patrick.net

Call it Crazy says

The ACA won't change that, it might actually increase it because the majority of the people who signed up are clueless regarding co-pays and deductibles! They think buying a low priced Bronze plan means they are home free....

Sorry, but that's far from the truth. The ACA was in part created to solve this dilemma. The very fact that millions of Americans who were previously uninsured will now have insurance is one of many reasons why medical bankruptcy will be drastically decreased. The Cap'n is on my ignore list.

edvard2 says

Call it Crazy says

The ACA won't change that, it might actually increase it because the majority of the people who signed up are clueless regarding co-pays and deductibles! They think buying a low priced Bronze plan means they are home free....

Sorry, but that's far from the truth. The ACA was in part created to solve this dilemma. The very fact that millions of Americans who were previously uninsured will now have insurance is one of many reasons why medical bankruptcy will be drastically decreased. The Cap'n is on my ignore list.

I keep thinking that many who buy insurance think insurance means "I don't have to pay, or I get a discount on my healthcare". Medical bankruptcy will be all but eliminated it appears.

Relative to that, a 5-6K deductible won't be a big deal, but getting to 5-6K might surprise some who had not been insured.

Even people I talked to that use insurance seem to misunderstand what it is that they get for it.

CL says

I keep thinking that many who buy insurance think insurance means "I don't have to pay, or I get a discount on my healthcare". Medical bankruptcy will be all but eliminated it appears.

Your statement nailed it: When health insurance was all private, even if you had one of the best plans, come a major medical procedure you would often still be on the hook for sometimes 1000's of dollars. That means you might have had to pay say- $1,500, which is the case with my plan as a deductible. But that's a far cry from the anywhere from $10,000- $100,000 it would have cost out of pocket. Its the same with car insurance: You also have to pay a deductible on top of the monthly sum.

So I find it interesting and ironic that many against the ACA mention these additional costs as if they never existed before: Of course they did. But the takeaway is ultimately, people aren't going to have their financial lives ruined as a result of not having medical coverage,plain and simple.

Houses.
Cars.

How about dropping the prices?

And getting us the pollution free, and livable units we want?

Call it Crazy says

With like 50% of the population living paycheck to paycheck, having to pay a 16K medical bill is the same as having to pay a 100K bill when you don't have any additional funds.....

When you have a medical bankruptcy, do they make you sell your house or other assets to pay the bill?

Call it Crazy says

Are you really this clueless???

Do you have any idea the total costs per year to someone on a bronze plan if they have a major surgery??

Your premise is that since they have insurance now, they'll be saved from medical bankruptcy?? Really??

Don't believe you actually understand how these plans work at all. With all of these plans there is a maximum cap, around $6,000 for individuals, 12k for a couple, per year. The difference between the "metals" is the deductible, which is higher for bronze for something like a major surgery.

It helps to understand the facts.

Call it Crazy says

Hospital staff in Northern Virginia are turning away sick people on a frigid Thursday morning because they can't determine whether their Obamacare insurance plans are in effect.

Yet another reason we need to nationalize the whole damn system.

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

Say hey! This was in the Wall Street Journal on March 30, 1999. Note "... how much it will buy."

Holy cow/interesting/compelling ...!

And where is it up to date??? Right here ... see the first chart shown in this thread.
Recent Dow day is Monday, January 6, 2014 __ Level is 105.3

WOW! It is hideous that this is hidden! Is there any such "Homes, Inflation Adjusted"? Yes! This was in the New York Times on August 27, 2006:

And up to date (by me) is here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1219038&c=999083#comment-999083

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

And http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

Call it Crazy says

Go look up the bronze plan and report what you find...

Already did, which is what I previously explained to you. Obviously you haven't read any of these plans or else you wouldn't be making inaccurate statements.

carrieon says

Kennedy was taken out because he ordered the U.S. treasury to issue lawful currency, just 10 days before the assassination.

BS, Kennedy committed suicide. It was all done with mirrors. I read it on the internet so it has to be true.

"confrontational but really trying to understand how sustainable the system really is? Is it people taking more risk? Is it people living above their mean? Is it investors? Is it Chinese buyers? Who can sustain such growth?

Thanks for your explanations

"

@ above. I think I said the same exact thing to BMWman whom ponder the exact same thing in 2011? Where is the growth? Who are the buyer's. This is not sustainable?

Well guess what, I told him look in the mirror, you are the demand and sure enough, he bought six months later. lol easy freakin call.

Well guess what, look in the mirror, you are the demand. It sounds like you make around 350K which is at least 18K a month net of tax. You can afford 5K in mortgage (permanent cost of interest, tax and direct payments) and still save 100K a year (some will be forced saving, 401K match deferred), so not understanding crying poor. If you are unwilling, plenty are willing due to income position (250K+ income) or wealth (plenty of millionaires). Housing is competed for at the margins and you have plenty of margins.

Of course it is sustainable, in fact, 2014 and 2015 will be more like 2013 and 2012 so there will be more escalation in your 3/2/2. The system has too much money with brutally nowhere to go and for basic property in coveted area (and you are competing for the same 5% of the housing stock in the SFBA) , no one is selling or even close to selling. (housingtracker) Not only are there too much money, you'll have a permanent low transactions due to the majority locking interest rate sub 3.5%. Worst, there is no new homes for sale, especially SFH as an alternative. Household income for the top 20% are rising and wealth is exploding, those will not change anytime soon.

You are competing for the same 5-10% of the housing stock so stop thinking in terms of median. You are not living like a median person. The median household is a renter or lives in a 300K deep east bay home or an old time homeowner who owned the damn place since 1970's with living cost cheaper than anywhere in the USA.

This is the USA, where interest rate is never really a risk as you know they always take the same low interest pill and the tax environment always favor landowners and deter transactions. Hoarding land is hoarding wealth which will be the trend going forward. The entire world kinda works that way.

It's been about 40 years since we last lost control of inflation. What does the average investor know about it? We were kids (at best) the last time. In my opinion, the 15 Trillion in liquidity-from-nowhere is only now reaching Main Street. Inflation will be the result and higher interest rates, the only Fed tool to combat it.

There are trillions of reasons why fundamentals have nothing to do with real estate prices. Your investments may well increase by another 20 percent this year, but so may french fries.

deepcgi says

the 15 Trillion in liquidity-from-nowhere is only now reaching Main Street.
Inflation will be the result and higher interest rates, the only Fed tool to
combat it.

OR money supply and price levels are not related. What if the inflation of the 70s was caused by increased demand driven by a 10% increase in the labor force participation rate from 1966-1980? In fact, the number in the labor force increased from 75M to 107M from 1966-80. That is a 2.5% annual increase.

2.5% more workers every year, many of whom just added to household income (1 income to 2) generating more household disposable income = more demand, higher prices.

Unless we get more income earners out of a household, or wage inflation, or both - we are not getting inflation.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=qGf

bob2356 says

tatupu70 says

Why do you ignore the obvious evidence that aliens killed Kennedy?

I'm convinced. There are video's, it must be true.

Why don't both you nitwits expand your myopic horizons and listen to this interview from Guns and Butter; one of the best programs on KPFA (non-corporate public radio in the Bay Area and a few other markets).

http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/98011

LBJ had a hand in it, that's for sure. The Warren Commission Report was bunk and was full of loose ends.

thomaswong.1986 says

Needless to say, you got what you voted for.. dismal 8 years, worst ever.

It's a worldwide phenomenon. Is Obama the Emperor of the Earth?

deepcgi says

Inflation will be the result and higher interest rates, the only Fed tool to combat it.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=qGp

is consumer debt / wages.

This is not a graph that can support "higher interest rates".

Should they appear somehow, the economy would crash in a deflationary cross-default spiral, like what we were seeing in 2008-2009.

Similarly, we're in an extreme regime with Federal debt:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GFDEGDQ188S

At 100% debt-to-GDP, we're getting into weird feedback effects, like what Japan is dealing with.

Interest paid by the government is an upward form of distribution, from taxpayers to "savers".

But if these "savers" don't spend, this is deflationary.

Basically our entire economy is fucked. Too much money with the "savers", not enough remaining within the paycheck economy.

3/4 of the country don't have 6 months income saved, hell 2/3 don't have $1000

http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/10/pf/emergency_fund/

Cherry picking clearly doesn't tell the whole story. and '77 is too late.

Keep raising rents and see whether or not Joe Renter pushes for higher wages rather than doubling up with the family next door.

Bill: I agree. We can't support higher interest rates.

Control Point: Keep raising the rent and the wage pressure will increase. People will not begin "sharing" single family homes.

finehoe says

thomaswong.1986 says

Needless to say, you got what you voted for.. dismal 8 years, worst ever.

It's a worldwide phenomenon. Is Obama the Emperor of the Earth?

You mean he cant fix it like Reagan did back in the 80s ?

Is increasing Min wage his only solution to the economic and

unemployment problems...

I predict a sudden and (to democrats) completely unexplainable drop in crime for the Windy City next year!
It's a much bigger risk when the person you're mugging might have a gun in their possession.

deepcgi says

Bill: I agree. We can't support higher interest rates.

Control Point: Keep raising the rent and the wage pressure will increase. People will not begin "sharing" single family homes.

Employers will respond to higher wage pressure with a hearty FUCK YOU and pink slips. Then they will then renew their shill cries of employment shortages to swell the labor pool with labor more willing to compromise on living standards.

Its worked great so far.

An armed society is a polite society!!!

thomaswong.1986 says

You mean he cant fix it like Reagan did back in the 80s ?

Reagan "fixed" the world? OMG, you really are delusional.

Only if the person's name is Fooscin.

It would be nice to hear some Fooscin and Yellen at the Fed for a change.

More people went to Disneyland the last week of the year, than signed up for Ohnobuycare.

@zzyzzx: man those pictures are so awesome. Made my day :)

Another thing employers do is raise prices, cut quality, quantity or all of the above But that is price inflation which is no longer possible as we've heard.

Plus, the 35 year old kids are already living with their parents, what is the next big compromise? Sharing a kitchen with strangers?

They are going to need to find quite a few undocumented immigrant C++ programmers crossing the Rio Grande, because 130k per year won't cut it with rents going any higher.

It really all comes down to blind faith in the "brilliance" of derivatives gambling. ALL of the liquidity in real estate is a result of those derivatives and the Central Bank's hopes that the money won't trickle down into the general markets. But look at the stock market. Of course it has trickled down.

Surprisingly perhaps, I'm more sure of a stock market crash than a real estate one, but they are not mutually exclusive.

.... and this is supposed to be a good thing?

Vicente says

Personally I don't prefer beef and think for many Americans it's a HABIT more than anything.

Cornfed CAFO beef is an unhealthy, subsidized (see how those two tend to go together) example of lemon socialism. The producers get the subsidies and keep the profits, while everyone else pays the price: direct subsidies for corn, obese customers' enlarged medical costs shifted onto everyone ("thanks, Obamacare"), pollution and disease from the runoff, environmental damage including the dead zone in the gulf of Mexico, etc. And that's when Democrats are in power; read Molly Ivins' pungent description of what happens when Republicans are in power and allow the beef to be smeared in its own feces so long as the feces aren't "fibrous".

Subsidized prices don't tell you much about the underlying costs, and can produce all sorts of distortions. In Soviet times, farmers sometimes gave bread to their cattle, because the bread was cheaper than the grain it contained. The recipients of corn subsidies argue that if their subsidies end, then we will see inflation in the retail price of beef. That's true, but we would see a reduction in the total cost of everything else, for example cornfields would become available for vegetables and the Gulf "dead zone" might become available for fishing if it isn't full of crude oil. Cornfed beef is a product that no rational person would buy at its actual cost, so the producers pay politicians to subsidize it, thus making it an artificially cheap habit.

I keep a spreadsheet of food prices, and over time I find they tend to revert to CPI, though I do observe volatility and shifts. For example, healthy food tends to get more expensive, while subsidized crap on the "Dollar Menu" stays the same, with the result that the people eating the subsidized crap become unhealthier and more unhappy, fattening them for medication (homefool's toxic SSRI placebos, "thanks Obamacare") and slaughter (don't even get me started on the consolidation in the funeral industry, raising prices dramatically for added "services" that haven't really improved on the ancient process of digging a hole and filling it in).

Congratulations. The "stupidity alarm" has been tripped, which triggers the ignore function. Adios!

deepcgi says

pushes for higher wages

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=qGG

blue is jobs
red is prime age 25-54 population
green is # job-seekers / jobs, right axis

"reserve army of labour"

the takeaway here is that the economy is generally doing pretty well on a jobs vs. population basis, 1970-1990 these were at parity, the 1990s good times and 2000s bubble boom time got us pretty high over the red curve, and we've recovered most of that now.

The green line, though, shows that times are still tough for jobseekers.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=qGI

shows that people are quitting jobs now at the rate they were at the bottom of the dotcom recession.

You can delete my posts all you want, but fortunately, you can't delete the truth. I know it, you know it, and your alien masters know it.

Keep trying to distract people with your CIA and organized crime BS--we know better. We know the truth.

How much are you getting paid, anyway??

Disgusting.

All invertebrates that allow themselves to be infringed upon by carrying a permit for an "arms" which is not a requirement listed in the 2nd Amendment know that in a medical emergency taking the gunpowder from a cartridge with juice & chewing on the lead will cure any ill including the gunshot wound they received when they were shot by another CCer.

"Insurance! We don't need no stinkin' insurance."

sbh says

And food , once consumed, has no store of value and is never resold.

Thus, the "greater fool" theory does not apply to food, except in times of extreme scarcity or hyperinflation. During wartime, or in current Zimbabwe, food prices can inflate dramatically. Bubbles Ben (and his faithful replacement, Old Yellen) have been playing with fire, jeopardizing currency stability in order to prop up housing prices. As with bankruptcy, price inflation can happen gradually, then suddenly.

tatupu70 says

I wonder if part of the issue is that housing is used to stratify--housing is bid up so that only people similar to you can afford it.

The trophy effect explains much of the inflation in trophy destinations like Nantucket, where the rise of the 1% has lifted the price of trophy housing dramatically. It also explains some of the effect in the RSFBA, but proportionally less as you look beyond the 1% neighborhoods. Realtors might tell you that every shack has the potential to lure the 1%, e.g. if a dot-con CEO moves in next door and decides to buy the whole neighborhood, but the actual likelihood of that happening trails off to lottery probabilities.

sbh says

Debt plays a much more substantial role in consumption and production of housing than in that of food. And food , once consumed, has no store of value and is never resold.

How to explain rent then? Debt shouldn't influence rental costs. But housing costs are generally at or near rental parity...

tatupu70 says

How to explain rent then? Debt shouldn't influence rental costs.

Of course it does. Renting is the substitute to buying. If the price of either goes up, then the value of the substitute increases along with it. In the "zoned zone," where supply of both is fixed, Fed QE yield suppression drives price inflation in both buying and renting.

curious2 says

The trophy effect explains much of the inflation in trophy destinations like Nantucket, where the rise of the 1% has lifted the price of trophy housing dramatically. It also explains some of the effect in the RSFBA, but proportionally less as you look beyond the 1% neighborhoods. Realtors might tell you that every shack has the potential to lure the 1%, e.g. if a dot-con CEO moves in next door and decides to buy the whole neighborhood, but the actual likelihood of that happening trails off to lottery probabilities.

I think it's more widespread than that. There are CEOs in every area that want to live near other CEOs or high income people. And even if you can't afford to live with the 1%-- someone making $100K/year wants to live with other people making $100K... It might not be the top neighborhood, but it's in the next tier, and so on...

bgamall4 says

Straw Man says

Should illegal alien be allowed to practice law?

In this particular case with the young man granted a law license, his dad was a legal alien, and applied for that status for his son. Apparently that was accepted, but the government is so shorthanded it didn't process the application.

Boo-fuckin-hoo: millions of people wait for years (or even decades) to get their status adjusted legally. But this guy can't wait - he's special. Because, apparently, we don't have enough sleazeball lawyers.

sbh says

And food , once consumed, has no store of value and is never resold.