Entitlement costs will be skyrocketing soon.

“Each day,10,000 baby boomers retire and begin receiving Medicare and Social Security benefits.”

Rob Portman, Senator

The above quote by Senator Portman is quite startling. Could such a huge figure possibly be true or is this just another politician trying to grab a headline?

If we look at current Social Security costs we find that 24 percent of the federal budget, or $814 billion, is paid to Social Security recipients. It currently pays monthly retirement benefits averaging $1,294 to 37.9 million retired workers in December 2013. Social Security also provided benefits to 2.9 million spouses and children of retired workers, 6.2 million surviving children and spouses of deceased workers, and 11 million disabled workers and their eligible dependents in December 2013. So we currently support approximately 58 million Americans with this program.

Medicare spending is a bit more difficult to tease out. However, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculates that $498 billion went to Medicare in 2013. Medicare provides health coverage to around 54 million people who are over the age of 65 or have disabilities.

[Source: Washington Post Fact Checker]

Generally speaking, if the Washington Post (Pravda on the Potomac) agrees with a Republican Senator you can bet the farm that the facts are accurate.

The Facts

Ten thousand people a day is certainly a big number. Over 365 days, that’s almost 4 million people. But then everything about the “Baby Boom” generation is pretty big.

There were 76 million people born between the years 1946 and 1964, the traditional window for the baby boom generation. That means that they will retire over a 19-year period. Simple math shows that 76 divided by 19 is 4 million, or almost 11,000 people a day.

While a certain percentage will die before they reach retirement age, analysts say that  immigrants will actually boost the number of potential baby-boomer retirees to nearly 80 million —and not everyone retires exactly at 65 or 66. Some baby boomers likely retired at 62. So let’s say it’s 80 million over 20 years—which still yields 4 million a year.

Thus, as a simple round figure, 10,000 a day is pretty close. In fact, that is a number used by the Social Security Administration in a 2012 report, which Portman spokeswoman Caitlin Conant said was a source used by the senator. She also cited a Pew Research Center report that used this figure.

Indeed, in a 2013 report, the Social Security Administration said that the wave of baby boom retirements was a significant problem for the agency itself: “By 2015, almost 33 percent of our workforce, including 48 percent of our supervisors, will be eligible to retire… We expect this trend to continue. During this same timeframe, the baby boomer retirement wave continues to have a significant effect on our workloads.”

The impact of baby boom retirements will certainly put pressure not only on the Social Security Administration, but on the Social Security and Medicare systems. So this is an appropriate figure to cite when discussing entitlement programs.

The Pinocchio Test

Portman is on solid ground with this number. He earns a coveted—and rare—Geppetto Checkmark.

So let’s do a quick calculation. Budget projections are typically made on a 10-year cycle. So let’s look at the next 10 years. At 4 million new retirees per year, that comes to a healthy 40 million new retirees on the dole (for the record, I am on “the dole”). Starting with a baseline of 58 million recipients this year, that equals a 70% growth in 10 years. It is even worse for Medicare. Ouch for the ever diminishing number of taxpayers!

If monthly payments stay the same – they never do, they always rise – then in 10 years we will need another $621 billion per year to support just the new retirees. That is a lot of billions when added to the $824 billion we currently spend – AND THAT’S JUST SOCIAL SECURITY, not Medicare.

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Global warming alarmists are running out of excuses.

Water, water, everywhere. Nor any drop to drink.

Samuel Taylor Coleridge

(Global warming alarmists) must be big enough to admit (their) mistakes, smart enough to profit from them, and strong enough to correct them.

John C. Maxwell

The global warming alarmists have been trying to deal with the failure of Earth’s temperature to rise in more than 17 years despite increasing concentrations of CO2. Their current favorite theory is that the oceans are absorbing the heat. Well, there is no question but that huge bodies of water can provide a heat sink.

One of the leading climate scientists, Kevin Trenberth, and his colleague, John Fassulo, have postulated that the massive El Nino Pacific Ocean warming event that occurred in 1997 and 1998 triggered the pause. They say that the El Nino caused a large loss of heat from the deep ocean to the sea surface that resulted in a cooling of the oceans. Since then the deep ocean has been absorbing heat back from the upper ocean and so cooling the atmosphere.

There are several problems with that theory. There have been many El Nino events since global warming alarmists have been documenting rising earth temperatures and trying to blame it on the anthropomorphic burning of fossil fuels. Events occurred in 1957-58, 1965-66, with a very strong El Nino event in 1972-73. Another El Nino occurred in 1977-78, and again, a very strong El Nino event in 1982-83. There was an El Nino in 1987-88 and yet another very strong El Nino in 1991-92. We experienced another El Nino in 1994-95. These all preceded the event that Trenberth and Fassulo are saying caused “the pause.” However, during these events there was no “pause” – even with 3 strong El Nino events recorded in the 40 years that preceded the El Nino Trenberth and Fassulo claim was responsible for oceanic heat absorption. I don’t know about you but that strikes me as odd – and worse, an unambiguous flaw in their explanation.

But, as they say, “the proof is  in the poof!” And here’s the “poof.” For us to believe the Trenberth and Fassulo hypothesis the oceans should have been warming at deeper levels. Oops! Ouch! As it turns out, the deep oceans ARE COOLING!

[Source: Deep Oceans Are Cooling. Amidst A Sea of Modeling Uncertainty: New Research on Ocean Heat Content, by Jim Steele]

Mr Steele isn’t a blogger like myself. He is Director emeritus the Sierra Nevada Field Campus of the San Francisco State University and author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism.

Two of the world’s premiere ocean scientists from Harvard and MIT, Carl Wunsch and Patrick Heimbach, have addressed the data limitations that currently prevent the oceanographic community from resolving the differences among various estimates of changing ocean heat content. Their analysis: 1) determined the deepest oceans are cooling, 2) estimated a much slower rate of ocean warming, 3) highlighted where the greatest uncertainties existed due to the ever changing locations of heating and cooling, and 4) specified concerns with previous methods used to construct changes in ocean heat content, such as Trenberth’s analysis.

Their results (Figure below) suggest a flattening or slight cooling in the upper 100 meters since 2004 which is in agreement with the results reported by Lyman (2014). The deep layers contain twice as much heat as the upper 100 meters, and overall exhibit a clear cooling trend for the past 2 decades. If Trenberth’s model is correct deep ocean warming would have been observed. The detected cooling of the deepest oceans is quite remarkable given that geothermal warming in the abyssal ocean from Earth’s molten core would generate the converse effect.

Screen Shot 2014-07-22 at 7.59.32 PM

So, once again, the observed data conflict with the global warming paradigm. The predictions from their models fail to explain the lack of global warming. Mirabili dictu. It seems to me they should heed the admonition of John C. Maxwell in the quote at the beginning of this post.

And thanks to HP for forwarding this to me.

Roy Filly


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Are we sorry yet?

Here is my take on the following. Our current President is supremely confident about himself, but almost invariably wrong. Romney called the global situation perfectly.

And thanks to ALF for forwarding this to me.

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The looming doctor shortage.

A friend and reader sent me the following New Your Times article for evaluation. It is entitled, “Bottlenecks in training doctors.” It warns of a looming doctor shortage and has the temerity to suggest that the Republicans in Congress are somehow to blame.

The New York Times is a little late to the party. I have been warning about this since 2011 – and that wasn’t the beginning of the problem. That was the point at which it became abundantly clear ObamaCare would seriously augment a problem already confronting US medicine.



The following paragraphs are from the article: “Some experts, however, believe that the real problem is not an overall shortage of doctors but an imbalance in the use of existing resources. For example, there may be too many specialists and too few primary care doctors; too many professionals in cities and affluent areas, too few in rural or impoverished areas; too many doctors doing routine procedures that could be handled by advanced-practice nurses, physician assistants or pharmacists.

“In any case, there is a desperate need for accurate, up-to-date information. But congressional Republicans, who refuse to cooperate in any way with the Affordable Care Act, have blocked a commission that was supposed to sort it all out and make recommendations.

The above portions of the article were particularly vacuous. “Too many specialists and too few primary care doctors.” Perhaps they are unaware that the California Assembly (a bastion of statist/altruist regulation) mandated in the late nineties that the University of California system – consisting of 5 top notch medical schools – “had to train one primary care doctor for every specialist they trained.” It was an unmitigated disaster and had to be rescinded. Statist central planners always think that a simple mandate can solve complex problems. They can’t. And, by the by, the late nineties were a decade before ObamaCare. Ergo, the problem is far from new. Of course, pontificating from the editorial board room of the New York Times is easier if your mind is devoid of reality.

Next issue: “too many professionals in cities and affluent areas, too few in rural or impoverished areas.” Let’s see what reality looks like. You are a recent graduate of a residency in surgery – that was 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, 1 year of internship, and 4 – 8 years of surgical training. You are somewhere between 31 and 36 years of age. Your education debt is $300,000. That isn’t the true cost. The true cost is far worse than that. Conclusion: it’s time to head for “a rural or impoverished area.” Don’t take that fabulous job at a first rate hospital in New York City, or Chicago, or Dallas. Forget that the “affluent city” job will provide for your family and pay off your education debt! That wouldn’t be ALTRUISTIC!

But the best one is the old statist standby. They want a “commission… to sort it all out and make recommendations!” Yes. Commissions always solve everything! Statists are always “gathering information” before they “centrally plan” your life. Damn those Republicans for blocking our “commission” wail the statist/altruists.

These “solutions” are brought to you by the New York Times Editorial Board. We are ever so lucky!

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Rugged Individualist. Some stats and a remembrance.

The government cannot love you, and any politics that works on a different assumption is destined for no good.

Jonah Goldberg

Demagogue: One who preaches a doctrine he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.

H. L. Mencken

A human group transforms itself into a crowd when it suddenly responds to a suggestion rather than to reasoning… to an affirmation rather than to proof, to the repetition of a phrase rather than to arguments…

Jean-Francois Revel

In October 2010 during the run up to the November elections, one of my sons convinced me to start a blog site and write down my political beliefs. Once I decided to do it I was committed (see Footnote 1). Today marks my 700th post. My little website has seen more than 69,000 views, nearly 100 views per post. So, I’m not the Huff Post, the Drudge Report or Salon, but still I am proud of this accomplishment.

The internet is amazing. People from nearly every country on Planet Earth have visited my website (Footnote 2 and World Map below). For those countries that have not, either their government is too restrictive to allow their people to read a political blog from a western nation (or the nation is simply too poor to have internet connectivity or even electricity).

Screen Shot 2014-07-19 at 3.29.21 PM

Those 700 posts have been dedicated to the proposition that our government is too big and too expensive. It consistently spends more money than it collects. By its very nature BIG GOVERNMENT IS BAD GOVERNMENT.

Government is not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem.

Ronald Reagan

Roy Filly

Footnote 1:

Who am I?

Posted October 15, 2010

I decided to write a blog at the suggestion of my son. I have developed a recent interest in politics. It is not that I ignored politics in the past. There has hardly been an election in which I did not vote over the past 45 years. What changed?

I feel very strongly that this country is headed in the wrong direction. By that I mean it is heading away from its founding principles. This has been happening for a long time but the acceleration in the wrong direction under Barack Obama has been breathtaking. It may sound trite, but I honestly think the votes that I cast on November 2, 2010 will be the most important of my citizenship.

This year is the first time in my adult life that I attended a political rally. I may be late to the game, but I have decided to play and I believe I have something to say. Once I begin to play, I will not quit. As Admiral Yamamoto declared following his country’s attack on Pearl Harbor, “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant.” In this instance, however,  Obama has awakened a Lilliputian. But watch out! Gulliver learned that Lilliputians can bring you down!

It matters little to me whether anyone ever reads what I write, but the need within me to write about my perceptions is profound. An argument needs to be made. Every individual needs to speak out, if only to say “I disagree.”

So what perspective will you be reading? Where do my politics lie? It is not at all easy for me to state my political beliefs. Frankly, I hate it when someone defines themselves as a Republican or Democrat or as a liberal or conservative. I will state that I vote Republican, but only because I believe that the Republican party is our last best hope to turn America around. That may change if the Republican Party does not take this opportunity to return to American founding principles. What is certain is that I am not a “one-word” political definition. I have very strong beliefs on a variety of issues. Some are very conservative – fiscal and defense. Some a very liberal – I am a first amendment absolutist – even to the right to burn the American flag (of course, I would like to punch the lights out of any American that does such a despicable act, but I strongly support their right to do it). I am definitely NOT a centrist and feel sorry for anyone that is. Centrists make compromise their creed. When it comes to principles, one cannot compromise. You either believe in freedom of speech or you don’t. You can’t say some speech is out-of-bounds. Out of whose bounds? Judged against whose standard? Does the  “right” wing define the boundary or the “left” wing? The only time that I am a “centrist” is when I just don’t give a damn who wins!

There are many people who command my respect for their perspective on government. However, my personal gurus are Ayn Rand, Thomas Sowell, and Charles Krauthammer. It is not that I agree in every aspect with the thoughts and writings of these individuals. Indeed, they are all too intelligent, educated, and advanced for me to even consistently follow their train of thought. However, I believe I have the ability to perceive a convincing argument when I hear it (and, on the opposite side of that coin, to know when it is time to start shoveling)!

With regard to that, I do not know if Ayn Rand is the greatest philosopher of all time (she certainly didn’t think so and gave that title to Aristotle). However, as Leonard Piekoff, the legal heir to her estate and the person who works hardest to keep her words alive, likes to say, she is the greatest salesman of philosophy. Well, she sold me. So, I guess I am an Objectivist. At very least, I am an anti-statist, and anti-collectivist, and an unashamed laissez-faire capitalist. I plan to use her words and arguments liberally in this blog. If I, at times, accidentally plagiarise her words, I apologize in advance. May she somehow know that plagiarism is the highest form of compliment. Let me be clear. The battle is not a political one but a philosophical one. Politics will be important, but the true battle is for American founding principles, and, if you have read this far, I am sorry to tell you that American founding principles are losing the battle. I hope not the war.

Thomas Sowell is the most convincing economist of our day, in my extremely humble opinion. More importantly, his notions of equality and the plight of black americans are inspiring. Like nearly every American, I was very proud on the day that America elected its first black president. I didn’t vote for Obama, but let’s face it, a black American president. How wonderful was that! However, if God had been paying attention or , at least, not playing a practical joke, our first black president would have been Thomas Sowell.

As for Dr. Krauthammer, he is a voice of reason in a cacophony of political noise. His positions are well thought out and he is never condescending or vitriolic.

Now you know some of what I think, but not yet who I am. I intend to write with a nom de plume. I gave considerable thought to several names. I liked Cato, because that was the pseudonym that Hamilton, Monroe and John Jay employed when writing the Federalist papers. Although my respect for these men is great, they espoused strong central government – exactly the opposite of what I espouse. So, in honor of my heroine, Ayn Rand, I have chosen John Galt as my pseudonym.

John Galt (the pseudonym became unneeded, Roy Filly)

Footnote 2: Nations that have visited my website

United States FlagUnited States
Canada FlagCanada
United Kingdom FlagUnited Kingdom
Australia FlagAustralia
India FlagIndia
Germany FlagGermany
Philippines FlagPhilippines
Switzerland FlagSwitzerland
Mexico FlagMexico
France FlagFrance
Indonesia FlagIndonesia
Netherlands FlagNetherlands
South Africa FlagSouth Africa
Brazil FlagBrazil
Japan FlagJapan
Spain FlagSpain
Singapore FlagSingapore
Belgium FlagBelgium
New Zealand FlagNew Zealand
Denmark FlagDenmark
Italy FlagItaly
Korea, Republic of FlagRepublic of Korea
Sweden FlagSweden
Romania FlagRomania
Malaysia FlagMalaysia
Thailand FlagThailand
United Arab Emirates FlagUnited Arab Emirates
Hong Kong FlagHong Kong
Pakistan FlagPakistan
Kenya FlagKenya
Poland FlagPoland
Russian Federation FlagRussian Federation
Guatemala FlagGuatemala
Greece FlagGreece
Turkey FlagTurkey
Ireland FlagIreland
Israel FlagIsrael
Argentina FlagArgentina
Croatia FlagCroatia
Finland FlagFinland
Norway FlagNorway
Costa Rica FlagCosta Rica
Austria FlagAustria
Bulgaria FlagBulgaria
Egypt FlagEgypt
Lithuania FlagLithuania
Portugal FlagPortugal
Iceland FlagIceland
Taiwan FlagTaiwan
Ukraine FlagUkraine
Czech Republic FlagCzech Republic
Viet Nam FlagViet Nam
Peru FlagPeru
Ecuador FlagEcuador
Colombia FlagColombia
Hungary FlagHungary
Estonia FlagEstonia
Nigeria FlagNigeria
Fiji FlagFiji
Puerto Rico FlagPuerto Rico
Chile FlagChile
Ghana FlagGhana
Morocco FlagMorocco
Saudi Arabia FlagSaudi Arabia
Iraq FlagIraq
El Salvador FlagEl Salvador
Trinidad and Tobago FlagTrinidad and Tobago
Georgia FlagGeorgia
Dominican Republic FlagDominican Republic
Bangladesh FlagBangladesh
Slovenia FlagSlovenia
Jamaica FlagJamaica
Mauritius FlagMauritius
Tanzania, United Republic of FlagUnited Republic of Tanzania
Bermuda FlagBermuda
Cambodia FlagCambodia
Nepal FlagNepal
Panama FlagPanama
Venezuela FlagVenezuela
Serbia FlagSerbia
Luxembourg FlagLuxembourg
Slovakia FlagSlovakia
Albania FlagAlbania
Bahamas FlagBahamas
Lebanon FlagLebanon
Moldova, Republic of FlagMoldova
Sri Lanka FlagSri Lanka
Ethiopia FlagEthiopia
Zimbabwe FlagZimbabwe
Algeria FlagAlgeria
Honduras FlagHonduras
Bosnia and Herzegovina FlagBosnia and Herzegovina
Jordan FlagJordan
Tunisia FlagTunisia
Cayman Islands FlagCayman Islands
Latvia FlagLatvia
Cyprus FlagCyprus
Belize FlagBelize
Angola FlagAngola
Senegal FlagSenegal
Jersey FlagJersey
Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of FlagMacedonia, the Former Yugoslav Republic
Oman FlagOman
Grenada FlagGrenada
Congo, the Democratic Republic of the FlagDemocratic Republic of the Congo
Antigua and Barbuda FlagAntigua and Barbuda
Brunei Darussalam FlagBrunei Darussalam
Bolivia FlagBolivia
French Polynesia FlagFrench Polynesia
Qatar FlagQatar
Mongolia FlagMongolia
Dominica FlagDominica
Macao FlagMacao
Zambia FlagZambia
Guyana FlagGuyana
Virgin Islands, British FlagBritish Virgin Islands
Palestinian Territory, Occupied FlagPalestine, State of
Malta FlagMalta
American Samoa FlagAmerican Samoa
Guam FlagGuam
Kuwait FlagKuwait
Djibouti FlagDjibouti
Gabon FlagGabon
Guernsey FlagGuernsey
Kazakhstan FlagKazakhstan
Haiti FlagHaiti
Sudan FlagSudan


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

Sometimes you just have to wonder at government waste.

I have devoted many posts to government waste. But recently I became aware of a project that literally boggles the mind when contemplating the term “government waste.” What could be in the minds of the geniuses that thought up this boondoggle?

First, let us consider why the money is being spent. It is being spent to house a new government bureaucracy. As the man says, “Just what we need – another government bureaucracy.” But let us put that aside for the moment. And, by the by, which one, ask you?  The Dodd-Frank “bailout bill” is one of the most intrusive government laws created in the past 50 years. And, worse still, it didn’t stop “bailouts!”  It did, however, create the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I’m certain you all feel much better “protected” as consumers today. It was created in 2010. Identity theft is one of the “protections” the Bureau is attempting to afford Americans. The Federal Trade Commission surveyed Americans about “identity theft.” They found that in the last four years 12.7% of survey respondents reported that they had been victims of one of the three most common types of Identity Theft. This implies that approximately 27 million American adults have been victims in this period. OK! So much for the protections supplied by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

[Source: Great moments in government waste and inefficiency, by Daniel J. Mitchell]

Allow me to return to the boondoggle. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau needs a home. They are renting a building – emphasis on the word “renting.” Ergo, the American public does not own this building. Some private citizen or organization owns the building. Nonetheless, you and I are paying for the “upgrades” to this person’s private property. As the renovation has progressed there have been a few “cost-overruns.”  Cost projections have increased $65 million in six months and $120 million since last year’s estimate. The current estimate of the per square foot renovation cast is $550.

Yes, say you, but the enhancements must have been very necessary in an era of a War on Terrorism. Indeed, say I. Here are a few of the “protective barriers” that the new spending includes: a four-story glass staircase, a two-story waterfall and a sunken garden. The terrorists are certain to be confounded by those.

You and I are currently scheduled to spend more than $215 million ($550 per square foot) on SOMEONE”S ELSES PROPERTY! That, of course, assumes no further “overruns.” Again, we are not “building” this building. It’s already built. We are renovating an existing building. It behooves us to learn what buildings have been built from the ground (or sand, as the case may be) up at a lower cost per square foot than this renovation.


Do you understand why such total nonsense is possible? The answer is as plain as can be. Who cares what it costs when you spending someone else’s money. Don’t you wonder which citizen is the beneficiary of your largess? Wanna’ bet he never says “thanks.”

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Part-time USA.

The US economy added 288,000 jobs in June and the unemployment rate fell to 6.1 percent, according to the latest jobs report issued by the Labor Department. Not unexpectedly, the Obama administration seized on the jobs report to once again proclaim an economic turnaround. “This is one of the strongest reports we’ve seen since the end of the recession,” said Labor Secretary Thomas E. Perez. The statement, “since the end of the recession” is one rarely heard from an administration official, because it refers to the “Obama Recovery” – a less than stellar feather in the cap of our fearless leader. So, a more careful look at “one of the strongest reports we’ve seen” is warranted.

A few brief notes to frame the analysis: the manufacturing sector added only 16,000 jobs, while construction added only 6,000; the average hourly wage for private sector workers increased by just six cents last month, and has increased only 2 percent over the past 12 months, less than the rate of inflation. A large share of the growth in employed people was, according to the report, attributable to an increase in workers employed part-time, whose numbers grew by 275,000. A little math shows that the 275K part-time jobs added divided by the 288K total job growth equals 95.5%. But it is worse than that. Workers, “who were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job,” hit 7.5 million. The number of people employed full-time has actually dropped over the past 12 months. And, if you can believe it, it is still worse than that. If you have a part-time job and get a second and a third part-time job to make up the difference and feed your family, your “one” total “full time equivalent” job is counted as three jobs by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

So let us put on our thinking caps and try to identify any event in the past twelve months that might drive such a remarkable turn of events in the employment history of the United States.

[Source: A part-timer boom, or blip? by Robert J. Samuelson - although Mr. Samuelson is more evenhanded on his ObamaCare analysis than my editing would indicate (RF)]

The trend toward part-time employment vindicates critics of Obamacare who have argued that the added costs of providing health insurance for full-time workers would cause many firms to emphasize part-time employment. Exactly how much more evidence do we need to conclude that the critics were correct?

OK. You are in the “more evidence needed” crowd. So here is “more evidence.” Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Mortimer Zuckerman — real estate developer and editor in chief of U.S. News & World Report — says yes. Some data seem convincing. In June, part-time jobs (defined as less than 35 hours a week) increased by 1,115,000, reports the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS); full-time jobs fell by 708,000. “Just think of all those Americans working part-time, no doubt glad to have the work but also contending with lower pay, diminished benefits and little job security,” wrote Zuckerman.

The BLS does two job surveys. They don’t always agree. That’s the case here. I have written about this in the past but a review is worth your reading time.

The payroll job figures came from a monthly survey of 554,000 business locations (“establishments”). Hence, this survey is called the “payroll” or “establishment” survey. Firms are asked the number of people on their payrolls, their pay and occupations. With this data, the BLS makes estimates for the entire economy. The payroll survey produced June’s 288,000-job gain.

But the payroll survey can’t estimate unemployment, because it doesn’t know how many people want a job and can’t find one. For that, the BLS turns to its “household” survey: monthly interviews with 60,000 Americans. Do they have a job? If so, is it part-time or full-time? If not, are they looking for one? If jobless, for how long?… So two surveys produce two estimates of June’s job change and one survey (the household) attributes all the gain to part-time work…

I believe that Americans are getting yet another thrashing from ObamaCare in addition to the impetus for firms to hire part-time employees. The Obama administration knows this and to avoid another ObamaCare black eye is currently beating insurance companies about the head and shoulders. They need to avoid yet another blow to the finances of the American family before the November elections. “And what are you talking about this time, Dr. Filly, ask you?”  I will let Avik Roy answer you, respond I.

Avik Roy of Forbes explains how the White House is coercing health insurance companies to limit premium increases before the mid-term elections. Here are some excerpts

Hidden in the midst of a 436-page regulatory update, and written in pure bureaucratese, the Department of Health and Human Services asked that insurance companies limit the looming premium increases for 2015 health plans. But don’t worry, HHS hinted: we’ll bail you out on the taxpayer’s dime if you lose money. …The White House is playing politics with Americans’ health care—and they’re bribing health insurance companies to play along. The administration’s intention is clear: Salvage the 2014 midterm elections. …Technically, the regulations don’t force health insurance companies to tamp down their premium spikes. But the White House isn’t asking nicely. …Under Obamacare, insurers are so heavily regulated that they have to play nice with the bureaucrats who call the shots. …If insurance companies don’t give in, regulators have powerful ways to make life hard for them. A shrewd CEO doesn’t need to look far to see what might happen if his company opts out.

If the premium increase happens next year or if American taxpayers need to fork over tax dollars to bail out insurance companies this year, someone please explain the difference to me. The difference is subterfuge say you! Good. You are finally catching on!

Aren’t we lucky to have ObamaCare.

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Israel. Why “peace” agreements never come to fruition.

Hamas has been sending thousands of rockets into Israel. Thousands. They are meant to kill and to kill indiscriminately. They are not laser guided bombs. They are just bombs. Even the World War II strategic bombing of Germany and Japan largely sought military targets. But not Hamas. Admittedly their rockets end up doing little damage. I am confident every one of my readers has thought about what the US would do if thousands of Mexican rockets were being loosed on the United States.

In the following video, Dennis Prager describes the foundations behind the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It’s simple. It’s short. And it is exactly correct.

And thanks to PCoop for sending this to me.

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Finally! An honest politician!

It practically doesn’t matter whether he’s a Republican or Democrat. He speaks the truth to his constituents.

And, yes. I approved this message. And thanks to ALF for forwarding this to me.

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Two things about the border.

Today is Controversy Day. So, “let me have it!”

The Democrats must agree that closing the southern border is the mandatory first step in immigration reform. That means sealed shut, no matter what the cost. They must insist that the President follow any new immigration law to the letter. Both parties must attack any president of either party who fails to enforce immigration law.

The Republicans need to understand that closing the southern border is not a complete solution. In the current crisis the illegal minors are not trying to “sneak” into the country. They present themselves to law enforcement officials at the border because current law allows them a free pass – no matter what anyone says. As well, the Republicans need to come to grips with the fact that Americans will never tolerate the forced deportation of 12 million people. Many have been peacefully and productively residing in the US for decades.

America has twice previously deported Mexicans. In 1935, due to the Depression, two million Mexican and Mexican-Americans were bused back into Mexico. That’s correct. American citizens of Mexican origin were caught up in the frenzy and repatriated to Mexico. These individuals were deported in an effort by the government to free up jobs for those who were considered “real Americans” and rid the county governments of “the problem.” The INS (now ICE) began “Operation Wetback” in June 1954, and deported 170,000 Mexicans in the first three months. This operation led to a temporary decrease in undocumented migration, yet did not end the flow. My point is simple. Deportation has not worked! We have millions more “illegals” today than before the forced deportations.

The US must also come to understand that all immigrant groups go through phases of integration into their new society. Because Mexican American border-crossers are often sojourners (they only intend to stay for a while, not make America their permanent home) the process has necessarily been slower than for the Germans, Irish and Jews who came to America and didn’t plan to go back to their nation of origin. Tracing the progress of sojourners is far more complex.

I don’t have the answer, but neither do my fellow Tea Party members who flatly say, “No amnesty,” without ever defining what that means and the impossibility of implementing a solution from that starting point.

Roy Filly


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment