Because, you know, my fixation on online quizzes:
Hello Irony!
A firm hired to build the fence between the U.S. and Mexico has been fined for – – – wait for it – – – employing illegal immigrants. Story here.
More debt collection!
My regular readers will now be falling asleep, but John Waller has put together a pretty good blog entry over at his commercial foreclosure blog entitled “Attachment: The 8 badges of fraud.” He focuses on a recent Northern District decision by United States Magistrate Judge, Christopher Nuechterlein where a creditor managed to freeze and attach proceeds from a $3 million sale from the debtor to another entity where the sale showed “badges of fraud” making the transfer impermissible under IC 34-25-2-1(b)(5).
States I’ve visited
(H/t Torpor Indy) States I’ve visited:
7th Circuit FDCPA decision
The 7th Circuit Court of appeals posted a decision on a topic near and dear to my heart, the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA). In the case of Catencamp v. Cendant Timeshare Resort, Judge Easterbrook writes an opinion holding that a creditor is a “debt collector” under the FDCPA if, in the course of collection, it holds itself out as a 3rd person.
Typically, the FDCPA does not apply to entities trying to collect on their own debts. But, if you refer it out to a third person, the third person is typically bound by the requirements of the FDCPA. In this case, Cendant Timeshare Resort was trying to collect on its own debt, but for whatever reason, it wrote the demand letter under a trade name, “Resort Financial Services.” The demand letter itself suggested that Resort Financial Services was a different entity than Cendant. So, the FDCPA applies and Cendant is probably on the hook if its alter ego Resort Financial Services did anything that violated the technical requirements of the FDCPA.
Google reader
So, Google continues its march toward world domination simply by providing products I think are really cool. Today’s installment is the Google Reader. It is a news reader with some nifty features. I really enjoy my current news reader that plugs into Firefox, but the Google Reader has a feature that will probably have me using it more. It allows me to mark stories as “shared” and then gives me a piece of code I was able to plug into my side bar that provides links to the stories I shared. So, lots of times, I think a story is interesting but don’t have the time or inclination offer much in the way of commentary. Sometimes I create a “go look here” post, and sometimes I just keep it to myself. Using the Google reader, I can just click share and it’ll show up in my “news of interest” widget on the sidebar. I’ll try it out for a while and see how it works.
Chris Rahe: Single payer health care
Chris Rahe, writing a column in the South Bend Tribune, opines that Gov. Daniels health care proposal doesn’t go far enough. Daniels has suggested increasing taxes on cigarettes to pay for insuring those who can’t afford it but who do not qualify for Medicaid. Rahe says band-aids and babysteps are simply too little, too late for the health care disaster we face today. We need to admit the system we have now is just flat broken.
Rahe suggests a single-payer system where the government essentially acts as an insurer, but the health care providers remain private actors, not government employees. While single-payer might be the answer, I don’t really buy the spin that this is essentially still the free-market. If you have only one source of money, that source wields a tremendous amount of power. Of course, our current health care system bears little resemblance to the free market.
Let’s say you have a cough, a fever, debilitating headaches, and a little numbness in your left hand. How much is it going to cost you to get that fixed? Go ahead, try calling around and trying to get a price. Not going to happen. First of all, they don’t know what’s actually wrong with you until you’re in the shop. By then, you have sunk costs and an incentive not to go shopping elsewhere. And that completely skips the fact that prices are all over the board depending on who the customer is. Medicaid gets one price, Medicare gets a second price, Insurance Company “A” gets yet another price, and the uninsured get the full sticker price.
So, anyway, the single-payer solution, may not exactly be market capitalism; but what we have now isn’t either. Rahe suggests that we pay for universal healthcare already, we just aren’t getting it. As Mike Sylvester pointed out last month, the United States pays the highest percentage of GDP on healthcare. The free market aside, Joe Flower pointed out 8 conservative, good-for-business reasons for a single payer healthcare system. (Short version: 1. Transaction costs; 2. Employer funding; 3. The basic idea of insurance; 4. Value; 5. Risk cost of receivables; 6. Service quality; 7. Efficiency; 8. Patriotism.)
And, anectdotally, I have learned that our current system has an adverse effect on the free market in non-healthcare areas. I was speaking with a woman this morning who recently left her former employer, in large part, because the new employer could offer her health insurance. Once she was able to secure insurance, her husband was finally free to start his own business for which he had long been qualified and long had a potential client base. He had just been unwilling to risk becoming an entrepreneur solely because of fear about obtaining adequate health insurance. I don’t imagine this sort of thing is uncommon.
Public money to be spent to study private toll road
Rebecca Green, writing for the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, reports a study underway to construct a privately owned, interstate quality toll road that would link I-94 in northwestern Indiana to I-57 in eastern Illinois to avoid congestion in the Chicago area. The Indiana Department of Transportation, and presumably its counterpart in Illinois, are going to spend $5 to $10 million dollars on the study over the next 3 years.
Everything that’s not nailed down: The lottery
(H/t Taking Down Words) The privatization fetish continues, apparently. The Daniels administration seems to be floating an idea to privatize the operations of the Indiana lottery to fund higher education.
Senate Tax and Fiscal Policy Committee Chairman Luke Kenley said Tuesday that he was not aware of the nature of the governor’s announcement.
However, he said the Daniels administration had approached some legislative fiscal leaders a month ago about leasing the operations of the Hoosier Lottery to a private company to raise cash for the state’s universities.
Kenley said the administration’s proposal would have earmarked money for student financial aid and for professors’ salaries to keep the state’s universities competitive with their peers.
“We weren’t particularly encouraging about it,†Kenley said. “We questioned the long-term relinquishment of an asset in exchange for money that might be used upfront in a non-capital way. We didn’t encourage the administration to pursue that.â€
With gambling, I’d go the other way. I’d just go ahead and make the state the only gambling operation in town. Back in June, I put it this way:
I think if the State is in for a penny, it should go in for a pound. Why be content to merely take a rake off the casino profits — why not have the State run the casinos directly and take the whole pie, reducing taxes accordingly? Normally you don’t want state run businesses — you want the private sector to be as innovative and efficient as possible. But I don’t think those policy goals really apply to gambling. I don’t think, as a State, we ought to be particularly enthusiastic about a booming gambling business that draws in more and more customers and convinces them to spend more and more of their money. So, I don’t think the normal free-market concerns about state-run businessess apply to gambling even though I’ll concede that private businesses would almost certainly deliver a better product more efficiently.
As for the moral concern, I’m reminded of the joke that ends with the punchline, “We’ve established what you are, ma’am; now we’re just haggling over the price.†We’re not somehow morally superior because the State doesn’t run the casinos and other gambling concerns directly. We’re just suckers for letting private business keep the lion’s share of the profit on this particular enterprise.
Privatizing not always more cost effective
I was glad to see a small entry in the Indy Star that shows a recognition that private entities do not always perform a function more cost effectively than the government. The example cited is the General Assembly’s decision to perform printing functions in-house rather than continuing to outsource the function. I’ve been citing that one for quite some time now. That cite has a run down of what I was able to find in the minutes of the Legislative Council. From those minutes, it looked like the move in-house was saving about $300,000 per year. The Star report indicates a savings of about $1.1 to $1.5 million for a three year period.
If you look through those legislative council minutes, you can see that Senator Harrison was not a fan of “in-house printing.” My speculation – for which I have no immediate proof – was that Sen. Harrison was friendly with the printer who had the contract and did not want to see the vendor lose the contract. That contract which included composition duties, along with duplication duties, called for a rate of $0.095 per page. By contrast, during the same time period a duplication only contract was going for about $0.02 per page. The big question, therefore, was whether the composition duties could be performed for less than $0.075 per page by government employees. And the answer to that was a resounding, “Yes.”
Now, some privatization advocates might argue that this private vendor just had a sweet heart deal; it was cronyism that made the outsourcing expensive. And there is a point to that. But, I have to ask, if you don’t think government employees can perform even core government functions properly by itself, what makes you think it can competently assign and oversee gazillion dollar contracts. And what makes you think that this current round of privatization will be free of cronyism? Exhibit #1: Gov. Daniels apparently wants to give Mitch Roob’s last employer, ACS, a billion dollars to screen Medicaid eligibility — despite the recent resignation of its CEO and CFO due to being investigated for falsifying the dates on options, a financial shenanigan designed to boost the value of those options.
As Dan Carpenter said, it comes down to faith. And I don’t see that we’ve been given much reason to have it.
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 507
- 508
- 509
- 510
- 511
- …
- 688
- Next Page »