ETN reported earnings 30 days ago. What's next for the company? We take a look at earnings estimates for some clues.
Backtrack to 2008 to 2010, when the increasing costs and unaffordability of insurance and health care for Americans were a front-burner issue. They remain so today. Soon after coming into office, the new Obama administration worked for two years, in the name of health care "reform," to appease corporate stakeholders in our well-entrenched medical-industrial complex. The political question then was not what was in the best interests of patients and families, but how to gain the support of the major corporate players, especially the insurance, hospital, and drug industries. Following their huge campaign donations, sending more than 4,500 lobbyists to the Beltway (eight for every member of Congress) (1) and a rapidly revolving door of conflicts of interest, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, or ACA and Obamacare) was passed by a narrow margin in Congress almost seven years ago. Today, it is obvious to all that patients are still not protected by good insurance coverage at affordable rates, and that the very name of the bill is a misnomer. The costs of health care keep rising at rapid rates as insurers, hospitals and drug companies blame others for these increases. None of these industries have contained costs as they pursue their business model of making profits, with their highest priority maximizing revenues for their CEOs and shareholders. As we are now seeing, insurers exit markets when they are not sufficiently profitable, even as health care stocks have soared to the highest sector of the S & P 500. Not only did the health insurance industry get some 20 million new enrollees as a result of the ACA (mostly through Medicaid expansion), but insurers gained many ways to decrease their risk for covering enrollees' health care costs. These include offering plans covering as little as 60 percent of costs (bronze plans), receiving "risk corridor" funds protecting them from losses (now a court case), benefit designs that still discriminate against the sick, shrinking provider networks, restrictive drug formularies, offering limited-benefit bare-bones policies, and deceptive marketing practices. In no way have they contained costs, even as they have been subsidized by new enrollees through the exchanges. All the while, they have gained market power through consolidation as they consume 15 to 20 percent of U. S. health care expenditures, mostly through profiteering, administrative overhead, and bureaucratic waste. If their merger agreements survive court challenges, just three giants--Anthem/Cigna, United Health Group, and Aetna/Humana will collectively have a margin share exceeding more than 130 million Americans. (2) Insurers have segmented the market in their own interests, shifting the burden of care of sicker patients to public programs. They have increasingly privatized both Medicare and Medicaid, resulting in higher administrative costs compared with public Medicare and Medicaid. They also maximize profits by cutting staff and value of coverage, resulting in worse outcomes for patients compared with public plans. (3) Most people are unaware that the government already pays for about 64 percent of total health care spending--about $1.9 trillion in 2013, much of that by subsidizing private health care industries, especially private health insurance. There is a long history to this subsidization, dating back to policy decisions after World War II giving tax exemptions to employers for their costs of providing employer-sponsored health insurance. The ACA bailed out the industry in 2010, which is once again calling for more government subsidies to stay in business. A just-released estimate by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) acknowledges that the three-year risk corridor deficit from 2014 through 2016 for insurer losses will exceed $14 billion. (4) The Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee for Taxation estimate that the net subsidy from the federal government in 2016 for health insurance for people under age 65 and costs for Medicaid enrollees under age 65 will be $660 billion. (5) That estimate includes effects of preferential tax treatment for employer-sponsored coverage. We can anticipate that insurers will make good on their threats to leave the market when we recall that 2.4 million private Medicare beneficiaries were abandoned in 2002, when they lost their Medicare + Choice coverage despite infusion of more federal dollars. (6) The incoming Trump administration and Republican-controlled Congress will be pressured to continue a further federal bailout of the private health insurance industry. But why whip a dead horse? It is past time to learn that corporate greed and the business model do not, and will never, serve the common good. As Wendell Potter, former Cigna executive and author of Deadly Spin: An Insurance Company Insider Speaks Out on How Corporate PR is Killing Health Care and Deceiving Americans, observes: Folks, we are guilty of magical thinking. We've fallen for insurers' deception and misdirection, hook, line and sinker. And many of us can't be persuaded that we are being duped. Meanwhile, the shareholders of the big for-profits are laughing all the way to the bank. Every single day. (7) We--Americans needing health care, employers, federal and state governments, and all of us taxpayers--cannot afford another bailout of the health insurance industry, especially since we have a real fix-- single-payer, not-for-profit national health insurance, Medicare for All. It will provide universal access to care for our entire population, save us all money, give us free choice of physician and hospital, and improve our health care outcomes in a reformed system dedicated to service and the public interest. Corporate stakeholders with their political and economic power, and their lobbyists (most unregistered) are again pushing for continued government bailouts of this industry, which has not earned it. Another bailout cannot reverse the health insurance industry's continuing death spiral. John Geyman, M.D. is the author of The Human Face of ObamaCare: Promises vs. Reality and What Comes Next and How Obamacare is Unsustainable: Why We Need a Single-Payer Solution For All Americans visit: http://www.johngeymanmd.org Sources: 1. Eaton, J, Pell, MB. Lobbyists swarm capitol to influence health reform. Washington, D.C. The Center for Public Integrity, February 23, 2010) 2. Mattioli, D, Hoffman, L, Mathews, AW. Anthem hears $48 billion Cigna deal. Wall Street Journal, July 23, 2015: A1 3. Geyman, JP. The health insurance industry's last-ditch holdup. The Huffington Post, August 15, 2016.) 4. Blase, B. A taxpayer bailout of ObamaCare insurers just got a lot more expensive. Forbes, November 21, 2016.) 5. CBO and JCT. Federal subsidies for health insurance coverage for people under 65: 2016 to 2026. March 24, 2016. 6. Waldholz, M. Prescriptions. Medicare seniors face confusion as HMOs bail out of program. Wall Street Journal, October 3, 2002: D4.) 7. (Potter, W. It's way past time for us to stop deluding ourselves about private health insurers. The Progressive Populist, September 1, 2016: p. 20.) -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Protesters on the University of Connecticut campus on Wednesday, Nov. 9, 2016. (AP Photo/Pat Eaton-Robb) The stories tend to sound the same: swastikas in school bathrooms; gangs of white men in #MAGA shirts harassing women in hijabs; racist sticky notes. Emboldened young supporters of President-Elect Donald Trump, we are told, have taken [...]
Rise expenses were largely responsible for earnings miss at Eaton Vance (EV).
Eaton (EV) is scheduled to report fourth-quarter and fiscal 2016 (ended Oct 31) results on Tuesday Nov 22, before the opening bell.
Further cementing President Barack Obama’s climate legacy, the Department of the Interior announced on Friday its intent to ban oil drilling in the U.S. section of the Arctic Ocean for the next five years, citing environmental risks. The plan blocks the sale of new offshore oil and gas leases in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas, north of Alaska, between 2017 and 2022. “The plan focuses lease sales in the best places ― those with the highest resource potential, lowest conflict, and established infrastructure ― and removes regions that are simply not right to lease,” Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell said in a statement. “Given the unique and challenging Arctic environment and industry’s declining interest in the area, forgoing lease sales in the Arctic is the right path forward.” The Obama administration’s proposed five-year program for oil and gas had included 13 potential lease sales — 10 in the Gulf of Mexico and one each in Alaska’s Cook Inlet, Beaufort Sea and Chukchi Sea. In March, the White House abandoned plans to include the Atlantic Coast in the upcoming sale. The Interior Department’s final plan, which limits drilling during the five-year period to the Gulf of Mexico and Cook Inlet, is being met with mixed reactions from environmental groups calling on Obama to use his executive power to permanently protect the fragile Arctic. The plan is a “significant win for Arctic and Alaskan communities and a strong step towards addressing climate change” but continues to leave the Gulf of Mexico at risk, San Francisco-based nongovernmental organization Rainforest Action Network told The Huffington Post in a statement. “This move locks the Gulf into another five years of corporate giveaways ― with decades more of climate pollution, offshore oil spills, devastation to fisheries, and health impacts to local communities,” RAN Executive Director Lindsey Allen said. “A true transition from fossil fuels doesn’t allow for energy sacrifice zones, especially when we know the climate can’t handle further fossil fuel development.” Carter Roberts, president and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund, applauded the announcement, saying there’s no proven technology to safely drill in the Arctic, and no way to clean up oil if it were to spill in frozen waters. He added that he hopes more permanent protection would follow. Earlier this week, NextGen Climate urged Obama to use his executive authority to permanently protect the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans from such drilling, noting the “dangerous agenda” of President-elect Donald Trump. “The Trump Administration has the potential to do serious damage to our climate ― but in the last few months of his presidency, President Obama can take concrete steps to secure his environmental legacy,” NextGen President Tom Steyer said in a statement, adding it would continue to flight against “Trump’s dark vision and dangerous plans for our country.” Such presidential executive action would be separate from the leasing program. Unsurprisingly, the oil and gas industry is disappointed by the announcement. The American Petroleum Institute, an industry trade group, called the move “short-sighted” and “detrimental.” “Our national energy security depends on our ability to produce oil and natural gas here in the U.S., and this decision could very well increase the cost of energy for American consumers and close the door on creating new jobs and new investments for years,” API President and CEO Jack Gerard said. “We are hopeful the incoming administration will reverse this decision ― consistent with the will of American voters.” The proposed expansion of oil and gas drilling in the Arctic and Gulf would result in climate-related social costs between $58.6 and $179.2 billion, according to a Greenpeace report released in June ― enough to potentially outweigh the economic benefits of selling the energy. The plan still requires Jewell’s final approval, and would take effect July 1, 2017. As he has promised to do with so many of Obama’s previous actions aimed at combatting climate change, Trump will likely try to do away with Arctic drilling ban. After all, the Republican president-elect has said he believes climate change is a “hoax.” Trump pledged in May to pull the U.S. out of the historic Paris climate agreement. He has also said he would cut all federal spending for climate change research, cleaner technologies and aid for communities already threatened by climate impacts. For guidance, he has turned to climate change denier Myron Ebell and fossil fuel lobbyist Mike McKenna to help with transition work at the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy. Furthermore, Trump has said he would increase America’s production of coal, oil and natural gas, as well as do away with Obama administration regulations aimed at cutting emissions. Global security leaders have warned Trump that failing to fight climate change could prove disastrous to national security, leading to increased risks of violent conflict and economic instability. Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, managing director of the Vet Voice Foundation, applauded Obama’s decision as a win for national security. “Encouraging oil and gas development in the Arctic would compromise our national security by placing additional demands on our military and undermine one of the globe’s most pressing national security concerns ― climate change,” he said in a statement to HuffPost. The proposed final plan makes available more than 70 percent of the economically recoverable resources, which Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Director Abigail Ross Hopper said is “ample opportunity for oil and gas development to meet the nation’s energy needs.” The bureau said a number of factors went into the decision to remove the Arctic from the plan, including “ecological conditions, environmental risks and recent changes in industry interest.” Jacqueline Savitz of Oceana said the announcement “demonstrates a commitment to prioritizing common sense, economics and science ahead of industry favoritism and politics as usual.” This story has been updated with reactions to the Interior Department’s plan. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Источник: Russian Insider Originally appeared at Nikolai Starikov blog. Translated by Andrey Medvedev. 1. Its key core principle is fragmentation. This may sound strange, but fragmentation is the ultimate foundation for Western brainwashing. It’s no secret that the education system in «advanced democracies» is designed to artificially create a very narrow view of the world. On the contrary, the Soviet school system tries to create a holistic view of the world even among the laziest of underachievers, filling their reluctant heads with higher mathematics, physics, chemistry and astronomy, however unlikely that they would use all this knowledge. Understanding the way our world is connected, cause and effect, and the ability to put together and analyze various facts is called «analytical thinking». It is the first step in creativity. All those things are suppressed in the Western system of education. Our country has tried to adopt this system as part of «education reform», which has one clear goal: the fragmentation of society, not simply into classes, but into castes. The ruling caste receives a classical education in privileged schools, the Cambridges and Eatons, where a holistic view of the world is taught and where future leaders and the elites of the Western world are forged. Everyone else gets an «advanced educational system», which has virtually abolished homework, leaving students barely able to read. Anyone who went to school the USSR and is also familiar with Western schools will tell you how much stronger the program in the Soviet Union was. Our high school students solved problems that Westerners studied in college. Emigrate While You Still Can! Learn More... The emphasis on this education system in the West is no accident. The fragmentation of consciousness and lack of a holistic world view are characteristics of a child’s perception of reality. Children, after all, live in their own world, a world of games, fairy tales, and dreams. They eventually develop an adult worldview based on experience, seeing their surroundings for what they truly are. 2. The goal of the Western education system is to raise children. Grown-up children. The only adults in the system are graduates of elite universities who receive a real education. Hence the startling naiveté of westerners who easily fall for all kinds of nonsense, if it is repeated to them on TV. For example, the idea that the US is a beacon of freedom and democracy for the entire world which, rather than pursuing its own interests only seeks to disseminate a rather nebulous «freedom». A child is easy to convince of anything – the key is to keep telling the story persuasively and vividly. The Western information machine is convincing because the same point of view is regurgitated everywhere: no other view is presented. A similar effect is achieved when a little boy poses the same question first to his mom, then to his dad, and finally to his grandmother. Having received the same answer, he decides that it must be so. 3. Children love to play and have fun, and modern Western civilization extends play and fun forever. There are thousands of games, and hundred of apps for games. There are movies, books, entire networks and special places to play. Everything is done to make sure that adults can play as much as they want. Is it important for society and humanity as a whole for individuals to play so much? What is the purpose of play for the human species? There is no conceivable benefit. But it is convenient to be able to manage individuals who only want to have fun, like a little child. This trend leads to immaturity. People do not want to have children — not surprising, since children do not create families or give birth. It’s unnecessary for them. Having families and raising children of your own generally leaves little time for games and ‘fun’. These three features of Western civilization are behind the strategy used to manipulate «Joe Sixpack». Colorful, fragmented thoughts are successfully placed in his head. This man-child, the average Western Joe, has no real understanding of what is happening, and is perfectly willing to believe a tall tale if it is colorful enough and repeated often enough. So how do you tell a manipulation from an honest presentation of the facts? Manipulators will appeal to your emotions, using feelings – and a bare minimum of facts – to create a false impression. Manipulators will present facts in the wrong sequence, in violation of logic, flipping cause and effect. They will invariably show a fragment of what is happening, but never the complete picture. Notice how Western media campaigns, as well as those of our pro-Western liberals, who are attached to the West by an invisible umbilical cord, are always fragmented and emotional. In August 2008, «they were all Georgians». Another time, they were fighting against the «tyranny of Saddam Hussein». A few years later «freedom reigned supreme in Ukraine» when they burned and stoned the unarmed «Berkut» police force. Then, all of a sudden, they are overcome by concern for the fate of Aleppo, although just yesterday, they couldn’t care less about the fate of Donetsk or Damascus and Homs. Then they will wrong their hands over «Putin poisoning Litvinenko with polonium», and nobody cares that had this been true, the method would have certainly poisoned more than one person, possibly the entire city of London. They put a small fragment of information into the Western man-child Joe Sixpack’s mouth and wrap it in a beautiful television picture. The picture shows burned trucks, but a total absence of shell craters. Everyone watching believes that the picture shows the result of a Russian air force attack on a humanitarian convoy. Nobody reports the fact that had the convoy really been hit by aerial bombs, the trucks would not just catch fire, they would have been pulverized. But the picture is in vivid color, and oh-so-convincing. Who is to blame for the deluge of refugees in Europe? Obviously, the European leaders who opened the floodgates of the continent to a million refugees, mainly from Afghanistan and other countries in the Middle East. But what does the Western propaganda machine say? The inundation of refugees is Russia’s fault, because she makes it so difficult to overthrow Assad. Had Russia not interfered, the war would have been over by now and no one would have had to flee to Europe. The lie is not just obvious, it’s a double-header: If you yearn for peace in Syria, don’t support those who violated it – the «opposition» that is. Six years ago, there were no Syrian refugees heading to Europe, even though Bashar al-Assad was alive and well as their leader. Russia’s actions are aimed at restoring that pre-war status quo. Instead, Russia is being blamed for the bloodshed and destruction in Syria, and also, for the fact that some 100,000 refugees ended up in Germany. When the Pentagon or the State Department, in all seriousness, point out «evidence from Facebook», they are not kidding or being dishonest. They, too, were brought up OVER THERE. And that’s why some of them genuinely believe this information to be true. Surely, the adults, Mom and Dad, could never lie to their little boy, could they? So the child genuinely believes that if he refuses to eat his breakfast, a scary Jabberwocky will pay him a visit, displeased with his lack of appetite – with all the consequences. The child cannot even conceive of the idea that a Jabberwocky does not exist and that his mother made him up to achieve her practical objective (feed the petulant child). A Westerner cannot believe that the film about «Russian attacks on a humanitarian convoy» may have been fabricated, or that MI-6 could have poisoned Litvinenko with thallium salts, or that the Western media could sink so low as to show «riots in Moscow» with palm trees in the background (because this was actually the footage of the riots in Athens). Surely, a «civilized country» would never stoop to such fakery? So today, the West and the Fifth Column in Russia «are residents of Aleppo» («Je suis Aleppo!»), even though neither of them give a damn about Syria in general and Aleppo in particular. It’s just that today, the spotlight of the Western info-circus is directed that way. So everybody is obediently staring in that direction, discussing only what they are shown. But fear not, in almost no time at all, they will forget all about Aleppo. They will be shown and told a brand new scary tale, and the infantile Joe Six-packs will believe it. They will begin to worry about someone or something… up until the moment the propaganda machine highlights other facts in another country, still failing to notice the tragedy of the Donbas or the various cities in Syria, or Yemen, or hundreds of other places on the planet whose daily tragedies are given the cold shoulder by the Western media. Оригинал размещён в моём блоге.
The third-quarter 2016 reporting cycle for the Finance sector is almost over. Results of the industry participants depict a significant improvement, despite a challenging operating backdrop.
Our safety and salvation lie in the Constitution and the rule of law. That is why the President's sole oath is to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." Thus, President-elect Donald Trump must void President Barack Obama's Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) aiming to restrain Iran's nuclear ambitions because it is an executive agreement that violates the Constitution's Treaty Clause. The Constitution's authors worried that the President would betray national interests for ulterior motives in concluding secret agreements with foreign nations. The example of King Charles II was fixed in their memories. The British Monarch unilaterally negotiated the Secret Treaty of Dover with French King Louis XIV in 1670. Among other things, the treaty provided that Charles II would receive a yearly pension from Louis; that additional sums would be forthcoming when Charles jettisoned Anglicanism for Roman Catholicism; that Louis would provide up to 6,000 French soldiers in the event Charles' treason provoked an English rebellion; and, that Charles would ally with France in its war against the Dutch. Accordingly, Article II, section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution empowers the President, "by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur." To provide treaty advice to the President, half of the eight United States delegates to negotiate the United Nations Charter were Members of Congress: Senators Tom Connally (D-Tex.) and Arthur Vandenberg (R-Mich.), and Representatives Sol Bloom (D-N.Y.) and Charles Eaton (R-N.J.). Presidents William McKinley, Warren Harding, and Herbert Hoover similarly included Senators as U.S. delegates to negotiate treaties. Alexander Hamilton elaborated the reasons for the Treaty Clause in Federalist 75: An avaricious man might be tempted to betray the interests of the state to the acquisition of wealth. An ambitious man might make his own aggrandizement, by the aid of a foreign power, the price of his treachery to his constituents. The history of human conduct does not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to commit interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as would be a President of the United States." President Obama negotiated the JCPOA without congressional participation. Further, the agreement between the United States and Iran is a treaty by any plausible constitutional standard or tradition. Hamilton explained in Federalist 75 that treaty "objects are CONTRACTS with foreign nations, which have the force of law, but derive it from the obligations of good faith. They are not rules prescribed by the sovereign to the subject, but agreements between sovereign and sovereign." The JCPOA fits an agreement between sovereign and sovereign like a glove. Moreover, agreements bearing on nuclear arms have traditionally been treaties. They include the Limited Test Ban Treaty, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the Intermediate Nuclear Force Treaty, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. Even a paltry agreement with Britain over migratory birds was a treaty, i.e., the Migratory Bird Treaty of 1916. Secretary of State John Kerry did not dispute that the JCPOA is a treaty in testifying before the House Foreign Relations Committee. Instead, Mr. Kerry explained that the Obama administration would no longer comply with the Treaty Clause because the threshold of political consensus needed for ratification was too challenging. Rep. Reid Ribble (R-Wisc.) inquired: "Why is this [Iran deal] not considered a treaty?" Secretary Kerry responded: "Well Congressman, I spent quite a few years ago trying to get a lot of treaties through the United States Senate...And frankly, it's become physically impossible. That's why...Because you can't pass a treaty anymore...And it's become impossible to, you know, schedule, it's become impossible to pass. And I sat there leading the charge on the Disabilities Treaty which fell to, basically, ideology and politics. So I think that's the reason why." Alexander Hamilton would have been appalled. The Treaty Clause is to prevent, not to facilitate presidential betrayals or follies. The Constitution's framers would have impeached, convicted, and removed Mr. Kerry from office for his constitutional perfidy. But Congress has degenerated from a vertebrate to an invertebrate institution over the past several decades. Accordingly, Mr. Kerry escaped congressional rebuke. Congress meekly acquiesced in the JCPOA as an executive agreement. But the Constitution's separation of powers is a structural bill of rights to protect the American people from tyranny. The Supreme Court has thus held that one branch may not voluntarily surrender its powers to another branch and jeopardize the liberties of the citizenry. Last March, Mr. Trump declared that his "Number-One priority" would be "to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran." That is not an option. It is a constitutional imperative until and unless the Senate ratifies the agreement with a two-thirds majority. And if the JCPOA precedent is not disowned by President Trump, it will lie around like a loaded weapon ready for any successor to use to justify an international global warming pact as a constitutionally valid executive agreement that might cripple the American economy. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Eaton Vance Dividend Builder A (EVTMX) a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) was incepted in December 1981 and is managed by Boston Management and Research.
On Nov 14, 2016, we issued an updated research report on Eaton Corporation (ETN).
Here are 7 movie and TV show casts that decided to bond by all getting tattoos together.
Catalyst Pharmaceuticals (CPRX) reported a narrower-than-expected third-quarter 2016 loss of 5 cents per share.
The latest American Petroleum Institute (API) report shows a crude oil build more than two times larger than experts expected, after last week’s government report revealed a record 14.4 million barrel increase in domestic inventories. The API reported a 4.4-million-barrel build in oil supplies in lieu of the two-million-barrel spike that Zerohedge’s industry insiders had anticipated. Oil prices were down slightly after the API numbers were released. As of this article’s writing, West Texas Intermediate is down 0.13 percent at…
Gibraltar Industries, Eaton, News, Scripps Networks Interactive and Entercom Communications highlighted as Zacks Bull and Bear of the Day
Gibraltar Industries, Eaton, News, Scripps Networks Interactive and Entercom Communications highlighted as Zacks Bull and Bear of the Day
Catalyst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (CPRX) is scheduled to report third-quarter 2016 results on Nov 9, after market close.