Saturday, December 29, 2012
Miscellaneous 160
1) The cost of cosmetic surgery has been rising at a rate that is lower than the rate of inflation (this, from the National Center for Policy Analysis). This tells me that competition in healthcare CAN work when in fact it's allowed to.............2) In 1975, there were 25 million people on Medicare and the average cost was $2,000 per enrollee. By 2040, those numbers are expected to be 88 million and $17,000, respectively. To say that this trajectory is thoroughly unsustainable should be obvious - TO EVERYBODY.............3) Medicaid was started in 1965 and its original budget was approximately $1 billion. The program's current budget is $250 billion AND, according to the CBO, the budget for that program is expected to hit $600 billion by 2023 and eclipse a trillion ten years later. Again, UNSUSTAINABLE.............4) According to the National Tax Journal, less than 50% (39-42, depending on the survey) of the people in the top 1% in 1996 were still in that group by 2005. This whole notion that the affluent have somehow carved out a permanent high status is ludicrous (not to mention a figment of the President's imagination).............5) The President seems to be operating on a notion that tax policy doesn't in any way influence economic behavior, that increasing taxes will never cause people to work less, invest differently, and/or shelter their money. The fellow is being exceedingly naive on this one, I think.............6) According the Social Security Trust, there were 5.4 workers per retiree in 1960. By 2040, that ratio will dip all the way to 2.3 workers per retiree. Time to think outside the box, I'm thinking.............7) Have you ever wondered why
the terrorists switched from machine guns (their previous mode of
terror) to suicide bombers in Israel? I'll tell you why. It's because Israel has a right to
carry law and little old ladies were pulling guns out of their
underwear and killing the terrorists before they could get off too many
shots. Interesting, huh?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
I suggest you read this post about SS.
I was just looking at the Trust Fund's own projections, Jerry. No, SS isn't in as bad a shape as Medicare and Medicaid but it is still expected to have a multi hundreds of billions of dollars shortfall by 2040.
SS will never have a shortfall. It cannot run a deficit by law. It will reduce benefits automatically. If nothing is done, it will still pay about 75% of scheduled benefits in 2040. Is that OK? No. We need to do something now like raise the cap and/or increase the rate. A rate increase of something like 40 cents per week per year for 20 years will solve the problem for the next 75 years.
I would also reduce by some percentage the amount that rich people get.
Social Security is not a welfare program and therefore I don't think it should be means tested. That said, means testing would not be a deal breaker for me.
Here is another interesting fact about SS. Even if nothing is changed with SS and SS benefits take a 25% hit when the trust fund runs out, someone retiring in 2040 will get an initial benefit 20% higher than someone retiring today and that is in constant 2012 dollars.
I hardly call that a crisis!
Means-testing SS and Medicare wouldn't make it any more of a welfare program than removing the cap would. In fact, having rich people paying a significantly disproportionate amount of the premiums and poor people taking a significantly disproportionate amount of the benefits would probably make it more so.
I.E., you would be weakening the relationship between taxes paid and benefits received, which was a critical principle of the program as it was envisioned by FDR.
I wouldn't completely remove the cap, just raise it, and raise the top benefit also.
Is it my imagination, Jerry, or are you getting more moderate? I agree with you AGAIN.
Hell folks, it's only money. We've got the presses, just crank em up and burn baby burn. Make JMK proud.
Will, maybe you're getting more liberal. :)
Printing money, while having a impact on the money supply, has nothing to do with the balancing the budget, paying down the debt, or paying the government bills.
Honestly, Jerry, I don't know where I am (politically) half the time. All I know is that I reduced the deficit by 138 billion dollars without even trying (and not really doing anything controversial, either) and those clowns in Washington can't even decide where to have lunch it appears. Sad, very sad.......As for the printing of money, I think that do use some of it to buy up T-bills. To finance the debt, though I clearly could be wrong.
Jerry glad to see you agree with me. ;-)
RN,
It's the last day of the year. We have to agree once in a while. Happy New Year!
Happy new year, gents (even wd if he's out there).
Happy New Year all. I hope everyone's wings are greased and attached as we go flying over the fiscal cliff. WEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeee.........
Interesting thing about the Israeli
carry laws: the weapon may not by
law have a round in the chamber. The reasoning is that many folks
are not that familiar with their
weapon and it prevents many accidents. Like this one , etc .
There are trade-offs, no doubt about it but in this country the passing of these right to carry laws in 45-46 states has been followed with a reduction in the murder rate (not that we can with certainly infer causality, mind you).
Post a Comment