Oil: Can’t Live With It; Can’t Live Without It

As I was driving into town, I noticed how much more expensive gasoline was this week than it had been last week.  At least 25c more per gallon (at places like Sam’s Club — more at private stations).  In fact, the ups and downs in prices on gasoline seem to be mimicking the ups and downs we have been experiencing with our weather of late.  Anyway, I was wondering why the gas prices were once again on the rise.

I guess I have become quite cynical in my old age because it finally dawned on me that this past weekend, there had been a large gathering of people in Washington to protest any further drilling for oil on our lands.  According to a friend of mine who attended, there were around 40,000 people who braved very frigid weather  to protest the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to U.S. And so  I concluded that the oil companies were raising the prices at the gas stations so that people would “buy into” the idea that drilling on our own lands would provide cheaper gasoline.  What better way to make the point than in people’s wallets.

According to U.S. News and World Report:

There’s no business on the planet that gushes forth more profit than selling oil — nothing even close.

In 2007, Exxon beat its own one-year old record of the biggest corporate profits ever by 3 percent.  If Exxon were a country, it would exceed the gross domestic product of nearly two thirds of the 183 nations in the World Bank’s economic rankings.

The article further asserts that at that time, Exxon’s profits were 80% higher than General Electric, once considered one of the most successful companies in the United States.

The most recent quarterly earnings (ie December 2012) for ExxonMobil shows a revenue of $449.89 billion with a profit margin of 9.98% or $41 billion in profits.  Astoundingly enough, even with these kinds of numbers, Exxon gets tax breaks.  Not only that, but they have the arrogance to gripe about the fact that President Obama is making noises of taking those tax breaks away.

In an article written by Katarzyna Klimasinska and Jim Snyder for Bloomberg News,

Chief Executive Officer Rex. W. Tillerson and four counterparts defended the $21 billion in U.S. tax breaks that Democrats are seeking to recapture to reduce the federal deficit.

The Democrats’ proposal would raise about $13 billion by blocking the five largest oil and gas companies from receiving a domestic-manufacturing deduction for exploration and extraction in the U.S……[and] generate $6.5 billion by curtailing the oil companies’ ability to claim tax credits for royalty payments made to foreign governments.

Royalty payments to foreign governments?  I could go into the rampant use of euphemisms by those in power, but I better remain focussed on the topic at hand.  Royalty payments to foreign governments.   Oh, that’s right.  We mostly drill in other countries.  Unfortunately, and this is probably for another article, much of the drilling that goes on by these huge corporations are in impoverished parts of the world like Angola or Nigeria.  As we pump Shell, Exxon, or BP into our cars, we remain blissfully unaware of what goes on “over there.”  Because there are no stringent regulations in place with regard to environmental soundness, ecological areas are destroyed by the drilling that these companies do.   It is not our backyard.  It’s not even in the State next door.  In fact, the destruction of those environments are so removed from our immediate realities, that we can’t even conceptualize thousands upon thousands of acres that are left to fester in the waste product of the extraction process.

Furthermore, people in these parts of the world are displaced from their homes if their homes happen to be sitting on a site that may produce crude oil.  Some people are even killed and the villages destroyed.  Now I am not saying that BP or Shell are behind these destructive means of acquiring land.  At least not directly.  Nevertheless, these are terrible realities that exist in other countries to allow us our freedom to come and go as we please.

So here we have huge oil conglomerates who receive incredible tax breaks and make more money than God, pushing to extract oil in the United States.  Of course we have tasted some of the repercussions of oil spills over the years destroying the ecology of our coastlines.  We all cry out in horror and shame, scramble to do some clean up, and then go to the gas pumps to fill ‘er up again.

We would have to so radically change our lifestyle to stop being so dependent on oil.  I am not sure that we have it in us to proactively do this.

© Yvonne Behrens, M.Ed  2013


Social Security, Let’s Take a Look

I decided that since there has been so much hooplah, and do I dare suggest, misinformation about social security, that I would focus on the history of social security and move forward to the present as I had done with the healthcare question last month.  As it turned out, the author of one of my favorite blogs, “Time Goes By” found a great little video on YouTube explaining Social Security.  Since I certainly cannot do it any better, I thought I would pass it along.  However, I am still interested in writing about the history of Social Security (in particular when it was started in the ’40’s and when it was first reviewed in the ’80’sand why it keeps being put on the table as an area that needs to be adjusted.  In the meanwhile, please enjoy this video explanation.

I am placing this in the boomer blog because clearly, Social Security is the next big thing facing boomers.

© Yvonne Behrens, M.Ed  2013





“Forks Over Knives”












© Yvonne Behrens, M.Ed  2013



Scams Everywhere

Over the past few years, it seems that every time you turn around, you are reading about how the elderly are being taken advantage of or, at the very least, how the elderly should be aware that they could be taken advantage of.  I tend to get annoyed by all the trumpeting about scam artists and how the elderly need to protect themselves against these predators.  I have, in the past, looked on this as a bit of fear mongering and making the elderly feel more vulnerable.

However, just recently, I found myself the victim of a situation that could have been avoided and in which I was taken advantage, thus helping me to recognize that scamming can happen to anyone at any time.  This is what happened to me.

I needed to have some trees cut: they were too tall and too close to the house and winds have started to become much stronger in our area.

I looked at the newspaper and called a couple of numbers.  One person answered.  He came over to give me an estimate.  He had his nephew with him and he seemed like an okay guy, so we agreed that he would do the work.

The day he came over, he came with another individual, his brother, he told me.  This man had a wild look in his eyes.  He also brought a different kid.  So it was the two men and a kid.  As I recount this story, I am aware that the outcome is just as much my fault as anything they may have done.  But the element that allowed the outcome was that I felt intimidated by their numbers and by the wild look in the “brother’s” eyes.

They cut down some trees — did not cut down the tree that had originally been the reason to call a tree cutter.  But, and again, this is on me, when we had originally talked about that tree, we had spoken about cutting it down.  On reflection, what with the fact that it was a hardwood tree and actually acted as a block should any of the pine trees behind it be blown down, I decided that I only wanted to top it off.  They claimed that they did not have the equipment to do that.  The main fellow offered to bring me real firewood when they came back to finish the job and then charged me an exorbitant price for the work done.  I really do not know why I did not negotiate, but in part it was because this kid was in our faces and the the wild “brother” standing a few feet away.  Oh, and the fact that they would ask questions like: “So do you live here all alone?” and had spent ALL day hanging around the house doing their “work.”  All of that added up to my writing a check for an amount that I did not feel I should be paying for the work done.

They claimed they would come back the following week to finish the job, but, of course, I have not seen hide nor tail of them.  And, I just gave them the money.  I have called every single day, leaving various messages of anger, guilt-riding, threats, but to no avail.  I will give their names to the Better Business Bureau.

What did I learn from this?  Yes, one can be taken advantage of if one is feeling vulnerable.  What can be done to avoid this?

1) Do not call someone cold turkey.  Get a reference from a friend or a neighbor.

2) When you call, tell them they were referred by the person who referred them.

3) if  possible, ask someone else to be there when the person comes to give an estimate and when you are ready to pay for the work.

At least this is what I learned from my very expensive lesson.

© Yvonne Behrens, M.Ed  2013



“Obama Care” summarized – part 4

…and so here is the final entry to the long story of trying to implement universal health care in the United States.

The opposition fought a dirty war, even incorporating racism to try and prevent the Health Care Reform Act from becoming law.  But politics is a dirty game and often has very little to do with us, the people.

The reality is that health care in this country has become so exorbitantly expensive, the system would become financially bankrupt were it allowed to continue in the direction it has been.   Thus, all the posturing by the opponents of the bill had more to do with buying time in order to figure out how to ensure their interests under the new system.  In the end, much of the original bill was watered down and implementing universal health care will be much more expensive than it would have been when originally considered.  However, some important laws did get passed and, hopefully, States will recognize the benefits to them.  Unfortunately, since so much of the focus on the part of big businesses is on how to take advantage of circumstances, (and by this I mean milk the system) we have become a society that is encouraged to look at how to take advantage of legislation.  I really do not know a remedy for this since the example in front of us is that one can get away with milking the system (Wall Street being the biggest example of getting away with….).

So, in the end, what is the Health Care Reform Act?  I think the following video will probably do a better job of explaining than I can.  So view and enjoy.

© Yvonne Behrens, M.Ed  2013



An Interesting Perspective

I was looking up healthcare videos and came across this video which I found interesting.  Other than the mis-pronounciation of President Obama’s name, some of the arguments being put forth are food for thought.  Watch and tell me what you think:


Obama Care Part 3 – 2009: The Battle

In my previous entries, I shared the history of the whole universal health care debate, a debate that has been going on for almost a hundred years in our country.

President Obama rolled out the details of the Health Care Reform Initiative in the summer of 2009.  As you may recall, there was an unbelievable amount of acrimony around the topic.  This was where older folks, who really did not know what was within the 906 page document, were encouraged to come to Washington, D.C. (free bus ride and free lunch) and hold up placards that “yelled out” such lines as “Don’t kill Grandma.”  This phrase, it turns out, was referring to a clause, somewhere in the middle of the 906 page document in which every patient would have a right to talk with their doctors about end of life issues and it would be covered by insurance.

Ah, yes.  It was quite a period of time, back then.  Representatives, who backed the President’s health care initiative, would hold town meetings, facing really angry voters, who, quite frankly, did not fully understand how this health care initiative would benefit them.  I remember our representative in the Fifth District of Virginia, Tom Perriello, one of the finest politicians I have ever met.  He was a straight shooter and he had the most impeccable manners.  He held town meeting after town meeting after town meeting, where angry folk would challenge the initiative. In fact, it was known that the opposition sent in individuals with prepared questions on specific, if not, obscure points within the document.  Congressman Perriello had such a grasp on what those 906 pages contained, that he was able to answer most every single person’s question, no matter how obscure.    On the rare occasion that  he was unfamiliar with a clause that was brought up, he took the person’s name and address and promised to get back with him/her within the 24 hour period with an answer.

In spite of his efforts, not only did he loose re-election because he stood firmly behind the health care reform initiative, but the anger and fear that had been stirred up to such a frenzy, made his answers fall on deaf ears.  The people were not there to learn, but rather to try and trip up or embarrass the Congressman.

During a June 2009 speech, President Obama  outlined his strategy for reform. He suggested seven steps that would bring down the costs of our exhorbitant health care costs:  1)  electronic record-keeping; 2) preventing expensive conditions; 3)  reducing obesity; 4) refocusing doctor incentives from quantity of care to quality; 5) bundling payments for treatment of conditions rather than specific services; 6) better identifying and communicating the most cost-effective treatments; and, 7) reducing defensive medicine.[8]

In September of 2009, the President added a a few more points to the original plan: 1)  by having everyone be part of the insurance plan, the plan would be deficit neutral; 2) implementing laws that would prevent insurance companies to discriminate based on pre-existing conditions; 3) individuals would have a cap on how much they would have to spend out-of-pocket;  4) the creation of an insurance exchange for individuals and small businesses so that these entities would not be unfairly penalized for not having the numbers that larger companies have and thereby lack the means of equal coverage; 5) tax credits for individuals and small companies; 6) the creation of  independent commissions to identify fraud, waste and abuse; 7) in order to lower insurance costs for doctors to protect themselves against malpractice suits, the President added malpractice reform projects to the package.   [9][10]

Atul Gawande, a surgeon, writing in The New Yorker, further distinguished between the delivery system and the payment system.  He argued that reform of the delivery system is critical to getting costs under control, but that payment system reform (e.g., whether the government or private insurers process payments) is considerably less important yet gathers a disproportionate share of attention. Gawande argued that dramatic improvements and savings in the delivery system will take “at least a decade.” His recommendations were to address the over-utilization of healthcare in our country.  That the focus of healthcare needs to move back to keeping people healthy rather than making profits.  He also suggested that a comparative analysis system of the cost of treatments and outcomes across various healthcare providers be initiated.  Gawande argued:

this would be an iterative, empirical process and should be administered by a “national institute for healthcare delivery” to analyze and communicate improvement opportunities.[13]

When I read these points, they certainly make sense to me.  So why all the anger?  Why all the hostility?  Why all the emotion?

Because a group would stand to loose quite a bit if the Health Care Reform Act were to become law.  What group?  The Health Care Industry which is made up of the insurance companies, the pharmaceuticals, and the hospitals.  Oh, and then the investors in this industry.  (To be continued)

© Yvonne Behrens, M.Ed  2012

“Obama Care” – Part 2, The History

On February 6, 1974, President Richard M. Nixon proposed a comprehensive health insurance plan to Congress.

How the times they have changed! Following is the first sentence of President Nixon ‘s address:




It is hard to believe that nearly 40 years ago, it was a Republican President speaking like this.

I will continue to quote President Nixon because he says it all:



–Across the Nation, the average cost of a day of hospital care now exceeds $110.  {!!!]
–The average cost of delivering a baby and providing postnatal care approaches $1,000.
–The average cost of health care for terminal cancer now exceeds $20,000.





President Nixon then shares how his health care plan would be organized:

The plan is organized around seven principles:



Unfortunately, President Nixon’s health care initiative never went further because of the Watergate affair.  In the end, President Nixon resigned the presidency and the question of health care once again was pushed aside. 

In his memoirs, “Seize the Moment” Nixon reiterated his views on why health care is such an important topic:

“We need to work out a system that includes a greater emphasis on preventive care, sufficient public funding for health insurance for those who cannot afford it in the private sector, competition among healthcare providers and health insurance providers to keep down the costs of both, and decoupling the cost of healthcare from the cost of adding workers to the payroll,”

Next came President Jimmy Carter, but he had alienated the Congress so badly, that he had very little sway over them and the question of health care floundered.

Under Ronald Reagan, a health care mandate  was passed.  This turned out to be a compromise that ended up taxing the wrong people, that is the hospitals, with no stipulation to be repaid for their services.

The law requires hospitals to treat patients in need of emergency care regardless of their ability to pay, citizenship or even legal status. It applies to any hospital that takes Medicare funds, which is virtually every hospital in the country.

Under President Bill Clinton, a comprehensive health care system was devised based on universal coverage.  Although the added coverage would be expensive, the cost of non-insured and the poor in emergency room procedures was more.  Hillary Clinton headed up the task force to provide the proposal.  Clinton’s plan, like Nixon’s, called for building on the existing private-sector health-care system and using government subsidies and tax credits to get all Americans under an umbrella of health coverage. Like Nixon, Clinton said her plan “is not government-run. There will be no new bureaucracy.”

In 1993, 23 Republican senators, including then-Minority Leader Robert Dole, cosponsored a bill introduced by Senator John Chafee that sought to achieve universal coverage through a mandate that is, a mandate on individuals to buy insurance. Nearly every major health care interest group had endorsed substantial reforms–grandiose ones, in fact. The American Medical Association (AMA) and Health Insurance Association of America (HIAA), the two great, historic bastions of opposition to compulsory health insurance, both went on record in support of an employer mandate and universal coverage. Even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce endorsed an employer mandate, as did many large corporations. Other groups came out variously for reform options that ran along a spectrum from Canadian-style, single-payer programs on the left to managed competition and medical savings accounts and radical changes in tax policy on the right. Under the circumstances, it was easy to believe the country was ready for substantial reform and that a market-oriented, consumer-choice approach to universal coverage, positioned in the center, could become a platform for consensus.

But, once again,  politics got in the way, and thus this health care initiative came crashing down. And every year, the health care costs have gone up.

These days, a day stay in the hospital costs at least $1,700, sometimes more, depending on which hospital.  Back to the history and onto…..

George W. Bush signed into law the Medicare Modernization Act.  This was supposed to provide all 40 million Medicare beneficiaries with a voluntary prescription drug benefit. This drug benefit gave seniors their choice of various plans to help them afford the cost of their medicines.  Of course what was not taken into account were the pages and pages of documents that these seniors were expected to go through.  And then there was the donut hole, that place wherein which the senior would fall when they reached a cap of $2,250 in their prescription drug costs.  In an environment where a pill can cost as much as $1,000, that hole could reach the senior fairly quickly.  And thus, something that looked like it was giving, ended up giving nothing.

So, the picture looks a little bit like different administrations offering a cake and being shot down for political reasons and some administrations getting crumbs through but with consequences that somehow undermine the crumbs thrown at the public.

Meanwhile, the law makers who keep negotiating and fighting against the idea of a universal health care system have the best healthcare system provided them for life.

(to be continued)

© Yvonne Behrens, M.Ed 2012

“Obama Care” Part 1, The History






In Lepore’s article, we learn that:











© Yvonne Behrens, M.Ed  2012




Antibiotics:  A regular part of our lives.  We get a tooth pulled, we are given antibiotics.  We have surgery, we are given antibiotics.  We have a stomach ailment, we are given antibiotics.  We have a cough, we are given antibiotics.  We have diarrhea, we are given antibiotics.  We have vague feelings of not feeling well, we are given antibiotics.  We have a viral something, we are given antibiotics.  Antibiotics have become as common in our lives as getting a yearly check up.

And yet, ……

Often, there are side effects that can be very harmful to our systems.  Often, the antibiotic prescribed is too potent for the particular ailment.

In an article written by Jane E. Brody for the New York Times, we learn in great detail some of the terrible repercussions of poorly prescribed use of antibiotics.  Ms. Brody cites that fluoroquinolone is the ingredient that causes innumerable unwanted side effects. :



I don’t know about lazy or not.  If in fact lazy is the reason, we have a major problem in our medical system.  But we might be talking about ignorance, not laziness.  If that is the case, we have an even greater problem in our medical system.

Ms. Brody continues:


The rising use of these potent drugs has also been blamed for increases in two very serious, hard-to-treat infections: antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (known as MRSA) and severe diarrhea caused by Clostridium difficile. One study found that fluoroquinolones were responsible for 55 percent of C. difficile infections at one hospital in Quebec.

A friend of mine, who had been on antibiotics, became a welcoming environment to the C. difficile.  My mother-in-law developed severe diarrhea while she was living in an assisted living facility.  No one could figure out why.  She had just gotten off a regiment of antibiotics, but, of course, no one suspected that as being the cause since antibiotics are beneficial, right?  Luckily for us, my friend had learned that her problem was being caused by C. difficile and she apparently had a brilliant doctor who suggested that Pepto Bismol would take care of the problem, which it did.  We gave my mother-in-law Pepto Bismol and lo and behold, her diarrhea, which had been going on for months, stopped!

Unfortunately, there are no studies out there to solidify the direct link between the fluoroquinolones and the C. difficile.

Fluoroquinolones carry a “black box” warning mandated by the Food and Drug Administration that tells doctors of the link to tendinitis and tendon rupture and, more recently, about the drugs’ ability to block neuromuscular activity. But consumers don’t see these highlighted alerts, and patients are rarely informed of the risks by prescribing doctors.

Until antibiotics are more closely scrutinized, I always check the “allergic to” box.  I think I am safer and will probably remain healthier that way.


© Yvonne Behrens, M.Ed  2012