text:
Reader comments are listed below. Comments are currently closed and new comments are no longer being accepted.
In my country there's a full public medicare. I think USA should do the same. It might be very hard for a now consolidated different system but everyone should have the right to be treated and cared for. In my country when someone's ill the first concern is to make him better,not whether he's insured or is rich enough to bear the costs of the treatment. Fully expanded Medicare is a basic feature of a civilized nation.
In my country there's a full public medicare. I think USA should do the same. It might be very hard for a now consolidated different system but everyone should have the right to be treated and cared for. In my country when someone's ill the first concern is to make him better,not whether he's insured or is rich enough to bear the costs of the treatment. Fully expanded Medicare is a basic feature of a civilized nation.
What remains to be seen is whether the Tea-Party bluster of Rick Scott and his ilk will stand up to the voters. Achieving Obama's goal may be simply a matter of a few (26?) states rearranging their state houses such that Medicaid can be allowed to expand. At some point, taxpayers are going to realize how much they're putting out to provide health care in emergency rooms -- as amazing as it is that the light hasn't already gone on.
The future of Medicaid. Not wishing to intrude. It's in the interest of a nation that its citizens are healthy. Doing nothing is the most expensive option. I know it seems complicated but it's very simple to keep a nation healthy and cheaper, being ill is expensive and if you have no money it gets on your morels.
Wow did the author miss something major. The Supreme Court ruled the Obamacare mandate as constitutional only as a tax. There is NO argument at this point because calling anything else makes it unconstitutional. Then the author flippantly disregards the effect of the tax, calling it small and of no effect, when in fact the tax nails the poor and lower middle class because they are the ones who have no insurance and the tax is per person costing up to 2000 dollars for a family of 3. Obama is full of it when he claims this tax only hits some small percentage of rich people. The only people who will get the so called tax breaks will only be the very poor, effectively ensuring the lower middle class, those with not enough money for a tax or insurance and make too much money for a so called subsidy, will be nailed and nailed hard by obama.
The supreme court effectively put this ridiculous law and controversy back on the politicians where it belongs. The court has told the democrats, you have in fact raised taxes or are doing something unconstutional, good luck explaining either outcome and they told the republicans, if you really want to end obamacare, you republicans will have to do it yourselves, not bluster and hope the supreme court does the actual work.
Both parties were nailed but Obama most of all. He has already lost, the bad economy alone is enough to ensure his defeat, having to now explain the Obamatax is going to be tough, especially with no democrats to throw under the bus this time around.
Anyway, the author here flippantly disregarding the Obamatax and pretending it is so small as to have no effect on the poor and middle class reduces his credibility.
Ya its a tax, in the exact same sense that choosing not to purchase a home effectively imposes a tax. You buy a house you pay a lower effective tax rate, you buy health insurance now and you pay a lower tax rate than not. As far as I can tell, no one is currently calling for the repeal of mortgage tax deductions (something a majority of economists have long been in favor of). The main difference with healthcare is that those choosing not buy insurance effectively increase the cost for the rest of us who choose to. The majority of people who currently choose to purchase insurance won't face a tax increase, while those who irresponsibly choose to forgo insurance will now have to pay for some of the additional costs they impose on the rest of us. It takes a major twist in logic to oppose a tax on not purchasing health insurance given all of the externalities associated with it, while supporting a subsidy on homeownership with its lack of any empirically validated positive externalities.
Its unfortunate that so many readers of "The Economist" don't even understand basic economics.
Ya its a tax, in the exact same sense that choosing not to purchase a home effectively imposes a tax. You buy a house you pay a lower effective tax rate, you buy health insurance now and you pay a lower tax rate than not. As far as I can tell, no one is currently calling for the repeal of mortgage tax deductions (something a majority of economists have long been in favor of). The main difference with healthcare is that those choosing not buy insurance effectively increase the cost for the rest of us who choose to. The majority of people who currently choose to purchase insurance won't face a tax increase, while those who irresponsibly choose to forgo insurance will now have to pay for some of the additional costs they impose on the rest of us. It takes a major twist in logic to oppose a tax on not purchasing health insurance given all of the externalities associated with it, while supporting a subsidy on homeownership with its lack of any empirically validated positive externalities.
Its unfortunate that so many readers of "The Economist" don't even understand basic economics.
You might want to learn some basic economics yourself and the concept of freedom while you are at it.
It is not irresponsible to NOT buy health insurance. Sure there are maybe 1000 people in the country who dont need it because they are billionaires and can pay for their own problems. The vast majority of people who dont have health insurance can't buy it because they cant afford it, even if offered.
It is a Tax in the sense of government writing a law and taking money from people. there is absolutely no correlation to a mortgage tax deduction, which is not a subsidy. You do realize there is a cost of living involved here, people need a place to live, food, clothing and the current tax systems does not in anyway accommodate this. If anything, there should also be a rent tax deduction so a tax payer always has his residence deducted as a cost he doesn't pay tax on.
You must not have ready my post very well. I never said people with insurance would face an increase in taxes. I said the people who will get hit with this tax are the uninsured, most of which are lower middle class and poor because those are the people who do not have insurance because they cant afford it.
To me it takes a major twist in logic to believe a tax needs to be imposed to force people to buy something they cant afford and it is an even larger twist of logic to think any of this will make one bit of difference. All that will happen is the middle class and poor will end up taxed or paying for insurance they cant afford and they still will have no better access to healthcare. If anything, because of the tax and mandate, the available free healthcare services will begin to be shutdown because that is what happens every time the socialists decide to monopolize charity or force people into some unrealistic belief in an equal utopia.
Anytime the government gets money, fees, payments, fines or whatever, it is a Tax. Not a difficult one to figure out. Also, there is Zero difference if that tax is paid to the Feds, State or local government, it is all a Tax, comes from the same source, so as states move to comply with this ridiculous obamacare, the taxes in those states will go up and yes that gets blamed on obamacare.
I feel a need to reply out of fear that someone may be misinformed from your comment. Too much here really to correct.
First of all, the PPACA (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) does not impose a tax on those not purchasing insurance who cannot afford it. The bill provides phased subsidies to low and middle income individuals for the purchase of such insurance; subsidies that do not phase out until 400% FPL (around $88,000 for a family of four). Those closest to the poverty line are exempt from this tax altogether. So yes, the people who will be facing this tax are acting irresponsibly (I realize this is a judgment call not an economic fact). Moreover, while you are correct that the bill does impose additional taxes (around $834 billion) it also offsets them almost entirely ($818 billion) through additional tax cuts, mostly via subsidies.
Second, you are clearly confused about about how the effects of taxes, subsidies, fines etc. are modeled in an economic sense. Your 3rd and 6th paragraphs make very little economic/mathematical sense and I would encourage you to take a course involving economic modeling. Yes, a reduction in taxable income is not technically a "subsidy" in an accounting sense, but it most definitely is modeled as one in an economic sense.
Third, the way you use terms like "socialist," "obamacare," "freedom," and "utopia" are clearly just buzz-words from someone who spends a little too much time getting information from talking heads and pundits and not enough from reading actual economic literature. If you are interested in learning a bit more about the ACA before you comment on it (eyes-rolling) you may want to check out the free online Coursera course being offered by the good folks at The University of Pennsylvania (yes, the instructor may be a bit biased but it will give you enough information to make more informed comments).
If you want to talk about freedom, explain to me how the cost shifting that occurs when the unpaid bills of an uninsured patient are transferred to a third party constitute freedom. I'm pretty sure that freedom does not include the ability to let others (hospitals, physicians, other patients, etc.) pay for your healthcare. And last I checked we live in a society where a large portion of healthcare is paid for after the services have already been rendered. So if you want to find an alternative way to stop people from defaulting on there medical bills, be my guest. Until then, I'd like to stop paying for other peoples healthcare when I get my bill. Keep in mind, the ACA contains most the ideas you conservatives railed about for years (Individual Mandate, Insurance Exchanges, Small Business Subsidies, etc.) because you were opposed to "freedom-killing-socialized" medicine. I would much prefer to have moved to single payer, but unfortunately President Obama tried to appease you guys by giving you what you you used to say you wanted. Go ahead and fact check me on this (I used to be a huge conservative myself also)!
Finally, I am fairly confident that I have an understanding of economics, as I conduct research and teach a number of economic courses at a top their econ program.
The article states: "The fine is fairly small, and those who do not pay it face no further punishment."
The truth is, those who do not pay the fine face the same string of government induced punshments one would face if they did not pay any other IRS imposed fine (including wage garnishment, social security garnishment, and prision).
Flat out lie. IRS has not figured out how to enforce the $695 penalty yet for not having insurance and it has already part of the law that they may not garnish wages or send people to prison for it.
If you are going to rant, as least be somewhat true. Your entire statement is flat out wrong.
The law, however, severely limits the ability of the IRS to collect the penalties. There are no civil or criminal penalties for refusing to pay it and the IRS cannot seize bank accounts or dock wages to collect it. No interest accumulates for unpaid penalties.
Of course with the fear mongering of right wing news It is no wonder that you have been misinformed.If people were going to be been sent to prison believe me all the republicans would be screaming this fact at fox news.But the fact no one even Hannity who supports,the most ridiculous stories on Obama, has not mentioned your talking points shows how weak your argument is.
You are right. I'm sure the IRS will simply mail us a warning, typed on pink paper with roses, that says "please, please, please pay the fine".
You sir...are a sheep.
He's a sheep because he knows the truth? And you are a fox (news) because you believe whatever propaganda your side puts out? Read the law if you don't believe somedude. It's public record. The IRS is allowed to take tax refunds from those who don't pay the penalty. That is their only enforcement power, it isn't like back taxes at all. Adjust your W-2 so you don't get a refund and you can skip the penalty forever. That's what the law says.
The real tax that pays for ObamaCare is a 3.8% increase in the capital gains tax on income over $200,000 a year. So Mitt will have to pay 21% instead of 18%. That's why he and his billionaire backers are dead set on taking health insurance away from tens of millions of middle class americans. They don't want to pay for it. You can make an argument that they shouldn't have to pay for it, but don't repeat lies about who actually pays according to the law. I disagree with that argument, because I will still be paying 32%, counting FICA and my 25% marginal rate, on one-three thousandth (.003) of Romney's income. And believe me, the Koch brothers and the WalMart heirs and heiress have more at stake than Mitt. A $1 million Super PAC contribution-bribe is a fraction of one year's savings to a multi-billionaire.
Just an FYI, your math is a bit off in terms of the effect of the capital gains tax changes, which do not account for the fact that people who take capital gains now will have vehicles at their command to deffer larger capital gains. Also, the dividend rate (which dividends are largely Mitt's income engine) will be increasing from 15% to a whopping 43.4%.
While the mechanics of how exactly the IRS would enforce the penalty is currently in question, there is no reason to doubt that the IRS will eventually employ similar tactics to what they do with standard tax revenue collection.
Now to put out there food for thought, how will this set of tax increases affect capital investment and future economic output? It would be difficult to conclude that this will definitely spur on growth (aside from the government component of GDP, which is misleading based on deficit spending).
$700 is a lot of money to most of the people the law purports to help. How do you square that circle? It's pretty apparent this law is going to become a giant game of Whack-a-Mole. It's unworkable and needs to be scrapped for common sense, incremental reform that is heavier on results and lighter on flim-flam.
Well the Romney website says his 2011 tax return reported $10.7 million in capital gains, more than half his total income for the year.
Romney's dividends will be taxed at 43.4% because the Bush tax cuts for rich investors, which Bush made time-limited to cheat on the budget rules, will expire. That puts the tax on dividends over $250,000 back to 39.6%, where it was during the Clinton administration. Remember back then, when no one would invest in new companies and economic output shrank? Oops, that isn't actually what happened.
Your history, your economics, and your math are all a bit off, just FYI.
"there is no reason to doubt that the IRS will eventually employ similar tactics..."
No, you're wrong. There's STRONG reason to doubt the IRS will employ similar tactics because THE TEXT OF THE LAW FORBIDS SUCH TACTICS. The IRS is DISALLOWED from using those tactics. Please read, learn what you're talking about before you post garbage.
Of course they could just actually purchase insurance, a good idea in any case, and the entire argument is moot. Most people buy insurance or have it provided by their employer anyway.
Well... that is sort of true... sort of.
The exact mechanism for figuring out and collecting has not been established yet, but the prohibitions against liens, garnishments, and penalties is kind of an empty shell, depending on how the mechanism is constructed.
You see, if you hypothetically owe $10,000 in income tax overall (including the Obamacare tax), but have only had $8,000 in withholding, you owe the IRS an additional $2,000. Unfortunately for you, there is nothing in the tax code that specifically earmarks what portion (if any) of your withholding applies to the penalty, or what portion of your tax liability that additional $2000 represents.
Remember, when you owe the IRS, you pay one check and don't get an itemized bill that says you owe X for this, and Y for that. There is nothing that would prevent the IRS from claiming that the penalty is already paid for in your current batch of withholding, and that the additional $2000 you owe represents plain old income tax -- for which they can use liens, garnishments, and penalties to collect.
Of course, it is entirely possible that the IRS will separate out the Obamacare tax on your tax return and itemize your payment separately. But I don't see anything in the statute that explicitly requires them to do so.
Let it happen. The way things are going, we will soon see two different America's, the blue state and red state ones. As quality in life improves in the blue states, it will drive both immigration and business.
A recent survey found America has never been so divided since the Civil War, which is history's warning not to repeat itself. A cathartic showdown may happen, and probably that's the only way left now to bring people to their senses.
dbngshm, Unfortunately, we are already seeing some of this ridiculous red state-blue state split. It almost feels like the pre-Civil War era when people called themselves Virginians or New Yorkers, rather than Americans. I've lived in several states, but have always considered myself a U.S. citizen first, not some sub-sect from Florida or California.
Also, businesses seem to be migrating to red states because of lower taxes and more lenient regulations, not to blue states for a better quality of life. This last year Rick Perry was boasting about all the businesses that left other states to relocate in Texas. The increased employment helped the Texas economy, but hurt the economy in other states that lost those jobs. Did the country as a whole benefit? It's hard to know, but my gut says it was at best a wash, and maybe overall a net negative.
That's not to say Governors shouldn't act in the interest of the states that elected them – they should. But the Federal Government needs to act for the good of the whole country, which sometimes means doing things individual states don't like. When people, like guest-iljomin (below) talk about a "federal government power grab" they re-enforce this states' rights view of the country and forget the legitimate role of Washington, D.C. If we had left it to states' rights there would still be slave states, states without clean air and water regulations, states where women couldn't vote, and, yes, states with no Medicaid. Thank You.
Jobs will ultimately go to the blue states. America as a whole is moving away from blue collar to white collar jobs. Jobs where the value of the employee matters, rather than geeting the cheapest employee.
In fact this is already happening, New York, Massachusetts and the Bay Area, all Democrat strongholds account for most white collar jobs.
Question: In "Also, businesses seem to be migrating to red states because of lower taxes and more lenient regulations, not to blue states for a better quality of life.", because of the healthcare context, you seem to be equating "high level of government service" with "better quality of life". Is that your intent?
Because one could argue that quality of life is going to be better when/where extensive government services *aren't* needed; i.e., afluent communities that can afford to pay for their own needs.
Just asking, because it impacts the (most likely) rationale of the rebellious states for *not* wanting to expand government welfare services: namely, mobility.
Communities with high levels of government services are also communities with high taxation levels. (States, unlike the Federal government, *have* to balance their budgets.) As you point out, low-tax states and communities are doing a good job of attracting jobs for their residents and those jobs come with health care. By *not* offering extended benefits to the unemployed these states seek to "encourage" these people to either get a job or move to another location that can provide the job *or* the free services. Either way, the "problem" is solved without taxation.
In your red-blue migration scenario, there would be a net flow of jobs to the "stingy" states and of "service recipients" to the "generous" states.
Historically, the effect of welfare migration in the US has been limited but quite real (the most prominent recent case being the Katrina refugees that moved to Houston "temporarilly" and are still there). Similarly there have been abundant reports of communties paying the travel costs of indigents to "export" them to other, bigger communities. (Try a web search for "busing homeless" for examples.)
Absent a federalization of health care, it will be advantageous for a low-taxation state like North Carolina to offer lesser services and encourage the migration of heavy "service users" to other states as it will reduce their costs, allow their taxes to remain low, and allow the continued migration of jobs into their state. Their goal is to maximize the productive population of their state and minimize unemployment by effectively exporting their non-working poor.
They are gaming the system to their advantage.
Of course, the "generous" blue states want to shift as much of their "generosity" to the Federal domain so they can be generous with other states' money, which is where we came in: the ever-increasing costs of Federal government services and the red states' efforts to restrict them.
Round and round it goes, with both camps playing the same political games. Neither side really cares about helping the poor out of poverty; one just wants them to go elsewhere, the other willingly takes them in as vote-generation wards...as long as somebody else foots the bill.
Hence, stalemate.
There are no angels on either side, just two competing vote-acquisition strategies.
If you Americans want a country with no basic health care, you are welcome to your country. Canada and Britain can afford it. If the prolifers hadn't spent a trillion dollars killing Arab toddlers, it would be even more affordable. Enjoy your country, guys. I enjoy not living there. It's an analogous situation for Israeli 'settlers': enjoy your war, folks.
Talk about sensationalism. This backdoor step to single-payer healthcare is more or less a way for insurance companies to sink their teeth into younger demographics than a way to provide Canada or Britain style health care. I'm glad that you like your health care system in your country, that's a great thing. There's no need to badger people outside of your country for not following your country's lead.
The states who take this dole act as wards of the central government and do so to compromise their own sovereignty. Sadly most of their citizens remain ignorant of this federal government power grab.
If these governors reject, there will be newly elected governors in the long run who'll eventually accept so let's not get too sensational here
This scenario seems unlikely. The federal government can probably require the states to cover people below 100% first or all citizens will be able to get subsidized health care through Federal exchanges. I think when it comes to implementation the ruling won't matter that much. For one thing if people are excluded, they can probably successfully claim discrimination. It probably just means the Feds have to foot the bill indefinitely.
I think the critical question is
"For how long and by how much will the federal government pay for Medicaid expansion?"
Yes, upto 90% until 2020 - and how does that proceed? 80% by 2030? 75%? 50%?
The federal government has a pretty bad record of paying for a populist program for now and the near future, then leaving states on the hook for later. Under Bill Clinton for example, the federal government paid temporarily for putting more policemen on the ground, then left the states on their own to continue the program.
This is not to say that universal health coverage is not a laudable goal. But it should not be like me getting my friend to buy a very expensive car saying that I'll pay the installments for a year, then you're on your own.
I think people need to keep in mind that these programs have very important long term implications - as we Americans are beginning to find out about Social Security and Medicare, the two biggest entitlement programs and as Detroit found out in the last decade about pensions and healthcare promises - many many decades after they were started.
CnKQ7pSia6, I agree there are potential pitfalls to Federal programs being shifted to state funding over time, and that they do have long-term implications. However, in this case it could be that the long-term implications are that health care costs are less than they would have been otherwise. That is certainly the promise of Obamacare – a larger pool of healthy people paying insurance premiums.
Only time will tell if this comes to pass. Assuming it does, then a more appropriate analogy would be having your friend make the first year payments on an economy car if you sell your luxury sedan. You still have to make payments after year one, but the payments will be lower. Thank You.
Dear John Mayberry -
Thank you for your response.
Here are a couple of major problems that I have with Obamacare -
1. All insurance programs are based on discriminatory rates based on individual behaviour. No auto insurance program has the same rate for all drivers, irrespective of driving habits. Obamacare (if I'm not mistaken, which I well may be) essentially says that everyone pays comparable (if not the same) premiums. This is a moral hazard. It is also a transfer of money from lower income and wealth citizens (the young) to higher income and wealth (the old).
2. The cost of healthcare is a very tricky issue. It has correctly been argued for example that it is economically beneficial for people to smoke - they die early on average but not so soon as to die before retirement. That saves a lot of money. I think the point I'm trying to make is that healthcare will always be expensive because it is nearly impossible to define what "basic healthcare" means. With the way that term is bandied around, you would assume its a given, but unlike "basic education" or "basic food", basic healthcare means whatever it takes to save or even prolong a person's life. It could mean a coronary bypass, a bone marrow transplant or very expensive renal dialysis for many years.
So healthcare will always be expensive because the standards keep changing. A 100 years ago, X-Rays and vaccines were advanced healthcare. Today it is CT Scans and MRIs. Tomorrow it will be something else, maybe genetic therapy.
The solution is not how everyone can afford whatever they need - that will never ever happen. It is to see how the cost of providing healthcare can be reduced. And Obamacare addresses very little or none of that at all.
Here are some things that I would humbly propose -
1. Reduce the cost of getting a new drug or device to the market - Today it costs more than $1 billion per drug that makes it to the market. Why? A sclerotic FDA patent system. The result? - A pharma industry dominated by a few players with very high barriers to entry. I cannot begin to tell you how many scientists I have known (as a former doctor and medical researcher myself) that invent something good and immediately say that the best option is to sell it to a big drug company since there is no way they can afford to get it to market.
2. Reduce the barriers of entry for doctors - This is a big one. The American Medical Association (AMA) is arguably the most powerful professional lobby in the US. They have consistently controlled the number of medical schools in operation and consistently opposed entry for foreign doctors - even those scoring over 95% percentile on the medical licensing exam. Why? Because it enables for example, the average anesthetist to make over $400K. A simple dictum of economics is that one way to reduce prices is to increase supply. And doctor's fees are a big big part of that price.
Finally, what do you do about people who are ill through no fault of their own - such as congenital or pre-existing conditions?
Give them money. Plain and simple. Impose a tax on everyone that is then used to pay for their insurance premiums. Like we do for food for the poor. Would that cover all the costs all the time? I don't think so. But considering how few of such people you actually have, the 98% who don't can pay a little each to help their 2% fellowmen who are truly unfortunate.
But the solution is not to - A. Make everyone pay the same rate irrespective of whether they smoke, drink or eat rubbish and B. De-link the payer (the employer) from the consumer (the employee) as the current system does.
CnKQ7pSia6, You've raised some excellent points. However, with regards to your point number 1, about insurance, I think generally the "transfer of wealth" is more from the young healthy people to the older less healthy people. But when I think about it in that respect, it actually seems more like Social Security. As long as the population as a whole gets younger, more healthy people pay in to support the aging people with their medical problems, and things might get better. But if the population as a whole ages…
Which brings me to your second point on what is "basic" health care. I think you're exactly right that there's no generally agreed to definition. Without that, everyone will continue to talk past each other. Your example of smoking is a good one I've heard many times. If the only goal of health care reform was to reduce the cost to the insurance companies or government, then we should be encouraging the riskiest behavior and eliminating safety protocols right and left. Who needs those pesky speed limits and stop signs, anyway? Obviously it's a question of balancing costs and benefits. However, as you've noted, we haven't clearly defined what the benefits are that we're trying to balance. Would you pay $40,000 for a car, if you didn't know what kind of car it was? A great deal for a Bentley, but a bad one for a Yugo. What do we really want for our health care dollars?
Yes, the standards keep changing because technology keeps advancing to provide ever more effective ways of treating illness. Inflictions that would have killed people only 20 or 30 years ago are now easily treated. These advances have raised our expectations of medicine nearly as fast as they have raised the costs. But you can look at that in the way anti-abortion advocates look at births – does extending lives cost society money, or does it save society money because of the additional contribution's those people will make? Everyone will die, some earlier than others. If we think that health care is only there to put off the inevitable, it's a losing game. If health care extends our lives to we can contribute more to society, then there's a payoff.
I also think you made some great recommendations. Thanks for your thoughtful reply!
As an MS sufferer, I'm refreshed by your impetus towards largesse towards me, but if you want to talk about things that don't reduce costs that idea is one of them. When I was diagnosed four years ago, basic interferons ran 1500 a month, now it's 3000 a month. A captive market of 400,000 MS sufferers in the US paying 3,000 a month is 14.4 billion dollars a year.
A solution which doesn't smack drug companies upside the head something fierce will just lead to drug companies using the chronically ill to siphon off public funds.
When my insurance lapsed at 22, I solved my problem by moving to Taiwan. When they built their system in 1997, they looked around the world and they really liked US Medicare/Medicaid. A very nice Medical loss ratio, people got to pick their own doctors and hospitals, covered the indigent etc.
When they talked to their American counterparts, the conversation went something like this.
American: "Medicare is great but it's insolvent, it loses tons of money every year. Medicaid has the same problem."
Taiwan: "That sounds bad. But don't the healthy and well off subsidize the system with their premiums?"
American: "Indirectly through some taxes, but not enough. "
Taiwan: "But surely those people also get insurance?"
American: "Yes, but they go into the private market, where the profits off of their premiums are set aside to help the poor suffering shareholders."
Taiwan: "So the private insurance industry takes all the young and healthy people, and says the government can only enroll expensive high risk old people, and poor people, who by definition can't pay?"
American: "Pretty much."
Taiwan: "Well, there's your problem."
Taiwan literally copied Medicare, gave it to everyone, and they pay 900 a year per capita, 6% of GDP on medicine with better outcomes than us paying 7500 and 18% of GDP.
Everyone pays a rate based on income done in the form of a payroll tax. If you're employed the employer has to kick in a fixed percentage of the cost. A monthly premium for someone making 1200$ a month is 30 - 45$.
I try to tell them about what healthcare is like in America and they don't believe it.
Britain, Canada and Australia 1) afford universal health care, 2) are not socialist or communist.
Many good points.
With regard to your Point #2, although I agree with you that we need more doctors, it should be mentioned that doctors' compensation (salary) per se is only 8% of the total healthcare cost. Yes the doctors are the ones who initiate or order those expensive tests and treatments, but a big part of health insurance payment goes to the hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, medical equipment makers, the labs, the imaging companies, etc. Most physicians do not belong in the top 1% income earners, unless of course, if they happen to own any of those biomedical companies. So I don't think increasing the number of doctor alone is going to lower the health care cost; you have to convince the doctors (and the patients) not to do too many tests, procedures, or undertake those treatments which have only equivocal benefits.
Britain, Canada and Australia don't have 300+ million, and they are not obese like Americans.
If you have a large population, then you have economies of scale. Apparently, Australia is almost as obese as America. I say "apparently" because I am Australian and do not wish to believe it. By the way, I myself had lap band surgery and lost 50 kg. Another point is that obesity kills people when their most productive years are behind them. It also kills people after they have worked productively. I think that the US's higher rates of violence and the underlying social inequality will make it harder for the US to pay for universal health care.
What conservative people SHOULD be about is maintaining a stable society. That is why they are prone to revulsion and big into duty and not into alternative life styles. On the other hand, liberals are about personal freedom. The conservatives are shooting themselves in the foot by supporting social inequality. They end up with a violent and unstable society. It's just crazy.
The way conservatives support a stable society is by promoting (as much as reasonable and feasible) equality of opportunity, and allowing people to enjoy the benefit of their labor as much as possible. Where it seems to be the opposite with progressives who attempt to promote an equality of results, regardless of effort (of course the super rich progressives get to carve themselves out a piece of the pie, but you have similar actions on both sides so one cannot honestly paint one side or the other as the horrible vampire monster).
Progressives say they are about individual freedom, and in a way that is true, so long as individuals fit into their parameters which progressively narrow. It is more true in terms of social liberties, but quite the opposite is true of progressives in terms of economic liberties, as many hold the attitude that everyone's effort and capital ultimately should belong to the government, the "only legitimate arbiter of an economy".
Conservatives (which are distinct from authoritarian republicans) promote individual freedom primarily through economic freedom, in terms of social issues conservatives would prefer to allow individual states to do what is best for their people, so that there are real differences between states and allow individuals to move to places which suit their taste.
These are two fundamentally different approaches to promoting individual liberty, I would personally promote a third option, one which would promote both social and economic individual freedom.
''politicians are still wading through a bog of fiscal and ideological considerations.''
Not to mention political.
Republican Governors like Jindal (LA) and Walker (WI) have said they will not accept the expansion of Medicaid paid for by the federal government. This is the current Republican party line, but likely to put them at odds with their constituents.
With the law upheld, Americans will now learn what is in it, as distinct from the propaganda campaign waged by Republicans to misinform the public. This was quite skillfully done (''government takeover of healthcare'', ''death panels'', ''pulling the plug on grandma'') but had little to do with what the law actually contains. The Supreme Court ruling legitimizes the law, and most Americans would now like to see their elected representatives move on to other issues.
It will be quite hard for Republican governors to explain why the poor should not receive health benefits that the federal government finances. The public will also learn than none of them loses the company provided insurance they have already, and that the ACA reforms many of the features (preexisting condition limits, etc) that they rightly find objectionable in the current system.
The offer by the federal government is to pay states 100% of the cost of the Medicaid expansion of the first three years and 90% thereafter. Governors that refuse the expansion will create a new civil rights movement.
I have just finished reading Milton Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom. Perhaps the way to deal with medical (and other services) for poorer people would be to adopt his proposal for a negative income tax at a level high enough so that everyone could have access to the services they need.
This should satisfy those who put a priority on compassion and those whose priority is less government intrusion into our lives.
(The author of this comment has a web log on economics at https://economics102.wordpress.com/)
It would definitely work on both accounts so long as people benefiting from the negative income tax responsibly use it(and governments eliminate all other social programs), otherwise they can simply squander it and demand more programs.
I personally love the idea, but I can see how progressives would scream and complain at the "moving backwards" of losing control over people through the programs.
This will only be a momentary partisan blip on the radar. Eventually, all states will accept the Medicaid expansion simply because no one turns down free money (at least not for very long). Even the most partisan of states will eventually accept the expansion, because they will figure out that the tier of people that will end up being covered under the expansion by the federal government are currently being covered by a mix of various state and local programs anyway, or going to publicly subsidized clinics or ERs. They will do the math, and figure out whether the 10% they have to pay is more or less than what they are currently shelling out for public assistance to that same tier of people. My guess is that it is probably less.
LexHumana, I agree!
Another way I've heard of looking at it is that all the states have to pay into Medicaid, so if they opt out of the expansion, they are helping to subsidize other states that sign up and getting less for their Medicaid dollar.
If the Federal Government is funding most or all of the expansion, this may not be true. But either way, opting out doesn't sound like a smart move, economically or politically. Thank You.
Of course no lower court agreed. The US Congress has been tying money to other things for a while. Again, this is a pre-New Deal view of federal power.
I can only hope that now states that want to raise their blood alcohol level for drunk driving back above 0.08 or lower their legal drinking age below 21 do so. Congress's former tying of those things to highway money is now unconstitutional. I'll raise a glass to that.
I hate to disappoint you in the middle of your toast, but it is highly unlikely that the National Minimum Drinking Age Act will be ruled unconstitutional. One, it was already upheld once by the Supreme Court. Two, the states argued that threatening them with loss of ALL of their Medicaid funding was a coercive condition on the funding, and the Court agreed. The majority upheld the provision as a restrictive condition only on the ADDITIONAL funds provided for the expanded Medicaid program. This is similar to what the drinking age statute does -- if a state doesn't comply, it loses 10% of its federal transportation appropriation for that fiscal year.
Can you elaborate on why this is different? The forfeiture of 10% of federal transportation appropriation is not a forfeiture of a "new" 10%, is it? If it is simply the regularly scheduled outlay that can be taken away this seems to me to be very similar to illegal coercion on Medicare.
They are not regularly scheduled outlays the same way Medicaid is, although the expendures do happen every year. The National Highway System is funded by the Highway Trust Fund (paid for by your federal gas taxes), and each year Congress has to decide how much to appropriate from that fund to operate the interstate highways. Money goes to routine maintenance, as well as expansions and new construction. Most of funding comes from the federal government (90% I think), but it is not a constant flow of money into a particular program like Medicaid. Transportation money will fluctuate from year to year depending on what projects need to be funded, and it is appropriated from year to year. As a consequence, it is treated as a receipt of new funds each year, and the Court has said that the federal government can attach any strings it wants to, on condition of receipt of these new funds. I also think the fact that it is only a loss of 10% has a lot to do with it -- if the federal government said you lose ALL of your highway funds, the Court ruling might have been different.
Disenfranchisement will make it easier for the ruling classes in some states to turn away federal aid.
Confusing comment was confusing.
I think he's referring to the laws the Republicans are passing in various states on voter Ids, restrictions on felons, citizenship tests etc, which have the net effect of making it harder for poor people to vote.
Hmm, I wonder if Governor Scott will be thinking of providing free transportation to help those poor Floridian who's now denied expanded Medicaid move to neighboring states where ACA Medicaid expansion is accepted?
The best way I've heard Obamacare summed up (as far as its biggest piece) is that it's a 3-legged stool; whereas if any leg were cut, the whole thing falls apart. 1) No pre-existing conditions clause i.e., everyone can get insurance at the same price, 2) For this to work and insurance companies stay in business, everyone has to buy insurance, and 3) for everyone to buy insurance, there must be a tax penalty come April. Well doesn't 26 states not participating in the Medicaid piece mean #2 no longer works? i.e., the stool is broked?
No, the Medicaid expansion issue was a separate and unrelated portion of the Obamacare statute. If Medicaid doesn't get expanded, it doesn't affect the mandate issue or the tax issue or the "guarraneed issue" issue.
Thank you for the clarification, Lex. But let's put the silos / issue buckets aside. From strictly a logical standpoint, wouldn't limiting the Medicaid population end up compromising the stool? I guess the question is whether or not the margin derived from that population hardly enough to move an insurer's profitability needle?
the.ronin, The "three-legged stool" analogy, as presented by MIT Economist Jonathan Gruber (architect of both Mitt Romney's Massachusetts Health Care Plan AND Obamacare), is "end discrimination in insurance markets, mandate insurance coverage, and subsidize that coverage for the poor" (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/29/10-obamacare-questions-...). There's nothing explicitly about a tax penalty (it comes from the mandate).
Also, Medicaid already subsidizes coverage for many poor people, and Obamacare provides an affordability exemption and establishes insurance exchanges to help other lower income people get insurance. Expansion of Medicaid, as discussed in this article, is just that – enlarging the pool of poor that are eligible for subsidized coverage.
You seem to be making the argument that if we can't cover all the poor, "the whole thing falls apart." That's a false argument, because health care is not a physical stool. What exactly "falls apart"? Having uninsured people who need health care is the situation we have now. As tragic and costly as that is, having fewer of them is better, not just for them, but for the rest of tax payers who help pay their emergency room bills. Not insuring all of them won't bankrupt the insurance companies, or cause them to cancel policies where there are pre-existing conditions.
The health care system won't 'fall apart' because several states decide their poorer citizens aren't worth an expansion of Medicaid. Those states will simply pay more in other ways. Thank You.
Insurers as much as they demonize it publically love Medicare and Medicaid.
It covers two groups that are guaranteed money sinks, poor people and old people, and keeps them off the balance sheets of private insurers who can then choose from the healthier and richer remainder.
It's a great deal for them.
The danger is when the government starts getting close to patients who are maybe not that poor. These people could be potential profits and thus insurance companies don't want to give these people the option of shifting to a cheaper government plan.
Dear Ultrabiased "journalist",
Its called The Affordable Care Act.
Rupert Murdoch
And equus tergum is called a Horses ass. I think its alright to use popular phrasing rather then Government issued wording. Unless your still calling the Iraq war Operation Freedom.
Affordable for people who either could not afford it, or could not be insured because it was a guaranteed money sink.
One thing that often gets swept under the rug is the distinction between medical care and medical insurance. It is a nuance that is important. To say that everyone is entitled to medical care is synonymous to saying that medical practitioners are obligated to serve those in need of medical care for less than market rates. We'll see what this means to the medical profession as a whole (not just the AMA) and how it affects people's decisions of whether or not to go into medicine.
Erasmus: Being an atheist in the Middle East
Buttonwood's notebook
Lithuanian politics: Stirring the pot
Q&A: Harry Melling: What Dudley did next
Daily chart: Uptown top ranking
Graphic detail
The Economist explains: Why Binyamin Netanyahu is giving a speech to...
The Economist explains
Argentine intrigue: Case dismissed
The Americas
Have you listened to The Economist Radio on Facebook?
The Economist Radio is an on-demand social listening platform that allows you to listen, share and recommend The Economist audio content
Test your EQ
Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines
In Other Words
Try our new audio app and website, providing reporting and analysis from our correspondents around the world every weekday
Want more from The Economist?
Visit The Economist e-store and you'll find a range of carefully selected products for business and pleasure, Economist books and diaries, and much more


text:
Milgard sets the standard for vinyl patio doors. We extrude our own vinyl patio door components using our custom vinyl recipe to deliver the best quality, consistency and durability. In fact, many of our vinyl patio doors actually meet light commercial ratings, and meet or exceed the criteria for structural integrity and reliable performance established by the American Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA). All are available in custom sizes and covered by our Full Lifetime Warranty.
Select a Milgard® Product Series
You'll love our worry-free vinyl patio doors. They won't warp, crack or peel. Nor do they absorb moisture. That means you can depend on them to slide open easily in any weather. What's more, they are energy efficient, so they help keep your home comfortable as well.
- 1
- Milgard Tuscany® Series vinyl patio doors also include Glass Breakage Coverage.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Gary Stanley |
Tech to face tough national competition at seven combined SEC and Big 12 sites
Squad will earn second team All-America honors
NCAA East Prelims begin next Thursday
Twelve out of 16 programs saw an improvement in their single year rates over the 2011-12 scores
Hadnot wins two golds, Jermey Hicks named Freshman of the Year
Consistency is key when establishing a winning formula and for over 30 years, Gary Stanley has consistently fielded winning track and field programs at Louisiana Tech.
The 2015 campaign marks Stanleyâ�TMs 27th year as head coach at LA Tech. During that span, Stanley has guided the Bulldog and Lady Techster track and field programs through five different conference affiliations (Southland, American South, Sun Belt, Western Athletic and Conference USA) and a bevy of national landscape changes but the constant factor throughout that time span has been LA Tech continuing to win championships.
In over three decades in Ruston, Stanley has amassed 21 Coach of the Year titles by his conference peers and won 19 conference championships in four different leagues as a head coach. When he was an assistant coach, Tech won another two conference titles to bring Stanleyâ�TMs overall trophy haul to 21 conference championships.
Stanley has guided athletes to 44 All-America honors in his tenure as head coach of the program including 19 of those honors coming in the last four seasons, an average of 4.75 All-America honors per year.
The most recent string of team success has been a dominating womenâ�TMs program that has won 13 of the last 14 Western Athletic Conference championships including seven consecutive outdoor titles. The Lady Techsters have laid claim to the 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 WAC Outdoor Championships and the 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 WAC Indoor Championships while the men continuously challenging for the top as well.
Four different conferences have bestowed the coach of the year honor on Stanley including the Southland, American South, Sun Belt and Western Athletic Conferences.
Stanleyâ�TMs long and illustrious career in Ruston began in 1982 when he started his collegiate coaching career as a graduate assistant fresh off coaching a Louisiana High School Athletic Association Class 4A state championship at Bonnabel High School in 1980.
He coached John Ratcliffe at Bonnabel High School as the future Tech star set the Louisiana state record in the 3,200-meter run with a time of 9:12, a mark that still stands today. Ratcliff then ran an astounding 8:53 in the 3,200m at a national high school postseason event before going on to have a stellar career as a Bulldog.
In 1984, Stanley was promoted from graduate assistant to a full-time assistant coach. Also in that year, he was given the reigns as the head coach for the cross country program here at Tech. Two years later, he guided Techâ�TMs men to a Southland Conference cross country title.
Stanley, after being a district champion in the mile and being crowned the city of New Orleans Cross Country Champion while at East Jefferson High School, went on to letter one year at Pensacola Junior College and three years at Southeastern Louisiana. His honors include the 1970 New Orleans cross country city champion, 1972 Southern AAU three-mile champion, 1973 Southern AAU one-mile champion, 1975 U.S. Track and Field Federation all-regional cross country and the 1975 LSU Invitational three mile champion.
One of Stanleyâ�TMs highlights was helping lead SLU to its only conference cross country championship in 1973 while finishing eighth overall in the race. Stanley attributes his success to the guidance of former head coach Jerry Dyes during his six-year assistant position under Dyes.
â�oeCoach Dyes was the greatest coach Iâ�TMve ever been around,â�� said Stanley. â�oeHe was so instrumental in my growth as a young assistant.â��
After serving six years as a full-time assistant in Ruston, Stanley was named the head coach at Louisiana Tech in 1988. Since then, his program has become one of the best and most consistent on the Louisiana Tech campus and throughout the state in track and field.
Prior to the teamâ�TMs WAC title winning streak, Techâ�TMs biggest team achievement under Stanleyâ�TMs guidance came at the national championships in 1999 with the womenâ�TMs team finishing 17th in the country in 1999 at the NCAA Outdoor Track & Field Championships in Boise, Idaho, ahead of national powerhouses Tennessee, Michigan and Miami.
The womenâ�TMs team finished 10th at the NCAA Mid-East Regionals in 2004 with 22 points, placing the Lady Techsters second in the state behind LSU and ahead of national elite programs like Wisconsin, Michigan State, Purdue and Ole Miss.
The Lady Techster 4x400m relay teams in 2007 claimed All-America honors both indoors and outdoors with the outdoor relay finishing third in the nation.
Stanleyâ�TMs expertise with distance runners has led Tech to qualify runners in every event at nationals from the 800 meters to the 10,000 on the menâ�TMs side. LSU is the only other track program in the state to accomplish such a feat.
In the past 40 years, the WAC holds an impressive 18 national titles in track and field, meaning Stanley faced a tough task of making Tech competitive among the nationâ�TMs best track and field squads during its 12-year membership.
After more than a decade in the WAC with several conference championships, Stanley now turns his attention to Conference USA with the hopes of bringing home a conference title in a fifth league.
Coach of the Year Honors (21)
1986 Men's Cross Country Southland
1990 Men's Cross Country American South
1990 Men's Indoor American South
1990 Men's Outdoor American South
1991 Men's Indoor American South
1999 Men's Indoor Sun Belt
1999 Women's Outdoor Sun Belt
2000 Women's Indoor Sun Belt
2004 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2005 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2005 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2006 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2006 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2007 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2008 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2009 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2009 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2010 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2010 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2011 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2011 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
Conference Championships (19)
1986 Men's Cross Country Southland
1990 Men's Cross Country American South
1990 Men's Outdoor American South
1999 Men's Indoor Sun Belt
1999 Women's Outdoor Sun Belt
2000 Women's Indoor Sun Belt
2005 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2005 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2006 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2006 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2007 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2008 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2008 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2009 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2009 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2010 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2010 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic
2011 Women's Indoor Western Athletic
2011 Women's Outdoor Western Athletic


text:
About Library
Our Library at the KPRIEAT supports the institute's march towards its vision to provide world-class facility for its users. Our Library is a member of DELNET (Developing Library Network). Our Library subscribes the e-journals IEEE- All Society Periodicals, ASCE Civil Engineering Collection, ASME Mechanical Engineering Collection , Elsevier- Engineering + Computer Science (275 journals)- Science Direct, Mc-Graw Hill Access Engineering Library & ASTM DIGITAL LIBRARY. Our Library Intranet Page provides the IP based online accesses towards these resources. Our Library has rich collection of books and non book materials and NPTEL collections.


text:
William Gibson Talks Zero History, Paranoia and the Awesome Power of Twitter
- |
- 2:26 pm |
- Permalink
From recession-proof military contractors cool-hunting secret, weaponized brands to "gear queers," viral iPhones and Twitter darknets, William Gibson's new novel Zero History examines the 21st century's techno-cultural fetishes with a deceptively simple directive: The future is now.
Gone is the sci-fi pretense of an imagined future, and for good reason.
"All we really have when we pretend to write about the future is the moment in which we are writing," the 62-year-old godfather of cyberspace told Wired.com by phone. "That's why every imagined future obsoletes like an ice cream melting on the way back from the corner store."
Out Tuesday from publisher Putnam/Penguin, Zero History dissects our paranoid, post-9/11 information overload with an eye for imminent terror and immanent transcendence. Like Thomas Pynchon's The Crying of Lot 49 and Don DeLillo's White Noise before it, Gibson's new novel is not as interested in riveting plot points as it is in parsing an everyday life swarming with signifiers.
Its main characters — detail-obsessed Russian translator Milgrim, ex-rocker and taste-making detective Hollis Henry, and postmodern marketing mogul Hubertus Bigend — have been retrieved from the pages of Gibson's previous novels Pattern Recognition and Spook Country to serve as ciphers through which the author's hypercritical cultural examinations are executed.
Wired.com spoke with Gibson in a wide-ranging interview about Zero History, social networking, 9/11, fashionable militarism, brainy endeavors like Inception and The Century of the Self, smartphones and the cinematic adaptation of his sci-fi classic Neuromancer.
Wired.com: Many of your previous characters have returned in Zero History, but it seems like the ones that steal the show are named Twitter and iPhone.
William Gibson: I hope not literally. It's naturalism, in terms of the milieu I'm describing, which is a milieu I encounter more often not. The people I hang out with tend to use Macs, not that I think they're necessarily superior. It's just the brand they smoke. The next book I may have to depict a Windows cultural universe just for balance.
Wired.com: There's a scene in the book where Milgrim is asked whether he's running a Mac or a PC. And when he answered "Mac," I could immediately hear the anti-Apple crusaders on Wired.com in my head screaming, "This is an outrage!"
Gibson: [Laughs] It's what I encounter in researching that particular milieu. What people don't notice is that Garreth's laptop is another unnamed brand, which is probably some weird, rugged, military unit running stuff we couldn't imagine. He's not a vanilla Mac user. But I did give Milgrim and Sleight totally bland, extinct smartphones like the Neo.
Wired.com: How about Twitter? More than most authors I've checked out, your tweet-happy avatar @GreatDismal seems to be most comfortable messaging and cool-hunting on the service. And in the novel, Twitter's consistently used as a communication and parenting device, depending on the spook.
Gibson: Well, I discovered Twitter while I was writing the novel, and I immediately saw its odd potential for being a tiny, private darknet that no one else can access. I'm always interested in the spooky repurposing of everyday things. After a few days on Twitter, what was most evident to me is that, if you set it up right, it's probably the most powerful novelty aggregator that has ever existed. Magazines have always been novelty aggregators, and people who work for them find and assemble new and interesting stuff, and people like me buy them. Or used to buy them, when magazines were the most efficient way to find novel things.
But now with Twitter, after following people who have proven themselves to be extremely adroit and active novelty aggregators, I get more random novelty every day that I can actually use. A lot of it just slides by, but a lot of it is stuff that I used to have to go through considerable trouble to find. And a lot of it is so beyond the stuff I used to be able to find, which is good.
Wired.com: It sounds like Twitter has successfully brought the social networker out of you.
Gibson: I guess Twitter is the first thing that has been attractive to me as social media. I never felt the least draw to Facebook or MySpace. I've been involved anonymously in some tiny listservs, mainly in my ceaseless quest for random novelty, and sometimes while doing something that more closely resembles research.
But I never wanted to be on Facebook. And to my surprise, I found that Twitter started to bring in new friends and connections. I suspect the difference is that it is less formatted, or not formatted at all. It hasn't been constructed to provide me an experience in any particular way, which is a function of its minimalist architecture.


text:
top notch djs, intimate space. Expensive drinks.
Community10 Countries 0 Friends 2 Reviews & Articles 1 Firsts Last Login: Member Since: Mar 29, 2008 Aaron S.Travel ScorecardCountries See cities Aaron has been to 62 cities and 10 countries and counting... Worldly: is a scout Danger: likes a little risk Roughing it: likes a bug-free bed and hot showers Shrewdness: can dodge thieves and survive touts Off the beaten track: likes popular destinations Depth of Knowledge: has written some choice bits Overall TravelCred score: 499 Updates on Aaron's World! Aaron's Friends! Aaron currently has no friends, but you know what? You can be the FIRST one! |


text:
Lexus Q&A
Ask Your QuestionAll 1999 Lexus ES300 questions
check engine light and VSC light and VSC off light are all on what is my issue
what symptons can i look for, for a bad manifold catalyst converter.
i had machanic replace ignition coils and he told me the manifold converter was turning red from ...
My engine and track light comes on. When I'm at a stop light my car vibrates.
It feels like it's going to cut off unless I put it in park. Also have a electric smell and ...
what causes too much play in the steering wheel
My 1999 Lexus ES 300 has too much play in the steering wheel , what causes this?
codes P0300,P0304,P0303,and P0446 i replaced ignition coil bank 1, 2 weeks ago.
ran fine until now,i've replaced 02, 04, 06 coils about 9 months ago for same problem. what c...
constant new batteries and car keeps draining batteries. alternator not problem
There is obviously something wrong other than the battery. What can be draining the battery?
I took my lexus to advance auto. I got some codes P1354,P0125 3 times each.
I think its cam or crankshaft sensor cause after going 40mph engine starts shaking then it stops ...
When I hit 40 at gentle acceleration, the tranny lurches and balks at overdrive
On moderate acceleration, if I stop accelerating at 40 mph, the tranny seems not to be able to de...
I have error codes on a es300 of PO300,PO301,PO303,PO305 and P1135
I believe it to be a bad bank one oxygen sensor question is,is it upstream or downstream and is t...
on interstate cruse control, engine dies,will turn over correctly, have fuel,
fuel relay ,fuel pump good .fuses good no power to fuel pump
why would my car only go in revers and it is leaking fluid from bell houseing
its leaking from spare holes on front side of the bell housing. it will only go in revers and I h...
What could be wrong if you smell pure gas?
Cant take your foot off the gas (doesnt do it all the time)
hi, my 99 es300 idles high when it warms up already, about 1500 rpm.
at warm up, it should be around 600 or 700 rpm, when the engine is cold i understand a little hig...
car misfiring, check engine light and trac off
engine shaking
Don't know what a dashboard light is telling me.
What is the dashboard light showing the rear of a car with lines coming out of it telling me?
This week's top 10
1 CharlesAutomotive | 6 Hal... |
2 pushrod | 7 puzzlednow |
3 globalhelper | 8 stevieray1 |
4 ziptie12 | 9 Sterling Car Care |
5 csubak30 | 10 duckmd1 |


text:
I'm sure if you asked most women, what catalog is their man's favorite they'd say "Victoria's Secret." I'll admit several places I lived, with all men, the Vickies catalog showed up quite regularly. But no catalog has ever gone from mailbox to recycling pile, by my significant other's hand, quite as quickly as The Phantom Fireworks catalog.
As if channeling my mother she took the catalog, stating matter of factually "you are not buying fireworks." She was right, I wasn't. Aside from being against the law in m y neck of the woods – something that doesn't stop my neighbors – my dogs are terrified of fireworks.
Still I retrieved the catalog from the pile and flipped through it. It took me back to being a kid. There's a good, acre sized, parking lot near my parents home that became fireworks central every fourth of July. My brother an eye would shoot bottle rockets and smoke bombs and strings of Black Cats while my mother looked nervously on. Then one local parents – who happened to be a civil war re-enactor with pyro experience – would come out and set off the mortars and other large scale fire works.
As I post this I'm flipping through the pages of the catalog. From a design standpoint it's nothing to write home about. page after page of eye-aching, gradient blends, drop shadows and starbursts, starbursts, starbursts! I, still, can't help but smile.
In these glossy page live my childhood favorites, jumbo smoke bombs, tank with report, jumping jacks and the two-stage out space jet! I can't help but wonder if, at this moment, hundreds of miles away, my mother has that same, worried, look on her face she did every time we went up to light a fuse.


text:
Find a Doctor
With over 450 board-certified physicians, Albany Med Faculty Physicians
are some of the most expert in their field. Find the right
physicians who meet your medical needs.
Icon Key |
Albany Med Faculty Physician
Providers noted by this symbol are employed by the Albany Medical College Faculty Practice. |
Qandah, Juleen DODept: Emergency Medicine |
Qian, Jiang MD, PhDDept: Pathology Specialty: Anatomic Pathology |
Qualia, Cary MDDept: Pediatrics Specialty: Pediatric Gastroenterology |
Quinn, David MDDept: Surgery Specialty: Orthopedic Surgery, Hand Surgery |


text:
Management Assistant Manipulated Expense and Payroll Computer Systems
LORI M. WILSON, 55, of Tacoma, Washington, was sentenced today to six months in prison, three years of supervised release and $80,000 in restitution for wire fraud. WILSON was indicted in March 2010, for five counts of wire fraud and five counts of mail fraud for her scheme to steal over $80,000 from her employer, Home Depot, between May 2006 and June 2008. WILSON used her special access to payroll and work expense computer systems to obtain reimbursement for expenses never incurred, and to obtain payment for hours she never worked. At sentencing U.S. District Judge James L. Robart rejected a request for a sentence of home electronic monitoring, saying that it is an important deterrent for citizens to realize they can go to prison and face serious consequences for this type of theft.
According to records filed in the case, WILSON was employed as an Administrative Assistant at the Home Depot Pacific Northwest Regional Office. Because of her job responsibilities, WILSON had special access to both an expense reimbursement computer system and a payroll computer system. WILSON was also able to access the system in using the user accounts and email addresses of her direct supervisors. WILSON was able to access the system and create false expense reports for reimbursement, and then sign in as her supervisor and approve them. She would delete the email from her supervisors account, alerting the supervisor to the expense approval. Similarly, she was able to report and approve overtime that had never been worked. WILSON was reimbursed more than $64,000 in expenses she never incurred between March 2007 and May 2008. WILSON was paid nearly $14,000 for hours she never worked between September 2006, and May 2008. The fraud was uncovered during an internal audit. When questioned about expenses in June 2008, WILSON resigned her position with Home Depot. On July 2, 2010, WILSON pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud.
In asking for a prison sentence, Assistant United States Attorney Kate Crisham wrote to the court that WILSON's theft harmed not only Home Depot, but the community as a whole. "Wilson's fraud also has an indirect effect on the community at large, as instances of employee embezzlement such as this one force companies like Home Depot to raise their prices, thus negatively impacting innocent consumers during a time when many are experiencing financial difficulties."
The case was investigated by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS). The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Kate Crisham.
For additional information please contact Emily Langlie, Public Affairs Officer for the United States Attorney's Office, at (206) 553-4110 or email@example.com.


text:
Star Wars Day Photos
By Kyle Anderson on May 6, 2013
People all over the world celebrated May the 4th, aka Star Wars Day, by gathering, dressing up, and having impromptu lightsaber duels. Here are some photos from the various goings-on across the United States and beyond:
Continue the Star Wars spirit by registering for this year's Course of the Force run benefiting Make-A-Wish. The relay goes from Marin County, CA, all the way down to San Diego during the week leading up to Comic-Con 2013. It's for a good cause, and it'll give you yet another excuse to wear your sneakers under your Jedi robes. Function AND comfort. Quarter-mile spaces are now available, so do not delay.
I was at Hollywood Studios. As he approached the stage, my brother-in-law overheard DJ Lobot say "This is really happening, isn't it?" with a huge grin on his face.
That was pretty awesome.
Had a blast at the EW CapeTown Film Fest, my parents are in that second pic… it was cool to share my love of Star Wars with my whole family (we had 7 people at the 2pm showing). And Dad totally got into it, he was disappointed he didn't have his own costume… face paint made up for it though! Really appreciate all of the 501st members that came out, they were fun and so nice. Plus, Sam Witwer took a pic with me! Can't wait to start making plans for next May the 4th… or if I can't wait that long, Course of the Force!


text:
The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles on OPRAH WINFREY is the Best Thing You'll See Today
By Joseph McCabe on May 12, 2014
Cowabunga! We have a sweet little treat for old-school Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles fans this fine day. One that may even help pull those of you dreading the upcoming Michael Bay reboot of the Turtles' film franchise out of your funk. Way back in 1990, the year of the Turtles' first live-action film, the Heroes in a Half Shell launched a Pizza Hut-sponsored Broadway concert tour, dubbed Coming Out of Their Shells, in which Don, Leo, Raph, and Mike played power pop on stage and saved April O'Neil from the clutches of Shredder.
As part of their tour, the foursome even made a stop on The Oprah Winfrey Show — and some forward-thinking soul recorded it on VHS and uploaded it to YouTube… Is it just me, or, in the video that follows, does one of the Turtles sound suspiciously like Charlie Day? Of course Day was only fourteen at the time, and more than likely wasn't doing Turtle voice work. But it does please me to think that in some parallel universe the Bay reboot has the Turtles 1.) keeping their snouts, and 2.) voiced by Day and his It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia co-stars Rob McElhenney, Glenn Howerton, and Danny DeVito — and April voiced by their leading lady Kaitlin Olson. Ah, if only…
Anyway, now you can enjoy some Turtles lore that you more than likely missed. (Unless you were regularly watching Oprah back in 1990.) So heat up a slice of pizza, kick back, and enjoy an all but forgotten piece of history.
Oh my holy crap! Turtles calling Oprah, "Babe"
Anyone who refers to the cartoon and prior movie TMNT as "old-school Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" doesn't know what they're talking about really, in that context. A pity the original characters were practically wiped away by being "kiddified" out of existence.
one of them sounded like Cliff from Cheers
looked more like toads than turtles
I think that was the original Donny voice by Corey Feldman, but I'm not sure.
Oh man, I totally had one of those concerts on VHS when I was a kid! …The memories…
The one guy sounds like Charlie Day, yes… but Raph sounds EXACTLY like Bob Odenkirk
haha wtf they dont have shells
these are not the ones from the movie….NEXT!!!


text:
Constitutional Rights PAC
Who We Are
Bill of Rights
Article I
Article II
Article III
Article IV
Article V
Article VI
Article VII
Article VIII
Article IX
Article X
Current Actions
Gun Appreciation
Gun News & Commentary
Fund the Fight
America is no place for political dynasties, be they named Clinton or Bush. [
Constitutional News & Commentary
Republicans in Congress already trying to overturn FCC's latest votes
Fri, Feb 27, 2015
US Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) today filed legislation to overturn the municipal broadband decision the Federal Communications Commission made earlier in the day.
Read More...
Statement from Larry Ward on FCC Decision
Thu, Feb 26, 2015
Constitutional Rights PAC Chairman Larry Ward issued the following statement in response to the Federal Communications Commission's decision today to begin regulating the Internet as a Public Utility.
Read More...
Obama to ban bullets by executive action, threatens top-selling AR-15 rifle
Thu, Feb 26, 2015
As promised, President Obama is using executive actions to impose gun control on the nation, targeting the top-selling rifle in the country, the AR-15 style semi-automatic, with a ban on one of the most-used AR bullets by sportsmen and target shooters.
Read More...
Hillary Calls for Regulating Internet: 'It's a Foot in the Door'
Thu, Feb 26, 2015
Hillary Clinton took a strong position in support of so-called net neutrality in an appearance yesterday evening in Silicon Valley:
Read More...
FCC Chair Refuses to Testify before Congress ahead of Net Neutrality Vote
Wed, Feb 25, 2015
Two prominent House committee chairs are "deeply disappointed" in Federal Communications Commission chairman Tom Wheeler for refusing to testify before Congress as "the future of the Internet is at stake."
Read More...
DC Posters Call FCC Chairman 'Boot Licker,' 'Obama's B*tch' Ahead Of Internet Regulation Vote
Wed, Feb 25, 2015
Individuals armed with wall paper paste and large poster-size images critical of Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler papered Washington D.C. early Wednesday morning.
Read More...
FCC Commissioner: Net Neutrality Is A Threat To Free Speech
Wed, Feb 25, 2015
An FCC commissioner strongly opposed to the agency's new net neutrality proposal partnered with an FEC commissioner Monday to warn that new Internet regulations could influence political free speech online.
Read More...
Police in Florida and other states are quietly tracking phones without a court order
Wed, Feb 25, 2015
More evidence that it's not just the NSA watching you.
Read More...
Obama power grab triggers 1st Amendment nightmare
Wed, Feb 25, 2015
Judge Napolitano: 'People don't know the danger that is coming'
Read More...
Deep-blue Maryland joins nationwide gun rights trend after electing more Republicans
Wed, Feb 25, 2015
A bill working its way through the General Assembly would make self-defense adequate justification for obtaining a concealed carry permit.
Read More...
Constitutional PAC: 70,000 Petitioners Oppose Title II
Tue, Feb 24, 2015
The Constitutional Rights PAC, which strongly opposes Title II reclassification of ISPs, says it has delivered to the FCC 70,000 petitions from folks who share its same view.
Read More...
Former Senator Coburn Urges Constitutional Convention
Tue, Feb 24, 2015
Former U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn met with Republicans in the Oklahoma Legislature and urged them to join the list of states calling for a convention to amend the U.S. Constitution.
Read More...
President Obama Tries to Block Ruling Halting Unconstitutional Executive Action
Tue, Feb 24, 2015
Impatient Presidents don't get to violate the Constitution.
Read More...
Texas governor: Obama's actions unconstitutional
Tue, Feb 24, 2015
President Obama's executive actions on immigration are unconstitutional, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) said Sunday, predicting that the case brought by his state and 25 others will go to the Supreme Court.
Read More...
Lawmaker Challenging Mall Of America's Gun Policy After Threat
Mon, Feb 23, 2015
A Republican state lawmaker says the al-Shabaab threat against the Mall of America means gun holders with permits should be able to take their weapons into the mall.
Read More...
Commish Pai: FCC May Outlaw Streaming Music to Your Phone
Thu, Feb 19, 2015
On One America News Network's "The Daily Ledger," FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai detailed some of the regulations he has found going though the secret 332-page proposed FCC plan designed by President Barack Obama to regulate the Internet.
Read More...
Billionaire Mark Cuban Says Net Neutrality Will 'F*ck Everything Up' (Video)
Thu, Feb 19, 2015
Billionaire investor and ABC "Shark Tank" star Mark Cuban unloaded on the Federal Communications Commission's plan to fundamentally change how it oversees the open Internet.
Read More...
Jeb: "I am my own man"... Hires George's staff.
Wed, Feb 18, 2015
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who is considering a 2016 presidential campaign, is seeking to distinguish his views on foreign policy from those of his father and brother, two former presidents.
Read More...
NRA Backs Senate's 2015 Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act
Tue, Feb 17, 2015
The 2015 Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act has been officially introduced in the Senate and if passed would treat concealed carry permits like driver's licenses.
Read More...
CNN Anchor: 'Our Rights Do Not Come From God'
Thu, Feb 12, 2015
During a heated discussion over gay marriage, CNN morning Anchor Chris Cuomo opined that the unalienable rights endowed to all Americans do not come from God.
Read More...
Fund the Fight to Protect Constitutional Rights
Latest Meme
Share this meme on your Facebook page by first
clicking here
then clicking the 'Share' link.
View all Memes
Sign the Petition
First Name
Last Name
Zip Code
Phone Number
Sign the following Petitions
Defend Our Gun Rights [
End DHS [
Restore Due Process [
Share This


text:
Lindsay Lohan shows off a new hair color as she arrives at the Santa Monica Courthouse on Friday (September 10) in Santa Monica, Calif.
The 24-year-old actress returned to her roots with strawberry blonde hair, close to her natural color!
As part of her probation requirements, Lindsay took a mandatory drug test on Friday. Linds also visited [...]
read more
Lindsay Lohan heads back to her car after stopping by a courthouse on Wednesday (December 7) in Santa Monica, Calif. The 25-year-old actress's Playboy cover recently leaked online, a week before it was scheduled to be officially rel... Read Post
After rocking long platinum locks for many months, Lindsay Lohan is returning to her roots. Her red roots, that is. The 'Machete' actress set the web abuzz on Friday when she stepped out in Santa Monica with freshly dyed auburn hair... Read Post
Lindsay Lohan lets her shirt do the talking as she arrives at the Santa Monica Courthouse on Tuesday (September 7) in Santa Monica, Calif. The 24-year-old actress checked in with her probation officer during her trip to the courthou... Read Post


text:
Welcome to Anime Amateur, a feature where yours truly (Nick Robinson, Whiskey intern) comes out of anime-watching retirement and jumps into the deep end with some of the stranger shows the world of Japanese animation has to offer. Join me as I try desperately to find my bearings in this strange and often beautiful land. My goal? To filter these shows through a decidedly non-otaku perspective. Let's dive in!
If you're reading this, odds are you're as big of a Persona 4 fan as I am. I'd even be comfortable guessing that more than a few of you don't consider yourselves 'anime people.' As you might have gathered from the title of this feature, neither do I! But for many of us non-Japanophiles, Persona 4 is sort of the exception that proves the rule; it's a distinctly anime-ass thing, but, for some reason, it captured the imaginations of many of us who otherwise wouldn't give most JRPGs the time of day. There's something truly special about Persona 4, and even if our fascination with it is just repeat exposure effect, it seems like this is an affliction many of us are stuck with.
Which helps explain the overwhelmingly positive reaction from the Whiskey Media community when the Persona 4: The Animation was announced. An animated take on one of our most treasured story-driven games, with all the dungeon-grinding bits replaced by action scenes? Who wouldn't be excited?
Well, it's here, and thanks to The Anime Network, it's being simulcast both in Japan and here (with subtitles). Convenience! Here's episode 1, for your viewing pleasure:
So, how is it? It's...all right! I think!
Here's the thing: This show is a lot like Persona 4. Like, a lot. If this first episode is any indication, they've used the PS2 game as a show bible, and the anime is alarmingly faithful to the source material as a result. The shelves in protagonist's bedroom, the buttons on Chie's jacket, even the homeroom seating chart (Sleeping Student is still conked out right behind the empty desk): virtually every detail of Inaba is reflected perfectly here.
And the P4 fanboy in me is beside himself. This first episode gave me a taste of the feeling I imagine Star Wars diehards had when they first saw the Episode I trailer; every time I recognized a person, place or thing from the game, I was elated. Which was something that happened a lot, because holy shit does this show ever cram plot points in!
If the Endurance Run is any indication, this first episode of P4A condenses over 90 minutes of pure story into a 25-minute episode. In one episode, we're introduced to the Velvet Room, the Dojima family, the adultery scandal, the concept of the Midnight Channel, shadows, Personas, Chie, Yukiko, Yosuke, Morooka, Teddy, Young Detective and at least a dozen other characters and locations. The resulting show is packed to overflowing with details, eager to fit every reference in, but ends up feeling a bit shallow as a result. What we have on our hands here is, so far, the Watchmen movie of anime: something so perfectly, unflinchingly loyal to the source material that it might actually be worse for it.
For me, the strongest part of Persona 4 was always the characters. In its 100+ hours, the game made ample time for its cast to just hang out between investigations. My worry is that if P4A continues to be a frantic Cliff's Notes of the game's main story beats, it'll miss what made the original stand out for me.
Also, can we talk for a second about what an awful anime protagonist Charlie Tunoku Yu Narukami makes? Like, he has literally zero personality traits. In the game, he works great a proxy for the player, but as a main character of a television show, he's about as charismatic as the paddle from Breakout.
I mean, let's try for a second to understand what this show would be like to someone who has no idea what Persona 4 is. Seriously, imagine it. Did you see how confused the person you just imagined was?
Look, there's a part of me that'll be satisfied if this show continues to be nothing more than a shot-for-shot anime version of the game. I've even seen some folks complain that the way Yu summons his first Persona is different from how it went down originally. And I'm not gonna lie: when I yelled at the screen after seeing that Yosuke was in the trash can but not rolling around in the trash can, I was only half-kidding. There's a reason Persona 3 fans reacted as cooly they did to 2008 series Persona: Trinity Soul: it had nearly nothing to do with the game, and it seems like Atlus got the message.
But what we've got here isn't even a retelling - it's just a telling! I definitely plan to keep watching, but right now, I'm not certain that this show has a ton of value outside "Hey, it's Persona 4! Again!"
So what do you guys think? Is this what you wanted out of a Persona 4 anime? If any of you are completely new to Persona 4, what was your reaction to this first episode? Let us know what you thought in the comments!
Nick Robinson is a Whiskey Media intern and a journalism student. Won't you follow him on Twitter at @Babylonian? He'd be ever so appreciative!


text:
Restaurants are where we celebrate special occasions, from graduating law school to quitting a corrupt law firm to take justice into our own hands. Make every occasion special with this Groupon.
Choose from Four Options
- $39 for an adult admission (a $63.95 value)
- $53 for an adult VIP admission (an $88.95 value)
- $24 for a child admission (a $39.45 value)
- $39 for a child VIP admission (a $64.45 value)

Guests feast on chicken and beef and cheer for their section's mascot while a pirate show unfolds on the indoor lagoon's 18th-century Spanish galleon.

The VIP upgrade includes:
- Front-row seating
- Admission to Governor's VIP lounge
- Special, VIP-only appetizer buffet
- Private cash bar
- Guaranteed audience participation, if desired
- One glass of champagne
- Two rounds of beer or house wine
- An opportunity to order filet mignon, or a platter of lobster, salmon, and shrimp as the dinner entree (an extra fee will apply)

Though this merchant sometimes offers a discounted price online, this Groupon is still the best deal available.
Pirate's Town
Pirate's Town unfurls a rotating line-up of action-packed, high-seas-themed shows. A Broadway-style production set aboard a replicated 18th-century Spanish galleon, the original main-stage show is one of the only theater performances to require a 300,000-gallon tank outside of Andrew Lloyd Webber's Manatees. Menus of such delicacies as premium beef skewers or roast chicken half keep up audiences' strength as they languish in the captivity of the main-stage show's dastardly star, Captain Sebastian the Black.
"Fine entertainment , good food, and nice service."
"Had a great time, you will enjoy. "
"GREAT EXPERIENCE !! VIP upgrade is a must if you love to participate and be in the front row "


text:
Caring for Aging Parent(s)
I'm guessing quite a few of us are dealing with this now. My sister said they had a sit down with her mother-in-law who still lives in an old house but wasn't taking care of herself. She was in the hospital again due to dehydration. They told her the house was too much for her (she was trying to avoid taking the stairs to get to the bathroom) so she wasn't drinking enough! They are trying to convince her to take an apartment on the same block where one of her daughters lives. Her adult kids due check on her and help her as much as possible.
My dad is also living in an old house and doesn't want to change/repair anything. We've offered. He's slowing down also but is very stubborn.
Also, we are noticing how some siblings are quick to help while others aren't so eager... (In my own family, the daughers are stepping up while the brothers need to be pushed or told to step in)....
Any thoughts?


text:
Posh primed for play-offs
Peterborough manager Darren Ferguson is confident his side will regain their best form in the npower League One play-offs.United, who are assured of a top-five finish going into the final match of the regular campaign at home to Dagenham on Saturday, are currently on their worst run of results of the season having won only two of their last nine games.Ferguson, whose team face either MK Dons or Bournemouth in a two-legged play-off semi-final, admits the performances in recent weeks have been below par but believes his players can raise their game for the big occasion.He told the Peterborough Evening Telegraph: "We have slipped below the level of performance I expect in recent weeks, but it's been an awkward time for the players because we've known we are going to be in the play-offs for some time. I wouldn't say we have had nothing to play for, but the edge has been taken off some of the games."What I do know, though, is that I have a set of players who can't wait for the play-offs to start and I have every confidence that they will show their best form in those games. I have players who will revel on the big stage."I expect a good performance against Dagenham on Saturday to get us a little bit of momentum going into the play-offs. I have no preference about who we play because we have performed well this season against the other teams involved."
Sponsored links
Related Peterborough United News


text:
Chrusciki with Mrs. Kostyra
Serve a stack of these bowtie-shaped Polish sweets at festive occasions.
- Yield: Makes about 7 dozen cookies
Source: Martha Stewart Living, February 2004
- 1 tablespoon unsalted butter
- 2 large eggs
- 5 large egg yolks
- 3 tablespoons granulated sugar
- 1 1/2 teaspoons salt
- 1 teaspoon orange extract
- 1 teaspoon lemon extract
- 1 teaspoon vanilla extract
- 1 teaspoon white distilled vinegar
- 1 tablespoon rum
- 3 tablespoons sour cream
- 1 teaspoon grated lemon zest
- 1 teaspoon grated orange zest
- 2 to 3 cups all-purpose flour
- Vegetable shortening, for deep-frying
- Sifted confectioners' sugar, for sprinkling
Melt the butter, and combine with eggs, egg yolks, granulated sugar, salt, extracts, vinegar, rum, and sour cream in a large, heavy mixer. Using the paddle attachment, beat on medium-high until lemon-colored. Add citrus rinds. Gradually add enough flour to produce a fairly stiff dough. Turn out onto a floured board, and knead for 8 to 10 minutes, adding flour if necessary, until the dough blisters, becomes elastic, and can be handled easily. Cut the dough in half, and wrap one half with plastic wrap; reserve at room temperature.
Roll 1/2 of dough very, very thin and cut into strips about 4 inches long and 1 1/4 inches wide. Cut the ends on a diagonal. Slit each piece in the center, and pull one end through the slit. Place on a parchment-lined baking sheet, and cover with a towel to keep moist. Repeat with other half of dough.
Heat the shortening in a cast-iron frying pan to 375 degrees, and fry the dough strips, a few at a time, for about 1 minute, until lightly browned, turning once with a long fork or tongs.
Drain chrusciki on brown paper bags; transfer to a cooling rack and sprinkle with confectioners' sugar. Store, tightly covered, in wax-paper-lined tins.
Cook's Note
Reviews (10)
BananaMan 20 Dec, 2014
Warning! 375 is too hot and cooking for a minute is way too long - 350 at the most, cook 3 at a time and turn them over almost immediately.
Auroraborealis16 23 Dec, 2010
This is my first time eating Chrusciki so maybe it's supposed to taste like this, butI found it so bland! I halved the recipe yet used the same amount of extracts and rinds, expecting the cookie to be an explosion of flavor, and to my surprise it tasted like a less flavorful funnel cake. The powder sugar may have redeemed it but I was disappointed :[
lovelivesinthekitchen 11 Dec, 2009
i know chrusciki very well, we also call the faworki and they are typical in the Carnival period in Poland. I'm Polish but living in Italy and every time I'm back home my granda makes them for me. I love them and they always make me dream about my childhood! Thank you for sharing this lovely recipe!
justyna -
ManicCat 21 Dec, 2008
I'm making these with my grandmother (Babcia) right bow for Christmas! It's always been her special treat. At the end, she sprinkles the Chrusciki with powdered sugar.
ManicCat 21 Dec, 2008
I'm making these with my grandmother (Babcia) right bow for Christmas! It's always been her special treat. At the end, she sprinkles the Chrusciki with powdered sugar.
reveillon 10 Feb, 2008
*** I wish I had a grandma like her !! Miss her !!
*** Figured out why not to decrease the extracts if you do only half the recipe: Mrs. Kostyra said it herself, when she explained her generous hand with the rum: the heat weakens them, so no matter how small the recipe you make, you still need the strength
*** what a kneading technique!!
*** I guess my pate gets sour cream from now on
*** the tsp vinegar is to sour the cream if you have only plain creamx Reveillon
kougarkar 17 Dec, 2007
This is the best recipe I have found for Chrusciki's. I made them tonight. My father's side of the family is Polish and most of my cooking
Ladydriver 17 Dec, 2007
Condolances to Martha on the passing of her mother. I also want to thank you for the chrusciki recipe that my grandmother, who was from Poland, made for many years. The only bad thing was she never had a written recipe for it. I have made them from other recipes that were similar for my children and grandchildren. I can now teach my granddaughter the original recipe so thank you very much for sharing this with us.
deelightful 13 Dec, 2007
These look like the Italian cookies served at Italian weddings in Rhode Island.They are called Wandi's here. I was so sorry to read that Martha's mother has passed away this year.My deepest condolances to Martha. Her Mother was always such a great lady when she appeared on her show.Thank you for sharing all of her wonderful recipies.
macguffin 21 Nov, 2007
my aunt mary who is 98 years old today used to make these delightful cookies. her recipe is not as elaborate as this one but those cookies were fantastic. i still remember how delicious they were. i've been thinking about them lately and i will make sure i try these soon. thank you for sharing the recipe.


text:
Comfort Inn & Suites At Tropicana Field
Description provided by Comfort Inn & Suites At Tropicana Field
Excellent location. Convenient to Tropicana Field, Museums, Downtown, Restaurants, and short drive to Gulf Beach. Guest Must be at least 21 years of age or older in each room. Contact the hotel directly for hotel policy.
List of Amenities for Comfort Inn & Suites At Tropicana Field
· AM/FM radio · Business center · Cable television · Coffee/Tea maker · Complimentary full american breakfast · Elevators · Exercise gym · Hairdryer · Ice machine · Iron · Iron · Meeting rooms · Microwave · Multilingual staff · Onsite laundry · Outdoor parking · Outdoor pool · Refrigerator · Safe deposit box |
Restaurant Information
Columbia at the Pier McDonalds Olive Garden Texas Cattle Co. Cha-Cha Coconut Fergs Sport Bar and Grill Ring-Side Cafe The Pub - Janus LandingMeeting Facility
Meeting RoomRecreation Information
Outdoor pool
Area Attractions
Al Lang Field
Bayfront Mahaffey Theatre
Baywalk Downtown Shop
BeachNear - Madeira Beach
BeachNear - Pass-a-Grille
BeachNear - Redington Beach
BeachNear - St. Peterburg
BeachNear - Treasure Island
Busch Gardens
Dali Museum
Derby Lane
FL State Fairgrounds
Florida Aquarium
Florida Internation Museum
Ft. DeSoto Park
Great Explorations
Holocaust Museum
Ice Palace
Raymond James Stadium
Ringling Museum
St. Petersburg Historical
St. Petersburg Museum of Art
St. Petersburg Pier
The St.Petersburg Pier
Tropicana Field
Tyrone Square
I-275 Tampa
Amtrak - St. Petersburg
Florida State Fair
Jazz Festival (Clearwater)
Greyhound - St. Petersburg
Sunshine Speedway
Room Information for this hotel
Handicap room, Alarm clock, Connecting rooms, Desk, Wireless internet connection, Non-smoking, Telephone, Sofa bedMiscellaneous Information provided by Comfort Inn & Suites At Tropicana Field
· American Dollars is the native currency.
· Check in time is 3:00 PM
· Check out time is 11:00 AM
· Renovated in 01/01/1997
· 75 rooms.
· 0 suites.
· 3 floors.
This Hotel's Cancellation Policy
Reservations not cancelled by deadline will be charged 1 night's stay, or full amount of stay for reservations requiring prepayment.


text:
The Turf Butler is a lawn landscape maintenance and installation company operating in Broken Arrow and the surrounding areas.
Each property receives my personal attention each and every time. This enables me to interact with my clients so that their wants and needs are met in a professional and timely manner. Your property will not be one of hundreds that are maintained by my company and it will never be left looking less than excellent.
Now is the time to book The Turf Butler for year round, all inclusive property maintenance. We also offer budget friendly seasonal service packages with payment options to suit your needs.
We're eager to discuss your lawn care needs...
918-851-1170 Clyde