patrick.net

I'll redirect the question to you.

Call it Crazy says

Bigsby says

Which particular part of that highlighted section do you have an issue with?

Go ask the people of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Crimea, etc. for that answer and get back to us....

You could say that about particular countries at pretty much any time in recorded history. Those places constitute a small percentage of the world's population. And you didn't just highlight the violent section, did you?

It's true. He should have included crime too. In the old days you would never hear about genocide or wars because we did not have modern communications.

Call it Crazy says

This year’s projection is that couples retiring at age 65 are expected to incur $220,000 in health care costs on average during their retirement years. This figure is unchanged from last year, although that’s hardly a cause for celebration for your average pre-retiree. Most people haven’t saved $220,000 period, much less earmarked that amount for health-care costs alone.

That's what Midicare is for.

lets increase the minimum wage to $1000 per hour and all live in the newly found paradise. if increasing minimum wage is good then why can't we keep increasing it to the max...what gives ?

Call it Crazy says

I guess you didn't read the rest of the article...

The study assumes that the hypothetical retiring couple has traditional Medicare. The $220,000 total includes monthly premium payments for Parts B and D, plus Medicare cost-sharing requirements–beneficiaries have to pay 20% of most of their doctor bills, along with co-payments and deductibles.

Maybe Obamacare will cover it???

I stand corrected.
My elderly parents have Medicare through Kaiser. Even though my father has severe health issues the total cost seems reasonable.

jkaldi1 says

lets increase the minimum wage to $1000 per hour and all live in the newly found paradise. if increasing minimum wage is good then why can't we keep increasing it to the max...what gives ?

THat's a piece of great reasoning there. Let's see if I can come up with an example to show you how absurd it is.

a) They say that one of the benefits of imprisoning violent criminals, is that it takes them off the streets and prevents them from doing further violence.

b) IF this is true, why don't we just put everyone in prison and that way we would have zero violent crime.

Does the absurdity of (b) make (a) any less true ?

a) Everyone agrees that some kind of post secondary school or training
enhances ones income earning potential.

b) If that's true, then staying in school for life should make one infinitely wealthy.

Does the absurdity of (b) make (a) any less true ?

a) IT's well known that when taxes are too high, (such as before Kennedy lowered fed income taxes), lowering them can actually stimulate the economy enough that the tax revenue to government increases and it's a win, win, win for everyone.

b) If this is true, then the lower taxes, the bigger and better the economy will be, and therefore as taxes approach zero, revenues to the government approach infinity.

Does the absurdity of (b) make (a) any less true ? (unfortunately we have a lot of retards in this country that wish (b) were true, therefore they essentially argue that it is true).

What gives ? It's called reductio ad absurdum (using it falsely). Or see "appeal to extremes."

marcus : I expected this answer..what a relief.
so the next question to you and everybody else on the board: who decides the $10 or $15 ? where does the number come from ? what are the issues...as you keep increasing the number towards the $1000 per hr ? does any of the morons even discuss this ?

Excellent.

Heraclitusstudent says

ZIRP is supposed to force capitalists to put capital to work.

You can't trade with nations that have millions of slave like workers without an impact on US workers wages.

You can't let capital and technologies flow freely to other countries without impacting how much capital is deployed in the US.

You can't lose $500 billions in trade, every year, for decades, without a massive financial industry to mask that fact.

Finance is a symptom.

Trade policy is to blame.

The study assumes that the hypothetical retiring couple has traditional Medicare. The $220,000 total includes monthly premium payments for Parts B and D, plus Medicare cost-sharing requirements–beneficiaries have to pay 20% of most of their doctor bills, along with co-payments and deductibles.

So it's really just for 2 people's premiums, without the copayments???

jkaldi1 says

If there was no -ve impact , we could theoretically increase it to $1000 per hr and then more.

Lose 1 pound in 3 weeks and there is no negative impact.
Lose 100 pounds in 3 weeks and you die.

Drink an extra 8 ounces of water per day and you'll probably benefit. Drink an extra 8 ounces of water per minute and you die.

For some systems, negative/positive impacts kick in only beyond a certain threshold. Google "hysteresis" or "Schmitt trigger" for an electronics example.

And even if there is a negative impact, it may be negligible in comparison to any positive impacts because we're so far to the tail end of the curve: the minimum wage is really puny right now.

When top marginal tax rates fell under Reagan, there was some benefit because they were so high. When Bush II cut them, they were already so low that the marginal benefits to the economy were nearly nil.

We make cost-vs-benefit calculations all the time, and accept some costs in exchange for hopefully greater benefits. If the costs are miniscule and the benefits tangible, it's an easy call

Why would I need to come up with a negative impact of an impossible event?

I know you won't answer this..because you talk more like a politician rather than a person in pursuit of truth. too much ego.
Its simple and you know it as well.
If i increase the minimum wage to $1000 per hr, all the jobs and industries would collapse and move abroad. Capital flight will happen overnight. US economy will collapse.
now...take a step back a bit and increase it only slightly to $20 per hr.
maybe economy can sustain it...may be not. but the risk is there. may be the risk will be at $30 or $40...but its there.
The risk at small numbers won't be that economy will collapse but there could be loss of productivity or competitiveness..
to just say that there is no risk is absolutely idiotic. either you are willingly acting ignorant due to your ego/ideology or you are really one ( which i find hard to believe).

bgamall4 says

I found it quite funny since there is a kernel of truth in some of these satirical positions.

For you that kernel of truth, could be last nights pop corn still stuck in your teeth.

bgamall4 says

Automan Empire says

The Borowitz Report is *****. A url including /blogs/ is not a strong reference point in a debate.

I am glad you got it. I almost deleted you because I wanted everyone else to find out. Just kidding.

I found it quite funny since there is a kernel of truth in some of these satirical positions.

Come on Gary, we all know you took it at face value.

we all agree that if we increase minimum wage substantially , there is real risk to our country's competitiveness .we don't know what that increase is though. so until we know the benefits of increasing the minimum wage beyond helping out the absolutely poor, we should keep our mouth shut and do nothing. we already have enough other problems to deal with.
and i am not questioning the increase of minimum wage to keep it inline with inflation.

jkaldi1 says

and i am not questioning the increase of minimum wage to keep it inline with inflation.

How about a 30% increase, then.

I believe that is almost enough to put it where it was in real terms in the 1970s; that is, to keep up with inflation.

Vicente says

When it comes to anything that might make them less money, oh my God you don't know what you are doing don't touch too delicate!

Will drastic cuts in top tax rates generate more revenue? Only one way to find out: do it!

Will modest increases in the now-piddling minimum wage produce a net benefit? TOO DANGEROUS WARNING ALERT WARNING ALERT DO NOT PROCEED!

Robert Sproul says

FortWayne says

until black people evolve on a mass scale and learn to live within the laws of the land, they are going to be more of them in jail.

After 250 years of slavery, 89 years of Jim Crow, decades of being redlined into declining neighborhoods with substandard schools, them crowding into our prisons (40% of the prison population) is the thanks we get.

Apparently, slavery only existed in the USA and Europe from 250 years ago until the mid to late 1800's. Also, no other ethnic groups in history have encountered severe racial discrimination, substandard schools, or going to prison.

Note that the "substandard" schools are not underfunded. A white school in Indiana gets less funding than SouthEast DC per capita.

Consider the racist photo above. The left simultaneously refers to the above guy as "privileged" and therefore undeserving of any pity for the situation he's in and also a subject of mockery for working in lower class jobs. His real estate will probably go up as liberals flee their crime ridden neighborhoods to move next to him. You should be nice to that inbred guy. He's going to be your neighbor someday.

"Three black teens arrested while waiting for school bus."

Compare and contrast to:
"Black teens charged with hate crime for beating up autistic white student at bus stop."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CKY9YcDtg8

For the record, I've been stopped by the police before as well. I worked a late night shift and since I was the only car on the road the police stopped me to see if I was a bank robber. Another time I was stopped, the police didn't bother to investigate. I suppose my tone and relaxed manner convinced them to not give me any trouble. One of the officers stopping me was black.

Race demographics of Lafayette, California from wikipedia:
"The racial makeup of the city was 86.81% White, 0.55% Black or African American, 0.22% Native American, 8.23% Asian, 0.09% Pacific Islander, 0.81% from other races, and 3.30% from two or more races. 3.95% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race."

Good luck with making the world into Sweden!

This number is similar to what it costs to raise a child not including college. No matter where one is in life cycle, there's a vacuum cleaner to scoop up the money.

PolishKnight says

The left simultaneously refers to the above guy as "privileged" and therefore undeserving of any pity for the situation he's in and also a subject of mockery for working in lower class jobs

See, whenever you try to say what "the left" thinks, you erect a strawman. Please stop.

Cantor's loss is fantastic, it really is great. I'm enjoying the MSM wringing their hands. How could the primary voters reject such a humanitarian and person of gravitas as Eric Cantor, that deep-minded Defender of Freedom(tm)?

He was the handmaiden of Blackstone, Finance, and the Defence and Prison-Industrial interests. He wasn't supposed to lose!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/06/10/why-cantors-loss-is-especially-bad-news-for-big-business/

The Defence Industry is particularly upset:
"Cantor’s stunning primary defeat is a huge blow to the US defense sector"
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140611/CONGRESSWATCH/306110028

And while the MSM is running with Immigration Issues, it seems Brat's real message to primary voters was his anti-Crony Capitalist stance:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/elites-beware-eric-cantor-s-defeat-may-signal-a-populist-revolution-20140611

Completely nuts on the minimum wage, pro-life, a modern economy, etc. etc. but wonderful on the NSA and Crony Capitalism and glutting the labor market.

This is the kind of unexpected blowback against the 1% underwriters of the tea party that you love to see.

tatupu70 says

PolishKnight says

The left simultaneously refers to the above guy as "privileged" and therefore undeserving of any pity for the situation he's in and also a subject of mockery for working in lower class jobs

See, whenever you try to say what "the left" thinks, you erect a strawman. Please stop.

But isn't this whole thread a strawman? Portraying the typical Republican as a white male whose also poor and stupid and mocking him while African-Americans doing drugs and committing crimes and not studying are blameless victims?

PolishKnight says

Portraying the typical Republican as a white male whose also poor and stupid and mocking him while African-Americans doing drugs and committing crimes and not studying are blameless victims?

Nope--maybe a few posts on the thread (yours included, of course), but definitely not the whole thread. Even this post implying that people think African Americans that commit crimes are blameless victims--you can't resist the strawman allure, can you?

bgamall4 says

You may find it interesting as she almost is blowing Henry Kissinger. I think it could be called "foreplay".

Jewish foreplay is 2 hours of the man begging.

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 Thursday, June 12, 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 "ThePublic Be Suckered"
http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

FortWayne says

While poor blacks are watching BET and listening to gangster rappers which celebrate robbing, killing, and selling drugs.

And that's a cultural difference, and until black people evolve on a mass scale and learn to live within the laws of the land, they are going to be more of them in jail.

Are you for real ? You make yourself out to be a basically a parody of a stupid white racist.

I'm no fan of "gansta rap" which I don't think you would find is all that big anymore. But it doesn't deal with robbing and killing as you say. It's about posturing and fantasies of being don carleon.

Sure there probably is some rap that is about all that. But I wonder how many people think the "The Godfather" is one of the best movies of all time, while having no interest in being a mobster ?

Again, I don't care about rap, that is I don't appreciate it. I'm probably close to your age and prefer music (you know with complex instrumental music and all). But I don't have as warped and retarded a view as you do of rap. Much of it sounds stupid to me, or based on values and an ego that I can't relate to. Much like your ramplings.

Here are lyrics to some of the top current rap songs.

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/jasonderulo/talkdirty.html

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/chrisbrown/loyal.html

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/lilwayne/believeme.html

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/treysongz/nana.html

This is the stuff thats popular. Yes, not my thing AT ALL. But not about robbing and killing.

tatupu70 says

Nope--maybe a few posts on the thread (yours included, of course), but definitely not the whole thread. Even this post implying that people think African Americans that commit crimes are blameless victims--you can't resist the strawman allure, can you?

I didn't make it up. I read this kind of stuff all the time including Robert Sproul's comment 62: "After 250 years of slavery, 89 years of Jim Crow, decades of being redlined into declining neighborhoods with substandard schools, them crowding into our prisons (40% of the prison population) is the thanks we get."

So it's a valid question/observation: Why does the left mock and dehumanize poor and lower middle class white guys while simultaneously pitying and excusing African Americans in similar socioeconomic situations? This is despite the left having been originally about praising the working and middle class European whites (consider the hammer and sickle flag of the former USSR). The answer is obvious: It's about the votes. The more leftists bash white males, the faster the whites flee the party. It's a feedback loop. Lather-rinse-repeat. I'm reminded of the psychological paradigm of the wife who nags the husband because he drinks and the husband who drinks because his wife nags him. I actually read of a scenario where a mother hits her son for swearing and the son whose swearing is doing so because his mother hits him. This happens all the time.

If the typical Republican voter is a poor white guy, then the typical Democratic voter will be an Oakland welfare recipient who blames all their problems on someone else. You know, the guy with the mullet isn't all that bad by comparison.

zzyzzx says

cost-sharing requirements–beneficiaries have to pay 20% of most of their doctor bills, along with co-payments and deductibles.

So it's really just for 2 people's premiums, without the copayments???

It says right there in the sentence above along with co-payments and deductables.

marcus says

But I wonder how many people who think the "The Godfather" is one of the best movies of all time, while having no interest in being a mobster ?

I remember a similar remark made by someone who observed that many who criticize rap music like songs such as "I shot the sheriff." I like that song. It has a wonderful melody, rhythm, and background vocals and was performed by an African American. So why is that song so different than a gangsta rap tune?

I suppose because partly the words don't matter that much. If the song was "I popped the berry!" and had silly lyrics, it would still probably be a hit. It was a well crafted tune. Also, "I shot the sheriff" by itself doesn't sound terribly graphic as, say, I slashed the sheriff through the throat. The more visual the lyrics, the more violent they appear to be because they prompt the mind to wonder how serious it is. This is the difference between, say, a show such as forensic files or a murder mystery and, say, a slasher film. I love Forensic files and my wife watches them all the time. (I think they help to discourage violence because viewers learn that it's hard to fool the detectives :-) but my wife can't even watch a slasher film for 5 minutes even as both programs describe murders under the same scenarios.

What if economy recovers just nice, goldilocks?

PolishKnight says

Why does the left mock and dehumanize poor and lower middle class white guys
while simultaneously pitying and excusing African Americans in similar
socioeconomic situations? This is despite the left having been originally about
praising the working and middle class European whites (consider the hammer and
sickle flag of the former USSR). The answer is obvious: It's about the votes.
The more leftists bash white males, the faster the whites flee the party.

I don't this the "left" made a strategic decision to "bash" white males - there's plenty of people in that demographic that remain to basically tank that vote. As far "mocking and dehumanizing poor/lower middle class" whites, I would say that americans in general are infatuated with success whether they are liberal or conservative. When a liberal person sees a minority who is not successful, they are more likely to believe that they are where they are because of systemic issues that serve as a roadblock. However, when they see a white person who is not successful, they may attribute the "failure" to innate factors since they are are likely to believe that whites don't have major impediments from society in this system, thus if they failed it's their own fault. Additionally, there is perception which has some truth to it that poor whites are the group that's likely to vote against their economic self interest the most and can be picked off via wedge issues to do that. That trait elicits impatience at best and comtempt at worst from the observers.

Call Nancy's Pest control.

This country is long overdue for a real grass roots anti big government movement. About time!

I really hate seeing articles based on articles based on who knows what since the original source isn't available on line. Fidelity doesn't have the study anywhere on their website so no one knows what it is based on. Fidelity is in the business of convincing people to save more money, which may influence the study (you think?) but apparently we will never know.

I don't know if 220k is a reasonable number or not. Average person lives 19 years in retirement so that would be 11,500 a year per couple. Medicare B is something like 105 a month. So call it roughly 10k after B premiums since I'm to lazy to go find a calculator. That means the average couple would be looking at an average of 50k a year in medical expenses to owe 10k at a 20% copay? Yet the average medicare spending per enrollee per year is 10k or 20k per couple for A,B, and D. Where is the other 30k? That's a hell of a big discrepancy.

But hey, someone posted it on a blog, so it has to be true.

bgamall4 says

jkaldi1 says

There is DEMAND. how else do you think, corporations are making money.

There is not the demand there should be. People who need to spend are broke.

there is not much demand in "USA" !

PolishKnight says

I didn't make it up. I read this kind of stuff all the time including Robert Sproul's comment 62: "After 250 years of slavery, 89 years of Jim Crow, decades of being redlined into declining neighborhoods with substandard schools, them crowding into our prisons (40% of the prison population) is the thanks we get."

And I didn't say you made it up. I said you took one post out of 60-some and pretended that it was the subject of the entire thread. Which you did. And you continue to do.

PolishKnight says

So it's a valid question/observation: Why does the left mock and dehumanize poor and lower middle class white guys while simultaneously pitying and excusing African Americans in similar socioeconomic situations?

"The left" doesn't. Given that, the rest of your post is meaningless.

Call it Crazy says

bob2356 says

I really hate seeing articles based on articles based on who knows what since the original source isn't available on line. Fidelity doesn't have the study anywhere on their website so no one knows what it is based on.

Wasn't difficult for me to find... One quick Goggle search..

Try reading the article at the OP, it might help....

https://www.fidelity.com/viewpoints/retirement/retirees-medical-expenses

I read it, did you? Please feel free to post the relevant sections showing the methodology (that's the part where they explain things like how (z+y+x) *w=220,000 and the definitions of what z,y,x,w mean) by which they calculated their number.

I may be an idiot, but at least I'm smart enough to know what the word viewpoint (as in fidelity.com/viewpoints) means. Apparently you aren't. The original number of 220k is from Fidelity Consulting. You did read the article didn't you? Apparently not. Since you are so good with google, post the link to the Fidelity Consulting report that has the details.

But hey someone posted it on a blog, so it has to be true.

In classic economics was easier to cut your losses and move on.
I don't think housing will drastically fall not in America not in China or any country where bubbles have crashed their economy, or countries that have prevented, or delayed a collapse.

In the past, one could just cut their loss, and take up a new business venture. The options are dwindling and other opportunities are more riskier than ever. Like here in the States for example there have got to be hundreds less options that one could have done ten years ago that are no longer an option. Such as manufacturing where more regulations than every have stifled out the small business participants, and more and more large corporations are the only ones that can afford the prohibitive costs of doing business. And also for them it helps that they get billion dollar incentives from the Government to become the monopolies they become in industries that are free of small business competition.

Investments are risky, no way to get money from interest from saving you money.

So the only option people will have is to hold tight and sit on their house even the value of their houses came all the way down to 10% of what they paid. They've got no where else to go. So it is very possible to envision a future where we have millions of houses on the Market yet the prices hold steady. If the other existing homeowners aren't blitzing out their houses in fire sales. Don't expect the banks to.

That pattern has successfully ill-served the country going on 8 years now.

I don't see it letting up.

The only way things will change is if some progressive comes along and busts up the Monopoly mess the last two or three presidents have made of America.

Thanks Obamacare!

Call it Crazy says

Those monthly premiums can be 3 times the Medicare premium.