A Few Questions About Obamacare and the Uninsured Rate

The good news for Obamacare supporters is that a
monthly tracking poll from Gallup
finds that the percentage of
uninsured Americans dropped this month, the first in which
Obamacare’s major coverage provisions kicked in. The uninsured rate
dropped from 17.3 percent down to 16.1 percent between December of
2013 and January of this year, according to the Gallup-Healthways
Well-Being Index.  

The less-good news for the health law’s backers is that the
uninsurance rate is still essentially the same as it was in the
early months of 2010, when the law passed. And it’s still several
points higher than it was late in 2008, just as the recession hit,
and when President Obama finishing his first campaign.

Here’s the graph:

The survey results leave a few unanswered questions:

How much of this month’s result is just normal
variation?
There have been numerous large month-over-month
spikes and drops in the numbers over the years, and this month’s
dip isn’t far out of the normal range. While it’s unlikely that
normal variation explains the entirety of this month’s drop, it may
explain some or even most of it. 

What happened during the summer of 2013? The uninsured
rate jumps all the way up to 18.6 percent, almost a point higher
than its previous high, before it starts falling again in the
second half of the year. 

How much of the expansion of insurance comes from Medicaid,
and how much is in private insurance?
The report doesn’t
attempt to break out the number of people who are insured through
Medicaid, the federal-state program for the poor that was expanded
under Obamacare. And federal data on Medicaid enrollments since
October of last year isn’t very helpful either, since it doesn’t
differentiate between people who renewed prior Medicaid coverage
and people who are newly covered under the health law. But it would
be interesting to know. In theory, it’s still possible that the
number of people with insurance of any kind (including Medicaid)
has increased, but the number of people with private insurance has
not. 

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1l1QCcc
via IFTTT

F’ville man charged with rape, aggravated sodomy

A Fayetteville man has been charged with rape and aggravated sodomy in a Jan. 20 incident involving a 19-year-old Riverdale woman.

Herminio Gutierrez, 21, of Booker Avenue, was charged with rape, aggravated sodomy, making terroristic threats and acts and misdemeanor battery, according to Fayetteville Det. Mike Whitlow.

Whitlow said the incident occurred in the early morning hours of Jan. 20 after Gutierrez and the woman returned from a date in Atlanta and went to his residence.

“He became sexually aggressive and she rebuffed him,” Whitlow said.

read more

via The Citizen http://ift.tt/1aP2BjC

F'ville man charged with rape, aggravated sodomy

A Fayetteville man has been charged with rape and aggravated sodomy in a Jan. 20 incident involving a 19-year-old Riverdale woman.

Herminio Gutierrez, 21, of Booker Avenue, was charged with rape, aggravated sodomy, making terroristic threats and acts and misdemeanor battery, according to Fayetteville Det. Mike Whitlow.

Whitlow said the incident occurred in the early morning hours of Jan. 20 after Gutierrez and the woman returned from a date in Atlanta and went to his residence.

“He became sexually aggressive and she rebuffed him,” Whitlow said.

read more

via The Citizen http://ift.tt/1aP2BjC

Why Is A Gigantic War-Blimp About To Fly Above the Skies Of Suburban Baltimore?

Submitted by Mike Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

One of the most disturbing and relentless trends over the past several years has been the redirection of war technology and equipment from the battlefield abroad toward domestic use in the USA. This has resulted in a militarization of police across the nation and has encouraged small towns to use Department of Homeland Security (DHS) grants to purchase ridiculous items such as tanks.

Sadly, it appears this trend is only accelerating. With billions of dollars already spent, and failed wars abroad, the military-industrial complex needs to continue to generate cash flow. May as well just use it against the American people.

 

We find out from the Washington Post that:

They will look like two giant white blimps floating high above I-95 in Maryland, perhaps en route to a football game somewhere along the bustling Eastern Seaboard. But their mission will have nothing to do with sports and everything to do with war.

 

The aerostats — that is the term for lighter-than-air craft that are tethered to the ground — are to be set aloft on Army-owned land about 45 miles northeast of Washington, near Aberdeen Proving Ground, for a three-year test slated to start in October. From a vantage of 10,000 feet, they will cast a vast radar net from Raleigh, N.C., to Boston and out to Lake Erie, with the goal of detecting cruise missiles or enemy aircraft so they could be intercepted before reaching the capital.

Interesting, I didn’t realize we were at war. When was the last time cruise missiles were shot into the United States?

Aerostats deployed by the military at U.S. bases in Iraq and Afghanistan typically carried powerful surveillance cameras as well, to track the movements of suspected insurgents and even U.S. soldiers.

 

Defense contractor Raytheon last year touted an exercise in which it outfitted the aerostats planned for deployment in suburban Baltimore with one of the company’s most powerful high-altitude surveillance systems, capable of spotting individual people and vehicles from a distance of many miles.

 

The Army said it has “no current plans” to mount such cameras or infrared sensors on the aerostats or to share information with federal, state or local law enforcement, but it declined to rule out either possibility. The radar system that is planned for the aerostats will be capable of monitoring the movement of trains, boats and cars, the Army said.

“No Current plans.” What a bunch of assholes. You know they can’t wait to attach an ARGUS surveillance system to these puppies.

“That’s the kind of massive persistent surveillance we’ve always been concerned about with drones,” said Jay Stanley, a privacy expert for the American Civil Liberties Union. “It’s part of this trend we’ve seen since 9/11, which is the turning inward of all of these surveillance technologies.”

 

The Army played down such concerns in written responses to questions posed by The Washington Post, saying its goal is to test the ability of the aerostats to bolster the region’s missile-defense capability, especially against low-flying cruise missiles that can be hard for ground-based systems to detect in time to intercept them.

 

The Army determined it did not need to conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment, required for some government programs, because it was not going to collect any personally identifiable information, officials said in their written responses to The Post.

Did the FISA court rubber stamp this assessment?

Technologies developed for battlefields — weapons, vehicles, communications systems — long have flowed homeward as overseas conflicts have ended. The battles that followed the Sept. 11 attacks have produced major advances in surveillance equipment whose manufacturers increasingly are looking to expand their use within the United States.

 

Aerostats — basically big balloons on strings — grew popular in Iraq and Afghanistan and also are used by Israel to monitor the Gaza Strip and by the United States to eye movement along southern border areas. Even a rifle shot through an aerostat will not bring it down, because the pressure of the helium inside nearly matches the pressure of the air outside, preventing rapid deflation.

So equipment used to control people in war zones are coming to America and there’s nothing to be concerned about?

The Defense Department spent nearly $7 billion on 15 different lighter-than-air systems between 2007 and 2012, with several suffering from technical problems, delays and unexpectedly high costs, the Government Accountability Office found in an October 2012 report.

 

“They are bringing this to the East Coast, close to Washington, to get the Pentagon guys and Congress to say, ‘Whoa, we could really use this,’?” said Daniel Goure of the Lexington Institute, a military think tank with ties to the defense industry. “This is re-purposing. You’ve already spent the money.”

Have fun Baltimore.

Full article here.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1g4PG4x Tyler Durden

“We Have to Break in Our New Celebrities Slowly”

I’ve always been curious about the relationship between
celebrities and the causes they represent: who initiates it, how
the celeb gets briefed, and so on. If you’ve wondered about the
same thing, the London Telegraph‘s recent
report
on actress/singer Elizabeth McGovern’s trip to Sierra
Leone with the California-based NGO World Vision will be
illuminating. Or maybe her story is entirely atypical and doesn’t
illuminate much at all. Either way, it’s an entertaining read:

ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA is a great movie.[P]erhaps because it is a profoundly
Christian organisation — [Sarah] Wilson describes it as “more
Christian than Christian Aid” — [World Vision] is big in the
United States, but has a relatively small presence in our more
sceptical isles, where we are wary of anything that looks like
proselytising (a spokesman confirmed that it sometimes uses charity
funds to set up Christian education courses for those of other
faiths).

I ask McGovern why, as a non-Christian, she chose to support World
Vision rather than one of the many secular, apolitical charities,
such as Unicef. Her answer is unexpected: she had no idea that it
was a faith-based organisation. As it turned out, charity
representatives failed to make their Christianity clear to her.
This, they say, was an “oversight”; they had assumed that McGovern
would take a look at the World Vision website (their logo is a
shining cross).

“I was stupid not to realise it,” she tells me later. “I think the
people at World Vision assumed it would be obvious.” McGovern has
not withdrawn from World Vision, as “on balance, it is an
organisation that does a lot of good for many people.” In addition,
World Vision has paid her band £28,000 to fund the recording of
their latest album and a UK tour, in return for which they have
agreed to promote the charity. Without this money, McGovern says,
her band would “never survive”.

I also enjoyed this impromptu political commentary:

“I get the impression that in Africa people have sex
far more freely than we do back home,” reflects McGovern. “You see
certain cultures where there’s just endemic cruelty to women. I
wonder if World Vision would take on the problem of women wearing
the burka? And that clitoris thing is awful.”

On a more substantial level, the article includes some
thoughtful commentary on the relationship between child
sponsorship, charity, and PR. When McGovern meets Jestina, the
African girl her donations have been sponsoring, the author notes
that “the money does not go to Jestina or her family, but is used
for various projects in the area. The little girl is being used as
the human face of her community, and McGovern is the human face of
ours; it is a feedback loop of public relations.” He doesn’t
declare this as a debunker — he goes on to say that those projects
do good for the community, and thus presumably for Jestina — but
to take a clearer look at what exactly the transaction we’re
witnessing actually means.

Read the rest of the Telegraph story here.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/KLHk36
via IFTTT

"We Have to Break in Our New Celebrities Slowly"

I’ve always been curious about the relationship between
celebrities and the causes they represent: who initiates it, how
the celeb gets briefed, and so on. If you’ve wondered about the
same thing, the London Telegraph‘s recent
report
on actress/singer Elizabeth McGovern’s trip to Sierra
Leone with the California-based NGO World Vision will be
illuminating. Or maybe her story is entirely atypical and doesn’t
illuminate much at all. Either way, it’s an entertaining read:

ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA is a great movie.[P]erhaps because it is a profoundly
Christian organisation — [Sarah] Wilson describes it as “more
Christian than Christian Aid” — [World Vision] is big in the
United States, but has a relatively small presence in our more
sceptical isles, where we are wary of anything that looks like
proselytising (a spokesman confirmed that it sometimes uses charity
funds to set up Christian education courses for those of other
faiths).

I ask McGovern why, as a non-Christian, she chose to support World
Vision rather than one of the many secular, apolitical charities,
such as Unicef. Her answer is unexpected: she had no idea that it
was a faith-based organisation. As it turned out, charity
representatives failed to make their Christianity clear to her.
This, they say, was an “oversight”; they had assumed that McGovern
would take a look at the World Vision website (their logo is a
shining cross).

“I was stupid not to realise it,” she tells me later. “I think the
people at World Vision assumed it would be obvious.” McGovern has
not withdrawn from World Vision, as “on balance, it is an
organisation that does a lot of good for many people.” In addition,
World Vision has paid her band £28,000 to fund the recording of
their latest album and a UK tour, in return for which they have
agreed to promote the charity. Without this money, McGovern says,
her band would “never survive”.

I also enjoyed this impromptu political commentary:

“I get the impression that in Africa people have sex
far more freely than we do back home,” reflects McGovern. “You see
certain cultures where there’s just endemic cruelty to women. I
wonder if World Vision would take on the problem of women wearing
the burka? And that clitoris thing is awful.”

On a more substantial level, the article includes some
thoughtful commentary on the relationship between child
sponsorship, charity, and PR. When McGovern meets Jestina, the
African girl her donations have been sponsoring, the author notes
that “the money does not go to Jestina or her family, but is used
for various projects in the area. The little girl is being used as
the human face of her community, and McGovern is the human face of
ours; it is a feedback loop of public relations.” He doesn’t
declare this as a debunker — he goes on to say that those projects
do good for the community, and thus presumably for Jestina — but
to take a clearer look at what exactly the transaction we’re
witnessing actually means.

Read the rest of the Telegraph story here.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/KLHk36
via IFTTT

Steve Chapman on Obama’s Retreat from the War on Drugs

President Obama has indicated some willingness to
dial back prohibition. Not standing in the way of states trying
legalization is a big deal. It shows a somewhat open mind about the
wisdom of the status quo and the practical effects of
liberalization. But, Steve Chapman points out, if Obama really
believes what he says, merely doing nothing is not quite enough. A
change of tone would be cold comfort without a change of
policy.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/KLHho7
via IFTTT

Steve Chapman on Obama's Retreat from the War on Drugs

President Obama has indicated some willingness to
dial back prohibition. Not standing in the way of states trying
legalization is a big deal. It shows a somewhat open mind about the
wisdom of the status quo and the practical effects of
liberalization. But, Steve Chapman points out, if Obama really
believes what he says, merely doing nothing is not quite enough. A
change of tone would be cold comfort without a change of
policy.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/KLHho7
via IFTTT

Bank Of America: “Gold Squeeze Gets Explosive Above 1270”

Just out from Bank of America’s head technician MacNeill Curry:

Gold gets explosive above 1270. Watch out.

 

With the US $ coming under pressure, the potential further gold gains is high and rising. 1270 IS KEY. A break of the 1270 pivot should be the catalyst for short squeeze higher, exposing the confluence of resistance between 1362/1399


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/KNWGEP Tyler Durden

Bank Of America: "Gold Squeeze Gets Explosive Above 1270"

Just out from Bank of America’s head technician MacNeill Curry:

Gold gets explosive above 1270. Watch out.

 

With the US $ coming under pressure, the potential further gold gains is high and rising. 1270 IS KEY. A break of the 1270 pivot should be the catalyst for short squeeze higher, exposing the confluence of resistance between 1362/1399


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/KNWGEP Tyler Durden