What
are the ramifications of everyone making $75,000 a year?
Nobody rich or poor.
Is that something we really want?
What would society be like?
Where would the money come from?
Be careful what you wish for?
Monday, April 11, 2016
Income inequality- statistics often misleading
As I have
written, statistics can often be misleading, and be used for what ever
political agenda some one likes.
For example, a case can be made that one
of the main causes of US income inequality is the great wealth so many American
enjoy. In a sense we are "victims"
of the success of so many Americans. Because so many American are so prosperous the numbers can be misleading.
Consider
the following information I came across from a reliable source:
A Danish
family can move from the bottom 10th
percentile to the top 90th percentile with
$45,000 of additional earnings; while an
American family would need an additional $93,000 to move from the bottom to the
top. As best as I can tell both countries have similar costs of living.
If so, who is
better off; a Dane whose income has gone up $45,000, thus moving her into the
top from the bottom percentile; or an American whose income went up twice as
much as the Dane's ($90,000), but went up from the bottom to only the
second highest percentile? Those who deprecate US economic mobility would say
the Dane is better off. I don't think that Dane would agree; she'd rather have
the increased income the American got, I assume.
From this
example, it appears that the US has more income inequality than Denmark.
However, is that misleading since more Americans seem to be doing better
than the Danes, even though Danes enjoy less inequality ?
However, as
I've often said statistics can be misleading , so where did I go wrong here?
Root Cause of Great Recession- Krugman confirms my post
My guy Paul Krugman has been reading my blog again!
So happy to read the first part of his Op Ed about how it
wasn't the big banks who Sanders wants to break up that started the financial
crisis.
I figured it out !
Why
don't young people like Hillary, but love Bernie?
She's their parents. He's their grandparents.
He'll give them everything they want.
She's their parents. He's their grandparents.
He'll give them everything they want.
Tuesday, January 5, 2016
ACA- Worth it?
When you consider how many are still uninsured and
how much the Democratic Party has been hurt, and will continue to be hurt
for quite a while, was the Affordable Care Act worth it?
According to a Huffington Post article in March, while the number of uninsured fell by 11 Million, we still have 37 Million uninsured. Plus most of the newly insured came from the expansion of Medicaid. Why haven't we done better than that?
It seems that largely due to the passage of the ACA, a GOP tidal wave took place in the 2010 election. And since 2010 was a census year, the GOP controlled and gerrymandered both Congressional and state districts to lock in GOP majorities in the House of Representatives. Those gerrymandered GOP majorities will stay in place at least until 2020.
With all of the havoc which the GOP controlled House has and will reek, was it worth it if more than 3/4 of the pre-ACA uninsured remain uninsured. In addition many people who had insurance feel their insurance options are worse today than before ACA.
Will we look back on this as a good beginning , as with social security or Medicare , or a political disaster with not enough positive impact?
Understand, I'm for single payer or Medicare for all. While many provisions of the ACA are beneficial, I just question whether the ACA is accomplishing it's core primary goal of eliminating the uninsured.
According to a Huffington Post article in March, while the number of uninsured fell by 11 Million, we still have 37 Million uninsured. Plus most of the newly insured came from the expansion of Medicaid. Why haven't we done better than that?
It seems that largely due to the passage of the ACA, a GOP tidal wave took place in the 2010 election. And since 2010 was a census year, the GOP controlled and gerrymandered both Congressional and state districts to lock in GOP majorities in the House of Representatives. Those gerrymandered GOP majorities will stay in place at least until 2020.
With all of the havoc which the GOP controlled House has and will reek, was it worth it if more than 3/4 of the pre-ACA uninsured remain uninsured. In addition many people who had insurance feel their insurance options are worse today than before ACA.
Will we look back on this as a good beginning , as with social security or Medicare , or a political disaster with not enough positive impact?
Understand, I'm for single payer or Medicare for all. While many provisions of the ACA are beneficial, I just question whether the ACA is accomplishing it's core primary goal of eliminating the uninsured.
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
Greek Debt Solution
Here's'
an idea:
The
powers that be in the Eurozone ( Germany and to a degree France) should say now
that the Greek people have spoken, they will (1) grant Greece a reasonable
degree of debt relief, both interest rescheduling and principal write
downs, and (2) provide assistance for a transition period to keep the Greek
economy going, thereby avoiding catastrophe and relieving the immediate
humanitarian threat to the Greek people.
They
would do all of this on the single condition that Greece exits the Euro in a
responsible and orderly manner.
Greece
then would stay in the EU, but start afresh with the Drachma rather than
the Euro as its currency. While it won't be easy, at least they'll be on
their own and have no one else to blame. They need not make any of the reforms
demanded by their creditors.
The
Eurozone will be all the stronger without Greece.
The
EU won't change.
Simple
.
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
Student Debt Relief
Allowing
students to refinance their
debt is a great idea, and really
is a no-brainer ( except as will be discussed later). We refinance in all other
arenas every day.
Reducing the student debt burden by refinancing at today's low rates primarily only helps the middle class; mostly because the
accursed 1% didn't need those loans in the first place and the poor largely got full scholarships. No debt
needs to be forgiven, just reduce the rate to the market rate, like every one else does. No moral hazard problem.
Who could be
against it?
While
it may increase the deficit, at this stage of economic cycle, it's not that major. Besides it's certainly worth it, and the economic growth it may well set off
could counteract the short term deficit increase. Remember Obama
has already brought the deficit down dramatically.
The GOP needs
to get over its deficit obsession for
this situation and the Warren Democrats have to
stop talking about raising taxes to pay for it. That's why Warren is only half
right on this issue.
However on a
moral level, it's a total government rip off of young people and their
families. To paraphrase the Passover Haggadah, "why is this debt
different from all other debt? All other debt can be refinanced when rates drop
, why not student debt?"
The answer is
that the Federal government is making a boat load of money on this debt and the
loss of it would reduce revenue and lead to an increase in the deficit. It's pretty obscene when you think about it-- the government profiting on the backs of middle class students.
On the other hand, refinancing student debt would be boost
to the economy, and housing in
particular. Young people would be better able to buy a house.
Sadly today the root cause of the failure to
allow student debt refinancing is the titanic political
fight over reducing the deficit and raising taxes. The Republicans need to
recognize this situation for the unfairness that it is, and not worry about the
reduction in revenue and ensuing increase in the deficit in the short term.
The Democrats
are also at fault because they want to use it as an excuse to permanently raise
taxes ( of course they say on the rich) and as such know very well the GOP
would not go along.
Meanwhile our young people continue to needlessly be
burdened by this trick bag our politicians have put them in.
I'm sure the general public is not really aware of this rip off, and I
don't know why the media hasn't covered it more extensively.
I wonder what
Hillary's position on this issue is. I hope she doesn't fall into the trap of
raising taxes on the rich to pay for it . The whole situation is just
wrong, and as such doesn’t need to be paid for by cutting other spending or
raising taxes.
Eric
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)