by SuperCameron, Sun Aug 23, 2009 at 10:35:42 AM EDT
From the Clinton Global Initiative:
"Diabetes now consumes 10% of the overall U.S. healthcare budget and some 32% of the Medicare budget."
"The NIH-sponsored Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) showed that lifestyle interventions such as diet and moderate physical activity for those over the age of 60 with pre-diabetes reduced the development of diabetes by 71%."
by SuperCameron, Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 08:30:37 AM EDT
Supreme Court nominee = political lightning rod.
They voted against her for the same reason Obama co-attempted to block the confirmation of Samuel Alito--policy disagreements. Everybody who had to or just wanted to vote against her collectively decided to give nebulous, stupid-sounding reasons.
"She's a bigot." "She doesn't understand the Constitution." "She's an activist judge. (What judge isn't?)"
It's bullshit now just like it was when Bush was in office. Since everybody knows it's crap, projection takes over; they read into the vote their own preconceived notions.
They should have just come out with it--"I voted against Sotomayor because she's pro-choice, anti-death penalty, pro-affirmative action (or pro-quota depending on one's perspective)."
by SuperCameron, Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:42:08 PM EDT
Soon it will be month-end in Arizona, where the State's budget shortfall stands in the neighborhood of $1.6 billion. Part of the plan to meet that shortfall is to bump the annual $200 million of revenue generated from traffic tickets by 60%. And that's for the State budget alone. Every city, county, university--pretty much all the incorporated areas intend to boost revenue the same way.
by SuperCameron, Sat May 30, 2009 at 10:19:59 AM EDT
Better public healthcare cannot be afforded. This is true for many reasons, but I'll only list two here.
1) We heavily subsidize sugar, red meat, and dairy fat--more than we subsidize healthy foods. As a result two thirds of Americans suffer from chronic medical conditions. They are expensive to treat and ultimately deadly. As "treatment" for them improves, the costs of those treatments increase exponentially.
When you increase food production among populations where family planning is not adequate, you wind up with exponentially more hungry people. By the same token, providing long-term chronic treatments to a population awash in fattening foods has given us (and will continue to give us) exponentially higher healthcare costs. Sorry if it sucks to hear, but this is the real world.
by SuperCameron, Sat Feb 07, 2009 at 06:43:46 AM EST
You know it's a beautiful day when RedState agrees with Obama and for once either one of them is right.
I couldn't agree more with the idea. In fact, I'd cap their pay at $25,000. And not just banks. We're bailing out the motor companies, too. They can have capped pay as well.
We should apply this standard to every public-teat funded company and organization in this country. Universities that take public funds can cap their pay. Agribusinesses, mines, record-profit oil companies--cap pay on every last God Damned one of them.
Try getting food stamps, healthcare assistance, or help with your heating bill if you make more than $25,000 a year. You'll be laughed out of the office. If you're dirt poor and you'r car breaks down, it's "sorry, babe, you're fucked". But corporate and university administrators can cop billions with impunity. You'll know them when you see them. They've got the reserved parking on the bottom floor of the garage, where they park their Beemers and Escalades.
Fine, motherfuckers. You're so smart you deserve millions in salary in bonusses? Then you're sure as shit smart enough to do it without leaching off the taxpayer. Wanna take public money? Fine. Your salary is capped. $25,000 a year.
Welcome to the real world, motherfuckers.
The policy, if implemented, is a great start.
by SuperCameron, Sun Dec 07, 2008 at 09:28:49 AM EST
by SuperCameron, Mon Sep 29, 2008 at 05:40:55 PM EDT
Word is out that 228 House members did the right thing and scuttled the self-described Wall Street Bailout, and did it right to the faces of our "leaders" in the White House and Congress. I, for one am glad to see it. I also want to shout out a loud "THANK YOU!" to my man in the House, Harry Mitchell, for getting this one right. Glad to see my donations weren't wasted!
Here's a tip for everyone who supports the bailout--when you admit your goal is to pay-off a bunch of gamblers, you've already lost. Whether people are making $7 an hour or $7000 an hour, they don't want to see their tax dollars go to a bunch of crooks.
by SuperCameron, Sun Sep 14, 2008 at 11:03:35 AM EDT
Kudos to bobswern for his diary on the financial projections of Nouriel Roubini. However, Roubini's projections are wrong. The drop in housing prices will not be 30%; it will be 40%. I base this projection on the historical level of housing prices (3.2 x average household income) and the January 2006 public statement from the mortgage man himself, Angelo Mozilo--
by SuperCameron, Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 03:10:12 PM EDT