New leader wants Silk Road to publish gov't secrets; calls old DPR a "fraud."

- Ars Technica: You've said that, contrary to popular belief, your site "does not represent drugs." What does it represent?

Dread Pirate Roberts: We represent a right for the individual to choose what they would or wouldn't like to put into their own bodies. The state is no longer a protector of the people in many ways. It has chosen to limit the choice of individuals, and it feels almost compelled to "educate" people about what they think is best. Just like many institutions, the state is no better than a private corporation, and indeed there are times when you could mistake some governments for a board of directors who have nothing but power and wealth on their minds.

- Even the use of legal drugs like alcohol has negative social consequences; what do you think about the distribution of more dangerous substances?

The role government plays should not be to infringe upon individual rights but to protect them. If a person was to lose control of themselves and cause harm or issue to others, then they are acting outside of their individual rights and infringing upon the rights of another—in which case there is reasonable ground to detain a person.

Did prohibition at all stop people drinking? No. Did prohibition stop people seeking help? Yes, and many people paid with their lives for it. Does prohibition take otherwise productive citizens who've done no harm to others out of society and let them sit in a jail cell to drain resources? I'll let you consider that.

Now we can say how alcohol does affect society, but we are then talking about what people do to others and not what the drug itself is doing. DoctorX [a user on the Silk Road message boards who claims to be a Spanish medical doctor specializing in cocaine, cannabis, and synthetic drugs] pointed out that if you leave a drug on the table, it will not get up and hurt you. The individual is responsible for looking after themselves and not damaging others. If they do so, then perhaps prison is a solution for the protection of society, but putting millions of people behind bars for being responsible drug users—not harming others—is a disgrace.

- You've said, "I believe that right now, we are living in a society where our enemy is no longer foreign but domestic." Could you elaborate on this?

After 9/11, there was a vast amount of scaremongering over terrorism, and the higher echelons of society saw fit to strip the rights of everyone in the process. This is not to say that, of course, there aren't terrorists, but so many times we hear in religion, money, and nationality that we must not judge many by the actions of the few—yet we can see such hypocrisy from the US government where everyone must surrender their rights for the actions of a few. Is the government any better than the people?

- You’re a libertarian. Do your views differ at all from those of the previous “Dread Pirate Roberts?"

A person can hold any school of libertarian view they would like to, but do they actually support their views through action? A person screaming their libertarian principles who then has those around him brought down with him for his own gain is not a person with any morality in them and in my view is a fraud of a genuinely good cause...

- You've said, "Silk Road while under my watch will never harm a soul. If we did, then we are no better than the thugs on the street." I take it you thought it was wrong of the previous DPR to—allegedly—order multiple hits on people in the course of doing business.

I think at this time it is inappropriate for me to comment on too many specifics as there is a lot that still is not public that I hold in gross contempt. There are probably actions I have done for which the community will hold me in contempt, which will not come to light just yet or maybe ever, if I am lucky. I do not say they are as foolish as hiring an online hitman, but I cannot excuse myself for having human moments. We are all still human, and I do make mistakes. Fortunately, they are limited to simple policy issues so far.

What is more important to me is ensuring I am not a single point of failure and any mistake I do make will only compromise my own freedom without hurting others.

- You've said, "With enough time and data, identifying our servers would actually be a trivial task for the NSA." How much does this worry you?

It is of course a credible threat. People like the FBI do their job in finding people through non-technical measures, such as when somebody has poor OPSEC [operational security], but the NSA wants to break the very foundations we stand on.

The NSA also has a huge budget, and anything they can do against Silk Road they can do against all Tor users, so we have to assemble some of the greatest minds in the world to defend our cause. When it comes to some kind of cyberwarfare, the NSA is undoubtedly the heavyweight, but they still have us to contend with.

- Can the new Silk Road site be taken down as easily as the previous incarnation?

There is only one person in the world that knows who [my second in command] “Defcon” is—me. So unless the feds have me they can never take down the Road, because as soon as I am missing he knows to just move servers and hit the killswitch on my access. Just think how much the FBI will be squirming in their seats and red-faced again if they could arrest the Dread Pirate Roberts and the Road continues to function in their face.

- How long did it take to build the new Silk Road—and did you do so from scratch or from existing code?

The initial build took several days, but testing and ensuring no security leaks are present takes weeks for every feature. No comment regarding what part of our source code comes from the original market.

- You were involved in an incident involving a competitor named TorMarket, in which you managed to hack and subsequently leak TorMarket’s database code. You said later that this attack was undertaken to prove that TorMarket’s promises of “secure codebase, competent operators, and common sense” were falsehoods. Do you stand by your actions?

That began as a private affair between myself and the TorMarket leaders and raged out of control when they sought to attack the wider community. We hope this serves as a warning for those wishing to take their anger out at people who are innocent, and I stand by my actions. At the time, reddit in particular gave me a hard time for striking back at TorMarket in the way I did, but if I let them stand any longer, then more bitcoins would have been lost to TorMarket’s greed.

If my actions seem unreasonable to people, then it is not because I am ignorant of the consequences or on some emotionally charged knee-jerk reaction; it is more likely that there is information the public is not aware of, as in almost every part of my work.
Nobody complains to me when they know I am breathing down the neck of would-be infiltrators and have already locked down over 15 law enforcement honeypot vendors or when our team is busy fighting off an armada of hackers. I do, however, confess it was quite boring the third time law enforcement decided to use the “SuperTrips” moniker and claiming to be him as a free man, when I know just as well as ICE where he is now.

- Thanks to Edward Snowden and other, leaks have been in the news quite a bit, and there’s been some discussion on Silk Road about having the site host leaks of government secrets. Is that something you’re considering?

"Government secrets" is a very broad term and one I don't want to let there be confusion over. You can say there would be government secrets to cover up human rights abuses or to protect corrupt officials, in which case I wouldn't hesitate to let the world know them at the right time. An inescapable fact is that even with my own ideology and what I represent, there must still be some secrets to protect people, and so each "government secret" must be judged upon whatever individual merit it carries—though the sale of such things will never be permitted on Silk Road. A person must release the information for the right moral reasons and not for profit or gain.

- Most of your competitor sites' discussion boards are all business; yours is one of the only sites to have things like a “philosophy and politics” section. Why is that?

I hope recent events highlight why we are the only market who discusses and openly allows people to challenge our beliefs.

Some still have the audacity to call my ideology "fake" and [say] that I am here just for the profit, then support some new market that swiftly closes the door (and runs with their money). I've had the opportunity to run off with more than 10 times the annual salary of Obama, but I have returned—at my own risk, if you knew the circumstances—to give the money to the rightful owners.

- Any final thoughts?

I knew the risk when I took this position, and I am never going to be a truly free man/woman now. All I now seek to ensure is that if I do go down that I don't take Silk Road down with me. Having a single point of failure is no longer acceptable simply because we believe it will protect our users from internal threats.

I have brought Silk Road back to life this time around, but the future of free markets is in the hands of those who are willing to step up after Silk Road falls. There is a revolution coming that is larger than Silk Road has been or will ever be.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/dread-pirate-roberts-2-0-an-interview-with-silk-roads-new-boss/

What's a raskul and why does it drink beer?

On the heels of the Senate’s passage of a long-awaited farm bill, the Obama administration is to announce on Wednesday the creation of seven regional “climate hubs” aimed at helping farmers and rural communities respond to the risks of climate change, including drought, invasive pests, fires and floods.

White House officials describe the move as one of several executive actions that President Obama will take on climate change without action from Congress.

In substance, the creation of the climate hubs is a limited step, but it is part of a broader campaign by the administration to advance climate policy wherever possible with executive authority. The action is also part of a push to build political support for the administration’s more divisive moves on climate change – in particular, the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulations on coal-fired power plants.

Tom Vilsack, the secretary of agriculture and a former Iowa governor, is to announce the creation of the climate hubs at a White House briefing.

“For generations, America’s farmers, ranchers and forest landowners have innovated and adapted to challenges,” Mr. Vilsack is to say, according to prepared remarks. “Today, they face a new and more complex threat in the form of a changing and shifting climate, which impacts both our nation’s forests and our farmers’ bottom lines.”

The hubs will be located in Ames, Iowa; Durham, N.H.; Raleigh, N.C.; Fort Collins, Colo.; El Reno, Okla.; Corvallis, Ore.; Las Cruces, N.M.; and Davis, Calif.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/06/us/next-phase-of-obamas-executive-push-climate-hubs.html?_r=1

http://youtu.be/waEeJJVZ5P8

--------------------------------------

don't bring your main bitcoin wallet with you...

I am just a messenger of the pony express...

Many consumers faced hurdles signing up for Covered California health plans. Now they're having trouble finding in-network doctors.



Maria Berumen uses a device to manage the pain from bone spurs on her spine. At least four doctors wouldn’t accept her health plan — even though the Covered California website and her insurer list them as part of her HMO network. (Katie Falkenberg, Los Angeles Times / January 30, 2014)


After overcoming website glitches and long waits to get Obamacare, some patients are now running into frustrating new roadblocks at the doctor's office.

A month into the most sweeping changes to healthcare in half a century, people are having trouble finding doctors at all, getting faulty information on which ones are covered and receiving little help from insurers swamped by new business.

Experts have warned for months that the logjam was inevitable. But the extent of the problems is taking by surprise many patients — and even doctors — as frustrations mount.

Aliso Viejo resident Danielle Nelson said Anthem Blue Cross promised half a dozen times that her oncologists would be covered under her new policy. She was diagnosed last year with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and discovered a suspicious lump near her jaw in early January.

But when she went to her oncologist's office, she promptly encountered a bright orange sign saying that Covered California plans are not accepted.

"I'm a complete fan of the Affordable Care Act, but now I can't sleep at night," Nelson said. "I can't imagine this is how President Obama wanted it to happen."

To hold down premiums under the healthcare law, major insurers have sharply cut the number of doctors and hospitals available to patients in the state's new health insurance market.

Now those limited options are becoming clearer, and California officials say they are receiving more consumer complaints about access to medical providers. State lawmakers are also moving swiftly to ease some of the problems that have arisen.

"It's a little early for anyone to know how widespread and deep this problem is," said California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones. "There are a lot of economic incentives for health insurers to narrow their networks, but if they go too far, people won't have access to care. Network adequacy will be a big issue in 2014."

The latest travails come at a crucial time during the rollout of Obama's signature law. Government exchanges and other supporters of the healthcare law are trying to boost enrollment, particularly among young and healthy people, ahead of a March 31 deadline.

Of course, complaints about outdated provider lists and delays in getting a doctor's appointment were common long before the healthcare law was enacted. But some experts worry the influx of newly insured patients and the cost-cutting strategies of health plans may further strain the system.

Maria Berumen, a tax preparer in Downey, was uninsured for years because of preexisting conditions. The 53-year-old was thrilled to find coverage for herself and her husband for $148 a month after qualifying for a big government subsidy.

She jumped at the chance in early January to visit a primary-care doctor for long-running numbness in her arm and shoulder as a result of bone spurs on her spine. The doctor referred her to a specialist, and problems ensued. At least four doctors wouldn't accept her health plan — even though the state exchange website and her insurer, Health Net Inc., list them as part of her HMO network.

"It's a phantom network," Berumen said.

It was no surprise to her family doctor, Ragaa Iskarous. She has run into this problem repeatedly with other patients in the last month, the doctor said. "This is really driving us crazy."

Berumen said she was seen by a neurosurgeon Thursday — after state regulators intervened on her behalf.

Insurers say they are working hard to resolve customers' problems as they arise, and they continue to add physicians to augment certain geographic areas and medical specialties.

"Any huge implementation like this comes with a lot of moving parts," said Health Net spokesman Brad Kieffer. "There is a learning curve for everyone, and we expect as time goes on these issues should dissipate."

Looking to head off potential problems, government regulators and patient advocates are pushing for tougher rules to ensure health plans provide timely access to care.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-obamacare-patients-20140205,0,1675336,full.story

Donating to the Pro Euro Ukrainians or the Pro Russian Ukrainians?

The main pillar of the warmist argument is the contention that a "consensus" exists among scientists that global warming is caused by man and threatens catastrophe. But a Canada-based group calling itself Friends of Science has just completed a review of the four main studies used to document the alleged consensus and found that only 1 - 3% of respondents "explicitly stated agreement with the IPCC declarations on global warming," and that there was "no agreement with a catastrophic view."
"These 'consensus' surveys appear to be used as a 'social proof,'" says Ken Gregory, research director of Friends of Science. "Just because a science paper includes the words 'global climate change' this does not define the cause, impact or possible mitigation. The 97% claim is contrived in all cases."
The Oreskes (2004) study claimed 75% consensus and a "remarkable lack of disagreement" by the other 25% of the abstracts she reviewed. Peiser (2005) re-ran her survey and found major discrepancies. Only 1.2% or 13 scientists out of 1,117 agreed with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) view that human activity is the main cause of global warming since 1950.
Actually reviewing the sources cited by the Oreskes study discovered this distribution of views, for example:



The conclusions of the report are rather shocking, and it deserves close attention. No doubt, the group, which is based in Calgary, will be attacked as an energy industry front, but its examination of the underlying reports on which the alleged consensus is based can be replicated. One wayt or another, a fraud is being committed - either the debunking is a fraud, or more likely, the consensus claim is fraudulent. Given that trillions of dollars are at stake, this report deserves the closest possible examination. 

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/02/debunking_the_97_consensus_on_global_warming.html

A decline in employment resulting from Obamacare means more choice, entrepreneurship and will result in a more “dynamic” jobs market, a chief White House economist said. He further said fewer people will choose to work because of Obamacare, the same as fewer senior citizens choose to work because of Social Security and Medicare.

Jason Furman, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, stressed that the Congressional Budget Office prediction by the Congressional Budget Office that 2.5 million people will leave the work force by 2024 as a result of the Affordable Care Act is a positive thing.

“This is a choice on a part of workers,” Furman told reporters Tuesday. “I have no doubt, if for example, we got rid of Social Security, and Medicare, there are many 95-year-olds who would choose to work more to avoid potentially starving or to give themselves the opportunity to get health care, I don’t think anyone would say that’s a compelling argument to eliminate Social Security and Medicare.”

The Obamacare law provides insurance subsidies and expands Medicaid allowing people to avoid “joblock,” or working somewhere just to maintain health insurance, Furman said.

“Similarly, here, CBOs analysis itself is about the choices that workers are making in the face of new options available to them by the Affordable Care Act, not something that about firms destroying jobs,” Furman said.

One reporter later asked, “Doesn’t that incentivize some people to do less because all of a sudden there is an incentive to do less because if there salary is less they still get a government subsidy and benefit?”

Furman disagreed.

“First of all, for many people, this potentially an incentive to do more,” he responded. “An incentive for more entrepreneurship because they’re not locked into a job, there’s an incentive for employers to hire more people because the cost of health care is lower.”

Furman added, “The Affordable Care Act essentially solves that and creates a situation where you can be more dynamic.”


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/04/heres-how-the-white-house-is-attempting-to-spin-damaging-nonpartisan-cbo-report-on-obamacare/


2.5 Million Fewer Workers From ObamaCare A Small Part Of Economy:
http://youtu.be/Dmyd6aUDPwc

Well.. Get a bunch of hammers then...



California company builds 5-foot android robocops to control crime-ridden areas



The local neighborhood watch may be beefing up its robotic arsenal if a new technology startup gets its way anytime soon.

In a bid to make local communities safer and give local law enforcement agencies more tools to fight crime, California-based Knightscope recently unveiled a line of K5 robots that it believes will “predict and prevent crime with an innovative combination of hardware, software and social engagement.”

The new K5 units have a look that resembles R2-D2 from “Star Wars,” but their casual design masks a highly advanced robot that its creators hope will drastically cut down on crime. Weighing in at 300 pounds, the five-foot K5 can patrol a neighborhood and uses a built-in laser to form a 3D map of the surrounding area in 270-degree sweeps. Four built-in cameras, meanwhile, are capable of scanning up to 1,500 license plates a minute.

“Data collected through these sensors is processed through our predictive analytics engine, combined with existing business, government and crowdsourced social data sets, and subsequently assigned an alert level that determines when the community and the authorities should be notified of a concern,” the company’s website states.

According to Fox News, Knightscope already has multiple clients lined up to test beta versions of the K5 in 2014. Rather than sell the robots outright, the company will charge $1,000 a month for daily eight-hour shifts. Inspired to take action after 20 children were killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, Knightscope CEO William Li is convinced that innovation in law enforcement is necessary to effectively make use of officers’ time and manpower.

"Our aim is to cut the crime rate by 50% in a geo-fenced area, which would increase housing values and safety while lowering insurance costs,” he told USA Today. “If we can do that, I think every mayor will be calling us."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83-bpqogngg

http://rt.com/usa/california-company-android-robocops-knightscope-645/

When an event is not news no one will comment on it, asking and writing about how the event itself is even news. It would just simply be ignored.

It is news because the politically motivated group made a big deal about making sure a lot of people would know about it, thus making their act becoming news. I believe this action would logically be defined as news, even if "small news"...

U.S. intelligence agencies last week urged the Obama administration to check its new healthcare network for malicious software after learning that developers linked to the Belarus government helped produce the website, raising fresh concerns that private data posted by millions of Americans will be compromised.

The intelligence agencies notified the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency in charge of the Healthcare.gov network, about their concerns last week. Specifically, officials warned that programmers in Belarus, a former Soviet republic closely allied with Russia, were suspected of inserting malicious code that could be used for cyber attacks, according to U.S. officials familiar with the concerns.

The software links the millions of Americans who signed up for Obamacare to the federal government and more than 300 medical institutions and healthcare providers.

“The U.S. Affordable Care Act software was written in part in Belarus by software developers under state control, and that makes the software a potential target for cyber attacks,” one official said.

http://freebeacon.com/the-belarusian-connection/


-----------------------------------------------------
http://youtu.be/ppNymgdStR4

Former Republican state Rep. Patrick Sheehan told the KATU Investigators he has gone to the FBI with allegations that Cover Oregon project managers initiated the design of dummy web pages to convince the federal government the project was further along than it actually was.

If Sheehan’s allegations are true, those managers could face time in jail for fraud.

“One of the allegations that was made was so alarming that it went way beyond a legislative oversight committee and so I did reach out and contact the FBI,” Sheehan said.

“The issue had to do with federal funding and proving some amount of compliance with the federal regulation in order to get funding.”


[...]
What that meant for the Cover Oregon website was that it was able to paint a picture of a flashy website – imagine a concept car that looks flashy in the showroom but doesn’t actually run.

But documents uncovered by the KATU Investigators show Lawson hadn’t actually figured out how to build the site, even as she was promising the federal government – and her bosses – that Cover Oregon’s website was going to work.

So what, exactly, were the federal and state reviewers being shown?

In a Sept. 27, 2012 email to Bruce Goldberg – Lawson’s boss at the Oregon Health Authority, who is now in charge of Cover Oregon – she sent a link to something called “The Solution Factory,” a site hosted by software contractor Oracle.

Lawson wrote in the email that the link went to a site hosting the same demonstrations the team provided to project stakeholders.

“It demonstrates what we have built to date,” she wrote. “By watching this every month, you can see our progress in real time.”

http://www.katu.com/news/investigators/Cover-Oregon-allegation-if-its-true-someones-going-to-prison-243427781.html?tab=video&c=y
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Watch the video.

Communication is a key ingredient for success: in business, in personal relationships, and even in sports—as we saw in last night’s Super Bowl. Soon, it will also become an essential factor in automotive safety due to a technology known as vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications.

V2V allows cars to “talk” to one another—exchanging basic safety-relevant data, such as speed, direction, and relative position—10 times per second. When cars share this information at such a fast rate, they can "see" all of the vehicles around them, sense the possibility of a crash, and warn drivers to avoid the crash.

Today, I was proud to announce another big step in V2V: After years of research and unprecedented coordination between industry and across government, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is announcing its decision to begin taking the next steps toward implementing V2V technology in all new cars and trucks.

V2V communications can provide the vehicle and driver with 360-degree situational awareness to address additional crash situations, like when a driver needs to decide if it's safe to pass on a two-lane road (potential head-on collision) or make a left turn across the path of oncoming traffic. It can also alert a driver when a vehicle approaching at an intersection appears to be on a collision course.

Our latest research estimates that V2V has the potential to help drivers avoid or mitigate 70 to 80 percent of vehicle crashes involving unimpaired drivers, and that could help prevent many thousands of deaths and injuries on our roads every year.

The research we’ve conducted at DOT and NHTSA demonstrates V2V’s viability and value.

As one example, in 2012, the DOT launched a real-world field test based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, that included nearly 3,000 cars, trucks, and buses outfitted with V2V communications technology.

Test vehicles were able to send and receive anonymous safety data messages between one another. Many of these vehicles were also able to translate the data into a warning to the driver in case of an impending crash.

NHTSA used all of the information available to us from more than a decade of research, including the valuable data from the model deployment, when we decided that now was the time to begin to take action that will eventually make these safety technologies available to the hundreds of millions of drivers across the country.

For almost five decades, DOT and NHTSA have worked hard to prevent deaths and injuries on America’s roads:

We’ve urged Americans to drive safely and partnered with state and local law enforcement to discourage dangerous behaviors, such as driving drunk, driving distracted, or driving or riding without a seat belt;
We’ve helped Americans make informed choices about their vehicles with our 5-Star Safety Ratings that tell consumers which cars perform best in the unfortunate event of a crash;
We’ve ensured that vehicles with safety defects were recalled so that consumers would be protected; and
We’ve helped accelerate the adoption of vehicle features, such as air bags and electronic stability control, that are proven to save lives.
All of these efforts have made a tremendous difference and will always be a part of NHTSA’s safety mission.

Since 1970, highway fatalities have declined by 36 percent and have fallen by 22 percent just in the last decade. But, with more than 30,000 fatalities on America’s roadways each year, we must continue to look to new and innovative ways to save lives.

V2V technology represents one such innovation. The opportunity to move forward with the lifesaving potential of V2V technology makes this a very special moment in automotive safety.

 
David Friedman is Acting Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

http://www.dot.gov/fastlane/v2v-cars-communicating-prevent-crashes-deaths-injuries

Executive Summary
1. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) will improve the well-being and incomes of Americans in the bottom fifth of the income distribution. Under our broadest and most comprehensive income measure we project that incomes in the bottom one-fifth of the distribution will increase almost 6%; those in the bottom one-tenth of the distribution will rise more than 7%. These estimated gains represent averages. Most people already have insurance coverage that will be left largely unaffected by reform. Those who gain subsidized insurance will see bigger percentage gains in their income.

2. The gains in well-being at the bottom are hardly surprising. The goal of the ACA is to make health coverage more affordable by reforming insurance arrangements and by subsidizing the insurance purchases of low- and moderate-income families. The new subsidies will come through an expansion of Medicaid and the introduction of refundable tax credits for the purchase of insurance through new state Exchanges. Because Medicaid is costless to the low-income population and since the refundable tax credits will be restricted to families with incomes below 400% of the poverty line, the great majority of the beneficiaries of the new government spending will be in the bottom half of the income distribution. Our estimates suggest, in fact, that the overwhelming majority will be in the bottom one-third of the distribution.

3. Our analysis also shows, however, that the estimated gains and losses are crucially affected by the definition of household income. The most widely used measure—the Census Bureau’s “money income” measure—does not count health insurance as income. Under this definition, the ACA has small effects on income, including those at the very bottom of the income distribution. (Some at the bottom may see a slight decline in their money incomes; others will see an income gain.) Even when we use a somewhat more expansive definition of income—one that counts part of the value of insurance—Americans in the bottom tenth of the distribution gain little, but this startling result says more about the way income is defined than it does about how the ACA affects low-income households.

4. The finding that the ACA will not have much effect on standard estimates of poor Americans’ incomes is easily explained. It is a byproduct of the way “money income” is defined. The definition includes pre-tax money wages, net self-employment earnings, pensions, government cash transfers (such as Social Security and unemployment compensation), interest, dividends, rent payments, and other regular and irregular cash income flows. It does not include the health insurance contributions employers make for their workers. Nor does it include government spending on health plans, such as Medicaid and Medicare, which pay for most or all of the health care of the people who are insured. Employers and the government currently spend about $1.5 trillion—13% of total personal income—paying our health care bills. The ACA will increase public spending to help low- and moderate-income people pay their medical bills. If we use a definition that doesn’t count the extra spending as “income,” household incomes obviously will not change very much.

5. Experts recognize the shortcomings of income definitions that exclude health insurance. But figuring out how to include it poses a challenge. To include the value of free or subsidized health protection in income statistics, the Census Bureau sometimes uses a concept called “fungible income.” The fungible value of insurance includes the full premium contribution made by employers in behalf of their workers. It also includes some or all the subsidies provided by the government to participants in public health plans, but only for families who have enough cash income to pay for basic food and housing. If income exceeds this threshold, then part or all of the value of government financed health benefits is included. When families don’t have enough cash income to pay for basic food and shelter needs, none of the value of government insurance is counted as income. The key point is that the “fungible income” approach assigns to low income households little or no income value from publicly financed health benefits.

6. Only when we count as income the full cost to the government of providing additional health insurance to the poor does the ACA have a meaningful and positive impact on the post-ACA incomes of the very poor.

7. The benefits of the ACA to low-income families would have been greater if the enacted version of the law had been put into effect. The Supreme Court’s ACA ruling in 2012 means that states cannot be compelled to expand eligibility limits for Medicaid as Congress intended. Slightly more than half the states have decided to raise income limits for Medicaid, but 23 states have declined to do so. Low-income children and adults in those states who were not previously eligible for Medicaid will remain ineligible. The Supreme Court decision combined with state inaction means the impact of the ACA on insurance enrollment among Americans’ with the lowest incomes will be smaller than would otherwise be the case. An additional 6% of Americans in the lowest money income quintile would have obtained health coverage if the enacted version of the ACA had gone into effect.

8. Following the projections of the CBO and other forecasters, we anticipate small net declines of enrollment in employer-sponsored health insurance. Some workers will gain employer coverage, and others will enroll in existing employer plans because they face penalties if they don’t have coverage. However, some employers may drop coverage for part-time employees, and some workers will leave their employer plans because less expensive coverage will be available elsewhere (for example, under Medicaid). On net, we expect enrollment in employer plans to shrink 5.9 million, or about 3½%, in the population under 65.

9. We expect the changes in employer coverage to have effects on money income as well as on income measured under more comprehensive definitions. If employers’ health costs fall, many will pass most of the savings along to their workers in the form of higher money wages. If employer health costs rise, we expect them to cut cash wages so their compensation costs remain roughly unchanged. The impact of the ACA on employer coverage varies by income decile; so do its effects on money wages.

10. On balance our projections indicate the shifts in employer coverage will slightly reduce money wages in many parts of the income distribution but increase wages in the bottom quarter and top one-fifth of the distribution. Many workers with modest incomes will find it cheaper to obtain subsidized plans through the Exchanges or free Medicaid coverage than to continue their employer-based coverage. When they leave employer plans, they generate cost savings for their employers—assuming their employers do not have to pay penalties to the government. This will allow their employers to increase money wages. Money wage gains are more common for families with incomes between the 10th and the 25th percentiles and above the 80th percentile than they are in other parts of the income distribution. We therefore project families in these income ranges will see increases in their money incomes. Between the 25th and 80th income percentiles, we project money wages will decline modestly.

11. Under more comprehensive income definitions—ones that include the value of health insurance—most workers’ money wage gains and losses are exactly offset by corresponding losses or gains in the value of their employer health protection. However, those workers who substitute subsidized government insurance for an employer health plan typically see a net gain in income under comprehensive income definitions.

12. The ACA contains a variety of provisions to offset the extra cost to the government of boosting Medicaid enrollment and providing new tax credits for insurance purchase. We include some of the biggest items in our analysis. The ACA cut federal subsidies to Medicare Advantage plans. It increased Part B and Part D Medicare premiums for high-income enrollees. The law imposed a higher Medicare payroll tax and a new investment tax on high-income taxpayers. In addition, the law imposes income-related penalty payments on nonpoor families not covered by health insurance and on mid-size and large employers which do not offer affordable insurance to their full-time workforce. The Medicare premium increases and the tax hikes reduce the net incomes of high-income Americans, but the anticipated cut in Medicare Advantage subsidies will affect the net value of those plans for everyone enrolled in them. Also, except at the very bottom of the distribution we project that penalty charges will also affect the net incomes of some families in most parts of the distribution.

13. On net and under the broadest income measure, the gains and losses cause small proportional drops in income for Americans in the top three-quarters of the income distribution which offset the larger proportional gains obtained by Americans in the bottom quarter of the distribution. The drop in employer contributions to health plans offsets some of the gains in projected government health subsidies, mainly to Americans at the bottom of the distribution. The projected drop in federal subsidies to Medicare Advantage plans reduces the subsidies received by participants in those plans. Higher Medicare premiums, Medicare payroll tax contributions, and the new investment tax cut net incomes of Americans, especially elderly Americans, at the top of the distribution. Americans under 25, especially those at the bottom of the distribution, enjoy income gains associated with broader and government-subsidized insurance coverage.

http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/01/potential-effects-affordable-care-act-income-inequality-aaron-burtless

A Fry Cook Asked Obama About Low Wages—And His Hours Being Cut Due To Obamacare

Darnell Summers, a fast food fry cook, joined President Obama on Friday for his first ever live Google Hangout. Summers told the president about his troubles making ends meet earning $7.25 an hour and how he has been on strike four times to increase his wages. Summers also told Obama how his work hours have been “broken down to part-time to avoid paying health insurance.” He asked how Congress and the president could help him and people like him “survive.” In his response, Obama urged Congress to pass a minimum wage increase, but did not address the health care part of the question.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/bennyjohnson/a-fry-cook-asked-obama-about-low-wagesand-his-hours-being-cu

A group of Columbia University and Barnard College alumni filmed a feminist pornographic film in the school’s Butler Library to fight what they see as “gender tension” at Columbia.

The NSFW film, titled “Initiatiøn,” was filmed as a feminist statement exploring “the rituals of American Ivy League secret societies, to the point of hysteria, highlighting our culture’s perception of female desire,” according to an article published on Gawker.

It begins with a group of girls sitting around a library table taking their shirts off. As the film progresses, the girls engage in activities including kissing, rubbing eggs on their bodies and twerking around chicken carcass.

One of the film’s creators, Columbia art and history major Coco Young, told the IvyGate blog that the library itself represented sexism at the school because only male author’s names are on the facade of the building.

http://gawker.com/some-nude-college-girls-filmed-a-feminist-porno-in-colu-1515084075

A million times better icon. I even like the mustard color.