Jump to content

Akkula

Members
  • Content count

    4,470
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Akkula

  • Rank
    SuperUser

Profile Information

  • Team
    Colorado State
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Great and healthcare and education have gotten a lot more expensive in real dollars. I thought we were mostly college graduates who would understand this concept but let me explain. If real wages haven't grown you can buy the same constant basket of goods with your wage as you could have bought 40 years ago. I am not sure if this concept is difficult or if we are just being Trumpian deflector shields and inventing alternative realities and facts. Now most workers are more productive in how much they can produce from 40 years ago and we would expect that productivity to increase wages but all of that additional productivity growth has accrued to someone else other than the workers. Wages have not grown in 40 years...period.
  2. Well....I guess we could start off the measurement by showing that the real wage hasn't grown for 40 years...why do I feel like we are talking in circles? The real wage is how economists would largely measure "better off" and they would use a standard basket of goods to measure inflation. The fact that people have cell phones, indoor plumbing, cars, etc. now that are better than what French royalty had in the 1700s is kind of irrelevant..... I feel like some of you are trying to make an argument that having zero wage growth is okay because someone invented some new technology in the last 40 or 400 years. Yes...we all agree that technology has advanced over time....now can we get back to talking about how the real wage hasn't grown instead of deflecting to some irrelevant point?
  3. Well, I guess we could argue that the middle class is really killing it now that they don't have to drive a horse and buggy or that they shouldn't be complaining because people in China have it worse. But the point really is that the middle class hasn't been growing while the wealthy have been growing tremendously and some people think that is troubling when wealth and income aren't more evenly distributed when there is growth.
  4. Well, that is true but I am talking about macro numbers for the entire middle class. Their wages aren't growing and they are having to take on more debt to cover the difference to keep their middle class lifestyle from falling behind. You are also right that there are a lot of factors but the consistent theme is that the middle class has been the golden goose for the last 40 years that we have been trying to kill. The way the middle class wages will rise is if they have a stronger negotiating hand as a group but we have leaned toward giving the negotiation power and tax cuts to the wealthy for the last 40 years and it is no wonder they are kicking the middle classes ass. This shows in income inequality and wage numbers while CEO comp and the stock market are going gangbusters.
  5. I am not sure why you don't understand that people are having to go deeper into debt to maintain the same standard of living that their parents had because of the lack of wage growth.... Just because people are "hood rich" with a quarter tank of gas in their new E class, that doesn't mean they are actually better off once you strip away the materialist veneer.
  6. I think you are doing what a lot of people do in conflating materialism with well being. A debt fueled binge and a lot of "stuff" isn't what brings happiness. People are having to go deeper and deeper into debt to maintain the same material lifestyle (or sometimes even better) than their parents had even though their wages aren't growing. It is the same thing that is happening with the federal government and it will hit individuals later in life when they find out they don't have any equity in their house, they never got a pension, and they no longer have access to unlimited credit. Right now people are just mortgaging their future in order to keep up. I know a lot people would wear jeans with a patch if they could actually have a well funded pension and be able to retire at age 65 like your parents were able to do. However, they think that somehow a new smart phone or a vacation that piles on their credit card will somehow fill the hole of true happiness and security without success. I am also pretty certain that people would love to get out of school with zero debt the way you were able to do. All of this access to debt is really just corporate welfare for banks, home developers, credit card companies, etc., and it is robbing us of our future.
  7. Akkula

    Omarosa On 'Meet The Press' ???

    This is just another swampy character in the Trump orbit who is either a criminal, under indictment, or with questionable ethics. Pruitt, Manafort, Collins, Papadopolis, Omarosa....what a swampy administration and this has really made Trump so ineffective at getting any policies passed that don't just fall in his lap.
  8. Well, it doesn't really matter the substance of my post. The shrill Trumpian voices will show up like little Sarah Huckabee Sanders to peddle irrelevant insults and distractions to take away from the message. If I was Trump I would love this Russia investigation too because it takes the eye off the utter failure of his policies. As we have predicted the stock market is super frothy and stock buybacks are at record levels with these giant corporate tax cuts. Instead of going to physical investments and wages the tax cuts are giving us unsustainable housing prices and stock market. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/stock-buybacks-evil/ I sincerely cannot believe that the debt and deficit scolds running for congress can even win another election if they voted for that disaster of a Trump spending bill. Are there any "fiscal conservatives" in the Republican party or was that just a mythical creature who used debt and deficits as a way to hammer Obama after Bush cratered the economy. It is so shameful that fiscal conservatives can ever pull the lever for congressional representatives who are such hypocrites and who are now ensuring our country is bleeding red ink.....
  9. It isn't but we keep doubling down in failed trickle down and trade deals that don't protect workers and the environment when we have proven over and over that they don't work. Now we are throwing in failed mercantilist trade wars to drive up inflation and lower consumer purchasing power. Time for some new ideas.
  10. But somehow the stock market and CEO comp are far outstripping inflation. Another failed trickle down tax cut experiment. Maybe next time we will learn. ...probably not. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/08/10/america-wage-growth-is-getting-wiped-out-entirely-by-inflation/?utm_term=.cc89f705f95c
  11. That is great but nobody is proposing "VA for all" or "UK Healthcare for all" the proposal is "medicare for all" and patients all seem to love medicare. Private providers would still be an vital part of the system but medicare would be setting reimbursement rates for those who choose to be insured. Private insurers should also be able to get those same reimbursement rates if they choose to offer that type of plan. If private insurance has better customer service and is more efficient than the government version people can vote with their wallets....very capitalist.
  12. It looks like there is already a proposal along the same lines as I proposed. A new public option. It is too bad Republicans haven't brought out there new amazing healthcare plan (because they have no ideas) so we are going back to something we probably should have had to start with in the ACA but it is strongly tying reimbursement rates to medicare reimbursements and saying you can't deny seeing patients in the new public option if you accept medicare. For me this is a better version of Medicare for all as I don't necessarily think just adding a ton of new beneficiaries to the existing medicare is really that good of an idea. Perhaps they can extend that pricing model to private insurers too so they can reimburse at medicare rates as well. Of course physicians could opt to be 100% private payer if they want....true capitalism....if they don't want public dollars they can survive without any patients receiving public dollars. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/04/health-care-public-option-medicare/558965/ Both of the new proposals would push providers much further, requiring those who participate in Medicare to accept patients choosing the new public option. That’s a huge lever, because few physicians can afford to renounce participation in Medicare. Both proposals would also require participating providers to accept Medicare reimbursement rates for the new patients (though each allows the government some wiggle room to raise rates if required to maintain a viable network). And, for good measure, each plan embraces the longtime liberal aim of empowering Medicare to use its buying power to negotiate for lower prescription-drug costs. ...To critics who argue that a public option might lead to a government-run single-payer plan by pricing private insurers out of the market, Murphy, in effect, says: So what? “I don’t foreclose the possibility that ultimately enough people will choose [the public option] that it would be hard for private insurers to stay in business,” he told me. “But that would be up to consumers.”
  13. What a vapid take. I am sure you are okay with letting the climate scientists set our environmental policies too, right? The difference between me and you though is that I will have facts and evidence on my side if I decide to challenge the status quo against status quo defenders like yourself. The more "Nelsons" from the Simpsons like you standing around the more I know I am winning the factual arguments since you folks don't have an original thought in your head nor can you refute that the USA has the highest medical costs in the world and it is bankrupting us.
  14. Well that is how I know you don't have anything of substance to say. It is great that you can cherry pick one issue bit why is everything more expensive here yet we don't have the best health outcomes. We are not getting what we are paying for. In my last post did I advocate anything like the UK system? Why are you arguing against an argument I never made? Maybe you can talk about how I want a to have a Venezuelan system next and argue that. Deny, deflect, distract from how expensive medical is as a way to defend the status quo.
×