Brother, Can You Spare Some F.R.A.U.D -- New Original Federal Reserve Song

http://dailybail.com/home/brother-can-you-spare-some-fraud-new-federal-reserve-song.html

This is really good...makes me so happy on a snowy Saturday morning...

People are clearing their cars of snow here in NW DC, but since the streets haven't been plowed most of those vehicles will go no where until that happens.

Let's keep government out of snow plowing [irony, satire].

"It is probably reasonable to expect that the employment-population ratio has stopped falling."

But the politically-motivated, utterly opaque, seasonally adjusted and endlessly revised U3 really wouldn't help us be sure of that, would it?

Maybe this census is the last gasp of statistics with a passing connection to reality before Potemkin really takes over the BLS.

Importing some LIBERAL PRIDE from the previous thread.

A true liberal is concerned with the state of those immediately below him in the economic hierarchy, because he knows that one day he or his children or his neighbors or brothers will need those rungs to be solid enough to support him on the climb back up to prosperity.

bearly writes:
Who was the last poor person you worked for ? In my case I can't remember ever working for one, but maybe that's just me. And I can't think of a single poor shiftless person that helped me or my family. Again, maybe that's a unique experience that I've had.

You've found the cause of our economic distress. We have run out of wealthy people to employ us as servants.

I'm sure some tax cuts will help by creating more wealth among the wealthy people, and social services cuts will make us more desperate, pliable, and thus attractive as servants. Hopefully enough of the two will allow us to finally be competitive with third world peasants. I see a road to recovery ahead, by gum.

Remember, wealthy ones, your property rights are not intrinsic to your possessions. Only by society's sufferance in creating and respecting those rights do you enjoy ownership of wealth, property, holdings, and whatever other instruments of monopoly by which you collect rent from the rest of us. Once this arrangement shifts from a beneficial and necessary economic tool to harmful parasitism, once the holders of wealth fall prey to the illusion of lordhood and forget that their position is dependent on the sufferance and observances of others, society will cease to recognize your claims, and all property rights will extinguish as if they never were. Falsely believe that you are not one of and among us, that your property rights and wealth somehow separates and insulates you from needing to concern yourself with the health of the society you inhabit, and whatever legitimate claim you think you have to your holdings, titles, possessions, and lands will evaporate like a mirage, as if it had never existed.

Servus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

pavel.chichikov wrote:
Servus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
-- love it, pavel. We are entering into a new era, the Servus Economy.

pavel.chichikov wrote:

Mammoths are trumpeting on Georgia Avenue.

What a image! Lets go back to the Paleolithic.

Thanks for that CR; as I noted yesterday that the column of Mr Norris in the NYT was definitely more upbeat than the blog comments of PK as goes UE. The issue is still confused in my mind. But that may just be me.

Still rocking out to Rush.

YouTube - Rush - The Temples of Syrinx (lyrics)

\m/ We are the priests of the temples of Syrinx! \m/

Now for some progressive rock songs about hobbits fighting necromancers. Or trees.

Note that the trend line is a 2nd order polynomial.

I'd just once like to hear the word polynomial in th mainstream media.

Excellent analysis. Stats I - IV were some of my favorite classes (to a 95% confidence interval).

@ Hoop

my personal Rush fav...

Please keep in mind that the people of the Paleolithic lived in a pristine, unspoiled world.

The sheer quantity of game would boggle the minds of most modern humans. Rivers teeming with trout, more fish than water in some places, fearless animals relatively naive to the curious rarity that was the human form

If we get a series of enormous jobs programs we'll get to full employment in no time. Just imagine all the jobs created or saved!

Hoopajoops LTD wrote:

Now for some progressive rock songs about hobbits fighting necromancers. Or trees.

YouTube - "Frodo, Don't Wear The Ring" - 'Flight of The Conchords' - Lord of The Rings Song

Just about everyone's healthy before 30, Pavel.

Hoops, IIRC the comparison was to people who were mainly agriculturalists.

How could there be fewer payroll jobs, but the unemployment rate declined? This is because the data comes from two separate surveys.

I would also add that the seasonal adjustment, which is especially large in January, is calculated separately for each of the surveys. When both readings are close to neutral, this seasonal adjustment can push them in opposite directions.

bearly wrote:

If we get a series of enormous jobs programs

A big part of our crisis is the intellectual bankruptcy of the right, which never acknowledged that ZIRP (or something close to it) under greenie in '02 was exactly that.

Badger boy, the narrative you described regarding the poor having a chance to be rich by supporting the existing rich is propaganda, and propaganda is for the purpose of influencing belief, belief which, I argue, is the true root of our property system. So I don't think we're in disagreement.

Hoopajoops LTD wrote:

The sheer quantity of game would boggle the minds of most modern humans. Rivers teeming with trout, more fish than water in some places, fearless animals relatively naive to the curious rarity that was the human form

The SF Bay was like that 150 years ago; I've read the accounts. Fish everywhere, the sky full of birds. No problem to go out and bag a dozen ducks before breakfast, any day you named. During the Gold Rush, San Francisco hotels employed hunters to keep meat on the table.

Edit -- I forgot the elk. Herds of elk all over the damned place. And grizzly bears.

Hoopajoops LTD wrote:

The sheer quantity of game would boggle the minds of most modern humans. Rivers teeming with trout, more fish than water in some places, fearless animals relatively naive to the curious rarity that was the human form

If you read John Smith's diaries of his exploration of the Chesapeake Bay in the 1600's, it's pretty much the same description. Now, not so much.

It is probably reasonable to expect that the employment-population ratio has stopped falling.

I wonder what percent of people who lost their jobs had to accept getting into much lower paying jobs as they could not find anything similar to jobs they used to have (people can hold out only for so long).

Great for short-term profits of corporations (more skilled labor cheaper), yet a bit problem for the economy as a whole longer term

I'm with the folks up North on this:

HoweStreet.com - The Source for Market Opinions

In the continuing theater of BLS absurdities, the unemployment rate fell to 9.7% in spite of a 25th consecutive month of job losses. Some stopped counting at 22 months in November. However, I find November questionable.

This month professional services contributed 44,00 jobs to the plus side, but 52,000 of them were part-time jobs. Amazingly a table below shows the number of part-time workers decreased by 849,000 from last month. Go figure.

I really do think that employment is ready to take another leg down, from small business closures. So many small businesses are close to the edge, doing the which-bills-will-I-pay-this-month game. One good shock would send them over the edge -- or 6-12 more months of things-as-they-are.

Doc Holiday wrote:

Go figure.

Umm... that was the whole point of CR's post this thread is linked to - the noisy relationship between NFP numbers and U3

MrM wrote:

Great for short-term profits of corporations (more skilled labor cheaper)

This happens in every single recession. Demand declines, higher paids get cut, demand returns and lower paid fill the payrolls. That applies except for the executives. They never get fired, just retire. Only this time demand might never return to pre-bubble levels, for anything.

I wonder why Mish thinks Joe Boomer's 65th birthday in 2020 will inaugurate such a jubilee of job-creation?

Spunkmeyer wrote:
If you read John Smith's diaries of his exploration of the Chesapeake Bay in the 1600's, it's pretty much the same description. Now, not so much.

"Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area."
- Agent Smith to Neo, "The Matrix"

bearly wrote:

That applies except for the executives.

This is applied by the executives, hence the outcome

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium

Yep, those lemmings have an instinctive sense of balance.

rb wrote:

California gets back just 78 cents for every dollar it sends to Washington

HA! DC is a skimming operation - period. How could you expect to get 94% back and keep all the federal programs including defense, FBI, anti-terror... going, along with all the hopeless pork-ridden bills.

I think 78 cents is too high given the current black hole that exist in DC. Maybe he would get more back if the USG shrunk.

YouTube - One Toke Over The Line - Lawrence Welk - WTF! (1971)

bearly wrote:

rb wrote:
California gets back just 78 cents for every dollar it sends to Washington
HA! DC is a skimming operation - period.

2 senators per each state, baby

From : howestreet

"The official unemployment rate is 9.7%. However, if you start counting all the people that want a job but gave up, all the people with part-time jobs that want a full-time job, all the people who dropped off the unemployment rolls because their unemployment benefits ran out, etc., you get a closer picture of what the unemployment rate is. That number is in the last row labeled U-6.

It reflects how unemployment feels to the average Joe on the street. U-6 is 16.5%. Both U-6 and U-3 (the so called "official" unemployment number) are poised to rise further although most likely at a slower pace than earlier this year."

Also see: The Good News About Jobs - Economic Beat - G. Epstein - Barrons.com

"The brightest spot in the BLS report was the decline in the unemployment rate by a statistically significant three-tenths of a percentage point, to 9.7%. The decline was confirmed by a disproportionate drop in the broadest measure of unemployment tracked by** BLS, U-6, which fell in January to 16.5% from 17.3%** the month before.

The decline in U-6 was mainly driven by a fall in the number of involuntary part-timers. People working part-time who would prefer full-time jobs fell from 9.2 million to 8.3 million in January, the lowest number in a year.

Real consumer spending, that is, adjusted for inflation, rose a seasonally adjusted 0.1% in December after a 0.4% gain in November. It was the lowest since September's 0.7% decline. For the fourth quarter, real spending increased at a 2% annual rate.

Spending is starting the year on a soft note," wrote Julia Coronado, an economist for BNP Paribas.
Real spending is down 0.5% compared with December 2007, when the recession began

bearly wrote:

HA! DC is a skimming operation - period.

Some of those lightly-populated Western states with more senators than Jews definitely get more than their share back. It's the politics, baybee.

MPConvert wrote:

IMO the headline number is a farce.

Norris, NYT, writes:

"A GLOBAL recovery in manufacturing appears to be accelerating. Most manufacturers around the world are reporting an increase in output and new orders, both of which plunged in late 2008 and early 2009 as a credit crisis spurred fears of a new Depression.

The sharpness of the rebound, reflected in the indexes created by the Institute for Supply Management in the United States, and recreated in many other countries by Markit, could indicate that the American economy is not in line for another slow recovery, as happened after the two most recent downturns, in the early 1990s and the early 2000s.

That strength was also reflected in the gross national product estimate for the final quarter of 2009, with an annual rate of growth o f 5.7 percent, the fastest for any quarter in more than six years. And on Friday, the Labor Department reported that the unemployment rate fell to 9.7 percent in January. It added that while the entire economy lost 20,000 jobs, there was an increase of 11,000 jobs in manufacturing employment — the first such gain in three years.
"

No mention of the effect of inventory replenishment on the 5.7 gdp number and a pretty upbeat column. Norris is one fo the better ones of the MSM.

Wait, I forgot, when it's in your home district it's not pork. Funny how principles of fiscal conservatism seem to have geographic boundaries like that. You'd almost think that every publicly proclaimed fiscal conservative in the senate is a hypocrite who thinks he's talking to total rubes.

SNAFU wrote:

No mention of the effect of inventory replenishment on the 5.7 gdp number

Sorry to nit pick, but the inventories are still declining, it is just that in Q4 they declined by a smaller amount than in Q3.

Hoopajoops LTD wrote:
Wait, I forgot, when it's in your home district it's not pork
Exactly. It's a variant on the Upton Sinclair quote about understanding something when his salary depends on his not understanding it. We're hard-wired for duplicity.

Hoopajoops LTD -Rush -
Now for some progressive rock songs about hobbits fighting necromancers. Or trees.

The trees,
YouTube - Rush - The Trees (better sound)

MrM wrote:

Sorry to nit pick, but the inventories are still declining, it is just that in Q4 they declined by a smaller amount than in Q3.

That's ok, I think the 5.7 number , as CR's column had stated and PK concurred, was a blip. The 2.? something number is more representative for the rest of 2010. The following related column(long) is well written, I thought:

"

Formula shows why it's so hard to cut jobless rate
By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer Jeannine Aversa, Ap Economics Writer 49 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The economy's 5.7 percent growth last quarter — the fastest pace since 2003 — was a step toward shrinking the nation's 10 percent unemployment rate.

There's just one problem: Growth would have to equal 5 percent for all of 2010 just to lower the average jobless rate for the year by 1 percentage point.

And economists don't think that's possible.

Most analysts say economic activity will slow to 2.5 percent or 3 percent growth for the current quarter as the benefits fade from government stimulus efforts and from companies drawing down less of their stockpiles.

That's why the Federal Reserve and outside economists think it will take until around the middle of the decade to lower the double-digit jobless rate to a more normal 5 or 6 percent.

Another way of looking at it: A net total of about 3 million jobs would have to be created this year to lower the average unemployment rate by 1 percentage point for 2010, economists estimate. Yet even optimists think the creation of 1 million net jobs is probably out of reach this year.

High unemployment poses a risk to the unfolding recovery because it leads consumers to spend less, keeping economic growth weak. A sharp pullback in spending might even push the economy back into recession. Joblessness also represents a danger for President Barack Obama's Democratic Party in this fall's congressional elections.

The National Association for Business Economics and the International Monetary Fund think gross domestic product will rise just under 3 percent for all of this year. GDP, the best gauge of economic activity, measures the value of all goods and services produced in the United States.

To get a sense of just how deep a dent the worst recession since the 1930s has made in the economy, consider this: The economy shrank 2.4 percent for all of 2009 — the sharpest drop since 1946. It was also the first annual decline since 1991.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com, and Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock, agree that the economy would have to grow roughly 5 percent for all of 2010 just to ratchet down the average unemployment rate for the year by 1 percentage point — to a still-high 9 percent.

Their math is based on Okun's law, named for economist Arthur Okun. In 1962, Okun produced a formula for the connection he saw between unemployment and economic activity.

Exactly how much GDP growth is needed to lower the unemployment rate for a given period varies. That's because the formula involves several factors besides GDP growth. It also considers, for example, businesses' productivity growth.

When the economy was recovering from the 2001 recession, it took two years to reduce the unemployment rate by nearly a full percentage point: It fell from 6 percent in 2003 to 5.1 percent in 2005. GDP growth averaged just over 3 percent.

Economists say the formula hasn't always held up perfectly in recent decades. Rather, it's relied upon as a rough rule of thumb for determining how much growth will be needed to lower unemployment.

But a near-textbook case occurred in 1976, when the economy expanded at a 5.4 percent pace. As Okun would have predicted, that growth drove down the unemployment rate by nearly a full percentage point: from 8.5 percent in 1975 to 7.7 percent.

Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
"

Bubblisimo Gerkinov wrote:

YouTube - One Toke Over The Line - Lawrence Welk - WTF! (1971)

Pure gold!

adornosghost wrote:
They were embarrassingly healthy. As soon as we became agricultural, we lost 6" in height.
Healthy folks who prospered in their communities would never have thought it necessary to impose civilization, nor to invent usury.

adornosghost wrote:

that remains of Paleolithic people

I don't mean to be a wet blanket on the theme, but very few of the recent Stone Age people seem like ideal models for us. Aborigines, rain forest tribes, Inuit, New Guinea tribes; granted that they've been pushed into the margins, but there's a reason people switched to agriculture.

Edit: I've always wondered why Tierra del Fuego was populated. Or Minnesota for that matter.

"In the world I see - you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Tower. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying strips of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway."

They were embarrassingly healthy. As soon as we became agricultural, we lost 6" in height.

Could this conclusion be a bit skewed? Usually only a certain % of remains/fossils of animals are found, it's not as if the fossil record that we find now is a complete record of all species, extinctions, & geologic events. Could it be that fewer remains of hunter-gatherers have been found because it's a nomadic population? That an agriculturalist population would be more likely to have stable/fixed burial sites? So it's more likely that the skeletons,etc, would be discovered & a greater % of the population buried? (if burial was part of death rites). It seems as though there'd need to be quite a few assumptions or adjustments made to the data found.

Some societies/tribes were nomadic because of the climate, environment, others utilized crop growing as well, some probably did both--probably whatever seemed to work best.

azurite wrote:

we lost 6" in height.

Could this conclusion be a bit skewed?

No, no! Taller people are healthier.

sdtfs wrote:

Taller people are healthier

and more advanced spiritually (cf. na'vi)

nova wrote:

I just finished shoveling us and the neighbor out. One and a half hours

Your ticker is in good working order. That is for sure.

Cool, I see there is some interesting in the hearing I am sharing with Taleb. Let me know if there are some problems.

The great thing about Congressional hearings is that they aren't copyrighted... I imagine this is why C-SPAN adopted a liberal non-commercial use policy. I think C-SPAN would lose if they argued copyright to Congressional hearings... even the video portions.

barfly wrote:
what happens when there's nothing left but parasites?
We call that utopia. True Darwinistic triumph.

When we were up in NoVa my dad invested in a snowblower and shared liberally.... you would think health insurance companies would subsidize these things....

sdtfs wrote:

No, no! Taller people are healthier.

If so, then the Dutch, who are not known to be hunter-gatherers, are currently the healthiest people.

Which Country has the Tallest People?

The parasites die or eat each other.

Damn, shoveling snow made me hungry...must go eat.

From the previous thread - a commenter on Krugman's site said: "The continue use of this slur [PIIGS] by the Anglo-Saxon press has made headlines in the Spanish press a number of times, but it is quite surprising to find a Novel Laureate using it."

Remember that 70k year ago volcanic explosion that decimated us.

Even at asympotic rates of population control it takes a long time
to get to overcrowding when you are only at 2000 or so.

Also, the weak got eaten, Darwinian contraints were functioning.

Nomads could run away from macro human predators, farmers
can't.

Woolsey wrote:

"The continue use of this slur [PIIGS] by the Anglo-Saxon press has made headlines in the Spanish press a number of times, but it is quite surprising to find a Novel Laureate using it."

I haven't read any Krugman novels. Does he write romance, or sci-fi?

lawyerliz, how's the priesthood treating you? Anoint any transactions lately?

Bubblisimo Gerkinov wrote:
I've been watching it unfold for the past 10 years.
We all have. They are saving their own at our expense. It's not just privatize gains and socialize losses, either, it's privatize gains made on public money and socialize losses of capital plus losses on investments made with that capital.

gruntled wrote:

A statistical analysis of the data, especially like the one in CR's last chart, probably captures the relationship between unemployment and economic activity as well as anyone's formula. In fact, I suspect this sort of analysis can be used to refine one's economic models and formulas to improve their predictive capability, along with one's understanding of underlying economic principles.

The number that has stuck in my head, is that it would take 3m additional jobs in 2010 to reduce the UE number by 1% and it is very unlikely that 1m additional jobs will be created in 2010.

SNAFU wrote:

The number that has stuck in my head, is that it would take 3m additional jobs in 2010 to reduce the UE number by 1% and it is very unlikely that 1m additional jobs will be created in 2010.

Well, you can always count on people to give up looking for jobs and drop out the labor force

Really, the only thing that will reverse the death spiral is
tariffs. Call them pollution tariffs.

Oh, and I asked the B of A lady, why they didn't finance their
own REOs. She agreed with me that this will slow the death
spiral, but said the problem was the regulators didn't want them
to do this!! Actually this makes sense to me. In times of yore this
probably wasn't a good idea, hence the rule.

And one can't abandon a rule, because it might cause a problem
somehow, somewhere, and a bureaucrat would be punished.

MrM wrote:

Well, you can always count on people to give up looking for jobs and drop out the labor force

True, more so if UE benefit is not extended beyond the latest extension.

One of my clients was at the end of the trail, with summary judgment scheduled
for November, 2008 yes 8. I noticed that they had dropped the wife as defendant,
so filed a motion. Haven't the faintest idea why they did this, but from their
perspective, it was wrong, and all they had to do was add her back in again.

Here we are in Feb, 2010 and they haven't added her back in again yet. Could have
been done in a month or 2.

You have snow machines? Gee maybe Fla should try to get the
Winter Olympics.

lawyerliz wrote:

You have snow machines? Gee maybe Fla should try to get the
Winter Olympics.

It does have to be below freezing for them to work, unfortunately. And the snow that they create could never be confused with real snow, except for in appearance.

Just back from morning coffee: here's some bumper-sticker wisdom for the day (or lifetime).

"Wag more, bark less"

noob goldberg wrote:

You have snow machines? Gee maybe Fla should try to get the
Winter Olympics.

It does have to be below freezing for them to work,

Yeah, you're right-so if it drops into low 40's down here especially with clear skies, it should be around freezing up there. That's the risks with having an event on a mountain less than 5000 feet high in the mildest park of Canada.

Somewhat OT, but interesting: the effects of a lengthy unemployment continue even after getting a job (even good ones)

After Escaping Jobless Rolls, Trauma May Linger - NY Times

One of the people interviewed indicates that extended UE has meant a complete change in attitude towards owning a home--the family now intends to stay renters--although they still own (but are not making payments on or living in) their house.

doug r wrote:

Yeah, you're right-so if it drops into low 40's down here especially with clear skies, it should be around freezing up there. That's the risks with having an event on a mountain less than 5000 feet high in the mildest park of Canada.

I also thought it was a bit risky to have it at Whistler, but I really didn't think they'd have this much trouble. Murphy's law, I guess.

sillythings wrote:

Please let me know what do you think

This is a prank, right ?

doug r wrote:

Yeah, you're right-so if it drops into low 40's down here especially with clear skies, it should be around freezing up there. That's the risks with having an event on a mountain less than 5000 feet high in the mildest park of Canada.

You make it sound like the Olympics is about the sport. Yeah, next you'll be telling me that thingy tomorrow is about football. Meanwhile the Sierra ski areas are running out of places to put the stuff (plus three feet since that picture was taken last week.).

broward wrote:
From each State according to ability.
To each State according to need.
And for the Federales?

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

And for the Federales?

The usual cut of the action.

sm_landlord wrote:

So, are you and EHP going to join the protesters? They made the LATimes this morning:

If I'm going to fly 3000 miles on my own dime it's going to be to somewhere a lot warmer and less populated than Vancouver during the Olympics.

sm_landlord wrote:

Protesters amass ahead of Olympics - latimes.com

I can't wait to see what happens to the Vancouver housing market in two months.

By the way, there's this npr guy--I think the show is called The Story--
who has been interviewing a lot of Haitians and people who are adopting
Haitians, etc.

To a Haitian, if you have enough to eat most of the time you are
rich. This one adoptee said that he thought that he was rich because
he nearly always had enough to eat, but sometimes they had only
one piece of bread, and he had to share with his 2 half-sisters. But
in his society, he was rich.

My view of hunter-gatherers is influenced by the experience of an anthropologist I used to know. She lived with an indigenous group in the Peruvian Amazon in the late 60s, early 70s. Actually, they were gardener-hunters. Women gardened, men hunted. She said it was a pretty good life. People spent lots of time in their hammocks, gossiping, telling jokes and making babies. A small-pox epidemic had brought their population down from about 300 to the 80s, and they were enthusiastically repopulating. If the men got too lazy and didn't hunt, the women would get on their cases, telling them: If we don't get some meat around here we're going to eat *******.

They had their anxieties though. There's a book called To Hunt In the Morning, by Janet Siskind. I've been told it's still well-known in Peru.

Rob Dawg wrote:
I can't wait to see what happens to the Vancouver housing market in two months.
The economic equivalent of this? Woman on Cell Phone and Eating Walks in Front of Train (old news from 2007)

Woman on Cell Phone and Eating Walks in Front of Train

Would a lemming do that?

I checked the moniker after and realized it was a troll to get the grouchy natives riled. We used to get a lot more trolls...

bearly wrote:

I checked the moniker after and realized it was a troll to get the grouchy natives riled. We used to get a lot more trolls...

Is it a bad sign when the trolls have all seen the light and converted to the dark side?

We tramped a bit around the neighborhood, and then I shoveled for about an hour. I have to tell you that once you get up into your 70s your stamina will lessen noticeably.

In fact, since we have no voting representation in Congress, we have less to do with the federal government.

pavel.chichikov wrote:

I have to tell you that once you get up into your 70s your stamina will lessen noticeably.

I'm in my 30's, pavel, and I can't stomach more than an hour of shoveling. Of course it all depends on snow density, but an hour of slogging through heavy wet snow is enough to kick the crap out of anyone.

Central Bankers often meet in a shroud of secrecy. Is this a cause of concern?

Secret summit of top bankers | News.com.au

LL,

Why not snow machines in FL. Here are some with gals driving!

That Girl Racing Moves Their NHRA Pro-Stock Snowmobile and Asphalt Program to Ice

bearly wrote:

A report is emerging this morning, that confirms that Premier Danny Williams has gone to the United States for Heart Surgery

You're right, this is a damning indictment of the Canadian healthcare system.

If you judge a country by who's breaking into to it, so should we see who's comes here for health care!

pavel.chichikov wrote:

I have to tell you that once you get up into your 70s your stamina will lessen noticeably.

My dad was complaining of this as well while we were at the gym over the xmas holiday. I kid you not: He is bitching because he no longer works out with 180 lbs on the bench, and is stuck with low values like 140. My old man could kick my butt if he needed to.

My reply was therefore unsympathic.

pavel.chichikov wrote:
I don't think we have any more to do with the federal government than people in Illinois or Colorado. I can walk to Maryland in ten minutes.
Gravitational pull that ensures the moon orbits the earth isn't anyone's fault either, merely a function of its position in the gravitational field our planet creates.

bearly wrote:

I have many stories, all horror stories.

There are no shortage of horror stories from any medical system. But I offer to you that the Canadian healthcare system is rife with problems, many stemming from rationing and a lack of medical system infrastructure investment.

But it seems to do a better job meeting the needs of all of our population than the American system, even if it's starved for resources. I wouldn't trade it, personally. But I'm also not dictating what American's should choose. Choose whatever you want.

Spunkmeyer wrote:

And, as a self-employed individual (whose income easily halved in 2009) I don't show up one way or the other, but have certainly felt the effects of the recession.

If you are self-employed and receive 1099-MISC income, you do count in the Household Survey.

As I posted yesterday, about 10% of the Household Survey "employed" are self-employed.

The biggest difference between 1099-MISC self-employed and W2 employed people is that self-employed people (mostly) don't pay into FUTA and don't qualify for unemployment benefits. So, if their income falls off, they don't show up in unemployment statistics. But they do show up in Household Survey employment.

It's my impression that a lot of long-time 1099 self-employed people are hanging in there, doing okay, maybe on a little less income...but they are coping better than a lot of people who depend on W2s.

Outsider wrote:
Talk about two-tier health care. A glimpse of the future?
Gattaca (1997)

Naturally, those with the most money deserve the best health care, as they have shown themselves fittest to survive. The more money you have, the healthier you deserve to be!

pavel.chichikov wrote:
I think I'll take a nap instead.
No! That would allow your body to rest, heal and prepare for future activity. You need a stimulus package!

Of course, RIF. How could I forget. Like a caste system. The lower rungs deserve to be there.

Eh, medical care is overrated anyway.
/s

What is your life worth?

I'm not sure that's the kind of entrepreneurial spirit we're looking for here Mr Chichikov.

C

josap wrote:

Minimum amount of care for everyone and you can also have your own insurance policy?

Canadians have very visceral debates about two-tiered healthcare systems. I personally believe that there is a stronger role for the market to play in the Canadian system than has yet been permitted, but I also firmly believe that a great deal of Canada's reduced crime rate can be attributed to our healthcare system, and the reduced stress and class stratification that it causes. Providing reduced coverage to the poor would increase social stratification, in my mind.

A homeless man and a senator can share a hospital room in Canada. Something about that possibility appears to reduce class boundaries out in the real world.

JP wrote:

That sounds like a gold-plated plan. There are usually cheaper higher-deductible plans.

Depends on age, over 55 you pay a bundle, pre-exixting and you are priced out as well. My isnure went over my mortgage in 2002 due to a small heart issue.

bearly wrote:

Hey, all you ObamaCare cheerleaders! Especially those that celebrated the Canadian system as the model. This is what I was describing. If you can afford it for anything but treating an ingrown toenail...
A report is emerging this morning, that confirms that Premier Danny Williams has gone to the United States for Heart Surgery
Premier Williams Newfoundland & Labrador: Heart Surgery In U.S. | NowPublic News Coverage

That case proves nothing. It is the same as to compare the health level of top politicians/businessmen as opposed to comparing health level of the average person.
Of course the US can offer the top of the line medical care in some areas - but only to those who can afford it or whose health insurance will cover it. The key questions of the health care debate are 1) universal access to health care (i.e., the problem with uninsured and denial of care to insured) and 2) the cost of health care for the society and for individual.

How does this news relate to either of these issues/

JP wrote:

To be fair: That sounds like a gold-plated plan. There are usually cheaper higher-deductible plans.

My personal plan costs over $10K/year. And that's with a $10K deductible. Just for me, myself, and I.

bearly wrote:

Getting old in Canada isn't an honor.

And yet, somehow, people end up growing quite old in Canada. Even older than in the USA, in fact.

MrM wrote:

That case proves nothing

Please find a case where a US politician (a Governor) went to Canada to get medical care. It's that simple.

josap wrote:

Depends on age, over 55 you pay a bundle, pre-exixting and you are priced out as well.

Well that's their own fault. There are alternatives to turning 55.
And pre-existing? Those sick people are using all the medical resources, so we need to make them pay the equiv of a mortgage.

JP wrote:

I'm amazed that someone who bankrupts the sick for merely being sick

Every. State. Has. Medicaid.

For those that can pay there's insurance or savings. If someone wants a Carnival Cruise, a big screen TV, 5 cellphones... whatever. I don't care.

bearly wrote:

Please find a case where a US politician (a Governor) went to Canada to get medical care. It's that simple.

Even if all millionaires and politicians around the world choose to get medical care in the US, it has little to do with the health care debate.
Please think about the two points I mentioned: the universal access to health care and the cost of health care for the society and for average individual.
I would be interested in mass examples of middle class Canadians going to the US to get medical care.

May none of you have an illness to understand how bankruptcy can occur with full health coverage and no mortgage.

Time to shovel more snow.

JP wrote:

May none of you have an illness to understand how bankruptcy can occur with full health coverage and no mortgage.

Amen.

bearly wrote:

Every. State. Has. Medicaid.

Medicaid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Having a limited income is one of the primary requirements for Medicaid eligibility, but poverty alone does not qualify a person to receive Medicaid benefits unless they also fall into one of the defined eligibility categories. According to the CMS website, "Medicaid does not provide medical assistance for all poor persons. Even under the broadest provisions of the Federal statute (except for emergency services for certain persons), the Medicaid program does not provide health care services, even for very poor persons, unless they are in one of the designated eligibility groups."

Counterpointer wrote:

"Eh? Not here, mate. All bet the farm on the mines and the house. Dopey buggers."

Awesome, C. Who would have thought the Australians would be the trigger?

MrM wrote:

I would be interested in mass examples of middle class Canadians going to the US to get medical care.

I would be curious in mass examples of Americans going to Mexico for medical care.

EDIT: removed because I'm tired of this debate. It never ends.

pavel.chichikov wrote:

She said it was a pretty good life. People spent lots of time in their hammocks, gossiping, telling jokes and making babies.

We can do that. If you decide to live your life with the same amount of possessions and view of the future, (except for the laptop, since you'll be posting from your hammock), I think it's about the same.

lawyerliz wrote:

Off to spend money.

Good girl, LL. Glad to see you doing your part!

noob goldberg wrote:

mass examples of Americans going to Mexico for medical care.

Ca, Az, Tx NM seniors go to Mex for allot of medical, dental and medications. Mostly due to cost.

And if you live in Mex for part of the year you can get the state insurance for $250.00 per year and the free medical that goes with it.

pavel.chichikov wrote:

So people who complain of bankruptcy for medical reasons or denial of service for one reason or another are lying?

The US is treat first then figure out who pays. BK is a god sent compared to loosing your life. Is money that in important? Lying to themselves maybe, quite common today when programed to be a victim..

Counterpointer wrote:

It's not that well appreciated but Chimerica's little brother is ChinOz.

Australia provides the resources.
China provides the labor.
America provides the paper.
win-win-win?

noob goldberg wrote:

I would be curious in mass examples of Americans going to Mexico for medical care

I am quite certain a lot more come to the US for medical care from MX. I know many.

Can we get some more frightened seniors on medicare in here arguing against expanding socialized medicine? Nothing encapsulates so perfectly the relationship between the grasping elderly and my generation. Gorge all you can on the rich fruits of your fathers and befoul as best you can the cribs of your sons. Get while the getting is good. Pile on the debt for excesses while castigating the poor. Consume it all, and discover that even a stomach which devours the world is not big enough to satisfy your hunger. It is no matter. As the inevitable march of nature dictates, your time will have passed soon enough. We are young, we have a great capacity for suffering, and we can wait and endure. With your passing, you will have robbed us as best you could, destroyed as many social institutions as was expedient, and left as many problems as was convenient for you, but at least we'll live to see a day when we can rise from under your yoke and suffer the fruits of your poisonous legacy in freedom.

Keep railing against socialized medicine, you bitter, aging medicare queens. You will only hold it back for another five years at most. Your kind will be remembered with revulsion, a clutching, backwards, despoiling curse on an entire generation.

Pretty bitter stuff and fun to write! I don't actually hold that viewpoint, but I sure can sympathize with it.

Blackhalo wrote:

Just think if California had their own currency...

Like this?
http://www.solidprinciples.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/bew.gif

or this?
http://www.boom2bust.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/California-IOU.gif

Lobbyist Ben Dover wrote:

The US is treat first then figure out who pays.

Nope, only in life threatening situations.

Friend of mine got hit by a car while riding his bike. Broke his elbow. No care at the emergency room, was not life threatening. Took him 8 months to find a Dr, hosp etc to do surgery he could pay for. Elbow is still screwed up.

josap,

The 60 year old self employed with no insurance? Do you seriously think he was the responsible party here? Maybe AZ doesn't treat broken bones but every where I lived the do.

noob goldberg wrote:

I would be curious in mass examples of Americans going to Mexico for medical care.

Here you go

Medical Tourism Mexico: Health Tourism Destination
Mexico's health care lures Americans - USATODAY.com
Retirees Flock to Mexico for the Sun and the Health Care | PBS NewsHour | Dec. 28, 2009 | PBS
Medical Tourism In Mexico
Health Care in Mexico
American elderly head to Mexico for cheaper medical care |
kens5.com | San Antonio News, Local News, Breaking News, Weather
| News
6 Million Americans Travel Abroad Each Year for Surgeries, Medical Treatments - Health News - Health.com

From USA Today
It's unclear how many Americans use IMSS, but with between 40,000 and 80,000 U.S. retirees living in Mexico, the number probably runs "well into the thousands," said David Warner, a public policy professor at the University of Texas.
"They take very good care of us," said Jessica Moyal, 59, of Hollywood, Fla., who now lives in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico, a popular retirement enclave for Americans.

Fron HealthDay News
An estimated 6 million Americans are traveling each year to such countries as India, Costa Rica, Mexico and Thailand in search of less-expensive treatments for simple and complex procedures. Even France and Belgium tend to be cheaper than the United States.