By Jacob G. Hornberger
When President Franklin Roosevelt revolutionized America’s economic system by enacting Social Security, he knew that it would be a permanent change. He knew that once he got people dependent on the system, he would have them. Sort of like how a heroin dealer feels about getting a new customer hooked on heroin.
That’s what President Obama and his acolytes were undoubtedly thinking about when they enacted Obamacare. Get it passed, get people dependent on it, and you have them. The program becomes permanent.
That’s what has now happened with Obamacare. With Republicans running scared for fear of adverse voter reaction if they follow through with their 8-year “Repeal Obamacare” mantra, the conservative movement to repeal Obamacare is now finished.
Trump is right. Under Obamacare, America’s healthcare system will continue to be a growing disaster. That’s because socialism is a disaster.
As the healthcare crisis grows, there will be increasing calls by the mainstream press for Republicans to join Democrats in a healthcare reform package designed to fix the crisis. But any healthcare reform package will only make the situation worse. When officials try to fix socialist programs, the situation only gets worse, which then causes officials to call for more reforms. The end of this road is a 100 percent socialist healthcare system, like in Cuba and North Korea.
Meanwhile, conservative commentators and conservative think tanks will continue to come up with their particular variations of conservative healthcare reforms. Why not? This racket has worked to garner support and money for the conservative movement for 8 years. Might as well keep it going.
But anyone who keeps going down the “Repeal Obamacare” or “Reform Obamacare” road is just wasting his time, energy, and money. That’s because all conservative and liberal healthcare reform plans leave intact the root cause of America’s healthcare crisis: Medicare and Medicaid.
That’s the important point in all this: If Medicare and Medicaid are left intact, America will continue to have a grave healthcare crisis. It can’t be avoided. These two programs are as socialistic as Social Security and Obamacare. They are the root cause of America’s healthcare woes.
Thus, to achieve a healthy healthcare system, there is but one solution: Get government entirely out of healthcare. Separate healthcare and the state. Adopt a 100 percent free-market healthcare system. Begin by repealing, not reforming, Medicare and Medicaid, along with Obamacare.
There is no other solution. The problem, of course, is that so many people have become dependent on Medicare and Medicaid. That’s the lesson that President Lyndon Johnson, who brought us these two socialist programs, learned from his mentor, FDR. Put people on the dole and you have them permanently. The result is a socialist system that will only continue to get worse and worse.
This article was originally published at The Future of Freedom Foundation.
When it comes to pushing a neocon foreign policy of confrontation and militarism, Washington is bipartisan. Both parties have boxed in President Trump and his campaign promises of better relations with Russia. Both parties are united in pushing a new Cold War with Russia. Where will it end?
Press Play to hear Ron Paul deliver his Weekly Update:
By Ron Paul
President Trump seems to be impatiently racing toward at least one disastrous war. Maybe two. The big question is who will be first? North Korea or Iran?
Over the past several days President Trump has sent two nuclear-capable B-1 bombers over the Korean peninsula to send a clear message that he is ready to attack North Korea. On Saturday he blamed China for North Korea’s refusal to cease its missile tests. He Tweeted: “I am very disappointed in China… they do nothing for us with North Korea, just talk. We will no longer allow this to continue.”
One press report from an unnamed Pentagon source claimed that President Trump “is to order a military strike against North Korea within a year,” after this weekend’s North Korean test of a longer-range missile.
Iran, which along with North Korea and Russia will face new sanctions imposed by Congress and expected to be signed into law by Trump, is also in President Trump’s crosshairs. He was reportedly furious over his Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s certifying that Iran was in compliance with the nuclear deal – even though Iran was in compliance – and he seems determined to push a confrontation.
Twice in the past week the US military has fired at Iranian ships in the Persian Gulf. On Tuesday an Iranian military ship in the Persian Gulf was warned off by machine gun blasts from a US Naval vessel. Then on Friday the US Navy fired warning flares toward another Iranian ship operating in the Persian Gulf.
Imagine if the US Navy had encountered Iranian warships in the Gulf of Mexico firing machine guns at them when they approached the Iranians.
Facing new sanctions, the Iranian government announced that it will not end ballistic missile testing even under US pressure. The missile program is not a violation of the P5+1 Iran deal unless it is specifically designed to carry nuclear weapons.
So whom will Trump attack first? Let’s hope nobody, but with continuing pressure from both Democrats and Republicans over the unproven “Russiagate” allegations, it increasingly looks like he will seek relief by starting a “nice little war.” If he does so, however, his presidency will likely be over and he may end up blundering into a much bigger war in the process.
Although Trump’s bombastic rhetoric on Iran and North Korea has been pretty consistent, the American people voted Trump because he was seen as the less likely of the two candidates to get the US into a major war.
A recent study by the Boston University and the University of Minnesota concluded that Trump won the most votes in parts of the country with the highest military casualties. Those most directly suffering the costs of war were attracted to the candidate they saw as less likely to take the US into another major war. These are the Americans living in the swing states of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan that surprised the pundits by voting for Trump over Hillary.
Will Trump’s legacy be blustering us into one or two wars that will make Iraq and Afghanistan look like cakewalks by comparison? Millions dead? It’s time to make our voices known before it’s too late!
By Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)
What will happen now that the Obamacare repeal has failed? The same thing that was already happening: Premiums will skyrocket. Insurers will exit, leaving monopolies or vacuums, and Americans will have less choice.
How did the GOP lose its nerve and run away from meaningful repeal?
Look no further than the billion dollar insurance companies.
The insurance industry, titans of crony capitalism, whined and whined that repeal alone would cause premiums to rise. Insurers to drop out. Americans to lose coverage.
Really? You mean exactly what is happening now under Obamacare?
What did the insurance companies want? Well, your money of course. It, apparently, is not enough to gouge us with the doubling of premiums; the insurance companies also lobbied, and lobbied hard, for a giant insurance bailout superfund. And, with compliant big government Republicans, they finally porked it up to nearly $300 billion. Obscene.
The GOP pork-fest offered to exchange Medicaid dollars for insurance profits. No wonder the bill had a 20 percent approval by the public.
Big government Republicans looked at each other, flummoxed that voters would look askance at legislation that takes taxpayer dollars from health care for poor people and gives that money to rich people at billion dollar insurance corporations.
The clean repeal, which I supported, wasn’t perfect, but it would have forced all parties to legislatively resolve the wreckage of Obamacare.
Read the rest of Rand's op-ed at Rare Politics
By Liberty Report Staff
Let's start at the beginning. Bubbles and Busts are both created by The Federal Reserve.
Presidents are merely along for the ride. They like to credit themselves for the bubbles, and then look for scapegoats, usually the (non-existent) free market during the busts.
But it is The Fed that creates them both.
President Trump has made a big (yet understandable) mistake. He's tried to portray himself as the cause of the current bubble in the stock market. He wants credit where credit is due.
In this case, credit is not due.
As we already mentioned, the Fed created the current bubble, and did so a long time ago.
One look at a chart of the S&P 500 says it all:
Chances are, Trump realizes that most people won't look at a chart of the stock market and he just wants some good PR.
The president wants people to think that he is the reason for the stock market bubble.
This is a big mistake.
The Fed is the premier member of the so-called "Deep State". In fact, without The Fed, there would hardly be a "Deep State" to speak of.
The Fed sits at the top of the Deep State. They have the ultimate power (that no human beings should ever have) to create new money out-of-thin-air.
In case Trump hasn't figured it out yet, the Deep State does not like him.
Should a major decline in the stock market occur during Trump's Administration, guess who will take the blame?
After all, he took ownership of the bubble!
Should the market tumble, the mainstream media (that also despises Trump) will have plenty of his quotes, YouTubes, and Tweets to use against him.
The economic woes will be pinned on Trump.
Will Trump deserve the blame? No, but it'll be too late.
This is not to say that a major decline will occur during Trump's tenure. Bubbles can take on a life of their own, and this one may last during Trump's full term.
But that's a risky gamble to make.
This bubble is going on almost 10 years now without a serious decline.
Should we see a major selloff, Trump has very few friends in the major power centers that will come to his aid.
As Peter Schiff points out in this fantastic clip below: The Fed now has their fall guy:
By Daniel McAdams
Yesterday, the US Senate passed HR 3364, the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act by a massive 98 yeas to two nays. Opposing the bill were Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rand Paul (R-KY). The bill passed in the House by 419-3 on Tuesday, with Reps Massie (R-KY), Amash (R-MI), and Duncan (R-TN) opposing.
The new sanctions bill ties President Trump's hands on foreign policy, as he will be forced to ask Congress for permission to ease the measures.
Speaking in favor of the legislation, Sen. Bob Menendez (R-NJ) cited the need to send Russia a message that it cannot meddle in US elections, that it cannot annex Crimea, that it cannot invade Ukraine, and that it cannot indiscriminately kill women and children in Syria.
Those of us living in the actual real world recognize that the first count remains unproven and the remaining counts are simply fatuous, fact-free bluster by Washington's uninformed, group-thinking, foreign policy elites. Fueled by the millions coming in to the military-industrial complex.
The House and Senate passed "Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act" now goes to President Trump's desk, where he faces a damned if he does and damned if he doesn't scenario. A veto would certainly be over-ridden, handing the president a bitter bi-partisan blow that would likely end whatever aspirations he may retain to keep his campaign promises to get along better with Russia. Similarly, signing the bill signs a death warrant for any foreign policy different than the one served up by the neocons for decades: create enemies; push war propaganda; collect massive checks from military industrial complex; demonize any American refusing to go along; repeat, adding bombs as necessary.
Checkmate, President Trump.
The ideas of protectionism and mercantilism are as old as the hills. When implemented, they distort the market and create tremendous economic problems. Nevertheless, there's always a litany of excuses for government to tilt the tables in one direction or other. Ron Paul goes through the most popular excuses today on Myth-Busters.
By Jacob G. Hornberger
Americans might soon have a new reason to thank the troops for their service, at least in Afghanistan, where the troops have been killing and dying for almost 16 years. According to an article in yesterday’s New York Times, “President Trump, searching for a reason to keep the United States in Afghanistan after 16 years of war, has latched on to a prospect that tantalized previous administrations: Afghanistan’s vast mineral wealth, which his advisers and Afghan officials have told him could be profitably extracted by Western countries.”
If that doesn’t say it all, I don’t know what does. How do empire and foreign interventionism become more morally perverse than that?
Maybe Trump and the U.S. national-security establishment are sensing that the American people are no longer buying into the “They’re protecting our rights and freedom” jargon. Maybe they feel the need to come up with a new and exciting rationale for their forever occupation of Afghanistan — minerals!
Just think, every time we see an American soldier, we can say, “Thank you for your service. The cobalt and the iron ore you are helping to bring to America are fantastic.” Imagine the eulogies at funerals of U.S. military personnel: “She was a great soldier and gave her life in Afghanistan so that we could have more copper and aluminum here at home.” Imagine the tears that will produce among friends and family members.
I’ve got a better idea, one that is based on the notion of a limited-government republic rather than on imperialism and interventionism: Bring all the troops home now. They have been there killing and dying in Afghanistan (and elsewhere) long enough. Liberate America’s private sector to engage in economic enterprise in Afghanistan and the rest of the world. Limit the U.S. government to defending the United States. Prohibit U.S. presidents from sacrificing U.S. troops in Afghanistan and elsewhere for minerals, regime change, empire, power, or money.
This article was originally published at The Future of Freedom Foundation.
Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL) asked Fed Chairman Janet Yellen a simple question at a recent House Financial Services Committee Hearing: Why does the Fed fear transparency? What exactly, specifically could an audit of the Fed result in that would harm the country?
By Liberty Report Staff
What's in the bills that Congress votes on?
American citizens surely don't read them. Why should they, when their distinguished "representatives" are minding the fort?
Truth is, those "representatives" often don't read them either.
The Patriot Act? .... Members of the House never read it.
Judge Andrew Napolitano said The Patriot Act:
"was posted on the House Intranet for 15 min [before the vote] and it’s 315 pages long. I read it twice, and it took me 20 hours each time."
Nancy Pelosi said: "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."
Now we're being told that Trumpcare is "secretive," and is being "rammed through" Congress.
Yeah, that sounds about right.
We're supposed to be surprised at this type of behavior, but it's really just par for the course.
It's important to remember what goes on in Washington. It's not a place where people abide by the U.S. Constitution, even though everyone "swears" to when they take office.
Washington is a place to grab what you can for yourself and your closest crony friends.
DC is not like the marketplace, where the rest of us are able to survive. In the market, one person voluntarily trades an item (or currency) for someone else's item or service. If you attempt to use force against another, there are serious consequences.
But in Washington, you go to grab, take, and plunder.
It's all force.
If you don't take that taxpayer money, or capitalize on the taxpayers, someone else will.
Ruthlessness is a virtue in DC.
Of course, it wasn't supposed to be this way, but that's what it has become. And it didn't become this way over the last year, or even the last decade. We're looking at a solid century of persistent decay.
Let's go back to 1933, when FDR was destroying the U.S. monetary system.
One of the destructive Acts was called the "Emergency Banking Act."
Here's a DC tip: Whenever you see the word "Emergency," you know a great big crime is about to take place.
Congress, of course, didn't read it.
House Minority Leader Bertrand H. Snell (R-NY) acknowledged that it was out of the ordinary to pass legislation that "is not even in print at the time it is offered."
But, Snell said it should be passed nevertheless because:
"The house is burning down, and the President of the United States says this is the way to put out the fire. [Applause.] And to me at this time there is only one answer to this question, and that is to give the President what he demands and says is necessary to meet the situation."
84 years later, Congress and The President are still robbing us blind.
Astonishingly, Americans are still "surprised" at how dishonest and "secretive" these bandits can really be.