U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-02-2020, 01:52 PM
 
8,838 posts, read 5,495,772 times
Reputation: 14949

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
"One of the candidates has to say: 'Americans eat sh*t--and too much of it'. All the candidates will talk about their health plans, but no one will mention the key factor--The citizens won't lift a finger to help.

....Here it is in a nutshell from the New York Times: 'Poor diet is the leading cause of mortality in the United States'."
We have to be more judicious in doing such analysis.

Bob eats junk, smokes, never exercises and becomes obese… and dies of a diabetic stroke at age 61 (just before collecting Social Security). Bill does everything correctly, and is spectacularly healthy in his 60s and 70s. At age 85, he gets pancreatic cancer. He undergoes a $300K Whipple-procedure operation, and then another $300K in chemo treatments. He finally dies at 88.

Tell me again: who cost the system more, in health-care? Bob or Bill?

I’d argue, that if it were normal for middle-aged people to drop dead from a lifetime of poor habits, or accidents, or violence – then healthcare expenses would be substantially lower. The problem isn’t that Americans are smoking too much… it’s that they’re smoking too little. Want to cut healthcare costs? Live like Russians in the 1990s.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
Centralization of power is the proposed answer to every crisis we have. I don't think that's an accident.
The sort of stringent, disciplined measures for which you are evidently advocating, can only be done by rigid, centralized authority. Markets won't do it, and democracies won't do it. Self-interest precludes the very possibility.

You have to pick your poison. Either we head into the "train wreck" that you bemoan, or we appoint a Galactic Emperor with absolute power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2020, 03:03 PM
 
6,082 posts, read 3,274,574 times
Reputation: 11068
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
Indeed. Government spending may be wasteful and/or unjust, but it stimulates the economy. Cutting spending means attenuating stimulation. This might be the fiscally-responsible thing in the long run, but in the short run, it’s a strain on the economy. It’s bad for consumer health and it’s bad for the stock market.

To be a "fiscal conservative" means to attempt to improve the future, at the expense of grievous setback and suffering in the present. And whereas the future improvement is speculative and unclear, the present sacrifices are very clear. Not an attractive deal. And not something that most people would countenance, regardless of political stance.


Not necessarily. Mandatory amputation of everyone’s right hand would probably **** everyone off (well, except for maybe some masochists or Sharia adherents). But it’s probably not the right policy.

Exactly. We can tinker around the margins, but true fiscal conservatism is attractive only in theory. In practice, it would be ruinous, even if it sounds fair and responsible.
Depends on how you view/define the "economy" and government spending and "stimulation of the economy". A very short-term view of this dynamic and your take is 100% correct. Or the flip side is that we are living way beyond our means at the expense of children/grand-children.

Classic Liberalism follows very closely the principals of Fiscal Conservatism. Common Characteristics include Free Trade, Low Taxes, Reduced Federal Spending, Minimal Government Debt, Private Enterprises/Property Rights, Protection of Individual freedoms/rights, and minimal Government regulation.

I will concede a few things:

- Markets are not perfect and can't solve for all things
- A purest view of Libertarianism/Fiscal Conservatism is simply not possibly in the current political stage
- "Tax and Spend" Democrats are typically labeled as Fiscally irresponsible while Republicans are typically branded as the "Conservative" or responsible party. Empirical evidence since Reagan shows otherwise and most "Deficit hawks" would agree that both parties are equally irrational when it comes to spending.

If you breakout our government spending into buckets you will see the biggest buckets are SS ($1.1T), Medicare ($0.9T), Medicaid ($0.5T), and Defense ($0.6T). To break it down further the mandatory buckets all have significant income streams via payroll taxes (SS, Mecr, Mecd) while DOD has smaller income streams from hardware sales.

See page 6 for a nice breakout:
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files?fil...k-Chapter3.pdf


Our problem boils down to our mandatory "entitlement" spending as a % of GDP over a 10+ year period. It will outpace economic growth and provide a significant headwind on current account deficits that will eventually have to be funded through a tax or dilution of currency value.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2020, 05:38 PM
 
27,110 posts, read 29,573,476 times
Reputation: 26508
Quote:
Originally Posted by creeksitter View Post
As for medicare costs it was GWB who included the requirement that medicare not negotiate drug prices. Huge giveaway to big pharma. Now let's talk about agricultural subsidies and who benefits. How about overpriced military contracts.
Your mistake is to frame things in an either/or us/them context. That's the typical divide & conquer technique the elites use on us.

The truth is there is bloat and wasteful spending across the board. On corporate welfare. On welfare for individuals (which even honest liberal researchers like Isabel Sawhill from the Brookings Institution admit is often ineffective). On the military. On medical care in general. As another liberal presidential candidate, Marianne Williamson, said in an interview with Dave Rubin "We don't have a health care system. We have a sick care system" (me paraphrasing). We're the most drug dependent, chronically ill population in the world, yet we continue to think the government making medications cheaper will fix it all. None of the other presidential candidates will talk about any of that when they talk about health care (and of course Williamson isn't in the race any more. Big surprise).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2020, 05:41 PM
 
27,110 posts, read 29,573,476 times
Reputation: 26508
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
I’d argue, that if it were normal for middle-aged people to drop dead from a lifetime of poor habits, or accidents, or violence – then healthcare expenses would be substantially lower. The problem isn’t that Americans are smoking too much… it’s that they’re smoking too little. Want to cut healthcare costs? Live like Russians in the 1990s.
Wrong. The best way to cut healthcare costs without living a crappy life and dying in your 50s or early 60s is to copy Dan Buettner's "The Blue Zones" model. The world's longest lived populations DO NOT use a lot of health care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2020, 07:10 PM
 
4,175 posts, read 1,759,261 times
Reputation: 2748
Quote:
Originally Posted by heart84 View Post
Let's take a quick look at "the greatest economy ever" and some things going on behind the curtain and this is in "boom" times lol.

Record balance sheet expansion by the Fed over the past 3 months. $100s of billions being pumped into the repo markets by the Fed to prop them up. $60 billion in month treasury purchases. Just yesterday, the Fed bought $825 million of mortgage bonds, sold none. Trump wants negative rates. $1 trillion+ deficit. $23 trillion national debt.

Check out this article quoting Trump in 2016 linked here.

From the article:

Trump in 2016 - Trump said rates are being kept lower to bolster Obama’s legacy. “Any increase at all will be a very, very small increase because they want to keep the market up so Obama goes out and let the new guy ... raise interest rates ... and watch what happens in the stock market.”

Doubting whether rates would change while Obama remains in office, Trump said: ”[Obama] wants to go out. He wants to play golf for the rest of this life. And he doesn’t care what’s going to happen after January.”

American savers are the worst hit by the Fed’s easy monetary policies, Trump said. “The ones who did it right — they saved their money [and] they cut down on their mortgages, ... and now they’re practically getting zero interest on the money.”

As a real estate businessman, Trump said: “I love low interest rates,” but for the good of the nation, rates should be higher.

LOL we seem to have had a "180."

What happens if Trump issues an executive order that forgives the national debt and stops paying interest to Fed?? Hypothetically??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2020, 07:35 PM
 
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
5,159 posts, read 2,342,513 times
Reputation: 3835
^ans: I am a, Republican.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2020, 07:36 PM
 
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
5,159 posts, read 2,342,513 times
Reputation: 3835
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasperhobbs View Post
The fiscal conservatives along with the tea party are nowhere to be found.
I am a Republican.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2020, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Silicon Valley
4,150 posts, read 1,887,028 times
Reputation: 6933
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
This is the crux of why the U.S. (and many other Western countries) is headed for a train wreck that will make 2008 look like a walk in the park.

I don't know why I bother saying it. The people who get it already see it and don't need to be told. And the people who need to hear it the most will never listen.

So if the Titanic is taking on water here, which I would agree it is, what can one possibly do? What can even the President or the Fed chair do? We went economy of confidence. Reading literature at the time people complained about the deficit then, but we could out-borrow the Soviets, and realized afterwards that heavy borrowing didn't hurt that bad. Something changed in the 70's and 80's though. The conservatives died. It just wasn't a vote winning approach and the economic growth was increasingly going overseas from US corporations.



I can't disagree with the OP. Elected Republicans in my lifetime have only been conservative when they are the party of No. When they have been, the economy has done well. In the meantime, we've divided ourselves on social issues. Otherwise they've simply taken us off standard and run up a credit card bill they have no intention of paying.


So who do you vote for? What do you do? Is the Titanic even salvageable at this point or should we simply enjoy a fine sherry while the band plays on and the tilt of the boat increases markedly.



Hotbox the economy? Ok. Sure, may as well at this point. 2% growth off a 5% deficit sure isn't going to get it done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2020, 10:39 PM
 
2,017 posts, read 507,430 times
Reputation: 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanv3 View Post
What happens if Trump issues an executive order that forgives the national debt and stops paying interest to Fed?? Hypothetically??
Global war and double-digit interest rates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2020, 12:57 PM
 
1,573 posts, read 1,604,024 times
Reputation: 1674
I think Trump sees the ONLY way to repay the national debt is with a greatly devalued US dollar.


I agree with that assessment. I don't see any other way to do it. If the debt and interest is not repaid in full, the global economy crashes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, 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