• ObamaCare—87% Receive Taxpayer Subsidies By Debbie Young
• ObamaCare’s Oligopolies By Debbie Young
• End The Fed, Part II By Richard C. Young
• E.J.’s Notes from the Wild, Wild West By E.J. Smith
• Will the Russians Blink? By Richard C. Young
• Immigration Wisdom Ann Coulter Style By Richard C. Young
• The Maximizers By E.J. Smith
• Read About Turmeric, Fibrin, Bromelain and Cancer By Richard C. Young
• Welcome to Weimarcare By Richard C. Young

The problem with ObamaCare—a problem its supporters don’t address—is that it fixes no problem in our health-care system. Instead, it subsidizes more people to consume health care at taxpayer expense. As the WSJ’s Holman W. Jenkins points out, of the eight million people who have signed up for ObamaCare, 87% are receiving taxpayer subsidies.

The pending decision in King vs. Burwell is a lethal threat to ObamaCare, writes Mr. Jenkins, in that it argues that the IRS is illegally misreading the law to grant subsidies to 6.7 enrollees in federal exchanges known as HealthCare.gov.

King is a threat to ObamaCare because, without subsidies, ObamaCare is nothing. It fixes no problem in our health-care system, except to subsidize more people to consume health care at taxpayer expense.

Subsidies aren’t always undesirable: They help some people get necessary care. But they do the most good when used sparingly, because subsidies also tend to inflate prices for everyone and encourage inefficient consumption that doesn’t improve health and may even endanger health.

ObamaCare, for all its flaws, could become the instrument by which responsible reformers renew their push for health care that delivers value for money. In the meantime, however, no worthwhile thoughts about ObamaCare, pro or con, are to be heard from people who count a program as a success just because Americans enjoy receiving benefits at the expense of other Americans.

Read more from Holman Jenkins here.

Oligopoly: a state of limited competition, in which a market is shared by a small number of producers or sellers.

Welcome to government health care—bigger insurance, bigger medicine, bigger health consolidations.  As the WSJ points out:

A healthier market would have many new competitive entrants given the transformative pace of technological and biomedical discovery. Health-care finance and delivery ought to be evolving along with these innovations, but the only disruptive force under ObamaCare is government. So five years into the glories of “health-care reform,” the same antiquated incumbents dominate as they did before, only with less accountability to patients. Cartels don’t care about quality, safety or costs to consumers.

Read more here from the WSJ on the prospects of the federal government converging into a “single monster health system.”

In End The Fed, Ron Paul informs readers that the nineteenth century saw many protests against the national bank system and the attempt to centralize money and credit in a government-sponsored, government-backed institution that operates in complete secrecy.

One might say that this is a populist cause. It is also a libertarian cause, one that would be cheered by Thomas Jefferson, a dedicated opponent of the Fed’s predecessor, the Bank of the United States, and by Thomas Paine, who saw paper money as the enemy of individual liberty on grounds that it always gives rise to despotism.

Paine, the same writer who inspired the American Revolution with his pamphlet Common Sense, also said this: “As to the assumed authority of any assembly in making paper money, or paper of any kind, a legal tender, or in other language, a compulsive payment, it is a most presumptuous attempt at arbitrary power….”

You don’t have to spend a ton of money to have fun with your family, but it certainly helps.

My family just returned from an incredible trip out west beginning at a ranch in Montana, then to Yellowstone National Park, and down to Jackson Hole, Wyoming.

This was an important trip for Becky and me.

One of Bec’s fondest memories as a kid was going out west to a dude ranch with her family. Mine was going across the country in a Winnebago in 1984 with mine.

Our kids are 14 (Izzy) and 12 (Owen), so this was the summer to head out west before it’s too late.

The two best things that happened to Izzy and Owen on this trip where: Izzy fell in love with a horse called Whiskey, and Owen met a group of friends to hang with for a week. Izzy wants to go back to see Whiskey, Owen wants to go back to play paintball  (he can do that closer to home), and I want to cry looking at the bill.

But it was worth every penny.

Riding a horse through the mountains of Montana brought Becky back to her childhood trip. Our drive along the wide-open spaces between the ranch and Yellowstone National Park brought me back to mine. There’s nothing like a five-hour drive, though, to drive everyone nuts.

I was talking with a client yesterday. He told me he had “one of those” weeks last week at work and was thinking about retirement. He wanted to talk finances with me to see where he’s at in terms of timing. After about 20 minutes talking I told him it’s not a money issue and he should take a long-weekend or plan a trip with his family.

It turns out my client misses his grandchildren and will see them the week of July 4^th.

If you feel like you need a change in your life, don’t think that you need to quit work, or move to another state to get closer to your family. I have found cutting and hacking away at your nest egg is never a good idea.

But if my client isn’t ready to come home after his trip, then it might be time to make a change.

Here Pat Buchanan chastises John McCain and the hawks in Congress for escalating the confrontation on NATO’s eastern border by planning to provide Ukraine with American offensive weapons and stationing NATO flagged heavy weaponry in Eastern Europe. The Russians, Pat says, are willing and able to respond in kind by moving nuclear capable Iskander missiles into the area. It’s a game of chicken and Pat asks if we are sure it is the Russians who will blink. Pat writes that the whole gambit is probably a losing proposition:

And NATO losing any such confrontation is the likely outcome of the collision provoked by the Pentagon and John McCain.

For if Kiev moves with U.S. arms against the rebels in the east, and Moscow sends planes, tanks and artillery to annihilate them, Kiev will be routed. And what do we do then?

Send carriers into the Black Sea to attack the Russian fleet at Sevastopol, and battle Russian missiles and air attacks?

Before we schedule a NATO confrontation with Russia, we had best look behind us to see who is following America’s lead.

According to a new survey by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, fewer than half of the respondents in Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Spain thought NATO should fight if its Baltic allies were attacked by Russia. Germans, by a 58-38 margin, did not think military force should be used by NATO to defend Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, though that is what Article 5 of the NATO charter requires of Germany.

Americans, by 56-37, favor using force to defend the Baltic States. On military aid to Ukraine, America is divided, 46 percent in favor, 43 percent opposed. However, only 1 in 5 Germans and Italians favor arming Ukraine, and in not a single major NATO nation does the arming of Ukraine enjoy clear majority support.

In Washington, Congressional hawks are primed to show Putin who is truly tough. But in shipping weapons to Ukraine and sending U.S. troops and armor into the Baltic States, they have behind them a divided nation and a NATO alliance that wants no part of this confrontation.

Unlike the Cuban missile crisis, it is Russia that has regional military superiority here, and a leader seemingly prepared to ride the escalator up right alongside us.

Are we sure it will be the Russians who blink this time?

Related video:

Ann Coulter eviscerates the popular narrative on immigration in her new book,  Adios, America: The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole.

Coulter defended her book in a tense interview with Jorge Ramos:

Here an excerpt from the book:

This is “Goodbye,” America. Adios. Paalam Na. No further warning will be issued.

For 40 years, the people have tried to tell politicians they want less immigration, but the politicians won’t listen.

Every single elite group in America is aligned against the public — the media, ethnic activists, big campaign donors, Wall Street, multimillionaire farmers and liberal “churches.”

They all want mass immigration from the Third World to continue. Both political parties connive to grant illegal aliens citizenship and bring in millions more legally, and the media hide the evidence.

Their game plan is: Never allow an honest debate on immigration.

Only in the case of immigration is the public systematically lied to from every major news outlet. They tell us, for example:

• Polls show the public overwhelmingly supports “comprehensive immigration reform.”

No poll shows this. The Left uses polls to manipulate public opinion, rather than quantify it. Typical is a Brookings Institution Poll that asked respondents to choose between two ways to solve the illegal immigration problem: “Arrest and deport all those who are here illegally” or “Provide an earned path to citizenship.” Absolutely no one has proposed that we deport all those here illegally — much less “arrest” them. But can’t I be against amnesty without voting for rounding up illegals at gunpoint? No! Look at the menu — no substitutions!

• Immigrants are doing jobs Americans just won’t do.

Americans are perfectly happy to do all manner of jobs — they just won’t do them for $7 an hour. Unions used to care about that, but now they just want political power. Democrats want the votes; certain business interests want the cheap labor. So both parties have conspired against the middle class.

• Amnesty will be fantastic for the economy.

Unless we’re talking about the Mexican economy, this is patently ridiculous. Adding another 30 million poor, unskilled, non-taxpaying, welfare-receiving people to America is good only for government workers and employers who refuse to mechanize their operations or pay Americans one dollar more.

• Hispanics will never vote for Republicans unless they pass amnesty.

First of all, moron Republicans: If they can’t vote, they can’t vote against you. Second, Hispanics who are citizens don’t care about amnesty! They’re already in. They vote 8-2 for the Democrats because they like big government. In 2011, 73% of California Hispanics said they’d support a candidate who wanted to “secure the border first, stop illegal immigration, and then find a way to address the status of people already here illegally.” In a 2014 Univision poll, 58% chose “Require border security first” over “Pass immigration reform.”

Read more here.

 

It’s hard to argue with 15-straight years of gains for the “Maximizers”.

Dr. Mercola posted this valuable information on the war against cancer a few years back and it is as timely as ever. Read with care his comments on fibrin and the important contribution raw vegetables can make to your health.

This systemic use of enzymes is just now taking off in the United States, but the use of enzymes to treat cancer has its roots all the way back to 1911 with John Beard’s The Enzyme Treatment of Cancer and Its Scientific Basis. Beard believed cancer was a result of diminished pancreatic enzymes, impairing your immune response. A study in 1999^iv suggests he may have been right on target.

Ten patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer were treated with large doses of oral pancreatic enzymes (along with detoxification and an organic diet), and their survival rates were 3 to 4 times higher than patients receiving conventional treatment. Proteolytic enzymes can be helpful in treating cancer because they help restore balance to your immune system. Dr. Nick Gonzalez in New York City, NY has also done a lot of work on enzymes in cancer treatment and has written a book on the subject.^v

Some of the ways proteolytic enzymes can be helpful in the fight against cancer are:^vi

• Boosting cytokines, particularly interferon and tumor necrosis factor, which are very important warriors in destroying cancer cells.
• Decreasing inflammation.
• Dissolving fibrin: Cancer cells hide under a cloak of fibrin to escape detection. Once the cancer cells are “uncloaked,” they can be spotted and attacked by your immune system. It is also thought that fibrin makes cancer cells “stick together,” which increases the chance for metastases.
• German studies have shown that systemic enzymes increase the potency of macrophages and killer cells 12-fold.

Fortunately, you get (or should be getting) many enzymes from the foods you consume—particularly, raw foods. These directly help with your digestive process. The more raw foods you eat, the lower the burden on your body to produce the enzymes it needs, not only for digestion, but for practically everything. Whatever enzymes are not used up in digestion are then available to help with other important physiological processes.

This is one of the reasons why it is so important to eat a diet rich in fresh, organic, raw foods. You may even want to try juicing some of your vegetables, and the core of your pineapple, as a way of getting more nutrients—and enzymes—into your body. In the event you use enzymes in supplement form, it is crucial that, in order for enzymes to be used systemically, they must be consumed on an empty stomach. Otherwise, your body will use them for digesting your food, instead of being absorbed into the blood and doing their work there.

Welcome to the era of Weimarcare insurance. Back in the 1920s,  Germany debased its currency to the point that the bank notes became essentially worthless. Eventually no one would take them. Now in America, Obamacare has morphed into Weimarcare, as an exploding number of health professionals will refuse to take patients with third-class, subsidized Obamacare insurance.

In my own experience, by example, three of the health professionals I work with take cash only. A fourth takes some private insurance, but no Medicare or Medicaid. Scant few Weimarcare patients will see the light of day in these offices. And now with the Supreme Court ruling, a wave of additional health professionals will hang out the “closed” sign to Weimarcare insurance policy holders.

So yes, welcome to the era of Weimarcare insurance. As the stark reality of Weimarcare takes hold, Americans will learn that it is one thing to have an insurance policy and quite another to find top-flight health-care professionals who will take it.

50M mark banknote issued in 1923, worth approximately one US$ when issued. Nine years earlier, 50M marks would have been worth approximately 12M US$. Within a few weeks, inflation made the banknote practically worthless.

Related video: