American Terrorism

Back in 2007 I felt pretty close to completely safe from terrorism. I lived in Salt Lake City, not exactly a terrorist target by any means. Also, I believed, with good reason, that the largest extremist threat came from outside the country. I remember reading a New York Times article which referenced a study that found that American Muslims assimilated better and were happier than their counterparts in Europe. Internal extremists bombed "The Tube" in England and attacked Spain but I felt that America was different. There was a much less serious home grown threat than in Europe. If we could effectively regulate who came into the country than the threat seemed manageable. I believe I was right at that time.

Now, after the failed Time Square bombing, my one time sense of security has taken a serious blow. The bomber, Faisal Shahzad, was an American citizen, naturalized on April 17, 2009. He earned his MBA from an American university and worked as a financial analyst. He married an Muslim American born in Colorado. He appeared to be completely naturalized. This was the type of well adjusted Muslim American that the New York Times referred to in their 2007 article. What happened?

Unfortunately, Shahzad is not the only recent example of an American extremist threat. David Coleman Headley was born in Washington DC and he helped plan the Mumbai terrorist attacks. Why does it appear that the threat of home grown extremist is higher now than it was three years ago?

The answer, I believe, has to do with the stability of our financial system. Shahzad struggled to make his mortgage payments soon after becoming a citizen. Eight months ago the bank foreclosed on Shahzad's home. Coincidence? Maybe, but I don't think so.

One of the principal new strategies in Afghanistan is to lure insurgents away with amnesty and a job offer. This strategy has worked in the past and it displays an profound reality: Financial security has a powerful, stabilizing effect. Unfortunately, the reverse is also true. Financial instability moves individuals toward extremes. The Nazi movement was born out of a financially crippled Germany. Communist Russian was born out of a economically troubled Russia. Even here at home in America we have seen the public move away from the middle and toward the poles during this financial crisis. In Utah Senator Bob Bennett, one of the most conservative Senators currently in the Senate, did not make it out of his own party's primary. The reason: He's not conservative enough. The same is happening on the left.

It is not surprising to see a once moderate, well assimilated Muslim American turn toward extremism when the American Dream lets him down for a few years. It is troubling and scary however. With the economy lagging in its recovery we could see more and more backyard disenchanted extremists. Obama has what appears to be a near impossible security task at hand. He must keep America safe at a time when terrorist threats are not just coming from abroad, but from our own backyard as well. As someone who works two blocks away from the tallest building in America, I hope he does good job.

Incumbant Rage

Look out Legislators!

Algorithmic Agony

Algorithms, short selling, leveraging... I have no idea what any of these terms mean. I'm an English major from the 126th ranked undergraduate institution in the country. My financial portfolio consists of a bank account and a checking account. For a while there I also had money in the stock market where I owned 10 shares of Petrobras (PBR). That didn't work out too well. All in all, I'm about as financially savvy as former Boston Celtics star Antoine Walker. Needless to say, I am completely incapable of understanding any of the financial news that's been flowing from Washington and New York over the past eighteen months. Apparently some bubbles popped and now, a year and a half later, I'm working in a job I could have done out of Junior High (I like to think that the two are correlated so as to not bruise my self-esteem). The one upside to my ignorance is that being grossly uninformed about the nations financial troubles puts me a in an ideal position to write about the financial reform bill on this blog. In the end though, I don't think anybody knows what's going on, with the exception of Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner and that Harvard undergrad who wrote that thesis.

The bill seems to have run through the same course as every other major bill of the past few months; Obama talks about it, Democrats propose it and Republicans unanimously say they hate it. Republicans say it's a bailout and that it will hurt the competitiveness of our nation's financial industry. The Republican bailout argument seems like pure political posturing to me. From what I've read, the bill would include an emergency pool of money, funded completely by the banks themselves, that would serve as a cushion if another major collapse occurs. Republicans make it sound like it's another tax payer bailout. Their misinformation campaign seems to have worked. After filibustering for three days the Republicans forced the emergency fund out of the bill.

The competitiveness argument makes sense though. If we place restrictions on our financial industry it could become less agile in an ever changing marketplace. It's like adding extra padding to a running back in football. He may be better protected but he will likely not run as fast or be as nimble. Is the trade off worth it? After smarting from the recession it feels like it now but in the long run it may drag us down.

In my uninformed opinion less is more with the financial reform bill. Financial firms don't need new restrictions to learn from their mistakes. Although many of the banks and insurance companies who caused the financial collapse received bailouts, there is still a natural incentive for them to avoid their prior hazardous practices. The brands of AIG, Citi Bank and others have been permanently tarnished, at least in my eyes. I will never bank with Citi and never buy insurance through AIG. I already hate Manchester United so no change there. The hit to their brand equity is in addition to the financial losses and layoffs the company suffered despite the bailout. Causing another financial meltdown is not in anybody's best interest. I believe the financial industry will police itself to a large extent.

I also worry that in the aftermath of an ugly recession the bill will go too far. When people are angry and hurting they overcompensate and overreact. Think Iraq and the Patriot Act after 9-11. A bunch of angry representatives and a bunch of angry, vocal constituents is a recipe for some pretty extreme policies. Reading Yahoo articles that call the financial reform bill "tougher than expected" is unsettling. In this fight I hope Republicans can dumb down the bill before it gets steamrolled through Congress.

Arizona Immigration Bill

I haven't read the recent Arizona Immigration Law, as a matter of fact, my primary source in regards to the law is Facebook with a little NPR thrown in. I think this qualifies my opinion as uninformed.

Illegal immigration is a problem. I think most Americans would agree with that. Where the issue lies is how to fix the problem. How do you bring together the contrasting opinions of "someone needs to do the jobs most Americans don't want anymore" and those who want to start building concrete fortresses around the borders? Arizona seems to think they found the solution.

According to my undoubtedly reliable source, the new Facebook group "1 million strong against Arizona Immigration Law SB1070," the law makes it a crime to be in the country illegally. Immigrants unable to produce documents proving their legal status could be arrested and jailed for up to six months. It also makes it illegal to hire illegal immigrants for day labor or knowingly transport them. The big fear is that this will encourage racial profiling.

I find several flaws looking at this interpretation of the law. First, are all people who hire day labor really going to be required to check legal documents confirming legal residence? How will this be enforced, and should it be enforced? Second, isn't this entire concept discriminatory? If you look like you might be an illegal resident you had better have your papers or you will be arrested? Does anyone else see a parallel with Nazi Germany?

My moderate and uninformed opinion is this: Arizona you have probably gone too far. While no one else has been willing to take a firm position on illegal immigration there is a difference between taking a firm position and taking a crazy one.

Take Stock In Schoolhouse Rock

Was I the only one confused about the odd path the health care bill took during its legislative life? I swear the house voted on it eight times. It seems so much less complicated when it's shown in a cartoon.

Tea Party Pontificators

Erin Prince Anderson from Philadelphia sent me this gem. I was always suspicious of the tea party and now I know why. They're just like me, uninformed, except that instead of taking a moderate view toward things they don't know they go radical. I love the Disney themed, cyclopse clown suit at 1:11 (To get a full view of him double click on the video and watch it on youtube). If you take away the reference to the "funny stuff," he actually makes a pretty good point.

Enjoy!

The Health Care Class Five Hurricane - Part 2

Continuing where I left off on the last post, the new health care legislation is going to cost someone a lot of money, and by someone what I really mean is the rich. Sacrificing the money of the wealthy might be worth it in my eyes if this plan actually cuts the cost of medical care. It's insane how much hospitals charge. I recently looked at the itemized bill of someone who broke their leg and it was ridiculous. They charged over $200 for a pair of crutches! I saw the same exact pair at Walgreens for $24.95. Judging by the way they charged for a night stay at the hospital you would think it was a luxury suite on top of the Burj Dubai. No wonder insurance companies charge so much for coverage. Hospitals charge them a fortune and they have to pass it on to us. I'm sure insurance companies get a hefty discount on hospital services but even with a 2/3 reduction it's still highway robbery. If the mandate reduces the number of people using emergency rooms for unpaid primary care by 30 million, as it claims, it makes sense to me that it could reduce costs. As for the hoards of illegal immigrants who will not be covered by the plan and who will continue to use emergency rooms for primary care, hopefully they won't negate all of the cost cutting potential the plan seems to have.

Numerous other factors contribute to high health care costs as well. Many patients on health insurance plans see the doctor too often and receive unnecessary treatment because the patients don't see a significant, direct cost to themselves. The way in which doctors are paid is also a mess. Doctors have an insentive to treat patients unnecessarily because the more procedures a doctor performs, the more he/she gets paid. This is in addition to every hospital feeling like they need to purchase the latest technology to keep up with their peers. All these extra costs get passed on to the average person buying insurance. Does the new legislation address these issues? I have no idea. If it does I haven't heard about it. It makes me wonder -- How many of these problems does the bill need to address to make a real difference in cost? Does anyone know Steven Leavitt's number?

Republicans certainly don't think the bill will lower health care costs. I find this ironic since I'm pretty sure that doing nothing won't cut costs either (excuse the double negative), which is exactly what Republicans did during the eight years of Bush. They chose Social Security reform over health care reform. Social Security Reform tanked -- thank goodness in light of the financial collapse -- and the health care problem grew to where we find it today. 45 million or so uninsured is a big problem that Republicans let slide.

In the end, I'm luke warm about the legislation but I hate the timing. Since I am inherently selfish, I have no problem with taxing the rich. I just wish Obama would have made the economy and our skyrocketing debt his first priority and saved health care reform until later. Some may say it was now or never or that health care and the economy are so intertwined that one cannot be fixed without the other, but I don't buy it. I think our economy's biggest problem is our debt and this bill will cost a lot of money. In my judgement, this health care cage match ends in a draw. Both sides lose. Democrats shouldn't have launched this during touch economic times and Republicans shouldn't be so annoying. Stop calling everyone a socialist!

Thus concludes my uninformed review of health care. You are probably thinking, "Reading this was a total waste of my time. This person has no idea what he's talking about" and you are probably right. But that's the beauty of the blog. It's a snapshot of the thoughts of the average uninformed American. Please feel free to share your uninformed opinions on the health care. To have something posted on the site, email your comment to moderateanduninformed@gmail.com. Otherwise, use the comment box below.