "proof" coin is a specially produced version of a coin that is also made by conventional minting techniques. The notion of a "proof" version of a bullion coin that could not exist in conventional form is meaningless. So unless the Mint if prepared to produce a beautifully struck coin with a trillion dollars worth of platinum in it, the "proof" alternative is excluded.
I would love to see the OLC memo, mainly to see whether they actually use a phrase such as "cranial-anal impaction". And of course, the Fed's lawyers would have to sign off on this before they cut the trillion dollar check, and that would never happen - the idea of the Fed risking its independence and alienating Congress forever by participating in this sort of Executive Branch end-run seems to ignore the history of the central bank in this country.
My strong suspicion is that Prof. Tribe did roughly as much homewrk as Matt, slid the phrase "bullion coin" as meaningless static, and pressed on.
This is what they were doing when they didn't have the site fixed, let Volodya steal his lunch money on Syria.
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 04:25 PM
"Hi, I'm (insert talk show host name here) and I'm here to tell you about the opportunity of a lifetime. Your own Trillion dollar coin! Yes! One. Trillion. Dollars.
For a limited time the United States Mint has authorized the production of one ounce coins minted from the country's unobtanium stockpile.
For further information call my good friends at Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe at 1-800-Satan Lives.
Help fund Obamacare and free stuff for everyone by calling now or on line at www.healthcarefiasco.gov
The first 50 successful registrants will receive a free audit by the Internal revenue Service valued at $2,000!"
Posted by: matt | December 04, 2013 at 04:30 PM
Since we're talking absurd;
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080326033802AANkQwZ
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 04:31 PM
But Matt, on the other channel the actor promises that if I buy enough coins, he will give me a safe to keep them in. Will you match that offer?
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 04, 2013 at 04:37 PM
Meanwhile Carlos Slim notes the Syrian matter is causing some headwinds in the 'AQ is on the run' meme.
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 04:44 PM
I gave mine away today at the Salvation Army kettle in from the local Publix. By the time I realized what I had done the guy was half-way to Fiji on a NetJet.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | December 04, 2013 at 04:45 PM
I have to cross-post this because its family:)
Tomorrow we celebrate Sinterklaas where Frederick will leave some oranges in his shoe and some milk and cookies on the hearth for the Old Bishop and his pal Zwarte Peet and the Kleine Peets in the hopes of some neat new things:
[Some of] My nephews and nieces in Belgium - Obviously a bunch of little rascists:)
Posted by: Jack is Back! | December 04, 2013 at 04:49 PM
--But Matt, on the other channel the actor promises that if I buy enough coins, he will give me a safe to keep them in. Will you match that offer?--
You mean the Nigerians haven't asked you to help them out with the $1T coin their aunt left them when she croaked?
They're not even asking for one thin dime in return, just your name, address and SSN.
You can use my email address and I'll go have halvsies with ya, OL.
Posted by: Ignatz | December 04, 2013 at 05:03 PM
What's the world coming to;
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/12/nooooo-elizabeth-warren-pledges-not-to-run-for-president/#comments
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 05:25 PM
evening all
Posted by: [email protected] | December 04, 2013 at 05:36 PM
From the Boston Herald article: "When asked if she sees a clash looming between Hillary Clinton's centrist wing of the party vs her liberal branch, Warren dodged any mention of the former U.S. Secretary of State."
Centrist?!
Posted by: Dave (in MA) (WTF Typepad) | December 04, 2013 at 05:37 PM
yeah, the fake cherokee trying to scalp the front runner!
Posted by: [email protected] | December 04, 2013 at 05:42 PM
William Devane is already under contract.
Posted by: MarkO | December 04, 2013 at 05:43 PM
"Centrist?!"
Of course. The midpoint between Lenin and Mao is accurately described as centrist. Fauxcahontas and the Red Witch have very different visions for the collective with the Red Witch taking a moderate review regarding who will be sent to the gulags.
Posted by: Account Deleted | December 04, 2013 at 05:46 PM
Centrist?-- heh
The Herald is right about one thing, 2015-2016 is the deathmatch between the Dem Alinskys and Clintonistas.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 04, 2013 at 05:55 PM
Ok, getting caught up after a long day of meetings. I will commit the offense of commenting on a topic from the previous thread. Iggy @11:50am:
Turley is the guy you don't want giving your son a ride in his car; with Toobin it's your daughter.
Was Turley in some kind of scandal? I know Toobin's story.
Jane: Have Noonan and Turley only fallen off the wagon because he has been so unsuccessful?
Turley, being a lib Dem, has done a much greater service than Noonan. Noonan is just trying to pretend that she was never on Barry's side, but should never be forgiven for her support. Turley, on the other hand, was the most powerful voice in the hearing yesterday precisely because he's a lib and (former?) Obama supporter.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 04, 2013 at 05:56 PM
I think it quite interesting that we have no one being touted as a candidate except Hillary. Why is that?
Cuomo, Warner, Bayh, Dean, and a bunch of others are really quiet.
And no one seems to be going to Iowa.
So, either Hillary is the designated candidate and everyone else has been told to forget it, or she is a stalking horse for someone else.
Who would that be?
Posted by: Miss Marple | December 04, 2013 at 05:59 PM
Miss Marple-- if HildaBeast runs the Cuomo, Bayh, O'Malleys won't run, period. Her challengers would come from the Left, Dean, Fauxcohontas, whomever Barry designates.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 04, 2013 at 06:02 PM
Damn you Thai pad!
Posted by: Beasts of England | December 04, 2013 at 06:07 PM
Seignorage only occurs when we accept the stated value of the currency and it is useful as tender or redemption.
Trillion dollar coin? I'll give you $5,000...
Posted by: Beasts of England | December 04, 2013 at 06:08 PM
-Was Turley in some kind of scandal?--
Also from the last thread in response to CH's well taken point I was being unfair;
Posted by: Ignatz | December 04, 2013 at 06:08 PM
With the polling as it is, how long before they start calling Hillary a conservative Democrat? Before the end of the year is my guess.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 04, 2013 at 06:10 PM
One other challenger from theLeft NK.
Michelle Obama.
I know I sound like a tin-foil crank, but I do not think Valerie is ready to leave, and Michelle would attract the LIV's.
They are not above doing this. Any objection would be attacked as racist/sexist.
Posted by: Miss Marple | December 04, 2013 at 06:10 PM
It was based solely on appearances
Impressive powers of perception re Toobin, then. I guess I was thrown off by CH's "Turley is a smart guy who fell in with the wrong crowd." But I will reiterate that I have some gratitude and even respect for Turley, but none for Peggy and certainly none for Toobin.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 04, 2013 at 06:12 PM
--...or she is a stalking horse for someone else.
Who would that be?--
Hillary will never be prescient.
Posted by: Ignatz | December 04, 2013 at 06:14 PM
2015-2016 is the deathmatch between the Dem Alinskys and Clintonistas.
Let's hope it is one of those murder/suicide outcomes.
Posted by: Some Guy | December 04, 2013 at 06:16 PM
--...how long before they start calling Hillary a conservative Democrat?--
Hillary will never be precedent.
Posted by: Ignatz | December 04, 2013 at 06:16 PM
And Michelle will never run for anything.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 04, 2013 at 06:17 PM
she might run for a food truck...
I saw the headline on Drudge that the temperature was minus 40 and my first thought was Celsius or Fahrenheit...
Posted by: peter | December 04, 2013 at 06:19 PM
Barry appoints Moochelle to run against HildaBeast? hey he's dumb enough and self-loving enough to do that. That would be great as far as I'm concerned, it would give us a conservative Repub POTUS.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 04, 2013 at 06:20 PM
[email protected]:19--
I see what you did there young man.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 04, 2013 at 06:24 PM
Tis the season to.....
watch Leon Redbone sing Frosty the Snowman, with an assist from Dr John.
Posted by: Ignatz | December 04, 2013 at 06:24 PM
Well as I was saying, he's been occasionally
right, although he went into the Gitmo swamps back in the latter 00s.
So the Syrian brouhaha has a certain rhyming quality with Afghanistan thirty years ago, now they seem to be having talks with a Saudi educated Syrian cleric, with a yen for theocracy, then, a Saudi educated Afghan cleric with a yen for theocracy, he along with Hekmatuar brought the bulk of the foreign fighterz
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 06:39 PM
I saw Leon at The Roxy on Sunset in 1978. There were a number of patrons in the audience dressed like him. I feared I had walked in on a screening of The Rocky Horror Picture Show.
Weird cat, Leon.
Posted by: MarkO | December 04, 2013 at 06:41 PM
I saw a piece by a guy yesterday in which explored the stunning ignorance of Yglesias in great depth. Also shredded his skills as a writer.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | December 04, 2013 at 06:42 PM
The radioactive material in Mexico has been found.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | December 04, 2013 at 06:48 PM
I think I posted it,
http://thefederalist.com/2013/12/03/taming-fury-rage-write-starring-slates-matt-yglesias/
it was mildly entertaining, to gauge his lack of knowledge, when he was at the Atlantic, we're talking James Cameron,
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 06:49 PM
I had a Redbone Coon Hound . My brother named him Leon .
Posted by: BB Key | December 04, 2013 at 06:52 PM
Who gives a damn that "Martin Bashir" resigned from MSNBC?
I've seen that headline in at least four places today. Who cares? Libs?
The disgusting wimps should have kept him on. Surely they cheered his comments.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 04, 2013 at 06:54 PM
George Neumayer with a postmortem on the California Republican party and a description of the prime suspect in the killing. Hint; his first language is Austrian.
Posted by: Ignatz | December 04, 2013 at 06:56 PM
I've never bothered to read Yglesias, although I was fascinated by his duet with Willie Nelson.
Posted by: MarkO | December 04, 2013 at 06:57 PM
Frankly, Jeff, doesn't that undermine the whole deal;
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-03/six-reasons-to-worry-about-iranian-nuclear-deal.html
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 06:57 PM
I think ValJar should run.
Where was it found Dot?
Posted by: Jane | December 04, 2013 at 07:00 PM
One mile from the site of the container, so the Horde informs me;
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 07:02 PM
we might have found a replacement for Bashir;
http://therightscoop.com/unbelievable-nyc-councilwoman-elect-blames-knockout-game-on-fear-of-jews/
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 07:03 PM
MarkO brings it again!
Posted by: Extraneus | December 04, 2013 at 07:06 PM
Too much is said of Yglesias, already, Taranto does a yeoman job of pointing out the insanity;
Charles Ornstein of ProPublica.org watched "a glowing news conference" Sunday, and on Monday "decided to log . . . and take the Web site for a test drive." It wasn't going anywhere: Ornstein experienced "long delays loading pages, an endless circle of tasks (some already completed) and ultimately an error message." He supplies screen shots and a transcript of a live-chat help session that goes on for nine minutes before a customer-service rep called "Kassie" tells him to try back later. When he does, "I couldn't even log on."
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 07:06 PM
Way too classy, Ig.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P37xPiRz1sg
Posted by: Beasts of England | December 04, 2013 at 07:12 PM
Taranto also points out how the vulnerables democrats like Begich and Landrieu, are trapped by the law, unwilling to challenge it, or their party, or as I would have put it, the explosive collars in the Running Man,
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 07:14 PM
Didn't read the whole article, Jane. It wasstill in its container, notfar from the stolen truck.
The indispensable Noemie Emery gets it exactly right:
"By threatening their lives as well as their budgets, Obama has created a huge class of losers, who statistically overrun the small class of winners and outweigh them in savvy, no doubt. 'A significant minority of losers or self-perceived losers and a few high profile bad outcomes are more than enough to cause real political problems,' as Kaiser Foundation head honcho Drew Altman informs us. They’re not a minority, and they have, and they will.
"As National Journal's James Oliphant tells us, the plan will insure about 25 million, about half of the number serviced by Medicare, at the expense of almost everyone else in the country, who stand to lose something — in anxiety, money, or care. Those helped 'represent just a relative handful of people, many of whom sit at the lower end of the political spectrum, and engage little with the political process ... that’s what’s going to make any sort of renewed national sales pitch so difficult. Among the politically active, the damage is done.'
"This is what political unviability looks like. We will have to do something to help the uninsured to get coverage. But it will have to be something else."
The website is just a short-term distraction.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | December 04, 2013 at 07:18 PM
This might fall under questions no one is really asking;
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/12/whatever-happened-to-chuck-hagel.php
his sponsors paid good money, and he just sits there;
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 07:18 PM
On the last thread someone (I think it was Porch) confirmed those on Fed and State High Risk Plans were being dumped on the Exchanges.
I knew that much - what I am really curious about is what these specific people are finding with their Exchange Options. Can they "afford" them? Are their doctors in network?
The reason this is of interest to me is over the last few months on twitter, I've read a number of pro-ACA tweets asserting those with pre-existing conditions 1) "could not get" pre-ACA insurance and 2) when asked, seemed utterly oblivious to the existence of these subsidized HiRisk plans, much less being aware they were closed down to new customers in March -- by the WH.
Have any reporters tried to find any of these people at all? It is one of the primary goals of ACA to address, after all. plus, it's another 150K-200K people whose insurance is being dropped.
Posted by: AliceH | December 04, 2013 at 07:23 PM
I predict the dem nominee will be Brian Schweitzer, former gov of Montana.
From Wiki: Upon finishing school, Schweitzer worked as an irrigation developer on projects in Africa, Asia, Europe and South America. He spent several years working in Libya[9] and Saudi Arabia, and speaks Arabic.[10] He returned to Montana in 1986 to launch a ranching and irrigation business in Whitefish.
Posted by: caro | December 04, 2013 at 07:23 PM
Obama, Dems hope minimum wage distraction will take Obamacare heat off
If true, that's pathetic.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 04, 2013 at 07:23 PM
Maybe if they weren't making the dollar like confetti, with QE infiniti, rhetorical question
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 07:28 PM
Probably correct Caro; they're gonna need someone who can pump effluent.
And that Arabic will help him out in Benghazi and Afghanistan.
Posted by: Ignatz | December 04, 2013 at 07:32 PM
This is (probably) where the WH pro-minimum-wage-hike schtick comes from.
This is another analysis without the spin or subterfuge.
I haven't read through them yet - slow going. Just thought some here might be interested in details behind the latest squirrel.
Posted by: AliceH | December 04, 2013 at 07:33 PM
lol, Iggy. And true.
Posted by: caro | December 04, 2013 at 07:37 PM
Noemie's article on Obama's "inverse genius" was first class fabulous.
Posted by: clarice | December 04, 2013 at 07:50 PM
Someone called for this rock-ribbed Republican?
Hagel announces $1B in Pentagon staff cutbacks, amid budget talks
Posted by: Extraneus | December 04, 2013 at 07:54 PM
Budget talks? We're getting a budget? Novel concept...
Posted by: Beasts of England | December 04, 2013 at 07:58 PM
[OT]Crossposted for JiB:
JiB, if I were taking my wife to Amsterdam in the Spring, is there a particular place you might recommend to stay?
And, aside from Rembrandhuis and a canal tour, what would you recommend visiting?
Rijksmuseum is sooo big.
We sill be visiting Nijmegen, too, where I worked long ago.
Posted by: sbwaters | December 04, 2013 at 08:00 PM
Good question, Alice. As a related matter, if they apply on an exchange, are they even asked about any pre-existing conditions? I would guess not.
I did read one story a week or so ago about someone who was dumped from a now-noncompliant state high-risk program and couldn't get an Obamacare policy, but that may have been a website issue.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | December 04, 2013 at 08:03 PM
At this point, i'll settle for one that's hinged, there is a quest worthy of Diogenes;
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/12/04/democrat-who-attacked-conservative-marilinda-garcia-has-history-of-being-unhinged-n1757554
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 08:07 PM
Foreign Policy Magazine is reporting that the Administration is caving in to the Chinese ADZ over the Senkaku Islands. The Solon from Scranton has spoken.
In other news, the RMB Yuan has surpassed the Euro to become the second most used currency in financial transactions globally.
Japan is screwed.
Posted by: matt | December 04, 2013 at 08:18 PM
'We really dodged a bullet,' not once but twice,
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 08:23 PM
Here's an article from HotAir regarding Obamacare pricing for someone with a pre-existing condition (although they this person doesn't seem to have been in a high risk pool before):
Binns had been trying to navigate the government’s health care website since October to find affordable insurance for her husband, a 60-year-old who has a pre-existing condition and whose job doesn’t offer coverage.
What she finally found for him Monday carries a premium of more than $400 a month and a $5,000 annual deductible.
“How can I pay this kind of money out?” she asked. “It’s going to take at least a second job and praying that I would make enough on a second job just to pay for this health insurance.” …
“I thought this was going to be the miracle for us,” she said, “and it’s not.”
This $400 a month seems to be for the husband only.
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/12/03/video-sticker-shock-greets-those-who-successfully-navigate-healthcare-gov/
Posted by: C.R. | December 04, 2013 at 08:28 PM
“I thought this was going to be the miracle for us,” she said, “and it’s not.”
I wonder how many people had the idea that they were going to get "free" insurance out of this whole deal. $400/month with a $5K deductible seems pretty reasonable for a 60-year-old, never mind the pre-existing condition.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 04, 2013 at 08:33 PM
I had the same thought jimmyk about the cost for the husband. I think many believed they wouldn't pay because it was sold that way (and that suggestion Ignatz made this morning about humans needing to be lead by sloths henceforth).
There are now changing the messaging now:
"The Department of Health and Human Services has crowned a YouTube video entitled “Forget About The Price Tag” as the grand prize winner in a contest meant to encourage young people to sign up for Obamacare." from the Daily Caller
Posted by: C.R. | December 04, 2013 at 08:48 PM
"is there a particular place you might recommend to stay?"
The Hotel Pulitzer.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | December 04, 2013 at 08:54 PM
to tell the truth, the best thing would be to cut the Pentagon by 20-25%. It is a paperwork machine as much as anything else. Colonels get coffee for Generals and the whole job in many cases is to keep your program alive at any cost.
In the year 19 and 63 my father's greatest accomplishment was to close out one of his programs on time, successfully, and under budget. It had never been done before. I'm not sure if it has been done since.
As to Obamacare we should do our own ad promising the kids a hot new car of some make and then delivering a clapped out Volvo or something. They would relate better to this kind of pitch. We need Joe Isuzu back for this.
Posted by: matt | December 04, 2013 at 08:57 PM
According to eHealth, coverage ($5K deductible)for a 60yo male in Akron could have been purchased from Anthem in 2013 for $226 versus the Kaiser plan at $418 this year. It's only an 85% increase. Mr. Binns' pre-existing condition would have pushed his premium much higher in 2013 but $418 is obviously no bargain.
Posted by: Account Deleted | December 04, 2013 at 09:00 PM
I agree with Allahpundit:
"The takeaway from all of this, really, isn’t that there’s no limit on the president, it’s that there’s no way of enforcing the limit. You might very well get a bipartisan group of federal judges to agree with Turley that Obama’s over the line. But they can’t issue that ruling without first hearing the case, and the vagaries of the law on standing to sue are such that often there’s no one who’s legally empowered to bring that challenge. The most productive thing that could come out of this hearing, I think, is an effort in Congress to expand standing for challenges to executive power. Two big problems there, though. One: Good luck getting Democrats to go along with it, especially at a moment when O’s power grabs are keeping some of the nastier political backlash to O-Care at bay. By covering his ass, they’re covering their own. Two: Even if the Senate flips next year and O is somehow pressured politically into signing a bill that would constrain his own power (good luck with that too), standing’s not a simple matter of passing a bill. There are constitutional components to it that can’t be changed by statute. You’d need an amendment, and there’s bound to be resistance both in Congress and in the state legislatures to the idea of expanding the Constitution to let private citizens potentially gum up the executive branch with lawsuits by making standing broader."
Posted by: Danube on iPad | December 04, 2013 at 09:01 PM
Thanks for the link, C.R.
$400/mo w $5K deductible doesn't sound great to me, but assuming good network and high % coverage after deductible, it's probably okay, I guess. And given pre-existing condition, it's actually fantastic.
I wonder, though - how were they paying for care w/o insurance that this looks worse for them?
Posted by: AliceH | December 04, 2013 at 09:12 PM
saw,
Just back from a Christmas Chorale rendition and dinner. Will send you an email but look at the Hotel Europa. World class restaurant.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | December 04, 2013 at 09:28 PM
Foolishness is probably incurable -- I don't know what else to do about the person who gambles the rent/food money at the track, or drinks it, or puts it up his nose. The best we can do is to arrange things so that they suffer most from the natural consequences of their actions, but realize that those consequences probably can't be limited to them. As for the truly destitute, they are rare enough, and very sick people are rare enough, that we can afford to support a small number of very sick destitute people.
The key to the system we had which more or less worked is that the handouts were not free, and there were strong incentives for everyone who could provide for themselves to do so, leaving the charity for small numbers of people that the rest of us could pretty easily afford.
You know, that was pretty much the system we HAD, and I think it worked pretty well. People were uninsured because they were foolish, or because they were truly destitute. If they became very sick, then they went bankrupt, lost everything, and then the rest of their medical bills were paid for by the "higher premium, larger deductible and out of pocket cap" from the rest of us.Posted by: [email protected]_prison_98 | December 04, 2013 at 09:30 PM
Saw is sbw of course.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | December 04, 2013 at 09:31 PM
"the best thing would be to cut the Pentagon by 20-25%."
Where did that number come from? As it is, I believe we're proceeding from ten carriers to seven. Is that a wise move? And of course there's a proposal under consideration to close all the comissaries, which cost chump change. Wise?
How many armored divisions should we have?
"Colonels get coffee for Generals"
No they don't.
"... and the whole job in many cases is to keep your program alive at any cost."
It is true that probably 85% of what goes on in the Pentagon is about buying stuff. It's been that way for many decades. You don't maintain the capability tofight two simultaneous wars without spending money, and it's inevitable that people will argue for the allocation of scarce resources to the programs they believe in.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | December 04, 2013 at 09:32 PM
And we still receive extraordinary technological spin-offs from our military expenditures.
Posted by: Beasts of England | December 04, 2013 at 09:36 PM
Good luck getting Democrats to go along with it, especially at a moment when O’s power grabs are keeping some of the nastier political backlash to O-Care at bay. By covering his ass, they’re covering their own.
He's only deferring the pain. I know that those nitwits don't think in those terms but if they're only looking for short term relief, they'll eventually get just what they deserve.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 04, 2013 at 09:41 PM
"And we still receive extraordinary technological spin-offs from our military expenditures."
We do indeed, but there's no question that DoD is horribly inefficient, and inherently it must always be so. It is necessarily a monopoly, undisciplined by market competition, and disbursing nothing but other people's money. Dog bites man.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | December 04, 2013 at 09:51 PM
Ace borrowed my Gruber line, re a particularly maladroit response to Mark Pryor by Top Man
Dayspring,
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 09:53 PM
The problem is this jackalope, took the Iowa Peace Pledge, and he seems insistent on keeping it, so they cut not only weapon systems, but
troop levels and commisaries, that stinks like
the Fulton Fish Market at noon,
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 10:05 PM
And in a similar light;
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/12/american-studies-association-leadership-recommends-academic-boycott-of-israel/
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 10:09 PM
Holy Cow. Do you guys ever start the thread on topic? Oh well. Like Maguire gives a shite.
Posted by: string/brane | December 04, 2013 at 10:12 PM
Because the Pentagon is the administrative center for the US military. There are no combat formations stationed there, after all.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | December 04, 2013 at 10:15 PM
$400 is less than I pay with a 3k deductible, 65% co-pay with no pre-existing condition. (I think that is what it is - all I know is I've paid about. 11k out of pocket this year under Romneycare.) My monthly premium is $500.
And compared to Obamacare, Romneycare is spectacular - and horrid compared to what I had before.
Posted by: Jane on Ipad hi there NSA | December 04, 2013 at 10:16 PM
BTW Peter Schweitzer is about to go on Hannity and say Obama never had a one on one meeting with Sebelius, in 3.5 years.
Posted by: Jane on Ipad hi there NSA | December 04, 2013 at 10:18 PM
The biggest issue with not reigning in Obama's power-lust is that it makes a civil war more likely. The more power an office has, the more tempting it is to not give it over, or to more blatantly cheat for its acquisition.
Want to combat corruption and keep the US a place where politics is a peaceful pursuit? Then reign in the government.
Keep giving the government power, and at some point someone will decide that much power is worth killing for.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | December 04, 2013 at 10:18 PM
Yet it was a target a dozen years ago, and not by accident, as I learned from Thiessen, the
main target area, was where their Middle East
trackers were located,
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 10:20 PM
Wow, Jane, I should be so far beyond shock at this point, but that is truly shocking...on his signature achievement.
Posted by: C.R. | December 04, 2013 at 10:29 PM
The Gitmo bar, is busy teaching any ally that works with us, like Poland today, that if you provide the resources where a nazgul like Al Nashiri is interrogated, he was the head of AQ's naval division, you will pay a price.
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 10:31 PM
C.R.,
I have never ever thought Obama does anything - ever, any day, any week, any year - except read from a TelePrompTer and be coached on how to pronounce words.
Posted by: Jane on Ipad hi there NSA | December 04, 2013 at 10:33 PM
Her staff wrote the 28,000 pages of regulation, that comprise this Fustercluck of viral coding,
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 10:33 PM
BTW Peter Schweitzer is about to go on Hannity and say Obama never had a one on one meeting with Sebelius, in 3.5 years.
They're trying to cover his hind quarters. He didn't know, how could he have known, when she never met with him?!
Posted by: Rob Crawford | December 04, 2013 at 10:37 PM
Way OT, but if you enjoy Marlborough Sauvignon Blancs, and you should, do try the Oyster Bay. It went really well with a Thai green curry this evening.
Posted by: DrJ | December 04, 2013 at 10:40 PM
As for the Noonan, her brief spite of 'selfawareness' is given due course here;
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 10:42 PM
This thing with "narrow networks" and Obamacare plans -- what happens when someone is on vacation in another state and they get sick or have a heart attack -- is none of that covered?
WonderBoy spent 10 weeks this summer out of the country. He bought a modest 90-day plan specifically designed for college students studying abroad. How is that going to work for rural people where a trip to the nearest WalMart takes them to an area where there are no in-network providers or facilities?
Posted by: [email protected]_prison_98 | December 04, 2013 at 10:47 PM
RC,
The Democrat Party may be moving BOzo to nonperson status. Why wouldn't they look at his plan to continue OFA after the WH has been fumigated of his presence as theft of party resources? In fact, why wouldn't the Democrat Party look at his megalomania in the same manner in which you do?
He's a dead albatross to the party and the stench rolling off him and his pathetic "signature" legislation makes him the biggest liability the Democrat Party has ever had.
Posted by: Account Deleted | December 04, 2013 at 10:51 PM
Well he's made his feelings about rural 'bitter clingers' rather clearly hasn't he, but as we see examine this Jabberwocky, we see it's 'no good for children, animals, or other living things.' which is typical of what his tenure did for Altgeld Gardens,
Posted by: narciso, | December 04, 2013 at 10:52 PM