This is real important people..........
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
Non-voting immigrants weigh in on city elections
The following story really pisses me off. I am a native Austinite, but I have lived just outside the city for the past 31 years. I still live in Travis County. I cannot vote in city elections. Now the Austin City Council is saying that they should listen to Non-Voting immigrants (many which are probably illegal) and they have never listened to the residents just outside the city. And most of us are in the 5 mile extraterritorial jurisdiction of Austin. They tell us what to do anyway. It just isn't right.
Non-voting immigrants weigh in on city elections
4/19/2009 10:29 PM
By: Heidi Zhou
Many immigrants say, even if they cannot vote, their opinions of the city and expectations of council members should matter.
Normally, they hide from politicians and TV cameras. But, on this day, they're making their voices heard.
Antonio Melo admits he can't vote. But, he's lived in Austin for 16 years and said that makes the city as much his as anyone else's.
"I believe the mayor should take us into account because we're living here," Melo said. "We're part of the city of Austin."
According to the 2006-2007 Travis County Immigrant Assessment, only 26 percent of the county's foreign-born population is naturalized citizens.
Marcelo Tafoya of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) said the remaining non-voting immigrant community still cares about local politics.
"A lot of the things that occur in the city and even the county directly affects them -- wages, opportunities to work, the fear of INS, although it's supposed to be a protected city, how we deal with the police," Tafoya said. "Although they may have no input on the decisions being made, but they do have input on asking why, and that opens the doors for others to come back and say, 'Wait a minute, they're right.'"
Howard Hawhee is one voter who said he does care about documented and undocumented immigrants.
"They are part of the community, whether or not they can vote, and some day they will vote or their children will be voting," he said.
The candidates at Sunday's forum seemed to realize that, too.
"We need a strong, steady hand in the mayor's office to make sure we stay focused on the fundamentals which include creating and saving good jobs with benefits for everyone in Austin," mayoral candidate Lee Leffingwell said.
Mayoral candidate Brewster McCracken spoke about inclusion.
"I believe it is the City of Austin's job to provide protection and opportunity and inclusion for everybody in Austin," he said.
Mayoral candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn was not in attendance.
Non-voting immigrants weigh in on city elections
4/19/2009 10:29 PM
By: Heidi Zhou
Many immigrants say, even if they cannot vote, their opinions of the city and expectations of council members should matter.
Normally, they hide from politicians and TV cameras. But, on this day, they're making their voices heard.
Antonio Melo admits he can't vote. But, he's lived in Austin for 16 years and said that makes the city as much his as anyone else's.
"I believe the mayor should take us into account because we're living here," Melo said. "We're part of the city of Austin."
According to the 2006-2007 Travis County Immigrant Assessment, only 26 percent of the county's foreign-born population is naturalized citizens.
Marcelo Tafoya of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) said the remaining non-voting immigrant community still cares about local politics.
"A lot of the things that occur in the city and even the county directly affects them -- wages, opportunities to work, the fear of INS, although it's supposed to be a protected city, how we deal with the police," Tafoya said. "Although they may have no input on the decisions being made, but they do have input on asking why, and that opens the doors for others to come back and say, 'Wait a minute, they're right.'"
Howard Hawhee is one voter who said he does care about documented and undocumented immigrants.
"They are part of the community, whether or not they can vote, and some day they will vote or their children will be voting," he said.
The candidates at Sunday's forum seemed to realize that, too.
"We need a strong, steady hand in the mayor's office to make sure we stay focused on the fundamentals which include creating and saving good jobs with benefits for everyone in Austin," mayoral candidate Lee Leffingwell said.
Mayoral candidate Brewster McCracken spoke about inclusion.
"I believe it is the City of Austin's job to provide protection and opportunity and inclusion for everybody in Austin," he said.
Mayoral candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn was not in attendance.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
Governer Rick Perry and Texas Secession
The following is a news article from yesterday. I just don't know how our lawmakers can keep getting it so wrong. Governor Perry is right. Citizens are mad abut how these jokers are running the country. The gov is not politically correct all the time, but he tells the truth. Texans really have a strong sense of identity. That does not make us a fringe group. Wake up all you politicians. The Governor is just saying what is going around the state right now. Hell, we had a tea party yesterday. Why not have a; "Remember the Alamo Party".
AP – Texas Gov. Rick Perry responds to a question, saying, 'read my comments,' after he signed the first bill …
By KELLEY SHANNON, Associated Press Writer Kelley Shannon, Associated Press Writer – Thu Apr 16, 7:10 pm ET
AUSTIN, Texas – In a state that once was its own nation, a Republican governor who talked about secession without completely dismissing the idea has Democratic lawmakers in an uproar.
Gov. Rick Perry, in comments following an anti-tax "tea party" Wednesday, never did advocate Texas breaking away from the United States but suggested that Texans might at some point get so fed up they would want to leave the union. That was enough to feed opinions for and against secession on Web sites, cable TV and talk radio across the nation.
At the Texas Capitol on Thursday, Rep. Jim Dunnam of Waco, joined by several fellow Texas House Democrats, said some people associate talk of secession with racial division and the Civil War and that Perry should disavow any notion of seceding.
"Talk of secession is an attack on our country. It can be nothing else. It is the ultimate anti-American statement," Dunnam said at a news conference.
State Sen. Rodney Ellis, a Houston Democrat, said that by not rejecting the possibility of secession out of hand, Perry "is taking a step down a very dangerous and divisive path encouraged by the fringe of Texas politics."
The Democrats are proposing a House resolution expressing "complete and total disagreement with any fringe element advocating the 'secession' of Texas or any other state from our one and indivisible Union."
Perry emphasized Thursday that he is not advocating secession but understands why Americans may have those feelings because of frustration with Washington, D.C. He said it's fine to express the thought. He offered no apology and did not back away from his earlier comments.
Perry's remarks Wednesday were in response to a question from The Associated Press as he walked away from the Austin rally, where some in the audience had shouted "Secede!" during his speech. The governor said he didn't think Texas should secede despite some chatter about it on the Internet and his name being associated with the idea.
"We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot," Perry said Wednesday.
A day later, Perry said he found the fascination with the remark interesting.
"I refer people back to my statement and I got a charge out of it," he said. "I was kind of thinking that maybe the same people that hadn't been reading the Constitution right were reading that article and they got the wrong impression about what I said. Clearly I stated that we have a great union. Texas is part of a great union. And I see no reason for that to change."
Texas was a republic from 1836, when it declared independence from Mexico, to 1845, when it became a U.S. state.
Perry has been speaking out against the federal government lately over federal economic stimulus spending. He's also in a tough race for re-election against a fellow Republican, U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, whom he is trying to portray as a Washington insider.
Perry spokeswoman Allison Castle criticized Dunnam, saying he was "trying to distract from the fact that yesterday thousands of Texans, including many in his own district, expressed their extreme displeasure at Washington's rampant taxation, big spending and bloated government."
Dunnam suggested Perry is positioning himself for his political future.
"We all knew he wanted to be president. I just didn't know it was president of the Republic of Texas," he said to chuckles from onlookers.
AP – Texas Gov. Rick Perry responds to a question, saying, 'read my comments,' after he signed the first bill …
By KELLEY SHANNON, Associated Press Writer Kelley Shannon, Associated Press Writer – Thu Apr 16, 7:10 pm ET
AUSTIN, Texas – In a state that once was its own nation, a Republican governor who talked about secession without completely dismissing the idea has Democratic lawmakers in an uproar.
Gov. Rick Perry, in comments following an anti-tax "tea party" Wednesday, never did advocate Texas breaking away from the United States but suggested that Texans might at some point get so fed up they would want to leave the union. That was enough to feed opinions for and against secession on Web sites, cable TV and talk radio across the nation.
At the Texas Capitol on Thursday, Rep. Jim Dunnam of Waco, joined by several fellow Texas House Democrats, said some people associate talk of secession with racial division and the Civil War and that Perry should disavow any notion of seceding.
"Talk of secession is an attack on our country. It can be nothing else. It is the ultimate anti-American statement," Dunnam said at a news conference.
State Sen. Rodney Ellis, a Houston Democrat, said that by not rejecting the possibility of secession out of hand, Perry "is taking a step down a very dangerous and divisive path encouraged by the fringe of Texas politics."
The Democrats are proposing a House resolution expressing "complete and total disagreement with any fringe element advocating the 'secession' of Texas or any other state from our one and indivisible Union."
Perry emphasized Thursday that he is not advocating secession but understands why Americans may have those feelings because of frustration with Washington, D.C. He said it's fine to express the thought. He offered no apology and did not back away from his earlier comments.
Perry's remarks Wednesday were in response to a question from The Associated Press as he walked away from the Austin rally, where some in the audience had shouted "Secede!" during his speech. The governor said he didn't think Texas should secede despite some chatter about it on the Internet and his name being associated with the idea.
"We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot," Perry said Wednesday.
A day later, Perry said he found the fascination with the remark interesting.
"I refer people back to my statement and I got a charge out of it," he said. "I was kind of thinking that maybe the same people that hadn't been reading the Constitution right were reading that article and they got the wrong impression about what I said. Clearly I stated that we have a great union. Texas is part of a great union. And I see no reason for that to change."
Texas was a republic from 1836, when it declared independence from Mexico, to 1845, when it became a U.S. state.
Perry has been speaking out against the federal government lately over federal economic stimulus spending. He's also in a tough race for re-election against a fellow Republican, U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, whom he is trying to portray as a Washington insider.
Perry spokeswoman Allison Castle criticized Dunnam, saying he was "trying to distract from the fact that yesterday thousands of Texans, including many in his own district, expressed their extreme displeasure at Washington's rampant taxation, big spending and bloated government."
Dunnam suggested Perry is positioning himself for his political future.
"We all knew he wanted to be president. I just didn't know it was president of the Republic of Texas," he said to chuckles from onlookers.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
5 Bailout Absurdities
U.S.News & World Report
5 Bailout Absurdities
Wednesday April 15, 8:05 am ET
By Rick Newman
Last fall, it probably made sense to flood the financial system with money, to prevent a panic that could easily have compounded a nasty recession. But that was then. As the bailouts have proliferated, so have the unintended consequences, and the financial system is starting to look like a fun-house version of American capitalism.
As the Obama administration enters a new phase in the financial bailout, here are some of the perverse developments that ought to be reexamined:
Bailing out profitable firms. In normal times, nobody would think of giving taxpayer funds to companies able to survive on their own. Yet that's exactly what we're doing. Goldman Sachs, Exhibit A, is sitting on $10 billion in government loans even though it earned $1.8 billion in the first quarter. Wells Fargo, which has gotten $25 billion, expects its first-quarter profits to come in at about $3 billion. Several other major bailout recipients, including JP Morgan Chase, will probably be profitable for much or all of 2009.
[See how bailouts can butcher capitalism.]
What gives? The original idea was to boost capital throughout the banking system, to make more money available for loans. The feds also hoped that funding all the banks would eliminate any stigma associated with a bank accepting federal money, forestalling the risk of a run on banks deemed sick. It was also quite possible last fall that all the bailout recipients would actually need the money - especially if the economy completely seized up, as some economists feared.
We seem to have dodged that bullet. Credit has slowly started to flow again, and it's starting to look like lending is down not because the money's scarce, but because consumers and businesess don't want to spend money or ask for loans. Meanwhile, banks that have received federal money are chafing under government scrutiny of pay, perks, and business practices. And taxpayers are simply sick of bailouts. Federal funding for companies that can fund themselves is an idea whose time has come, and gone.
[See why more companies are likely to fail this year.]
Loans that the borrowers aren't allowed to repay. The government wants all of its bailout money back - just not yet. The feds are worried that banks seeking a PR boost will pay back their bailout funds before they're ready - then suffer more losses down the road and end up back at the government teat. The plan now is to first complete the bank "stress tests" to determine how healthy the biggest bailout recipients are, and only then consider payback plans. Even then, the government may refuse to allow early paybacks, because the banks that don't step forward will look weak by dissociation.
Goldman Sachs is challenging this federal paternalism and pushing hard to end its arrangement with the federal government. Wells Fargo has complained about the whole bailout regime and may even be burnishing its first-quarter numbers as a pretext to pay back its loan and get the government out of its business. Let them. It's time to recoup taxpayer money from those able to pay it back, and if that exposes competitors as weak - well, that's how capitalism works.
[See why Goldman Sachs should repay its TARP money.]
Everybody wins. So far, the financial bailout has played out like a soccer game for six-year-olds: Everybody wins and nobody's feelings get hurt. Enough of that. It's time for leaders to emerge, and if weaker competitors falter or fail as a result, the good news is that the nation's financial safety net is a lot stronger than it was last fall. Besides, at some point, the risks of propping up weak companies exceed the risks of letting them fail.
The Obama administration seemed to acknowledge that in its recent response to GM and Chrysler, giving the foundering auto companies a tough set of conditions to meet in order to get any more federal money. If they come up short, they're welcome to try their luck with a bankruptcy judge. Banks are a bit different, since they supply the capital that the rest of the economy needs in order to grow. But still, they deserve tougher love than they've been getting.
[See why the auto bailout is a good model for other bailout-seekers.]
Congress, Inc. Those Merrill Lynch and AIG bonuses may have been disconcerting, but Congress's reaction was even more alarming. Provisions to enact tax laws aimed at a single corporation - AIG - reveal the dangers of angry legislating. Others proposals to limit pay, select managers, and set interest rates at banks receiving bailout money threaten to establish a two-tier banking system in which privately run banks respond to market forces, while government-controlled banks respond to political forces. That's hopeless. The market produces excesses, but so does Congress. And the market has better self-correcting mechanisms.
[See 5 lessons from the AIG and Merrill bonuses.]
The $1 CEO. Ed Liddy, an outsider who took over as the chief executive of AIG last fall, has one of the hardest jobs in America. He has to dismantle a dying giant of a company, preserving the vital organs while excising an entanglement of financial malignancies that could still threaten the global economy. For this, he's getting paid $1, while also being treated to perks like a Congressional whipping every now and then. The CEOs of Fannie Mae and Citigroup agreed to similar salaries, as if sacrificing a paycheck atones for the sins of their predecessors.
[See 7 surprises buried beneath the AIG bonuses.]
Are Americans suddenly averse to fair pay for hard work? Let's hope not. Obviously there's a lot of justified sensitivity about overpaid bankers who earn millions with no accountability for disastrous decisions. But paying a pittance to people who are actually solving big problems and restoring value is no solution, even if they're willing to do it. We need to outgrow phony symbolism and pay people what they're worth. Otherwise, we devalue the whole notion of honest work, and risk making bailouts a way of life.
Taken from Yahoo News: http://biz.yahoo.com/usnews/090415/14_5_bailout_absurdities.html?.&.pf=banking-budgeting
5 Bailout Absurdities
Wednesday April 15, 8:05 am ET
By Rick Newman
Last fall, it probably made sense to flood the financial system with money, to prevent a panic that could easily have compounded a nasty recession. But that was then. As the bailouts have proliferated, so have the unintended consequences, and the financial system is starting to look like a fun-house version of American capitalism.
As the Obama administration enters a new phase in the financial bailout, here are some of the perverse developments that ought to be reexamined:
Bailing out profitable firms. In normal times, nobody would think of giving taxpayer funds to companies able to survive on their own. Yet that's exactly what we're doing. Goldman Sachs, Exhibit A, is sitting on $10 billion in government loans even though it earned $1.8 billion in the first quarter. Wells Fargo, which has gotten $25 billion, expects its first-quarter profits to come in at about $3 billion. Several other major bailout recipients, including JP Morgan Chase, will probably be profitable for much or all of 2009.
[See how bailouts can butcher capitalism.]
What gives? The original idea was to boost capital throughout the banking system, to make more money available for loans. The feds also hoped that funding all the banks would eliminate any stigma associated with a bank accepting federal money, forestalling the risk of a run on banks deemed sick. It was also quite possible last fall that all the bailout recipients would actually need the money - especially if the economy completely seized up, as some economists feared.
We seem to have dodged that bullet. Credit has slowly started to flow again, and it's starting to look like lending is down not because the money's scarce, but because consumers and businesess don't want to spend money or ask for loans. Meanwhile, banks that have received federal money are chafing under government scrutiny of pay, perks, and business practices. And taxpayers are simply sick of bailouts. Federal funding for companies that can fund themselves is an idea whose time has come, and gone.
[See why more companies are likely to fail this year.]
Loans that the borrowers aren't allowed to repay. The government wants all of its bailout money back - just not yet. The feds are worried that banks seeking a PR boost will pay back their bailout funds before they're ready - then suffer more losses down the road and end up back at the government teat. The plan now is to first complete the bank "stress tests" to determine how healthy the biggest bailout recipients are, and only then consider payback plans. Even then, the government may refuse to allow early paybacks, because the banks that don't step forward will look weak by dissociation.
Goldman Sachs is challenging this federal paternalism and pushing hard to end its arrangement with the federal government. Wells Fargo has complained about the whole bailout regime and may even be burnishing its first-quarter numbers as a pretext to pay back its loan and get the government out of its business. Let them. It's time to recoup taxpayer money from those able to pay it back, and if that exposes competitors as weak - well, that's how capitalism works.
[See why Goldman Sachs should repay its TARP money.]
Everybody wins. So far, the financial bailout has played out like a soccer game for six-year-olds: Everybody wins and nobody's feelings get hurt. Enough of that. It's time for leaders to emerge, and if weaker competitors falter or fail as a result, the good news is that the nation's financial safety net is a lot stronger than it was last fall. Besides, at some point, the risks of propping up weak companies exceed the risks of letting them fail.
The Obama administration seemed to acknowledge that in its recent response to GM and Chrysler, giving the foundering auto companies a tough set of conditions to meet in order to get any more federal money. If they come up short, they're welcome to try their luck with a bankruptcy judge. Banks are a bit different, since they supply the capital that the rest of the economy needs in order to grow. But still, they deserve tougher love than they've been getting.
[See why the auto bailout is a good model for other bailout-seekers.]
Congress, Inc. Those Merrill Lynch and AIG bonuses may have been disconcerting, but Congress's reaction was even more alarming. Provisions to enact tax laws aimed at a single corporation - AIG - reveal the dangers of angry legislating. Others proposals to limit pay, select managers, and set interest rates at banks receiving bailout money threaten to establish a two-tier banking system in which privately run banks respond to market forces, while government-controlled banks respond to political forces. That's hopeless. The market produces excesses, but so does Congress. And the market has better self-correcting mechanisms.
[See 5 lessons from the AIG and Merrill bonuses.]
The $1 CEO. Ed Liddy, an outsider who took over as the chief executive of AIG last fall, has one of the hardest jobs in America. He has to dismantle a dying giant of a company, preserving the vital organs while excising an entanglement of financial malignancies that could still threaten the global economy. For this, he's getting paid $1, while also being treated to perks like a Congressional whipping every now and then. The CEOs of Fannie Mae and Citigroup agreed to similar salaries, as if sacrificing a paycheck atones for the sins of their predecessors.
[See 7 surprises buried beneath the AIG bonuses.]
Are Americans suddenly averse to fair pay for hard work? Let's hope not. Obviously there's a lot of justified sensitivity about overpaid bankers who earn millions with no accountability for disastrous decisions. But paying a pittance to people who are actually solving big problems and restoring value is no solution, even if they're willing to do it. We need to outgrow phony symbolism and pay people what they're worth. Otherwise, we devalue the whole notion of honest work, and risk making bailouts a way of life.
Taken from Yahoo News: http://biz.yahoo.com/usnews/090415/14_5_bailout_absurdities.html?.&.pf=banking-budgeting
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
( Bailout Song ) WHERE THE MONEY GOES
Please forward this to all your friends, this song needs to be heard.
Monday, April 13, 2009
"Financial Crisis: The Musical" Lyrics: B. Hopman Vocals: R. Hopman
Well, I guess we have to just laugh about it sometimes.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Easter Video
Well, I am not mad today. Today we celebrate Easter. If you think that is just for the Easter bunny, watch the video below. The video tells the story. God Bless.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Friday, April 10, 2009
Fred Thompson on the Economy
I know most of you have seen this, but I just wanted to put it where you can easily find it. I like Fred.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Nancy Pelosi wants to protect Illegal Aliens Jobs " It's Un-American to Enforce the Law"
This woman scares the hell out of me. I'm mad that she thinks it's Un-American to uphold the law. Please watch.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Burning Down the House
This video is an informative look at the factors that are causing our current financial and economic crisis. It discusses policy changes 13 years ago that unleashed the sub-prime mortgage-backed securities market, which accelerated prices erratically, inviting speculation and loose lending practices which were both condoned and encouraged by existing regulation and carried out by risk-blind executives and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Aside from ripping the corporate goons in the media, please be respectful in your comments. Thanks.
I know it is after the election, but the information is crucial.
Aside from ripping the corporate goons in the media, please be respectful in your comments. Thanks.
I know it is after the election, but the information is crucial.
Hedge Funds and the Global Economic Meltdown (Part 3)
Short selling hedge funds lit the spark that led to the global economic meltdown. Now they want to help craft the laws Congress will pass to fix our broken regulatory system. That's insane. Please forward this to your friends. Get mad with me.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Ballad of Timothy Geithner
This one really makes me mad. My wife nearly got fired for a mistake my accountant made on our taxes. It was a $700 mistake. This guy cheats for 5 years. Treasury employees now have an out. It if good for our boss, we too can make "honest mistakes".
flash2pic
flash2pic
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Friday, April 3, 2009
News Article from Austin, Texas
People,
This is what is wrong with our country in a nutshell. Nobody is watching. This should never happen and was a total waste of taxpayer money. I am not saying that these people didn't need help, but there should be a way to keep them from living in the emergency rooms. And I am not talking about univeral health care, I am just talking common sense. This makes me really mad.
9 patients made nearly 2,700 ER visits in Texas
Wed Apr 1, 9:19 pm ET
AUSTIN, Texas – Just nine people accounted for nearly 2,700 of the emergency room visits in the Austin area during the past six years at a cost of $3 million to taxpayers and others, according to a report. The patients went to hospital emergency rooms 2,678 times from 2003 through 2008, said the report from the nonprofit Integrated Care Collaboration, a group of health care providers who care for low-income and uninsured patients.
"What we're really trying to do is find out who's using our emergency rooms ... and find solutions," said Ann Kitchen, executive director of the group, which presented the report last week to the Travis County Healthcare District board.
The average emergency room visit costs $1,000. Hospitals and taxpayers paid the bill through government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, Kitchen said.
Eight of the nine patients have drug abuse problems, seven were diagnosed with mental health issues and three were homeless. Five are women whose average age is 40, and four are men whose average age is 50, the report said, the Austin American-Statesman reported Wednesday.
"It's a pretty significant issue," said Dr. Christopher Ziebell, chief of the emergency department at University Medical Center at Brackenridge, which has the busiest ERs in the area.
Solutions include referring some frequent users to mental health programs or primary care doctors for future care, Ziebell said.
"They have a variety of complaints," he said. With mental illness, "a lot of anxiety manifests as chest pain."
This is what is wrong with our country in a nutshell. Nobody is watching. This should never happen and was a total waste of taxpayer money. I am not saying that these people didn't need help, but there should be a way to keep them from living in the emergency rooms. And I am not talking about univeral health care, I am just talking common sense. This makes me really mad.
9 patients made nearly 2,700 ER visits in Texas
Wed Apr 1, 9:19 pm ET
AUSTIN, Texas – Just nine people accounted for nearly 2,700 of the emergency room visits in the Austin area during the past six years at a cost of $3 million to taxpayers and others, according to a report. The patients went to hospital emergency rooms 2,678 times from 2003 through 2008, said the report from the nonprofit Integrated Care Collaboration, a group of health care providers who care for low-income and uninsured patients.
"What we're really trying to do is find out who's using our emergency rooms ... and find solutions," said Ann Kitchen, executive director of the group, which presented the report last week to the Travis County Healthcare District board.
The average emergency room visit costs $1,000. Hospitals and taxpayers paid the bill through government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, Kitchen said.
Eight of the nine patients have drug abuse problems, seven were diagnosed with mental health issues and three were homeless. Five are women whose average age is 40, and four are men whose average age is 50, the report said, the Austin American-Statesman reported Wednesday.
"It's a pretty significant issue," said Dr. Christopher Ziebell, chief of the emergency department at University Medical Center at Brackenridge, which has the busiest ERs in the area.
Solutions include referring some frequent users to mental health programs or primary care doctors for future care, Ziebell said.
"They have a variety of complaints," he said. With mental illness, "a lot of anxiety manifests as chest pain."
Thursday, April 2, 2009
1st of a 4 Part Series on the Economic Meltdown
Must Read. If you ain't mad after reading this wait till you finish the series.
Let's take back America.
flash2pic
Let's take back America.
flash2pic
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Obama and Spending
I am not saying that this video is 100% correct, but it scares the hell out of me.
Wake up America.
Wake up America.
A Video about the Stimulus Package
I don't know how you can watch this video and not get mad. Please tell your friends to come to this blog as I am going to put up videos like this every day. I'm still mad.
Hello America
You know I am just tired of all the BS and I hope in a small way to distribute news that most people don't receive. Trying to understand Washington D.C. at this time and just what happened to cause this crisis. I ain't saying that everyone's viewpoint that you see here is right, but it needs to be heard.
I am going to start off with a video that Dick Morris produced. Is he right, maybe, but let's all watch.
flash2pic
I am going to start off with a video that Dick Morris produced. Is he right, maybe, but let's all watch.
flash2pic
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
