U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Vermont
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 06-18-2014, 05:50 AM
 
Location: in a cabin overlooking the mountains
3,079 posts, read 3,723,232 times
Reputation: 2253

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cgregor View Post
A GDP of $22 billion in a state with only 600,000 residents yields a per capita GDP that is higher than 21 of the 36 countries that have better health care systems than the US does. Here they are, with the proportion of their GDP they spend on their health care. (Vermont spends about 19%; the US spends 17.6%)

The Kaiser Family Foundation lists the percentage each spends for health care. Those countries are: France, 11.7%; Belgium, 10.5%; Denmark, 11.1%; the United Kingdom, 9.6%; Andorra, 7.%, Japan, 9.2%; Finland, 9.0%; San Marino, 7.2%; Israel, (7.7%), Saudi Arabia, 4.0%; New Zealand, 10.1%; Spain, (9.6%; Oman, 2.7%; Italy, 9.5%; Cyprus, 7.4%; Greece, 10.8%; Portugal, 10.7%; Chile, 7.4%; Argentina, 8.3%; Colombia, 6.5%; and the United Arab Emirates, 3.7%.

In terms of per capita GDP, Vermont ranks 94th among the world's countries.

I don't think there's any reason to go selling us short by pleading poverty.
I'm confused, is spending a lot on health care a good thing or a bad thing? I ask because when K-12 education is dicussed, Vermont's high per pupil spending compared to the rest of the US is generally touted as a good thing. So if we spend a lot on health care, that must be great, right?

Last edited by FrugalYankee; 06-18-2014 at 06:21 AM..

 
Old 06-18-2014, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Winter Springs, FL
1,789 posts, read 4,067,156 times
Reputation: 925
The Governor is s***ing his pants right now over IBM. Some information was released in the past few days on the economic impact on the state. If GlobalFoundries pulls the plug in Essex, the results would be horrible for the state. Frank Cioffi, the president of the Greater Burlington Industrial Corporation did an interview about this deal. From the interview:
"No economy could sustain the loss of 4,000 jobs," Cioffi said. "It would be catastrophic. It would shock us into a real estate recession and an economic recession worse than the one we are trying to get out of now."
GBIC estimates IBM employs about 4,000 people in Vermont. Its study shows that 10,000 families are directly or indirectly supported by IBM. The analysis reveals the plant injects $1 billion into the overall Vermont economy. Losing that, says Cioffi, would set Vermont's economy into a tailspin.
We also need to remember, these are not $8-15/hour jobs. IBM pays very well.
As I mentioned in a previous post, GlobalFoundries has a plant in NY and they get a huge tax incentive from NY. New York provided GlobalFoundries with $1.8 billion in tax incentives and Vermont can't compete with those numbers. What the state may use is $5 million dollars in incentives to try and keep the plant open. My opinion is if NY offers more incentives to GlobalFoundries, they will pull the plug. Personally, 1.8 billion sounds a whole lot better than 5 million.
 
Old 06-18-2014, 11:32 AM
 
Location: in a cabin overlooking the mountains
3,079 posts, read 3,723,232 times
Reputation: 2253
Maybe this is the wake up call they need in Montpelier. So far all they care about is Burlington and the rest of the state can go fry ice. If Burlington is hit as hard as the rest of us have been for decades perhaps maybe some of our legislators and other elected officials will consider the possibility that Vermont is indeed not friendly to business and perhaps maybe toy with the idea of making changes.
 
Old 06-18-2014, 12:11 PM
 
809 posts, read 678,655 times
Reputation: 1333
FrugalYankee, spending on health care is a good thing when the results are commensurate to the amount spent.

In terms of education spending, Vermont's is higher than most other states, but Vermont also ranks at or near the top in educational results, so spending for education is producing commensurate results.

In terms of health, the US ranks 37th, but in terms of spending it is first. Clearly, something is wayyyy out of whack.

Colombia has healthier citizens on average than the US does, but only spends about $1,100 per person. Compare that with our expenditure of $7,800 (in 2012) per person in the US. Colombia might be a second-world narco-state, but that only makes us look a whole lot worse! France, judged by the World Health Organization to have the world's best health care system, spends only about $5,800 per person.

All 36 countries that have better health and better health care than we do have government-regulated systems. Some are single-payer (like Canada), some are global-budgeted (like the UK); many are a combination of public and private systems (like Switzerland and Germany). But in the US we have people that insist government is bad for you, and when elected to office, they proceed to prove it (h/t to Thomas Frank of "What's the Matter with Kansas?").

The Vermont legislature's focus on weaning us from the for-profit health care system will, when we pull it off, cause the nationwide collapse of the present private-profit system. (Blue Cross/Blue Shield Vermont, which basically pushes paper from payers to providers, paid its corporate officers $3.8 million in 2012; Eric Shinseki, who just resigned as head of the Veterans Administration, which is acknowledged to be this country's best health care system, was paid $180,000 a year to oversee hundreds of hospitals and thousands of workers. Governmental oversight and control makes the difference!)
 
Old 06-18-2014, 12:44 PM
 
Location: in a cabin overlooking the mountains
3,079 posts, read 3,723,232 times
Reputation: 2253
Colombia also has a signficantly lower average wage.

Colombia's average wage less than half global average - Colombia News | Colombia Reports

In 2012, the average monthly wage for Colombians was $692.

In the US, the average monthly wage in 2012 was about $3600. $7800/ $3600 = 2.17.

For Colombia in 2012, the numbers looked like this: $1100 / $692 = 1.59.

I don't see anything wayyyyyy out of whack here. I'd rather get treatment in the US than in Colombia, and I don't see how it would be possible to reduce costs to Colombia levels without reducing everyone's cost of living and earnings.

I am not giving up hope that Shumlin and his cronies get tossed in the next election and this single payer administered by the state will be nothing but a bad joke. The only thing on the verge of collapse is Vermont's shaky economy.
 
Old 06-18-2014, 04:15 PM
 
317 posts, read 585,905 times
Reputation: 380
LOS ANGELES (CN) - A taxpayer demands that California tax Blue Cross and Blue Shield as the profit-making organizations they are, not, as they fictionally describe themselves, as nonprofits.
Courthouse News Service

Nonprofits have to clear the books of cash at the end of the year so they dole it out to all the executives. The Vermont Blue Cross in Berlin had a $500,000 computer system they purchased and never installed it in two years and by the time they did and hired someone who knew anything about it, well it was on the way to becoming obsolete. Ask me how I know. I think they refer to it as backscratching. You take care of me and I'll take care of you who cares if we ever use this half a million dollar piece of hardware. What a scam that place is and they just asked for 9.9 % increase not 10% because a lot of paperwork would be involved and a closer look taken if it had been 10% scam city.
 
Old 06-18-2014, 04:31 PM
 
809 posts, read 678,655 times
Reputation: 1333
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrugalYankee View Post
Colombia also has a signficantly lower average wage.

Colombia's average wage less than half global average - Colombia News | Colombia Reports

In 2012, the average monthly wage for Colombians was $692.

In the US, the average monthly wage in 2012 was about $3600. $7800/ $3600 = 2.17.

For Colombia in 2012, the numbers looked like this: $1100 / $692 = 1.59.

I don't see anything wayyyyyy out of whack here. I'd rather get treatment in the US than in Colombia, and I don't see how it would be possible to reduce costs to Colombia levels without reducing everyone's cost of living and earnings.

I am not giving up hope that Shumlin and his cronies get tossed in the next election and this single payer administered by the state will be nothing but a bad joke. The only thing on the verge of collapse is Vermont's shaky economy.
FrugalYankee, Colombians are healthier than Americans, and they spend only some 6.7% of their GDP on health care, while Americans spend 17.8%.

Given what you report for income difference, it would appear their health care providers are doing better for a lot less.

However, that might not be true, since "purchasing power parity" has to be taken into account-- how far a standard unit of currency will go in a particular country. $100 will probably go a lot farther in Colombia than it does in the US, so economists compute what the 2012 average monthly Colombian wage signifies in purchasing power parity. You can easily find it; it will certainly shrink, if not erase, the wage differential.
 
Old 06-18-2014, 06:54 PM
 
Location: On the 3rd planet from the sun
115 posts, read 115,117 times
Reputation: 63
Default Q

Vermonts GDP as of 2013 was nearly 23 billion USD.
10 Porrest States

10.Delaware 66B
9. New Hampshire 59B
8.Maine51B
7.Rhode Island47B
6.Alaska 45B
5. South Dakota 38B
4.Wyoming 37B
3.Montana35B
2.North Dakota 31B
1.Vermont???! 24B

Last edited by Geomaster2004; 06-18-2014 at 07:16 PM..
 
Old 06-18-2014, 07:46 PM
 
Location: in a cabin overlooking the mountains
3,079 posts, read 3,723,232 times
Reputation: 2253
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgregor View Post
FrugalYankee, Colombians are healthier than Americans, and they spend only some 6.7% of their GDP on health care, while Americans spend 17.8%.

Given what you report for income difference, it would appear their health care providers are doing better for a lot less.

However, that might not be true, since "purchasing power parity" has to be taken into account-- how far a standard unit of currency will go in a particular country. $100 will probably go a lot farther in Colombia than it does in the US, so economists compute what the 2012 average monthly Colombian wage signifies in purchasing power parity. You can easily find it; it will certainly shrink, if not erase, the wage differential.
Or Colombians aren't eating at Pizza Hut, McDonalds, Taco Bell, KFC etc. Spin it any way you want, if I need a lung transplant I'll have it done in the US thank you.
 
Old 06-18-2014, 08:19 PM
 
7,598 posts, read 9,457,529 times
Reputation: 8962
Quote:
Originally Posted by 68vette View Post
The Governor is s***ing his pants right now over IBM. Some information was released in the past few days on the economic impact on the state. If GlobalFoundries pulls the plug in Essex, the results would be horrible for the state. Frank Cioffi, the president of the Greater Burlington Industrial Corporation did an interview about this deal. From the interview:
"No economy could sustain the loss of 4,000 jobs," Cioffi said. "It would be catastrophic. It would shock us into a real estate recession and an economic recession worse than the one we are trying to get out of now."
GBIC estimates IBM employs about 4,000 people in Vermont. Its study shows that 10,000 families are directly or indirectly supported by IBM. The analysis reveals the plant injects $1 billion into the overall Vermont economy. Losing that, says Cioffi, would set Vermont's economy into a tailspin.
We also need to remember, these are not $8-15/hour jobs. IBM pays very well.
As I mentioned in a previous post, GlobalFoundries has a plant in NY and they get a huge tax incentive from NY. New York provided GlobalFoundries with $1.8 billion in tax incentives and Vermont can't compete with those numbers. What the state may use is $5 million dollars in incentives to try and keep the plant open. My opinion is if NY offers more incentives to GlobalFoundries, they will pull the plug. Personally, 1.8 billion sounds a whole lot better than 5 million.
I had no idea that this might happen--it would be economically devasting to VT. IBM is one of the state's largest employers ( along with UVM and Fletcher Allen). Digital closed its doors years ago, and then GE shut down on Pine Street.

People thinking of relocating to VT had better reconsider their plans. Just think about the effect on property values in Essex Junction alone..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Vermont
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:39 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top