a succinct prediction for the effect of the current health care reform package

I'm afraid this is probably accurate.

From the comments to a post in Tiny Revolution.com:

The Republicans are in absolute opposition to health care reform because:

1.) They don't need to vote for it for it to pass. The health insurance companies are going to get their guaranteed profits that the "reform" gives them.

2.) The current bill with mandates is going to drive a wedge between those Americans who can still afford to pay for health insurance and those who can't or are being denied it. That means that while there may be more Americans getting some health care in the future, it also means that every health insurance increase is going to be blamed on the Democratic brand. You might as well print Obama's picture on every bill going out from Aetna or Blue Cross. That means that if this health care reform plays out as it looks to me, the Democratic brand will be reviled by most of what's left of working class households. When liberals fail, that's what makes fascism attractive to the underclasses.

This piece of health care reform will thus accomplish a government safety net for insurance companies instead of the probability of the whole industry collapsing in a few years (as it would without "reform"). It will so destroy the Democratic Party as to clean away all the underfunded candidates (generally more liberal and independent Dems), thus leaving only the well-funded corporate Dems or their corporate-funded Republican opponents in office. Those progressives who think that the Dems can pass this piece of crap and then clean it up down the road won't have many corporate-free Dems in Congress in a few years to do much of anything, as if they had any power to ever do it right.

Bad.

Posted by Bob In Pacifica at December 26, 2009 12:14 PM

CIA proves once again why it's a Agency of Intelligence

A Tiny Revolution:

For a Mere 30 Billion Bucks, Here Is What You Get!

By: Bernard Chazelle

Every 4 years the best and the brightest in the US Intelligence community get together and peek into their $30 billion crystal ball to tell us what's coming. OK, they missed the fall of the Shah, they missed the demise of the Soviet Union, they missed the Internet bubble, they missed the credit crunch crisis, they missed the electoral success of Hamas, they missed the rise of Putin, Saddam's WMD were a slam dunk, but, never mind, this time they REALLY REALLY get it right! Check this out -- this is not a spoof: these are genuine quotes.

Excerpts from Global Trends 2025 by National Intelligence Council:

Canada will be spared several serious North-American climate-related developments -- intense hurricanes.

What? No more intense hurricanes in Saskatoon???

A terrorist use of a nuclear weapon would graphically demonstrate the danger of nuclear weapons.

Any moron could say that a terrorist use of a nuclear weapon would demonstrate the danger of nuclear weapons. What makes you a US Intelligence analyst is the most deliciously felicitous addition of the adverb graphically.

The Middle East will remain a geopolitically significant region in 2025 based on the importance of oil to the world economy.

This sounds like drivel but it's not: it's a nasty swipe at Barbados! (CIA humor)

No history of the past 100 years can be told without delving into the roles and thinking of such leaders as Vladimir Lenin, Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, or Mao Zedong.

Wait! What about Gerald Ford? (I've been told that, because of budgetary constraints, the report hopes to double as a history textbook for 2nd graders.)

With high [oil] prices, major exporters such as Russia and Iran would have the financial resources to increase their national power.

A sustained plunge in oil prices would have significant implications for countries relying on robust oil revenues to balance the budget or buid up domestic investment.

Or, as that famous spook, Charlie Brown, used to say, "I'd rather be rich and healthy than poor and sick."

To be a US Intelligence analyst requires the ability to write English as a second language:

The views of Western Europeans appear to be buoyed to the extent that the United States, its key allies, NATO, and the EU deepen practical multilateral approaches to international problems.

While you deepen your practical multilateral approaches, consider this interesting discrepancy between this report and its predecessor. Today we're told:

A global multipolar world is emerging with the rise of China, India, and others. The US is one among many global actors who manage problems.

But 4 years ago, the prediction was:

The 2020 Report projects continued US dominance, positing that most major powers have forsaken the idea of balancing the US.

So how can we trust these clowns if they contradict themselves every 4 years? Now they got me all worried about hurricanes in Saskatoon...

— Bernard Chazelle