On health-care reform, money talks, bull-oney walks
The passage of health-care reform marks the transition of the United States from a capitalist to a socialist economy, and is destined to hasten the financial collapse of this once proud and great nation.
Or so the rhetoric on the right would describe it. It is “Armageddon” and will “ruin our country,” as House Minority Leader John Boehner has claimed.
Yet as we all know, talk is cheap. What is the verdict of those with real skin in the game, those who have invested vast amounts of money in the previously capitalistic system and are about to see those fortunes, along with economic liberty, snatched away from them by government? These are the people most sensitive to change, the students of the game who will suddenly shift billions of dollars from one place to another in response to the slightest hint of change in the economic winds.
How have they responded to the onslaught of Armageddon and the abandonment of capitalist principles?
Yawn.
Last Friday, the Dow closed at 10,741. Health-insurance reform became political reality over the weekend, and yesterday the the Dow closed at 10,837, a gain of almost 100 points. The Wall Street Journal reports that stock futures are up this morning as well.
In fact, the Dow charts tell an interesting tale. On Jan. 20, the day we all woke up to find that Scott Brown had won the special election in Massachusetts and that health-insurance reform was seemingly doomed, the Dow began an 800-point decline. It began to recover in early February, about the time that the Obama administration renewed its push for reform, and since then it has risen almost 1,000 points.
I’m not for a minute linking that rise to the improved prospects for health reform. An awful lot of things have been going in the global economy, and it would be foolish to attribute a 10 percent market rise to what is in truth one relatively minor factor among many.
Instead, it is enough to point out that those with fortunes on the line, those trained to be exquisitely sensitive to economic trends, apparently believe that the foundations of American capitalism and finance remain solid.
Money talks, bull-oney walks.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
240 comments Add your comment
FinnMcCool
March 26th, 2010
10:42 am
projections of costs, market effects, etc by the tea bag types is a notch lower than astrology and several notches lower than weather forecasting.
They’ve proven this time and time again over the last year. Remember Tucker Carlson’s face on election night 2006? Remember what he said? “An ocean of change” or something like that in total disbelief.
Gandalf, the White
March 26th, 2010
10:42 am
Skippy ISN’T A KANGAROO! He’s a Wallaby!
Paul
March 26th, 2010
10:42 am
Bosch
“Urbane” means she lives in a city…..
Gandalf, the White
March 26th, 2010
10:43 am
No lives in a city is Urabana..
Peadawg
March 26th, 2010
10:43 am
Peadawg…like what Barry and Joe Biden do? I think I understand now!
I don’t know who Barry is. But Joe Biden can use all the smoke and mirrors he wants. He’s right up w/ Cheney in terms up the worst VP.
Bosch
March 26th, 2010
10:44 am
Peadawg,
“He says things to make himself seem smart.”
Oh my God.
Or could it be — I don’t know — that maybe he IS smart? Dumb people can’t say things to make themselves seem smart.
FinnMcCool
March 26th, 2010
10:44 am
Who was the last President to smoke in the White House?
Clinton…. with a cigar. Isn’t that what he was doing with that cigar?
Gandalf, the White
March 26th, 2010
10:45 am
Chicago Politics baby! Barry! He’s …well you know the rest.
Damn Skippy!
Gandalf, the White
March 26th, 2010
10:46 am
Barry you know Bosch, Barry Obama from HI. He always had the best grass on North Shore in High School!
Gandalf, the White
March 26th, 2010
10:46 am
Finn, emmmmm, I think you missed something there……but I meant cigarettes…
Keep up the good fight!
March 26th, 2010
10:48 am
Yes Patriots…rally around and fight against the Constitution which calls for separation of church and state. Remember its all about Christianity vs. Islam or some other religion which is not “ours”. Its all about a public ceremony and not about what Christianity teaches. Its not as if the President does not have the right to address his religion in private. I am a Christain…and I am not at all offended. I am more offended every day by Christians who claim that name and who fail to live up to what social justice! (that ought to bring out the Beckheads).
Especially since those who use a brain know that not all Muslims believe what a few extremist claim and not all Christains believe what some nut jobs who claim to be Christian claim.
Bosch
March 26th, 2010
10:48 am
jewcowboy,
Have ya’ ever seen Tricia Helfer? I mean Mary Mcwhatshername is pretty and all, and she’s a great President, but:
http://www.desktopexchange.com/gallery/albums/Tricia_Helfer_Wallpaper/Tricia_Helfer_4.jpg
Damn Skippy!
Paul, I totally forgot Mary McWhat’shername’s name.
USinUK
March 26th, 2010
10:49 am
there you go … (and there logic went) …
first of all, the muslim day of prayer was neither organized nor sponsored by the white house
secondly, the white house issued a proclaimation recognizing the day, but decided not to POLITICIZE it the way W did
funnily enough, one would think THAT is the more godly action to take …
Bosch
March 26th, 2010
10:49 am
Gandalf,
Kangaroo – wallaby – whatever, they all look alike.
Keep up the good fight!
March 26th, 2010
10:49 am
Peadawg….I am glad you acknowledge that Cheney was the worst VP…… We can agree on that!
jewcowbot
March 26th, 2010
10:51 am
“guess it Doesn’t matter if “Christians” Are offended by this event – We obviously don’t count as “anyone” anymore.”
Americans are offended by other Americans practicing their freedom of religion?
Gandalf, the White
March 26th, 2010
10:51 am
New Post up top
Paul
March 26th, 2010
10:53 am
Bosch
“Paul, I totally forgot Mary McWhat’shername’s name.”
That’s ’cause she went off to live in the city.
I just opened the link…. y’know, Cylons getting resurrection doesn’t seem fair ’cause we’re the ones having the heart attacks -
Paul
March 26th, 2010
10:54 am
Gandalf the White
You’ve been gone, right? (Welcome back).
You’re ’sposed to say “SQUIRREL!!!”
The Thin Guy
March 26th, 2010
10:54 am
If Marxist Medicine is good for us, why isn’t it good enough for Øbungle and his goon squad?
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=36193
Time for Jay Bookman to get back to work on how you can buy a genuine Rolex watch for $ 15 from the libs and know when it’s time to get up and start working for the government. This country has no future.
stands for decibels
March 26th, 2010
10:55 am
Back for a bit:
Yet he lets N Korea and Iran slide?!!? And takes a hard line with an ally?
Paul, stop hyperventilating–it’s tit for tat. You show up our Veep, we show up your PM.
Binjy-bob’s a big boy–I’m sure he found a place to eat that night.
Doggone/GA
March 26th, 2010
10:57 am
“Isn’t that what he was doing with that cigar?”
Eventually
jefferson
March 26th, 2010
11:02 am
We have determined if a person is F’d in the head, there is nothing you can do.
Two Cents
March 26th, 2010
11:08 am
It’s funny to me how conservatives rush to yell that President Obama is a liar, but listened to eight years of the Bush administrations lies — which led us to war — without any complaints. Conservatives even accused the rest of us of not being patriotic for questioning Bush’s motives.
Funny how everything’s different when you’re the one who’s questioning authority — suddenly it’s OK.
What’s next? Republicans are going to say they were for health reform before they were against it? Oh wait, they were, back when essentially this same legislation was their counter to the Clinton administration’s health care reform.
Morrus
March 26th, 2010
11:10 am
Vote out the incumbents and start over
md
March 26th, 2010
11:12 am
“I’m just not buying into the 24 trillion dollar deficit notion. For yuan thing, there just aren’t enough Chinese workers out there to float that much cash.”
You’re not? So now what the CBO has to say is irrelevant??
And if there are not enough Chinese workers out there to float that much cash, you must be affirming that we are definetly in deep doo doo.
MiltonMan
March 26th, 2010
11:21 am
Jay, stick to being a lame journalist. You definitely have no clue when it comes to the financial side of things. Most financial experts have already stated that the stock market was up yesterday because of the EU deal to pay off Greece’s debt.
Why don’t you talk about how the price of gasline has rising since Obama has taken office?
Two Cents
March 26th, 2010
11:25 am
MiltonMan
I can’t believe you’re actually going to bring up the price of gasoline?? Really?? After the price skyrocketed to more than $4 a gallon during Bush’s administration?
And how does a president exactly have control over gasoline prices? How does that work?
Dr. Michael Palmieri
March 26th, 2010
11:44 am
It never ceases to amaze me that people that you would imagine are somewhat educated, as I am sure Jay is can be so blinded by his liberalism. ANYONE that thinks this so called “health care bill” is good for the American people, and good for the economy is simply wrong. Large companies such as Caterpillar, Verizon etc. have already stated the 40 0/0 tax on their health insurance plans given to their employees will cost them so many millions, they will have no choice but to lay off workers. So Jay, like most liberals, you never look beyond the surface of anything…so keep praising this disaster of a president.
Pogo
March 26th, 2010
11:45 am
This is one of the more pathetic attempts that Jay has made to prove that the capitalist markets love Obama’s socialist agenda. They do not love it. They are just using short-term investments to make money while they can. Anyone that knows anything about the market knows that Obama’s/Pelosi’s deficit numbers are eventually going to take down not only the markets but pretty much our whole economic system. The government cannot continue to be the biggest monetary prop for our economy. Yes, Wall Street will make money when it can. What is sad is that Jay finds solace in a small jump in the numbers knowing there is going to be hell to pay soon. Sad
Scout
March 26th, 2010
12:01 pm
jewcowboy @ 9:51 am :
I know !
By the way, did you see last week where the U.S. Army is discontinuing bayonet training? “Eeeegads” are we getting soft !
No before all you “warriors” out there say it’s outmoded, the last full bayonet charge was by a British unit (after they had run out of ammo) in Basra in 2004. Individually, it has probably been used much since then ……… you just don’t read about it.
BugintheirEar
March 26th, 2010
12:01 pm
I like most Americans do believe that reform is needed, but reforms not take over. But why if our government did the right thing we could afford healthcare for all. Our congress and senate for too long get together to do one thing, spend our money. We need a change in their thinking on both sides of the isle. They need to get together to figure out how to cut spending and stop funding programs that don’t work. If we did this, paid back our debt and not allow for deficit spending then out dollar would be strong and out economy would follow.
BMan35
March 26th, 2010
12:02 pm
Jay,
The main reason the market went up WAS because the bill was passed. But you’re either forgetting, didn’t know, or don’t acknowledge that the one thing the market does not like is uncertainty. The market would have gone up either way regardless if it passed or failed.
ken
March 26th, 2010
12:12 pm
the word capitalism should be replaced with FASCISM
SPC
March 26th, 2010
12:25 pm
Take a look at the 5 year treasury auction earlier this week and the explanation for the weak results and higher yeilds. Your argument is foolish, the real test will be the state of the economy over the next 5 years and beyond.
This is a case where I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think so. The health care bill is socially responsible, but it’s a fiscal disaster, and it didn’t have to be. This is the problem with our government, they can’t make the hard choices necessary to protect the economy. They make the easy ones and kick the can down the road. Someday the bill will come due. Ask the folks in Greece how they like it.
Keep up the good fight!
March 26th, 2010
12:30 pm
Hey all you “its unconstutional” posters who claim “its never been done before”, try this one:
This claim is false. As Center for American Progress Policy Analyst Ian Millhiser noted, “President George Washington signed the Second Militia Act of 1792, which required a significant percentage of the U.S. civilian population to purchase — at their own expense — ‘a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack’” in case the President ever called them to serve.
Damn that socialist Washington (George that is)!
Tom
March 26th, 2010
12:40 pm
The proposed health care reform of 2010 is not necessary and may well be very harmful.There is a large set of options to use effectively short of gutting the system. Copying the European health care system is a terrible idea: Get the facts about the Obama’s Health Care Reform, and the Healthcare System.
TnGelding
March 26th, 2010
2:07 pm
They recognize it for what it is, a bonanza for the insurance companies.
“Recall Dennis Kucinich’s response to H.R. 3962 the Affordable Health Care for America Act in November. “H.R. 3962 would put the government in the role of accelerating the privatization of health care. In H.R. 3962, the government is requiring at least 21 million Americans to buy private health insurance from the very industry that causes costs to be so high, which will result in at least $70 billion in new annual revenue, much of which is coming from taxpayers. This inevitably will lead to even more costs, more subsidies, and higher profits for insurance companies — a bailout under a blue cross.”
http://www.infowars.com/health-insurance-company-stock-prices-say-it-all/
Wicked Alice
March 26th, 2010
8:53 pm
Hey, I know this is probably going to bore all of you, but back in 1965 when Medicare came into law, I worked for John Hancock Ins.in group claims. Hancock got the contract in Ga to run Medicare. Prior to that an emergency room visit might total $30.00. Yes, this was in 1965 dollars, but then something “really strange started happening”, not just to seniors either. There was a steady increase in the cost of all medical expense. Of course double digit inflation took over as well, but still the increase in hospital costs began to not have any correlation to it’s previous level.
Yes, many other things came into play, but the fact remains that Medicare caused a surge in
the price of just an ordinary situation like suturing at an emergency room. Yes, John Hancock got the contract, but who was in charge? The feds have this amazing ability to increase everything except the amount of money we as citizens have after taxes are paid.
Can’t keep up with the sarcasm and cynicism going on here. Pretty sad that this is all Bookman has to come home to. My husband was a reporter back in the days when they were not handed an agenda. I will not be visiting this sad diatribe again, but good luck to you all and may your children prosper.
N.J.
March 28th, 2010
2:32 am
What I resent the most is the bogus co-opting of the Boston Tea Party by the right wingnuts like Sarah Palin. The Boston Tea Party was NOT a revolt against big government, but was in fact a revolt against BIG BUSINESS and the sort of benefits that Republicans suggest that big businesses should get from government, The TRUE history of the Boston Tea Party was that the Founders damned wanted a LOT of regulation of trade, particularly trade that benefited the huge private businesses that were getting “charters” out of the British Government which they pretty much owned because they paid for the political campaigns of most of the members of Parliament.
Corporations first came about in the middle of the 1600s in England where the crown vested governmental authority to certain commerce groups. The royal charters granted regulated the trading company or corporations since only the Crown had the right to govern trade. The right of the Crown to regulate or control the corporation largely went unused leading to much abuse and monopolistic power. Some such royal charters had their own governors and armies like the East India Company.
In fact it was the East India Company that led to the Boston Tea Party. At the time the colonies were boycotting tea which was owned almost solely by the East India Company. In an effort to prop up sagging profits from the boycott taxes on tea were cut. This in turn cut into the profit of a group of Americans smuggling tea into the colonies. Seeing their profits eroded by the tax cut they then raided the English ships in the harbor. While the classical story of the Boston Tea Party of a protest over rising taxes and tax without representation makes for good patriotic propaganda it is indeed patently false and has taken on mythical proportions.
This was but one of the many abuses the colonies suffered at the hands of English corporations. There were many other abuses. Often American colonial settlements were patents granted to English corporations by the Crown. South and North Virginia were two such patents. These corporations obtained their labor supply with indentured slaves. Typically after seven years of labor the indentured slave would be given a hundred acres. As many as two thirds of the colonists are estimated to have been indentured slaves. Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania all began as commercial enterprises ran by chartered corporations.
A full listing of such abuses is beyond the scope of this book. But the example provided is sufficient to illustrate the contempt many of the founders had for corporations as well as the need to regulate them. Perhaps the eloquent words of Thomas Jefferson best sums up the founder’s outlook toward corporations. . “I hope we shall take warning from the example of England and crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our Government to trial, and bid defiance to the laws of our country ”
The concept of granting a charter as a privilege and not a right carried over into early American corporate law. Thus the present view that corporations hold a property right is based on another myth. This point will be expanded further a little later in a look at court case and the Dartmouth case. In fact the view of this property right did not come about until after the Civil War. Prior to this time the concept of a corporate charter as a privilege was the commonly held view. The present view of a corporate charter having property rights only came about through judicial activism and through various state legislators.
If anything, the guys who pulled off the Boston Tea Party would have backed Obama’s health reform to the hilt had the conditions that exist today with regard to the huge health insurance companies existed back then. The founders would have passed laws to regulate those companies to the max if the founders lived today.
Even when the Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation and the Commerce Clause gave the government power over trade, the states for the most part followed the lead of the federal government. Individuals and groups of individuals could NOT simply go out and form a corporation for business purposes. Every corporation in ALL of the states could ONLY be formed by an act of the state legislature under special acts that very tightly restricted the corporations. The regulation and granting of corporate charters was left to the various states. The states continued to treat a corporate charter as a privilege granted only under special acts of their legislators. But the process of hearings and petitioning the state legislators was plagues with delays, favoritism, and out right corruption. In perhaps the first blow to increasing corporate power came in 1795 as the pace of incorporations continued to expand was in a movement to grant general charters to alleviate the problems with hearings and petitions. North Carolina was the first state in 1795 to enact a general incorporation law, followed by Massachusetts in 1799, New York in 1811 and Connecticut in 1837. However in some states it required more than a simple majority for the granting, renewing or altering a corporation charter. In 1840s, citizens in New York, Delaware, Michigan and Florida required a two-thirds vote of their state legislatures to do so. In Wisconsin and four other states every bank charter had to be first approved by the voters within the state after the charter was recommended by their legislatures.
To put it simply, even at this stage of the game a corporation could ONLY be formed for a single business venture, they could NOT do business across state lines, and they had a limited period of time that they could exist. After that the corporation was legally dissolved, not by the owners, but by the law.
The founders hated corporations and they were wrigint laws restricting them before the ink on the constitution was dry