Socialism, Communism, Fascism never work, Capitalism on the other hand always does!

Class Warriors

Bill Neinast

IN PERSPECTIVE

Last week’s column was a play with words.  Under discussion was the news media’s unabashed preference for “progressive” movements toward total government control under socialist principles in lieu of “radical” beliefs in individual responsibility and freedom under smaller governments.

Fair, another word, also fits into this discussion.  This is another favorite of liberal or “progressive” class warriors.  Oddly, however, it rarely stands alone.

In progressive terminology, there is always a modifier like “un” or “not,” as in unfair or not fair.  So to be fair, let’s define the basic term.  The simplest definition is that fair is just or appropriate in the circumstances or is in accordance with the rules or standards.

For progressive class warriors, the distribution of wealth of this country is unfair.  In their opinion, the only way that wealth can be distributed in a fair way is to tax it. Bring in the tax money from the greedy wealthy, give 50% or more of it to bureaucrats to study how to distribute it fairly, then pass the remainder to those who pass muster with the bureaucrats.

Under this philosophy, the wealthy never pay their fair share of taxes.  The better off among us indulge themselves with money that should go to the government in taxes.

Rarely will this group acknowledge that those whom they disdain often do a better job of distributing their wealth in a fairer way than could ever be done by bureaucrats.  This better sharing of wealth is frequently illustrated in this paper.

Just last week, for instance, there was an account of the Ed Kruse family’s gift of over 100 acres of expensive land to the city of Brenham for development into a multi-use public park.  How much of that property would end up in a park to be used by citizens from all walks of life if it first had to go through bureaucratic hands?

This gift is just the last of a long list of Kruse benevolence, including Brenham Blue Bell Aquatic Center, an athletic field at Texas A&M, and support of Texas Lutheran University.

A few days later, the $200,000+ donation of Gary and Sandi Applet to construct a permanent home for the Washington County Healthy Living Association.  This association is better known as the Senior Citizen Center, and has been moving from pillar to post for several years.

The new, permanent center will be built on four acres of land previously donated for that purpose to the city of Brenham by the John Kenjura family.

About the time that the Kenjuras were donating land to the city, Dr. Wilfred Dietrich donated the quarter million dollar Dr.Bobbie M. Dietrich Memorial Amphitheater at Hohlt Park to the city of Brenham.  Then, just a few months ago, Wilfred received the Distinguished Service Award from Sam Houston State University in recognition of his gifts of endowed scholarships at seven universities.  As Wilfred noted, “all of us know the act of giving gives a greater pleasure than receiving.”

Not to be forgotten are Leon and Mimmie Toubin and their gift of a lot in the business district of Brenham for the construction of the historically significant Toubin Park telling the story of The Burning of Brenham.  The Toubins are also single handily preserving Brenham’s Jewish Synagogue, the oldest Orthodox Jewish Synagogue in the state, and the Jewish section of Prairie Lee Cemetery.

These are just five local families who are giving generously on a continuing basis to help or comfort all of their neighbors without regard to circumstances. There are countless others quietly assisting in different ways.  Consider, for example, the numerous lists of benefactors adorning the entry halls of Scott and White Hospital, Brenham.

All of this in just one small city in one of the 254 counties in Texas.  How much is it replicated in other small towns and counties around the nation?

Many, if not most, of the donors of this largesse are among that group disdained by “progressives” as unfair because they do not pay their fair share of taxes.  They are, however, among that 53% of taxpayers who pay taxes to pay the salaries of bureaucrats to decide how the taxes will be spent.  Only part of what is left over after all the bureaucratic decision making winds up helping the “less fortunate.”

So here’s the perspective.

Progressive class warriors are fighting a losing battle.  They are striving to make the world fair.

That is not possible.  The world is not fair and never will be.  It is not fair that some are born in wealthy countries like the U.S., much of Europe, and Japan while others are born in countries impoverished for various reasons.  It is not fair that some are born with natural athletic abilities while so many others are just klutzes.  It is not fair that some are born with healthy bodies and minds while others are never able to care for themselves.  It is not fair that some are born and reared in loving, two-parent  families while others have to endure an abusive single parent household.

This list could go on and on.  Enough has been written, however, to paint the picture.

There is no amount of taxes or wealth controlled by any government that could change this picture.  Trying to change it by taking more money out of the pockets of philanthropists through taxes might result in even more unfairness, as too much would go to making government even bigger.

Let’s leave it to those who some believe are not paying a fair share of taxes to decide which group or program would benefit most from their largesse.

Obamacare and the Edsel: A Tale of Two Lemons

With the government shutdown you may have missed the press (what little there was) about the problems www.healthcare.gov.  So let me ask a question, if the government after spending over a $500 million dollars with a Canadian firm, can't design and implement a web site that works, how is the world do you think they are going to provide healthcare more efficiently that private providers, whose web sites work, do now!

David Carton at The American Spectator wrote a great article that you might enjoy!

Marc

Spending Away the Civilization!

Great insight by Peter Morici (Twitter @pmorici1) a a widely published columnist and a professor at the Smith School of Business, University of Maryland School.  Sign up to read more of his stuff if you like this!

"If growth continues at 1, 2 or even 3 percent, then the weight of the baby boom retiring on federal entitlements will push federal deficits through the ceiling in the next decade.

"Higher taxes won’t help much. If tax rates are too high, successful people work less and take their skills elsewhere. Technology companies and financial institutions--where the real fortunes are made these days--can park their patents and profits in Ireland or some other low-tax jurisdiction.

"Sooner or later, Washington won’t be able to continue borrowing. Just as unions and banks will now tussle over whether pensioners or bondholders should have first claim on Detroit’s remaining revenues, Washington can dicker with Beijing over whether the Social Security checks should go out or the Middle Kingdom gets all the interest due on its holdings of U.S. bonds.

"At that point, we can auction off the Grand Canyon and spend the Fourth of July remembering what a great civilization we spent away."
 

What is a liberal?

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money! - G. Gordon Liddy

Why Medical Bills are Killing Americans!

Bill Neinast

IN PERSPECTIVE

Steven Brill’s “Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us” may be the longest article ever to appear in Time Magazine.  The 39 page article in the March 4 issue is not cluttered with distractions.  There are 11 full page pictures and a few scattered reproductions of parts of hospital bills.  That leaves 56 long, wide columns of detailed reading.

Brill concentrates most of his attention on hospitals.  He includes for profit institutions and the not-for-profit conglomerates, including MD Anderson headquartered in Houston.

Until the last few pages, he seems to be applying sound business principles to his analyses.  In the end, however, his cover is broken. His suggestions for possible corrective action indicate that he may never have been in a management position in any business and that he believes the government is the answer to every problem.

Then, after some calm reflection on the entire article, clearly the major cause of escalating medical costs is understated or ignored completely.  Instead of the government being a solution for the problem, it is the principle cause of the problem.

Throughout the article, Brill lays blame on chargemasters.  Chargemasters are the computer billing programs for hospitals with an amount listed for thousands of individual procedures, medications, supplies, etc.  Each hospital and hospital system has a unique chargemaster developed for and by the institution.  In nearly every instance, the amount listed has no basis in reality.  Each of those amounts could be called obscenely high.

Analyzing why those amounts are so grossly exaggerated leads to one conclusion.  The primary reason is the government’s intrusion.

There were many huzzahs and hurrays when Uncle Sam announced that it was going to help seniors pay for their medical care.  Then the reality of Medicare set in.

The government was going to pay 80% of the charges it deemed reasonable.  Reasonable charges would be discounts of the average of charges for a procedure or bill within specific regions. 

Hospitals wanting a reasonable return on their investments, therefore, had to do whatever possible to raise the “average” in their region.  That meant everyone pegging their chargemaster prices as high as possible and then negotiating with the government and insurance companies to obtain that discounted rate.

Bills churned out by chargemasters, however, are rarely paid in full.  Patients who normally pay in full are wealthy foreigners and unknowing or uncaring Americans. 

The government and insurance companies know those chargemaster bills are mere starting points for negotiations and rarely, if ever, pay as much as one half of the bill.  

The system has also spawned a new cottage industry.  

Knowledgeable and experienced individuals are now becoming representatives for uninsured patients presented with massive hospital bills in six figures.  The representatives take the bills apart line by line and frequently end up with the patient paying no more than the government or insurance companies would pay under their negotiated fees.

The escalating fees will be exacerbated by Obamacare.  The new law is already bringing more Americans under the government’s or insurance umbrella.  When complete, every American will be covered by Medicare, Medicaid, or insurance.

Everyone will be lulled into thinking that medical care is now free or almost free and do what many people do when they think something is free.  They will use it, without regard to whether they really need it.

Two other factors that Brill discusses in relation to exorbitant hospital bills are the million dollar salaries for the non medical administrators of hospital system and run amok personal injury lawyers.

Some of the million dollar salaries are mind boggling.  Consider, for example, MD Anderson in Houston.  According to Brill, “Ronald DePinho’s [President of MD Anderson] total compensation last year was $1,845,000.  That does not count outside earnings derived from a much publicized waiver he received from the university that, according to the Houston Chronicle, allows him to maintain unspecified ‘financial ties with his three principal pharmaceutical companies.’

“DePinho’s salary is nearly triple the $674,350 paid to William Powers Jr., the president of the entire University of Texas system, of which MD Anderson is a part.”

The nauseating nightly TV ads for law firms urging anyone who has not been made completely whole by any medical procedure to contact them “for the compensation you deserve” has been discussed here too often to require repeating.  Just to talk with any physician about what that constant threat of malpractice law suits requires them to do above and beyond what they think is reasonably required.  Each Xray, MRI, and Cat Scan they require “just to be sure”  does nothing in most cases but add to the patient’s bill.

So here’s the perspective.

Brill’s article is a good read on how and why American medical bills are so much higher than the rest of the industrialized world.  He also has some ideas on how some of those bills might be reduced.

One of his suggestions, however, goes too far.   He would have the government cap the salaries for hospital administrators.  

Whenever the government starts stepping into office buildings and telling businesses what they may pay their executives, we are in deep trouble.

The Unintended Consequences of Charity!

My friend, Bill Neinast, always writes thought provoking articles.  He asks some tough questions in the following piece.  Sounds like Toxic Charity is a book that should be required reading for all of America's elected and appointed officials and every citizen.

Bill Neinast


IN PERSPECTIVEToxic Charity is an excellent primer for anyone interested in charity.  Whether interested in giving, planning, or participating, this short book is a must read.

Robert D. Lupton, the author, has been involved with charitable works in Atlanta for 30 years.  As founder and president of FCS urban Ministries (Focused Community Strategies), he knows whereof he speaks when he discusses how churches and charities hurt those they help.

Upton is not anti charity.  He is, however, concerned about how most charities in this country are planned and executed.  In his opinion, charities bear responsibility with the federal government for creating a society of dependency.

Concomitant with that culture of dependency is a loss of the work ethic.  Without that work ethic, the effective charities in third world countries that involve buy ins by the communities being helped have little chance of success in the U.S.

Several examples of the need for involving targeted communities in the help project that involves water wells in Africa.

In one area, women were walking several miles to get their daily supplies of water.   A group of Americans decided to help.  They had a well dug and fitted with a pump in the center of the village.  When they returned to admire their gift a year later, they found the villagers trudging back to the old spring for water.  The pump on the well had broken and no one knew or bothered to learn how to fix it.

Another group learning of a need for water in a village undertook their assistance differently.  They involved the village in the project from the beginning.  Villagers decided where to dig the well and who would be served by it.  They developed a community system with water piped to homes, where it is paid for.  That village is now piping and selling water to other villages in the area.

Upton also considers mission trips to be religious tourism.  He illustrates this belief with examples of trips, usually by church affiliated groups, that provide no real or lasting benefit for the community being “served.”

The money spent on transporting and supporting the mission participants could be used more effectively.   Money instead of bodies to help the target community accomplish a task internally like the water system mentioned above would be much better gifts.

A local pastor who has participated in some missions agrees.  He believes, however, that the real benefit of such trips is the spiritual lift the trips give the participating parishioners.

Is that a valid trade off?  Upton probably would answer, “No.”

He would cite in response the mission group that went to a third world country to tile the floor of a new church.  None of the participants had tiling experience. When the mission left, local tile setters had to redo the whole floor at more expense than if they had done the job initially.

Was the spiritual lift for a small group of inexperienced tile setters worth the cost, regardless of the source of the money?

Locally, the Upton technique could have profound effects.

Take the Goodfellows give aways for the Christmas season.  A new approach would be to buy the same toys and food with the donated funds, but not to be given away.  The items would still be available for the identified families, but not as gifts.  Instead, they would have to buy them at substantially reduced prices.

This should restore in the heads of households an appreciation of being able to provide for their own families.

So here’s the perspective.

Upton believes the best charity is the microlending described in the development of the community water system.  Unfortunately, he believes that microlending and a buy in of Goodfellows discussed above will not work in the United States.

In his own words, “Experienced microlending organizations have identified three essential elements for successful microloans:  The borrower must have (1) an ingrained work ethic, (2) a demonstrated entrepreneurial instinct, and (3) a stable support system.  Like legs on a three-legged stool, all three must undergird the borrower or the transaction will not stand.

“In developing countries where people must constantly hustle simply to survive, a work ethic is almost a given.  Not so in a culture like the United States, where the welfare system has fostered generations of dependency and has severely eroded the work ethic.  Where a people assume that their subsistence is guaranteed, hard work becomes neither a necessity for survival nor a means to escape poverty. “ (pages 120-121)

When and how can we restore the work ethic in our homeland?