Jan 212011
 

The Le Cordon Bleu Institute of Culinary Arts in Pittsburgh is closing next year. Normally, this wouldn’t really phase me much, as I don’t have any interest in attending culinary school. I like to cook, but I’m more of a weekend warrior in that regard. I am, however, generally interested in local Pittsburgh news, so I read the Post-Gazette’s analysis of the closing.

Pretty standard fare, until you get to the bottom, which caused all of my hair to promptly fall out.

“As a for-profit institution, CEC has faced increasing pressure from the Obama administration and Senate Democrats in the past year. A proposed “gainful employment” rule from the Department of Education would deny federal funding to schools with graduates facing high proportions of debt related to their expected salaries. In 2010 a two-year associate’s degree from Pittsburgh’s Le Cordon Bleu cost $42,660. According to financial aid data for the 2008-09 school year, 47 percent of all students received federal student loans, worth more than $6.5 million to the school. Mr. Miller cited the “gainful employment” rule as a major factor in CEC’s decision to close the Pittsburgh school, and he predicted that it would soon affect other for-profit schools in the area.”

Let that sink in a moment. The school is closing because of pressure directly from the Obama administration.

Continue reading »

Aug 112009
 

I love when overambitious politicians accidentally speak the truth – to their own detriment. I mean, how could I top a gem like this?

“Obama sought to dispel talk that his ultimate goal is a single-payer federal health care system, like that in countries such as Canada.

He also disputed the notion that adding a government-run insurance plan into a menu of options from which people could pick would drive private insurers out of business, in effect making the system single-payer by default.

As long as they have a good product and the government plan has to sustain itself through premiums and other non-tax revenue, private insurers should be able to compete with the government plan, Obama said.

‘They do it all the time,’ he said. ‘UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. … It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems.’

  1. The Post Office has a monopoly on standard mail delivery.
  2. The Post Office struggles to sustain itself through non-tax revenues such as stamp sales.
  3. The Post Office is inferior to UPS, FedEx, et al., for shipping.
  4. The Post Office is an inefficient pseudo-monopoly that eats tax revenue and keeps mailing prices high due to lack of competition and innovation.
  5. The Post Office is no worse than any other government bureaucracy.
  6. Why should we expect government insurance/health care to be any better?

Update 08/13/09: Lew Rockwell has tossed in his two cents about this gaffe.

Obama and the Post Office

“Writing in The State and Revolution in 1917, Vladimir Lenin summed up the economic aim of socialism as follows: ‘To organize the whole economy on the lines of the postal service….’

“Incredible, isn’t it? After centuries of treatises and miles of paper and tubs of ink, this is the great historical turning point: government employees carrying sacks of paper mail from house to house, and operating at an economic loss.”

Update 08/18/09: John Stossel has chimed in.

Obama’s Post Office Mistake

“His mistake is telling. If he didn’t notice that the Post Office, despite providing worse service than UPS and FedEX, is bailed out by Congress, will he notice when a government-run health care plan is feeding off billions of your tax dollars?

“Or would he care? Before the election he supported a single payer system. Subsidized co-ops would be an easy back-door way to achieve the same thing.”

Get Adobe Flash player