Why bring in 110,000 refugees when we can’t take care of all of our own people?

We have previously noted that the ‘official’ U-3 unemployment rate of 4.9% is really a bogus statistic, and that the U-6 unemployment rate of 9.7% is a far more accurate indicator.

In August of 2016, the “participation rate”1 in the labor force was 62.8% of the eligible population; that was lower than any August of the entire Obama Administration, except for 2015. In 2009 and 2010, the worst years of the economic downturn, the August participation rate was 65.4% and 64.7%, respectively. It was in the 66% range every August during the Bush Administration. Other than 2015, it was the lowest August participation rate since 1977, Jimmy Carter’s first year as President.

Simply put, while 4.9% of the working aged, work-eligible population which does not have a job is actively looking for employment, another 4.8% would like to have a full-time job, but have given up looking for one because they are too discouraged at the prospects of actually finding one. Roughly speaking, for every ten people employed, there’s another person who wants a job, but cannot find one.

So, what does the Obama Administration want to do about that?

Obama Is Reportedly Planning to Bring a Lot More Refugees to the U.S.

by Reuters | September 13, 2016, 11:51 PM EDT

The Obama Administration plans to increase the number of refugees admitted to the United States by 30% in fiscal year 2017, according to the Wall Street Journal, which cited an annual refugee report submitted to Congress.

Secretary of State John Kerry presented the new target of 110,000 in the 2017 fiscal year starting Oct. 1, up from 85,000 in 2016, during a closed session to members of the House and Senate judiciary committees on Tuesday, according to the newspaper.

Kerry has said repeatedly over the past year that the United States would admit at least 100,000 refugees in fiscal 2017 and try to admit more if it were able.

Using the August 2016 numbers released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics2, we have a working aged, work-eligible civilian population of 253,854,000, of whom only 159,463,000 are considered to be in the labor force. Including the U-6 numbers, there are roughly 15,538,000 unemployed or underemployed people in this country, yet President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry want to add another 110,000 people to that number!

Even if we assume that the various ‘screening’ procedures are 100% effective, that not a single potential Islamist terrorist gets through, we would still be adding 110,000 more people, very few of whom speak English and have skills — other than manual labor — which translate to the American job market. All of these people will need to be fed and clothed and housed, and that means we would be importing another 110,000 welfare recipients.

With 15,538,000 Americans not being taken care of, with 15,538,000 Americans who need jobs, why on God’s earth would we bring in another 110,000 who won’t be able to find work? We haven’t been able to take care of all of our own people; it’s sheer stupidity to bring in more!

The American taxpayer is already overburdened, and even with that, the federal government is running huge deficits, with the current fiscal year deficit projected to wind up at $590 billion, up from the $534 billion projected last March. Even with too-high taxes, the federal government is still having to borrow more and more money, and we still aren’t taking care of everyone who needs help, so, naturally, the ‘solution’ is to import even more people who need help!

But, it’s more than just the federal government which will see increased burdens. State and local governments are having a tough time funding the public schools, and bringing in 110,000 refugees, few of whom speak English, means that the local school districts where these refugees are settled will have the additional expenses of not only educating the children who are part of the refugee population, but providing teachers and translators who speak Arabic.

Barack Hussein Obama is supposed to be President of the United States of America. That means that his responsibility is to the United States, not to everybody else. Bringing in more refugees to burden the American taxpayers is the wrong thing to do!

  1. The civilian labor force participation rate is the number of employed and unemployed but looking for a job as a percentage of the population aged 16 years and over.
  2. This reference is updated monthly, so if you check the link after the next release, the numbers may be different.

If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen

From The Wall Street Journal:

Hillary Clinton ‘Felt Overheated’ And Left 9/11 Ceremony

Democratic presidential nominee went to daughter’s apartment and is ‘feeling much better,’ spokesman says

By Ryan Tracy and Peter Nicholas | Updated Sept. 11, 2016 3:45 p.m. ET

Hillary Clinton’s early departure Sunday from New York’s 9/11 memorial ceremony thrust questions about her health to the forefront of the presidential race.

The 68-year-old Democratic nominee left the ceremony at Ground Zero after 90 minutes because she “felt overheated,” a spokesman said. Videos posted on Twitter appeared to show Mrs. Clinton losing her balance as aides and security helped her step from a curb into a black campaign van.

The Clinton campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about the videos, but sought to downplay the incident and show she had quickly recovered.

Mrs. Clinton, who went to her daughter’s New York City apartment after leaving the memorial, walked out unassisted from the building about two hours later and waved at the waiting cameras. “I’m feeling great,” the former secretary of state said. “It’s a beautiful day in New York.”

There’s more at the original, which noted that Mrs Clinton left at around 9:30 AM, and that the temperature, two hours later, was described as being 82º F and humid. Mrs Clinton stumbled on her way back to her vehicle.

This episode just makes Chris Cillizza’s article of just five days ago, Can we just stop talking about Hillary Clinton’s health now? all the more ridiculous. Mr Cillizza wrote:

(T)o believe that something is seriously wrong with Clinton, you have to a) assume her doctor lied and b) that her coughing, which often happens when someone catches a cold or spends a lot of time speaking publicly, is a symptom of her deeper, hidden illness.

Well, I do assume that her physician lied, given that the Clintons, and seemingly everyone around them, lie all of the time. Mr Cillizza said, in his next sentence, “That seems, um, unlikely to me?” I’m not certain why he used a question mark at the end of that sentence, unless he was uncertain of his own statement. Mrs Clinton is clearly in poor health; her defenders deny it, but anyone with any objectivity at all can see it, just by looking. You do not need to be a doctor to tell that she is barely keeping up with her campaign events, which even a sycophant like Mr Cillizza described as “do(ing) a lot more raising money than campaigning” over the last month.

Naturally, the Clinton campaign and her minions in the professional media have been doing everything they can to discredit stories about her poor health, but the truth is obvious: you can see it yourself.

TABC Licensing

Navigating the System to Get the Proper Accreditation for Your Business

Texas like many other states requires that restaurants, clubs, and other businesses be licensed to sell liquor. The laws surrounding this licensing process can be subject to change and confusing to understand, however. When you want to add liquor sales to your business or secure the licensing needed to open a new restaurant, club, or other business, you may need help navigating the necessary paperwork and process. Instead of going through the process alone, you may find it best to rely on people who know the laws, TABC license procedures, and other Texas mandates that pertain to your desire to sell alcohol on your business’s premises.

Figuring Out and Complying with the System

The laws regarding alcohol sales exist to protect both business owners and consumers. Even so, they may be difficult to comprehend. When you hire a business to help you understand these laws, you may shorten the process involved with getting licensed. You also gain the information you need to apply the laws to your business yourself.

You can start the process of figuring out the system and complying with it by setting up a free consultation with the company. The website lets you contact the firm and initiate the free first meeting. During that meeting, you can determine if you want to complete the process and if the staff at the company have the skills that you are looking for when you pursue the proper licensing to sell alcohol.

Establishing Contact

The website offers an insight to the business and how it can help you become TABC licensed. You can explore at length the company’s About Us section and also the information online about the state’s licensing process.

If you feel comfortable with the information you found on the website, you are then invited to fill out the contact form. The form is the first step in setting up the initial meeting. You can also follow the company on Facebook and check out what others are saying about the process and the company itself.

Texas requires that businesses that want to sell liquor first become licensed. The process to gaining this license can be time consuming and confusing if you do not understand the laws. Rather than rely on your own understanding or risk making errors, you can partner with a TABC licensing business to guide you through the process.

The World Of September 11th Through History Why forgetting is SCREWING US

This Sunday is the 15th Anniversary of the Downing of the Twin Towers and other Buildings in the World Trade Center.  But that is one thing to consider.  HOWEVER we look at 9/11/2001 it is a Totally Incomplete look at the true significance of of what September 11th means in the world of Islam.  My opinion is that Islam has had a very rough time about celebrating this date.  Islam has heavy losses in History about September 11th.  In reality The WTC and Benghazi can be looked at as one Pyrrhic Victory (WTC) and one Victory, Benghazi.  Other than that, September 11th is a losing date.  Here’s the Scorecard:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks WTC Pyrrhic Victory and the US Wars of Attrition in the Muddled East
So, where are we now?  This is the self-professed Muslim’s last year (I Guess) of residing at 1600 PA Ave, NW, Washington, Disease.  Who knows what is in store on Sunday.  Remember that on Wednesday, September 10th, 2001 we all had no idea of what was about to happen in New York City, Arlington, VA, or Shanksville, PA the next day.  But most remember when reminded.


Kim Jong-un blows up another hole in the ground

From The Wall Street Journal:

North Korea Conducts Fifth Nuclear Test

The test, which came hours after Obama wrapped up a trip to Asia, signaled a challenge for his successor

By Alastair Gail and Carol E Lee | Updated Sept. 9, 2016 5:40 a.m. ET

SEOUL—North Korea conducted a fifth nuclear test hours after President Barack Obama wrapped up a tour of Asia, highlighting the U.S.’s struggle to rein in the rising threat from dictator Kim Jong Un.

Pyongyang declared a successful test hours after the U.S. Geological Survey detected a magnitude 5.3 earthquake near North Korea’s nuclear test site in the country’s northeast early on Friday, a reading that surpassed the magnitudes of tremors set off by the country’s previous nuclear tests.

North Korea confirmed in a statement released through its state media that it conducted a test explosion of a nuclear warhead. It said the test was successful and confirmed its ability to produce nuclear-tipped missiles “at will.” It added that it would continue to build up its nuclear force in quality and quantity.

There’s more at the original.

Perhaps I’m the only one who says this, but I absolutely love North Korean underground nuclear tests. Weapons grade fissile material is difficult and expensive to produce, and every time Kim Jong-un’s lackeys blow up a hole in the ground, they expend more of the limited stockpile of weapons grade material they have. The more tests they run, the fewer nuclear weapons they have in their arsenal for use against anybody else.

North Korea is like a spoiled brat, screaming for attention, and every time they run another test, they get more attention.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

Onn CNN this morning, sometime between 5:09 and 5:18, Christine Romans was telling us about the labor market, and how there are now 1.3 job seekers for every job opening, and how this was the lowest ratio in a long time, far lower than it had been during the recession. This was reported as just plain good news.

But, as we pointed out two days ago, the “official” unemployment numb er, U-3, of 4.9%, reflects the fact that the participation rate, the number of employed and unemployed but looking for a job as a percentage of the population aged 16 years and over, is the lowest it has been since Jimmy Carter was President. The U-6 unemployment rate is 9.7%, almost twice the official rate. If there are only 1.3 job seekers for every open job, that’s because so many people might want a job but have given up looking for one.

Is it wrong of me to laugh?

From The Philadelphia Inquirer:

Kane seeks $1 million immediately in divorce case

Updated: September 7, 2016 — 10:57 AM EDT

SCRANTON, Pa. (AP) – Convicted former Pennsylvania attorney general Kathleen Kane is asking a judge to order her estranged husband to immediately provide $1 million of about $6 million she contends she should receive in their divorce.

Kane filed a petition last Thursday saying she needs a partial distribution of joint assets held by Christopher Kane to pay attorney fees as she prepares for sentencing and appeal of her perjury conviction, The (Scranton) Times-Tribune reported.

The petition said she is now unemployed and has no income other than the alimony and child support he pays for their two sons, which court records show totals $19,000 a month. It argues that he would be credited for any money paid once the distribution is finalized, and he has an interest in her having the best defense possible “to avoid any negative effects” on their children from her incarceration.

Kathleen Kane is a Scranton native who in 2012 became the first woman and first Democrat to be elected Pennsylvania’s attorney general. She resigned Aug. 17, two days after her conviction on charges she abused the powers of her office by leaking secret grand jury information to smear a rival and then lied under oath to cover it up. She is scheduled to be sentenced Oct. 24.

I’m sorry, but what? Mrs Kane receives $19,000 a month from her estranged husband? According to my precise calculations, that’s $228,000 a year, a lot more than the vast majority of Pennsylvanians have on which to live.

Christopher Kane invested $2.3 million of his money to help Mrs Kane win the attorney general’s race in 2012. If he hadn’t done that, he’s be $2.3 million richer, and his wife would not be looking at going to prison.

Gary Johnson on Taxes

I have said many times before that, as a real Republican, I cannot and will not vote for Donald Trump. He is a Republican only for convenience, and his past positions have been far closer to the left than the right.

But I cannot and will not vote for Hillary Clinton, either. Voting for Donald Trump is like walking through [insert vulgar term for feces here]: some of it sticks to your shoes. Trouble is, voting for Hillary Clinton is like walking through [insert vulgar term for feces here] and blood and slime and dead bodies; she’s worse than he is, far worse. Because Hillary Clinton will carry Pennsylvania, I can vote for Gary Johnson and not have to worry that I am somehow harming the Republic. If Donald Trump stands a real chance of carrying the Keystone State, he won’t need my vote anyway, because he’ll be on his way to a landslide national victory.

Governor Johnson will not win the election, period. The (very slight) possibility exists that he could carry a couple of states, maybe just enough to throw the election into the House of Representatives, which would guarantee a Republican president.

I do not agree with all of Mr Johnson’s policies and positions. However, I can vote for Mr Johnson without soiling myself. Here I will begin an (intermittent) series on Mr Johnson’s policy proposals, noting where I agree, and where I do not. From Mr Johnson’s campaign website:

Today’s federal tax code does all the wrong things. It penalizes productivity, savings and investment, while rewarding inefficiency and designating winners and losers according to political whim.

For far too long, tax laws have been used not just as a means to collect needed revenues, but as a way for special interests to penalize their competitors while subsidizing themselves. The result is a tax code that is more than 70,000 pages long, enforced by a government agency with almost 100,000 employees. As a result, our tax code has created a nightmare for the average American, while providing shelter for those with the means to manipulate it.

I completely agree with this. Yet, even with nearly 100,000 employees, tax cheating still occurs, and some people still get away with it.

Governor Johnson advocates for the elimination of special interest tax loopholes, to get rid of the double-taxation on small businesses, and ultimately, the replacement of all income and payroll taxes with a single consumption tax that determines your tax burden by how much you spend, not how much you earn.

This sounds OK in theory, but I’m not sure how this could work in practice. Having lived in Delaware for two years, I saw how people from Pennsylvania and Maryland would cross the border to buy things in the First State, which had no state sales tax. I lived near the Lantana Square shopping Center in Hockessin, and there were always plenty of Pennsylvania license plates in the parking lot. The lesson was simple: people knew that they could save money by shopping in Delaware.

Which leads to the obvious conclusion: people with the means to do so will find it more efficient to buy in foreign countries! It’ll be harder for someone in Iowa, but people along the Canadian and Mexican borders will cross for cheaper goods. When we were in Italy last June, we bought a few things, far less than Customs required us to declare, but yes, such would have avoided the kind of consumption taxes Governor Johnson proposes.

While I would like to see the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment, and have all direct taxes on people assessed by population rather than income, I’m not foolish enough to believe that would ever happen. However, the single-percentage-rate tax proposals of the 1990s — the so-called ‘flat tax’ — with the only deductions being personal exemptions could well be a solid way to go. Such would be simple, and it would be easy enough for the vast majority of people to do their own taxes.1

Such a tax would be structured to ensure that no one’s tax burden for the purchase of basic family necessities would be increased. To the contrary, costs of necessities would likely decrease with the elimination of taxes already included in the price of virtually everything we buy.

OK, this one I don’t believe. Whenever I hear a politician saying that he’ll “ensure that no one’s tax burden for the purchase of basic family necessities would be increased,” I know that he is lying to me. How can Mr Johnson, or Paul Krugman, or anyone, say, with a straight face, that adding a consumption tax to toilet paper won’t increase the purchaser’s (federal) tax burden when some people’s federal tax burden is already zero? How can anyone say that adding a consumption tax to orange juice won’t increase the purchaser’s (federal) tax burden when the government does not know what any individual’s federal tax burden really is until tax time comes?

Many leading economists have long advocated such a shift in the way we are taxed, and Gary Johnson believes the time has come to replace our current tax code, which penalizes the savings, productivity and investment we so desperately need.

This is absolutely correct, but I do not believe that a consumption tax, or perhaps a European-style Value Added Tax, is going to do that. If the consumption tax encourages savings, then it concomitantly discourages productivity and investment, because encouraging savings means discouraging consumer spending.

However, at least Governors Johnson and Weld understand taxes, and understand economics. While I don’t support every Libertarian Party economic position, I do appreciate their very clear position that the government is too large and tries to control the economy, when it cannot, and should not try. The most that the government does when it meddles in the economy is to make things harder on individuals. I noted previously that all of those learned economists working for the government and Wall Street were both very well informed and completely clueless about the economy. The Obama Administration’s spectacular 2009 stimulus plan, the one which was supposed to hold official unemployment to a maximum of 8%, turned out to be a spectacular failure, because all of those scholarly economists failed to predict how 200 million American economic actors would behave. The favored solar energy companies, which received preferential treatment and federal loan guarantees in the stimulus, mostly failed. Very little worked the way the economists said it would. We would have been better off — at least as far as increasing the national debt was concerned — had the infernal bill never been passed. At least Governor Johnson doesn’t want to have the government meddling in the economy, and that’s a big thing to me.

No, I don’t agree with every position Governor Johnson advocates, but I do understand the difference between an honest candidate, and those who are dishonest.

  1. I do not care if Jackson-Hewitt and H & R Block go out of business.

CNNMoney says that “The general public has ‘extremely little factual knowledge’ about the job market and labor force” The truth is that the public have a better understanding of the economy than our learned economists

From CNNMoney:

Most Americans think unemployment is a lot higher than 5%

Americans think the economy is in far worse shape than it is.

by Heather Long | @byHeatherLong | September 6, 2016: 2:28 PM ET

The U.S. unemployment rate is only 4.9%, but 57% of Americans believe it’s a lot higher than that, according to a new survey by the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University.

The general public has “extremely little factual knowledge” about the job market and labor force, Rutgers found.

It’s another example of how experts on Wall Street and in Washington see the economy differently than the regular Joe. Many of the nation’s top economic experts say that America is “near full employment.” The unemployment rate has actually been at or below 5% for almost a year — millions of people have found jobs in what is the best period of hiring since the late 1990s.

But regular people appear to have their doubts about how healthy America’s employment picture is. Nearly a third of those survey by Rutgers believe unemployment is actually at 9%, or higher.

Republican candidate Donald Trump has tapped into this confusion. He has repeatedly called the official unemployment rate a “joke” and a even “hoax.”

There’s more at the original.

What this tells me is that “regular people” just might have a better understanding of the economy than the highly-educated economists working for the federal government and august publications like The Wall Street Journal. So, “(n)early a third of those survey(ed) by Rutgers believe unemployment is actually at 9%, or higher?” Well, for August of 2016, the U-6 unemployment rate, defined as “Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force,1 plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force,” stood at 9.7%. To me, it sure looks like those “regular people” are the ones who have it right: without the vast majority of them actually looking at the U-6 numbers — you do have to know where to look — they still guesstimated that unemployment was 9% or higher, right in line with the official numbers.

In August of 2016, the “participation rate”2 in the labor force was 62.8% of the eligible population; that was lower than any August of the entire Obama Administration, except for 2015. In 2009 and 2010, the worst years of the economic downturn, the August participation rate was 65.4% and 64.7%, respectively. It was in the 66% range every August during the Bush Administration. Other than 2015, it was the lowest August participation rate since 1977, Jimmy Carter’s first year as President.

Despite the “malaise,” high inflation and unemployment of the Carter years, despite the recession during Ronald Reagan’s first two years in office, people were moving into the labor force, not moving out of it, people were looking for jobs, not quitting the work force.

Let’s be honest here: people are dropping out of the labor force because they think that it’s simply a waste of time to go out and look for jobs that they know are not out there. The learned economists just don’t get it.

Paul Krugman, a Nobel laureate in economics, regular columnist for The New York Times and $225,000 per year professor at City University of New York, wrote:

For while the U.S. has done reasonably well at recovering from the 2007-2009 financial crisis, longer-term economic growth is looking very disappointing. Some of this is just demography, as baby boomers retire and growth in the working-age population slows down. But there has also been a somewhat mysterious decline in labor force participation among prime-age adults and a sharp drop in productivity growth.

Really? A Nobel Prize-winning economist, and all he can say about the persistent decline in the participation rate is that it’s “somewhat mysterious”? Unlike the esteemed Dr Krugman, I don’t have a PhD in economics,3 nor am I a “distinguished scholar” at CUNY Graduate Center’s Luxembourg Income Study Center, but the persistent decline in the participation rate isn’t “somewhat mysterious” to me; I just told you what has caused it!

More, the “regular people” mentioned in the CNNMoney article have told us what the problem is: they recognize what the real unemployment rate is, and understand the futility some people feel in looking for jobs that simply are not there. The CNNMoney article said, “The general public has ‘extremely little factual knowledge’ about the job market and labor force, Rutgers found,” but, looking at how the “general public” estimated that the real unemployment rate is “9%, or higher,” and got it right, I’d say that the “general public” actually have more factual knowledge about the job market and the labor force, and the economy, than do the highly educated talking heads.

Dr Krugman is paid $225,000 a year by CUNY, to teach one seminar a year.4 Robert Stacey Stacy McCain guessed that Dr Krugman’s salary from The New York Times ought to be at least the equal of Tom Friedman’s reported $300,000 a year. I suppose that, to him, it’s easy to advocate policies which would drive up energy costs, because he is wealthy enough to afford them, having conveniently forgotten that there are other people who cannot.5 It’s easy for him to say that “the U.S. has done reasonably well at recovering from the 2007-2009 financial crisis,” because he only hobnobs with people who do have jobs, good jobs: Times colleagues, university professors, government officials and, occasionally, graduate students in economics. It’s easy for him to say, look, unemployment is down to 4.9%, because the people with whom he associates are not worried about their careers, are not worried about losing their jobs, and are not worried about whether they’ll have enough money to make it until next payday. Thing is, it was the people who do have to worry about paying their electric bill, who are worried about making last Friday’s paycheck stretch until next Friday’s paycheck, who got it right about the economy.

How have the professional economists done? Here was Heather Long’s tweet about economists’ estimates of what the August jobs report would show:

And then she tweeted the actual results:

So, CNNMoney came closest, but was still off by 15.9%. @Estimize, on the other hand, which sells itself as “access to earnings estimates from 16,000+ of your buy-side & independent analyst peers. Academically proven more accurate & representative than First Call,” missed by 42.4%. Remember: these aren’t economic forecasts of what will happen, but economists’ estimates of what has already happened, and they are still getting it wrong.

I do not know if Miss Long wrote the article headline and subtitle; that is normally the job of editors. But the article subtitle, “Americans think the economy is in far worse shape than it is,” reflects a belief by the editors, and I presume Miss Long, that the American economy is in good shape. Perhaps, for them, it is, but when we get to the “regular people” mentioned in the article, no, it isn’t. The American economy is not creating jobs at a good rate, wages remain stagnant in real terms, and people are genuinely afraid that the jobs they have now might not be there over the long term.
Cross-posted on RedState.

  1. Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule.
  2. The civilian labor force participation rate is the number of employed and unemployed but looking for a job as a percentage of the population aged 16 years and over.
  3. My highest degree is a Bachelor of Arts, and while I took a lot of economics courses, economics was not my major.
  4. Dr Marcie Bianco, a part-time adjunct professor at CUNY, complained that Dr Krugman would earn more in one year at CUNY than she would over her entire career.
  5. Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, an advisor to the Hillary Clinton campaign, advocates taxing fossil fuels, even though such a move would immediately lead to higher prices for oil, gas and coal. It would also hike the cost of anything that uses those fuels such as electricity and transportation. The goal is to force Americans to find alternatives that are cheaper and better for the planet.

Single-payer health care is just so wonderful!

From The Telegraph:

Obese patients and smokers banned from routine surgery in ‘most severe ever’ rationing in the NHS

By Henry Bodkin • 2 September 2016 • 10:00pm

Obese people will be routinely refused operations across the NHS, health service bosses have warned, after one authority said it would limit procedures on an unprecedented scale.

Hospital leaders in North Yorkshire said that patients with a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or above – as well as smokers – will be barred from most surgery for up to a year amid increasingly desperate measures to plug a funding black hole. The restrictions will apply to standard hip and knee operations.

The decision, described by the Royal College of Surgeons as the “most severe the modern NHS has ever seen”, led to warnings that other trusts will soon be forced to follow suit and rationing will become the norm if the current funding crisis continues.

Chris Hopson, the head of NHS Providers, which represents acute care, ambulance and community services, said: “I think we are going to see more and more decisions like this.

“It’s the only way providers are going to be able to balance their books, and in a way you have to applaud their honesty. You can see why they’re doing this – the service is bursting at the seams.”

The announcement is the latest in a series of setbacks for patients who are facing rolling strikes by junior doctors that threaten to cripple the health service as winter approaches.

The decision by Vale of York Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) comes amid increasing limits across the NHS on surgery for cataracts as well as hip and knee operations.

There’s more at the original.

There was an outcry about this. From the BBC:

Obese patients ‘surgery ban’ in York to be reviewed

3 September 2016

A proposed restriction by the NHS Vale of York Clinical Commissioning Group would have seen non-life threatening procedures delayed by a year for those with a body mass index exceeding 30.

The rule would also apply to smokers.

NHS England, which can intervene as the CCG is under special measures, said the group had agreed to rethink the move.

Under the move, obese patients in the Vale of York area could have secured a referral in less than a year if they shed 10% of their weight.

Similarly, if smokers refused to quit they would face having procedures delayed for up to six months, which could be accelerated if they stopped smoking for eight weeks.

The CCG said the proposals, announced as part of a package of measures being considered to reduce costs, came at a time when the local system was under “severe pressure”.

The new rules would only apply to elective surgery for non-life threatening procedures, for example hip and knee operations.

Yeah, just because somebody can’t walk, or can’t walk without serious pain, why that’s not life threatening!

This isn’t really a surprise. Health care isn’t free; someone has to pay for it, and when that someone is the government, well it’ll be the government which has to find ways to cut costs. That was the impetus behind the Veterans’ Administration Hospitals delaying treatment, that’s why the UK and Canada have both stretched out appointments and treatment, to save money.

When — and it really is a when, and not an if — the United States goes to a single-payer health care system, when Obysmalcare finally collapses, we’ll start to see those cost cutting measures imposed on all of us.

Yeah, our health care system is the most expensive in the world, but we are getting what we pay for, in immediate or near immediate care. If I call for a doctor’s appointment tomorrow, I’ll get one within a day or two.