Do you remember family physicians who made house calls when you were sick?  Do you remember not waiting endlessly in waiting rooms, only to be shuffled into one of a half of dozen examination rooms, only to wait endlessly again to see your doctor?  Do you remember your doctor spending more than just a few minutes talking to you, devoting considerable time examining you, explaining your condition, and precisely giving you instructions on how to take care of your illness?  Do you remember the family doctor who knew your medical history so you did not have to recount all of your ills and pains throughout eternity whenever you went to see him?  Do you remember a doctor who was willing to prescribe medication over the phone, without necessitating an afternoon visit to his office, and expeditiously authorizing those required refills of your medications without you begging and pleading on the other end of the phone? 

Do you remember when family physicians were considered just that:  family!  Yes, they were competent and knowledgeable, but they expressed a personable bedside manner as opposed to a strictly sterile and clinical demeanor.  Let’s face it:  our bodies are not objects.  They are very personal to us.  And although other professionals, like lawyers, need to convey a certain objectivity, doctors see and know all of us, even our most intimate and hidden aspects.  It’s hard to reveal all of that stuff to an outsider, to one who is not regarded as a member of the family. 

I remember when doctors were like family.  In fact, our family physician for years in New Britain was Edmund Orbach.  He was my grandfather’s doctor; my mother’s doctor; and my doctor until his retirement some decades ago.  Dr. Orbach had escaped Nazi-occupied Austria in the mid 1930s and started a medical practice in New Britain, on the corner of West Main and Washington Streets.  He was a little man with a thick German accent, with the bedside manner of the proverbial old-time family physician.  He knew me since I was a baby, and would ask me questions about school and my homework; and would even urge me to pursue medicine as a career. 

One never felt rushed during his examinations.  He patiently addressed all of one’s questions, no matter how stupid they might appear in retrospect, since we did not feel obligated to hold back out of embarrassment because, after all, he was like a member of the family.   And in detail without any rushing so that we would full absorb what he was saying, he explained the course of treatment, unlike so many medical professionals today who are already anticipating the next patient in the adjacent examination room and don’t want to know too much about you, but shuffle you out of the office, preferring not to say too much about your condition, diagnosis, prognosis, or prescriptions.

Perhaps such is due to the litigious nature of our times.  Maybe doctors are deathly afraid of saying anything that can be used against them in a court of law since so many people are sue crazy today.  Whatever. 

I recently met a doctor here in Berlin who reminds me of the physicians of yesteryears, possessing all of their courtesies and graces, reminiscent of the bedside maners of doctors of yore.  He is very personable; he conveys a real genuine concern for the patient; he takes his time examining each patient; and he explains in great detail the course of his treatments without rushing each one out of the office.  I am relieved to have found such a physician here in Berlin, Connecticut.

His name is Dr. Othman El-Alami.  My wife first introduced me to Dr. El-Alami a couple of years ago since she had been raving about him for years to me.  She thought him to be a very special doctor and trusted him.  My wife is a cancer survivor of ten years, and knows everything there is to be known about doctors.  Trusting her expertise in this important area, I decided to give him a try as my primary doctor, and now I am so very pleased to have made this wise decision.

What first impressed me about Dr. El-Alami was his courteous, warm manner.  Unlike so many physicians that I have patronized in the past, I did not feel that I had to apologize for being ill and taking up his time.  He displayed a genuine interest in my well-being and health.  When was the last time you felt that way in a doctor’s office?

But what impressed me the most was his willingness to openly communicate his detailed diagnosis and prognosis of my condition without me drilling him like a prosecuting attorney.  He takes his time, volunteering information unasked for but appreciated by me.  For instance, suffering from a post-nasal drip that felt like the flow of the Mississippi River coursing down the back of my throat, he recommended covering my mouth and nose with a scarf so that the cold weather did not irritate my nasal passages.  It was like mom reminding me to button up my coat and put on my earmuffs.  I liked that.

Or upon noticing that I was adding pounds like the neighborhood hippo, he suggested that I refrain from more than one starch at dinner, refusing that tempting slice of fresh Italian bread from San Remo’s bakery.  I am still struggling with that recommendation.

But what adds to that old-time feeling of a family doctor is the atmosphere of Dr. El-Alami’s office.  Nadia, his wife, is always at the front desk.  She is another familiar face who knows all of the patients and their medical history.  It is reassuring to me that there is continuity of the medical team–in fact, a “family” team–unlike all those other medical offices where the staff is indulging in musical chairs and there is always a different face manning the front desk, having no clue at to who you are, and recording your visit without that glad-to-see-you-again greeting.

And if you are suffering from a medical problem, Nadia will get you an appointment on that day, if necessary.  No suggestion of going to the emergency room if you cannot wait until next week or next month to see the doctor.

Yes, I am very pleased that I have found a doctor here in the town of Berlin to entrust my medical care.  A doctor that I know is accessible, competent, pleasant, and personable, just as Dr. Edmund Orbach was to my grandfather, my mother, and me as a young man.

Thank you, Dr. El-Alami.  I appreciate your genuine, kindly, family care.

“If you think we can eliminate online piracy, what do you see as alternatives to the proposals in the Protect IP Act, and how can they best be implemented?”

My emailed response to his question follows:

Dear Senator Blumenthal,

This is the Age of Information. And to promote literacy, free speech, and the exchange of ideas, the internet needs to be protected and made free to all users, as if it were one huge public library.

If vendors wish to protect their property, then they are free to do so through technology, installing controls on discs to prevent duplication and publication. Let these vendors assume the financial responsibility; do not impose such at the taxpayers expense.

We are not charged extra if we lend copies of books that we purchased at bookstores to friends.  This is not regarded as piracy but as sharing.  Neither are we charged extra for copies of books that we take out from the public library.  Again, this is not regarded as piracy but as educational.

The important point is to conceive of the internet as one big public library, making all information contained thereon freely and publicly available. If we wish to promote intellect, communication, brainstorming, literacy, the exchange of ideas, creativity, innovation, etc., then make their medium–the internet–free and available to all.

Thank you,
William Brighenti, CPA
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

With the backdoor bailouts of Wall Streeters like Goldman Sachs and others by individuals in the federal government, Americans more now than ever believe that our economic system is rigged because of government favoritism resulting from political contributions and swinging door recruitment of former federal employees by Wall Street firms.

Noted among these disturbing backdoor bailouts is the Goldman Sachs funding by American taxpayers of $16 billion when Henry Paulson was head of the Treasury Department.  Since Hank Paulson was the former CEO of Goldman Sachs, who earned about $567 million during his employment there, Americans are perceiving that our system of government is controlled by Wall Streeters and the rich.  Normally when a company goes bankrupt, there is not a government bailout at taxpayers expense at 100% of the monies lost from its economic failure.  Paulson’s, Geithner’s, and other governmental cronies’ involvement has had a disturbing effect on the American public’s confidence in the integrity of our political system.

Also in 2010 the enactment of the egregious estate tax law, which lowered estate taxes from 55% to 35%, is being perceived as a result of $10 million of political contributions by the Walton family alone, as well as from other monies from rich interests, at a time when our country cannot afford such luxurious and unnecessary tax gifts to those without need.  In return for their $10 million contributions, the heirs of the Walton fortune of $84 billion received a huge estate tax break of nearly $17 billion.  Not a bad return on the Walton’s investment, is it?  Political contributions sure pay off for Wall Street and the rich.

The study found that Americans are becoming quite upset with the collusion of government and the 1%, representing the rich in our country, and are becoming more disillusioned in our capitalistic system.  The question is, how long will the masses put up with this government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich, given the recent uprisings in the Middle East and the protests of the occupiers of Wall Street throughout our land.

Let’s all hope not very long.

For a detailed discussion of the PEW Research Center study on the growing conflict between the rich and the poor in the United States, please see the article and video, the conflict between the rich and the poor has become very strong over the past two years.

The Barefoot Accountant

the Barefoot Accountant

For those unaware, the Glass-Steagall Act originated in 1933 in response to the Great Depression since economists believed that permitting commercial banks to function as investment banks led to casino-like gambling in the stock market, creating that irrational exuberance of driving stock prices ridiculously above their economically justifiable market values based on earnings per share.  So it’s no small coincidence that merely eight years after its repeal in 1999 that the stock market suffered a collapse reminiscent of that of the Great Depression. 

With the continued repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act we have four big banks sitting on $2 trillion, investing in treasury bills and stocks, instead of loaning that money to small businesses to create jobs here in America.  And the stocks that the big banks are investing in are those of the multinational corporations, who are, in turn, investing overseas where labor is dirt cheap.  In other words, Wall Street is investing in Asia and not Main Street USA!  Consequently, don’t expect that unemployment rate to return to normal in your lifetime.  Better hold onto that $8/hour job at Walmart.

Jacob Lew is not in favor of Glass-Stea­gall either.  You may wonder why Jacob Lew is against deregulation of the commercial and investment banking industry.  Because he is a Wall Streeter, just like Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers and William Daley, Obama’s former Chief of Staff, who was formerly Vice Chairman of J P Morgan.  Did you know that Jacob Lew was the chief operating officer of Citigroup’­s Alternativ­e Investment­s unit?  You know, that very same Citigroup that is a big commercial and investment banker who betted against the subprime mortgages.

Obama keeps going to Wall Street for his economic advisors.  So even though it’s election season and Obama is talking tough about band-aid cures for our depression–e.g., two month extensions of our unemployment benefits and a patry $108 billion in infrastructure investments when some economists are urging the need for a $2 trillion investment–we have the same President Obama serving the interests of Wall Street and the 1% over Main Street and the 99%.

Isn’t it time to send a protest vote against Obama, the Democratic National Committee, and all representative pawns of Wall Street?

Susan Bysiewicz recently published her Accountability Plan, holding Wall Street and corporate special interests accountable for the economic mess in which we all currently find ourselves.  In fact, Susan today characterize that mess as a “depression”, and not merely a recession.  I agree with Susan Bysiewicz:  this is not a recession but something along the lines of the Great Depression.  Frankly, unless something is dramatically done in the very near future to change things in Washington, the middle class is in danger of disappearing in the United States in a matter of years.

Susan’s plan is simple, though well-researched and footnoted, detailed, and comprehensive.  It consists of thirty-four pages of about a half dozen proposed reforms.

To hold Wall Street accountable for its part in precipitating this calamity on middle America, Bysiewicz advocates a transaction tax on all speculative security trades on Wall Street.  This is not new:  in fact, we had such a tax until the mid-1960s.  Moreover, it is prevalent in the United Kingdom and in a number of countries in Europe.  She asserts that it has not impaired the capital markets there nor did not previously do such in the United States when it was in place; rather, she argues that it mitigates the frenetic activity of the casino-like gambling inherent in the day trading of the big security firms, reducing investment risk by stabilizing security prices.  Because of the trillions of trades on Wall Street every year, even though the tax is very tiny (which is why I dubbed it the “ttt” for tiny transaction tax), as low as .01% of the trade, Susan Bysiewicz estimates that its application would raise, at a minimum, $150 billion in additional tax revenues every year.  Perhaps a lot more.

With those additional tax revenues, Bysiewicz proposes that the funds be used to refinance under water mortgages and assist in the initial financing of clean energy alternatives.  Her proposal for the rescuing of homeowners in or near default is essentially the Homeownership Vesting Plan of Mark Zandi, a noted progressive economist.  Mortgages would be refinanced at their current market values, with the revenues from the transaction tax subsidizing the differential between those values and the existing mortgage balances.

The other portion of the transaction tax revenues would be used to offset the initially higher utility rates from the purchase of clean energy alternatives by utilities until those costs decrease to those of fossil fuel energy costs.

The other major components of Susan Bysiewicz’s Accountability Plan include the following:

1. Elimination of corporate tax loopholes and subsidies as well as the Bush tax cuts.
2. Further restrictions on lobbying and lobbyists, and the overturn of the United Citizen’s decision.
3. Immediate return of all troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and the closing of many bases in Europe and Japan.
4. Immigration reform.

For a detailed discussion and critique of Susan Bysiewicz’s Accountability Plan, please see,

Susan Bysiewicz has published her Accountability Plan for reforming and fixing America’s economy and government in Washington

The Barefoot Accountant

Jay Carney recently appeared on “Morning Joe” on MSNBC, alibiing President Barack Obama’s ultimate responsibility for the failed economic recovery over the last three years. Like a child caught in the act of a household crime, Carney pleaded the excuses: how was President Barack Obama to know how really bad the economy was in January of 2009; no one told Obama that the economy was that bad; if he had only known better…or the like.

But, in fact, back in January and February of 2009, a number of noted economists as well as a host of progressives told Obama and the public how bad the recession was. They likened it to the great depression. Only President Obama did not listen to the voices of Paul Krugman, Martin Feldstein, James Galbraith, Martin Zandi, and many others. Instead Obama listened to the establishment, to the counsel of Wall Streeters Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers, and instead of proposing an immediate infrastructure investment of a $1.5 trillion, and selling treasury notes to buy up subprime mortgages to restructure them, he offered a pittance of an infrastructure plan of $140 billion contained in a stimulus package of $787 billion, a third of which consisted of tax cuts. In other words, Obama caved in to Republican opposition and Wall Street and heeded the economic counsel of Geithner and Summers rather than economists like Krugman who said that his economic plan was too small to deal with the deepest recession since the great depression.

Now President Obama continues his band-aid approach to our never-ending recession, where true unemployment approaches 20% and not 8.6%, since many have fallen off the radar screen of national statistics, no longer eligible to collect, no longer attempting to find work. What is Obama’s big economic plan going into the 2012 election? Merely to extend the 2% cut in the payroll tax. Wow. Will this return our country to economic recovery and prosperity? Not a chance.

For Cenk Uygur’s transcript of his chastisement of President Obama on his repeated failure to listen to progressives, please see the article, President Barack Obama failed the economic recovery with a stimulus package too small

Being very emotionally attached to this computer–my wife claims the mouse is an extension of my arm–I searched for a local computer repair shop in the Berlin area. I didn’t want to go to Best Buy’s Geek Squad since I had a horrible purchase experience in that store recently. And anyway, I prefer patronizing the local small businesses here in Berlin, Connecticut rather than some impersonal, huge, national chain, hiring individuals at $8/hour. So I called a few numbers and either received voicemail or a voice struggling with the English language: neither was encouraging.

Talking to a friend of mine about my computer hiccups, he recommended a computer repair shop conveniently located on the Berlin Turnpike, right next door to Snookies, and gave me its phone number. When I called, I reached a very friendly and intelligent individual named Austin Kowaleski, who owns and manages the business, New Life Computers. Like a concerned parent describing the medical symptoms of a child to a doctor over the phone, I recounted the case history of my desktop, describing how it would simply shut down unexpectedly, how it has been groaning a little bit louder over the past year, and how sometimes it would not boot up.

Interestingly, like an old time, cagey family physician who could identify an ailment at a glance, he asked me if I had any cats! At that moment, I knew that I had placed the right call. Yes, I told him: I had six of those furry rascals. It suddenly occurred to me that computers do not like cats: their fur hairs plug the vent openings, creating intense heat inside the computer and causing it to shut down or even worse, burn out. This is a good computer doctor, I thought.

So I brought my computer down for an examination. Entering the shop, I felt immediately a wave of nostalgia. It is a small shop, full of life, several technicians to my left working on a bench underneath a row of video monitors, shelves of computer parts stacked up high to my right, a couple of customers immediately in front of me conferring with the techs, and at the end of the store, Austin delivering his diagnosis and prognosis in a reassuring tone to a patron. I was relieved that I was not the only soul in that emergency room with my family computer.

Shortly a tech waited on me, explaining what he was doing, and allowing me to watch the diagnostic procedures. I waited with baited breath; the suspense was building; I prayed that the techs could save the life of my computer. Burn tests were run; core temperatures were taken; my Dell was opened up; a thorough vacuuming followed, removing dust and cat hairs that had accumulated over three years; fans were removed and cleaned; then Austin, sensing the puzzlement of the technician, interceded, placed a thermometer in different areas of the computer and quickly found the overheated component: a broken video card. Austin saved my computer from the afterlife.

Unfortunately, small businesses like New Life Computers, are disappearing from the American landscape. Big impersonal chain stores have driven many out of business. I love the small businesses, like New Life Computers. One gets the opportunity to talk to the owner of the shop and get to know him. More importantly, he or she gets to know you, what you like, and what you need. That’s what makes them so much more personal, and business is always personal: every successful businessperson knows that business is 90% people.

I never talked to Bernie Markus nor Arthur Blank, owners of Home Depot. Nor to Sam Walton or Brad Smith of Intuit. But I talked to Austin Kowaleski and he knows me. And if I have a problem, I can call him and speak to him directly. To me that’s very reassuring in this era that when I call customer service at the Hartford Courant or Comcast, I am speaking to someone in the Philippines, or when I call AT&T, I am transferred somewhere to India. I often have difficulty understanding what these individuals are saying on the phone. And they ask me all those same questions over and over again, attempting to identify me because they do not have a clue as to who I am. But small shop owners know me, and I have no difficulty communicating with them. I like that.

I guess my experience at New Life Computers was nostalgic. I remember the 1950s in downtown New Britain, when small businesses flourished, and citizens operated small shops like Austin. It was before the era of big chain stores, where faces are unfamiliar, and you sometimes feel lost in endless aisles of inventories. My uncle had opened the first television store in New Britain after World War II and operated it for several decades before being driven out of business by the chain stores. His store, too, was small like Austin’s, bustling with activity, with all work being undertaken in full view of the customers and not in some back room or, more likely, removed from the counter only to be shipped somewhere out of the country for repair. Customers addressed him by his first name: they knew him. They had purchased their first Philco or Emerson television from him, and then were now considering a newer TV or a rotor antenna or a UHF converter. Zenith and Motorola TVs, tube testers, video tubes, transistor radios, and other television parts cluttered the store. If they had a problem, all they had to do was call him. No endless questions or expensive warranty service plans were required. He serviced his customers without question.

Unfortunately, many today never knew that America. Yet it still exists in some small businesses, like that of New Life Computers. Nostalgically, I felt at home again at New Life Computers. There was the personal service of yesteryears, and all at a very inexpensive price. And I know that if I ever have a problem with that computer, all I need to do is pick up the phone and I can speak to Austin Kowalewski, the owner of the shop, about my issue. And that, to me, is very reassuring. I like that.

Here is a President who promised us change we could believe in as well as hope and change.  But what happened over his years in office thus far?  Nothing.  Certainly the rich got richer, with Obama immediately caving in on the extensions of the Bush tax cuts, instead offering to cut social security, medicare, and medicaid in order to reduce the resulting increase in our deficit and national debt.  And Obama never proposed that single-payer healthcare system that he promised, instead proposing Republican Governor Romney’s version of a mandated healthcare program.

And not one CEO on Wall Street was ever indicted or imprisoned for scamming the American middle class and homeowners, getting trillions in the process, and causing a depression affecting the entire world economy. 

And instead of breaking up those huge banks controlling the money in our economy, Obama through his reappointment of Ben Bernanke and the advice of Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner has continued to bail out Wall Street, resulting in the Fed supplying these Shylocks with $7.7 trillion and $700 billion in TARP monies.

And did Obama step up enforcement of Wall Street after the greatest heist in world history?  Not a chance:  enforcement of regulations have been watered down by 76%.

President Obama’s new found, born-again progressivism is merely a campaign ruse to fool the average American into voting for him once again, offering an extension of the payroll tax cut now as his big reform achievement, while Wall Street continues its control over Washington in order to continue its transfer of wealth from middle America to the 1%.

For more on Obama’s born-again progressivism, please see Cenk Uygur on President Obama’s born-again Progressivism. Obama does not walk the talk,  where a video and full transcript of Cenk Uygur’s interview of Senator Bernie Sanders on Obama’s new found progressive rhetoric is available.

The Barefoot Accountant

The United States is following the paths of Greece, Italy, Spain, Ireland, et al, accumulating more and more debt; however, even though over 70% of its citizens wish to address the $15 trillion debt by raising the highest marginal tax rate on the wealthy, the government for some reason refuses to enact such legislation.

President Barack Obama promised “change we could believe in”.  The only change I have witnessed over the past few years is the continued jingle in the campaign coffers, especially since the United Citizens Decision.  Is President Obama really truthful about change when he dines at campaign dinners with Wall Streeters asking for their contributions?  Recall that Goldman Sachs (or should we say Government Sachs) was the largest single contributor to President Obama in 2008.  Are you surprised that not one Wall Streeter was ever indicted or imprisoned for the greatest heist in the history of mankind?

Susan Bysiewicz has stated that our country has the greatest tax code that money can buy.  In part three of the Barefoot Accountant’s interview of Susan Bysiewicz, who is challenging Chris Murphy for Connecticut’s senatorial seat in the Democratic primary of 2012, presents her views on the tax inequity that presently exists in the United States.  For a transcript of the interview, visit The inequity of America’s tax laws.  Barefoot Accountant’s interview of Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Democratic primary candidate for U.S. Senate.  Part III of interview.

Jeffrey Butler, CEO CL&P

With the slow response from Connecticut Light and Power (also known as Northeast Utilities) on restoring power after Hurricaine Irene and now after the Alfred snow storm, it is time to consider imposing big penalties on utility companies for failing to restore power and maintain power lines in accordance with prescribed standards. Massachusetts passed such legislation in 2009, allowing utility companies to be fined up to 2.5 percent of their transmission and distribution revenues, which could result in $20 million in penalties to CLP if it continues to pursue power restoration at a snail’s pace.

Although Massachusetts had total outages far less than Connecticut from Alfred, it now appears that this state received a favorably disproportionate share of restoration resources from CL&P in comparison to those directed to Connecticut. The question is, was this mere coincidence or deliberate action on the part of CL&P to avoid fines under Massachusetts law.

Connecticut residents may be suffering more and more outages over the winter, when temperatures do not merely dip below forty (40) degrees but below freezing. Decentralization of CL&P’s operations, with the closing of a number of substations in New Britain, Bristol, and other areas in Connecticut, plus the apparent unresolved issue of who should be bearing the maintenance costs of trimming trees from wires, will in all likelihood inhibit any improvement in response time on the part of CL&P to restore power more quickly to Connecticut residents following a storm outage than it has after Irene and Alfred.

As we all know, the compensation and bonuses of CEOs are contingent upon the bottom line of utility companies, where dividends reign supreme with shareholders.  Obviously chief executive officers like Jeffrey Butler are not rewarded for incurring extra costs to speed up restoration of power lost from severe storms.  Given this structure of rewards, isn’t it time we give CL&P an economic incentive to speed up its restoration efforts in the future? Better yet, isn’t it time we demand CL&P to step up and reduce the likelihood of outages by implementing a better maintenance program in order to minimize the occurrence of these outages?

Levying $20 million fines for lackadaisical responsiveness on the part of CL&P to power outages might just be that necessary first step to motivate Jeffrey Butler and the management of CL&P to devote more efforts to improving its response time to outages.

By the way, I never saw a helicopter on Sunday, when CL&P said that it would devote that day solely to assessing damage by helicopter flights over all of Connecticut, before sending crews out to attempt any restoration efforts.  Did you?

If you were as disappointed as I was in the response and power restoration efforts of CL&P to the outages suffered by Connecticut residents from storms Irene and Alfred, then please sign the petition urging Governor Dannel Malloy to impose steep penalties on Connecticut utility companies for failing to meet ongoing power restoration standards:  please click Petition Governor Dannel Malloy to Impose Penalties on Utility Companies and sign!