There are a number of causes of high health care costs in the US; here are a few
_Patent protection of drugs drives up prices in US only
_High price of living in the US drives up all prices
_Effective emergency care in the last few weeks of life in the US can cost over $10,000 a day; people may die a few days sooner elsewhere.
_(For historical reasons) much health insurance in the US is employer-paid, almost completely disconnecting the consumer from price concerns. This causes price explosion.
Going to "government pays" completely removes the consumer from price concerns, making the situation worse. The government then has price concerns and decides who gets what treatment, if any treatment at all. (Remember the claim of death panels?) What sort of treatment do you think someone who is a personal or political enemy of the government panel will get? Politically controlled health care is a dramatic way to get your opponents to STFU. In addition, countries that already have government health care have every reason to understate how much it costs and overstate how effective it is; there is good reason not to trust the numbers.
Government controlled healthcare is a cornerstone of Marxism and it's no surprise that Obama likes it. It falls in with his Marxist beliefs, his hatred of America and his desire to destroy it.
There is a commercially produced carbonated soft drink line that uses stevia. It's called Zevia, made by a Los Angeles-based company of the same name. For diet soda, it's not bad.
The "poverty line" in the US is a BS government definition, bearing no relation to real poverty, just as failure to care for oneself or one's family in the US has little relation to the ability to do so.
Want a stable society where equality is widespread? Then you're looking for universal starvation-level poverty.
Gun control doesn't automatically mean "THEY GONNA TAKE ER GUNS"
One of the most popular themes of the gun control crowd is gun registration. Both in theory and in history gun registration is prelude to gun seizure.
Furthermore, most of those who advocate for gun control want gun seizure. They fear and hate guns and gun owners. But why? Well, some are just fools and cowards. But most, liberals, understand that guns are a threat to the lives of tyrants, and most liberals wish they were tyrants. Liberals properly see guns as a threat to their dream of dictatorship.
Previous US debt peaks have been due to war expenditures, and the debt went down when the war ended. Now, the debt is due to massive gifts to non-workers, most of which are written into law to continue indefinitely. The US is in deep trouble. The two political parties are the villains and the cowards, and neither will fix the problem.
Did you bother to read your own words? It's the Swiss who are "handing out guns like free toasters". Americans have to buy their guns, the gov't doesn't give them to you.
Improving technology will continue to make the high resolution less difficult, and artifacts need not be a problem. 4000 linear pixels is easily resolved by someone with poor vision and dirty glasses like me: I checked just a minute ago to make sure.
Twenty years from now, the idea that anyone would want to watch the sort of unrealistic images we think are satisfactory today will seem silly.
It's good to have someone starting to formulate a specification, hopefully one that will get general support. We really don't need another format war.
If the format is in place, designers can make ASIC hardware that will be much better at transcoding than general purpose CPUs. As for decoding, CPUs can easily handle HD now, 4k should be no problem in just a few years.
Of course, there are going to be problems. Optics needed to take full advantage of the format are on the order of $10,000 per lens. That suggests to me that there will be a lot of "augmented reality" software that needs to be developed, to fill in details that aren't there in the captured images. As animation becomes more effective, it will tend to replace human actors and live shots of many sorts, because the animated viewed image can be perfect.
Whether TV manufacturers are pushing this or not is irrelevant. 4k displays will be a delight for a variety of computer users, artists and IC designers among others. Stop complaining that this will make your life more difficult.
Your mistake is thinking that production and dollars are equivalent. The government giving 80% of its revenue to the unproductive does not and cannot increase economic activity. If that 80% spending ceased immediately, after the leftist riots ended there would be an enormous jump in production as everyone now without income desperately started producing anything they could to earn food and shelter.
When things reach the shape they already have, with less than 45% of people working, and even fewer working at productive jobs, the range for improvement by ending the subsidies to sloth is easily a factor of 2.
To follow your analogy, imagine waking up bleeding in a muddy ditch. Yup, that's Obama who's come along to help by applying leaches.
That unfunny joke has been put forth as solid economic policy for much longer than my 63 years. Let's say that there are only two people in the world, Joe and a slacker named Sam who owes Joe 10 years worth of labor (for the 10 years worth of labor that Joe has already provided Sam). Is everything OK, is there no real debt, because among those two "they owe it to themselves"? The same holds true no matter how many people the group is expanded to, some people owe money to other people among us, and those two groups are, on net, distinct. And some among us are not "good for the money" and never will be, by choice.
In the House there's an evil Democrat minority and a slim Republican majority. Most of the Republicans are stupid enough to believe they can play the Democrat's game indefinitely, or are too cowardly to oppose party leadership. Only the Tea-Party Republicans remain, and there aren't enough to stop the fools and villains.
Defense spending is about 19% of the federal budget, compared to about 50% in the 1950s. Since defense is almost the only major expense the federal government should have, your claim that we should reduce it further is beyond stupidity. Why don't we just stop defending ourselves entirely, then we'll all be dead in a year or so and with the money we saved we'll all be rich.
A family cannot expect to improve finances by borrowing and investing into infrastructure.
The concept of a family business is entirely beyond your grasp.
The reality is, is that the problem is cost cutting and malignancy of the wealthy classes. Profits have been up to record levels for years now and we're in a financial crisis?
Your hyperbole and hatred aside, profits are up because wise companies realize they're living under a thieving government, and see no point in investing in a future that Obama will steal. Money that would have been invested in technical advances and in keeping alive the jobs of marginal employees is being put in safe places, in the forlorn hope that the future will provide a safe place to invest.
Inflation is part of the harsh penalty paid for failing to pay for what the country spends. However, you implicitly point to that as a solution, not a problem. The US dollar is now worth roughly 2% of what it was 80 years ago, and not accounting for that is less than honest. People who hold the debt of the US are being cheated.
Gee, smart enough to gloss over the difference between working and non-working poor, but not smart enough to teach himself instead of staying in the feudal college system.
Capital gains reflect the success of companies invested in, that success being measured in dollars of profit and already taxed by government.
The other common form of capital gains is property value increase. Buy property for $30k, sell it 30 years later for $150k, and the government taxes you on the $!20k it claims you "made in capital gains". Alas, you've made nothing, the government has watered the currency by 80% in the interim, and is now taxing you for the privilege of using government money.
Slashdot Mirror
There are a number of causes of high health care costs in the US; here are a few
Going to "government pays" completely removes the consumer from price concerns, making the situation worse. The government then has price concerns and decides who gets what treatment, if any treatment at all. (Remember the claim of death panels?) What sort of treatment do you think someone who is a personal or political enemy of the government panel will get? Politically controlled health care is a dramatic way to get your opponents to STFU. In addition, countries that already have government health care have every reason to understate how much it costs and overstate how effective it is; there is good reason not to trust the numbers.
Government controlled healthcare is a cornerstone of Marxism and it's no surprise that Obama likes it. It falls in with his Marxist beliefs, his hatred of America and his desire to destroy it.
Ooh! Ooh! Imaginary lines! Like Oceans. Like Rivers. Like Mountain Ranges.
There are good reasons not to be patriotic in nasty countries. Bringing up bogus reasons weakens your argument and makes you look foolish.
There is a commercially produced carbonated soft drink line that uses stevia. It's called Zevia, made by a Los Angeles-based company of the same name. For diet soda, it's not bad.
The freedom which makes possible more fun also makes possible more deaths and injuries due to foolish behavior. Consider fireworks.
Only Monsanto has superseeds.
The "poverty line" in the US is a BS government definition, bearing no relation to real poverty, just as failure to care for oneself or one's family in the US has little relation to the ability to do so.
Want a stable society where equality is widespread? Then you're looking for universal starvation-level poverty.
One of the most popular themes of the gun control crowd is gun registration. Both in theory and in history gun registration is prelude to gun seizure.
Furthermore, most of those who advocate for gun control want gun seizure. They fear and hate guns and gun owners. But why? Well, some are just fools and cowards. But most, liberals, understand that guns are a threat to the lives of tyrants, and most liberals wish they were tyrants. Liberals properly see guns as a threat to their dream of dictatorship.
Nothing Krugman says can be relied on. Lying and twisting is his profession.
Previous US debt peaks have been due to war expenditures, and the debt went down when the war ended. Now, the debt is due to massive gifts to non-workers, most of which are written into law to continue indefinitely. The US is in deep trouble. The two political parties are the villains and the cowards, and neither will fix the problem.
Did you bother to read your own words? It's the Swiss who are "handing out guns like free toasters". Americans have to buy their guns, the gov't doesn't give them to you.
Improving technology will continue to make the high resolution less difficult, and artifacts need not be a problem. 4000 linear pixels is easily resolved by someone with poor vision and dirty glasses like me: I checked just a minute ago to make sure.
Twenty years from now, the idea that anyone would want to watch the sort of unrealistic images we think are satisfactory today will seem silly.
Absolute screen size is completely irrelevant. It's how many degrees the images subtend, and how many pixels are in that angle.
Very roughly, human vision runs into natural limits at 7k x 4k. 4k wide is not a limit for all time.
Just turn on a soap opera.
More seriously, hang a curtain or a tapestry in front of the set when it's not in use.
It's good to have someone starting to formulate a specification, hopefully one that will get general support. We really don't need another format war.
If the format is in place, designers can make ASIC hardware that will be much better at transcoding than general purpose CPUs. As for decoding, CPUs can easily handle HD now, 4k should be no problem in just a few years.
Of course, there are going to be problems. Optics needed to take full advantage of the format are on the order of $10,000 per lens. That suggests to me that there will be a lot of "augmented reality" software that needs to be developed, to fill in details that aren't there in the captured images. As animation becomes more effective, it will tend to replace human actors and live shots of many sorts, because the animated viewed image can be perfect.
Whether TV manufacturers are pushing this or not is irrelevant. 4k displays will be a delight for a variety of computer users, artists and IC designers among others. Stop complaining that this will make your life more difficult.
Your mistake is thinking that production and dollars are equivalent. The government giving 80% of its revenue to the unproductive does not and cannot increase economic activity. If that 80% spending ceased immediately, after the leftist riots ended there would be an enormous jump in production as everyone now without income desperately started producing anything they could to earn food and shelter.
When things reach the shape they already have, with less than 45% of people working, and even fewer working at productive jobs, the range for improvement by ending the subsidies to sloth is easily a factor of 2.
To follow your analogy, imagine waking up bleeding in a muddy ditch. Yup, that's Obama who's come along to help by applying leaches.
That unfunny joke has been put forth as solid economic policy for much longer than my 63 years. Let's say that there are only two people in the world, Joe and a slacker named Sam who owes Joe 10 years worth of labor (for the 10 years worth of labor that Joe has already provided Sam). Is everything OK, is there no real debt, because among those two "they owe it to themselves"? The same holds true no matter how many people the group is expanded to, some people owe money to other people among us, and those two groups are, on net, distinct. And some among us are not "good for the money" and never will be, by choice.
A bus running in the far Boston suburbs runs empty if the union driver ever bothers to show up.
In the House there's an evil Democrat minority and a slim Republican majority. Most of the Republicans are stupid enough to believe they can play the Democrat's game indefinitely, or are too cowardly to oppose party leadership. Only the Tea-Party Republicans remain, and there aren't enough to stop the fools and villains.
The concept of a family business is entirely beyond your grasp.
Your hyperbole and hatred aside, profits are up because wise companies realize they're living under a thieving government, and see no point in investing in a future that Obama will steal. Money that would have been invested in technical advances and in keeping alive the jobs of marginal employees is being put in safe places, in the forlorn hope that the future will provide a safe place to invest.
Inflation is part of the harsh penalty paid for failing to pay for what the country spends. However, you implicitly point to that as a solution, not a problem. The US dollar is now worth roughly 2% of what it was 80 years ago, and not accounting for that is less than honest. People who hold the debt of the US are being cheated.
Gee, smart enough to gloss over the difference between working and non-working poor, but not smart enough to teach himself instead of staying in the feudal college system.
Capital gains reflect the success of companies invested in, that success being measured in dollars of profit and already taxed by government.
The other common form of capital gains is property value increase. Buy property for $30k, sell it 30 years later for $150k, and the government taxes you on the $!20k it claims you "made in capital gains". Alas, you've made nothing, the government has watered the currency by 80% in the interim, and is now taxing you for the privilege of using government money.
You, of course, would solve that "problem" by taking away the ability of the rich parents to give their money to their offspring.
Some rich parents motivate their progeny to work hard and effectively. George Romney appears to have done so for Mitt.