Today's Supreme Court ruling is good news, not only for those many Americans now uninsured, but also for all Americans who might lose a job and consequently health care insurance in the future. And for those employees who have remained in a job they hate just so they can retain health insurance. You all know someone in those categories. There are so many good aspects to the Affordable Care Act that I think Americans (who have been lied to about it) will eventually fight to keep it.
The big effect: Everyone must now get in the pool. No more insuring healthy people and denying coverage for less healthy people or those who become ill.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Fiscal Drag From State And Local Governments
Three economists from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York have recently published an analysis of the drag on the economy caused by reduced expenditures by state and local governments here. They show the state and local sector of our economy, representing about one seventh of the overall US economy, is currently dragging down gross domestic product (GDP) by a significant amount:
To explain why this is so, the economists remind us just what state and local governments do:
"What Do State and Local Governments Do?
State and local governments are a very important part of the U.S. economy. The sector employs nearly 20 million people, accounting for about one in seven U.S. nonfarm jobs and more than the manufacturing and construction sectors combined. Almost three-quarters of these jobs are in local government. Unlike the federal government, whose nondefense spending is largely devoted to transfer payments like social security, state and local governments are direct service providers, with primary responsibility for water, sewer, and transportation infrastructure as well as important public services like education and police and fire protection. The essential nature of these services, as well as the size of the sector relative to the U.S. economy, makes stresses to the sector of particular concern."
That is worth keeping in mind. State and local governments do not cause economic downturns. But they suffer from economic downturns at budget time and without outside help from the federal government, they can only make downturns worse.
The federal government can make them better, but only if those who govern have the vision and wisdom to act.
In a quixotic gesture, economists Paul Krugman and Richard Layard have published a manifesto laying out the essence of this case for wise and effective action and are asking other economists to sign on. But economists aren't the problem, though many have contributed very bad ideas. Political leaders are the problem. And for some of them (many but not all Republicans) the agenda is precisely to make the economy worse rather than better so they can increase their hold on government at all levels after the next election. And many of their largest contributors don't care about employment, because they benefit from economic contraction.
To explain why this is so, the economists remind us just what state and local governments do:
"What Do State and Local Governments Do?
State and local governments are a very important part of the U.S. economy. The sector employs nearly 20 million people, accounting for about one in seven U.S. nonfarm jobs and more than the manufacturing and construction sectors combined. Almost three-quarters of these jobs are in local government. Unlike the federal government, whose nondefense spending is largely devoted to transfer payments like social security, state and local governments are direct service providers, with primary responsibility for water, sewer, and transportation infrastructure as well as important public services like education and police and fire protection. The essential nature of these services, as well as the size of the sector relative to the U.S. economy, makes stresses to the sector of particular concern."
That is worth keeping in mind. State and local governments do not cause economic downturns. But they suffer from economic downturns at budget time and without outside help from the federal government, they can only make downturns worse.
The federal government can make them better, but only if those who govern have the vision and wisdom to act.
In a quixotic gesture, economists Paul Krugman and Richard Layard have published a manifesto laying out the essence of this case for wise and effective action and are asking other economists to sign on. But economists aren't the problem, though many have contributed very bad ideas. Political leaders are the problem. And for some of them (many but not all Republicans) the agenda is precisely to make the economy worse rather than better so they can increase their hold on government at all levels after the next election. And many of their largest contributors don't care about employment, because they benefit from economic contraction.
Health Care
Whatever the Supreme Court has to say about the Affordable Care Act this morning, my order of preference for a health care system would be:
1. Straight socialized medicine - government delivered health care. Like I had for many years in the military;
2. Medicare for everybody or some other single-payer system;
3. ACA or something like it;
4. Our present hodge podge of employer-provided health insurance, which will drive the country broke to the benefit of insurance company executives.
1. Straight socialized medicine - government delivered health care. Like I had for many years in the military;
2. Medicare for everybody or some other single-payer system;
3. ACA or something like it;
4. Our present hodge podge of employer-provided health insurance, which will drive the country broke to the benefit of insurance company executives.
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
South Avenue: History Lesson
The plat dedicated Avenue A, Neuse Front Street West of the dotted line, Avenue B and Main(e) Street. In 1923, The Town of Oriental conveyed Avenue B to adjacent landowners W.E. Northen and W.M. Adams. In September 1927 The Town of Oriental conveyed a strip of land described by metes and bounds (red hatched area) which corresponds to the outline of Neuse Front Street west of Avenue A and Main(e) Street to C.P. Goodwin. Town Board minutes indicate that most of the outlined area was then under water.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Elections Are Expensive
Last week, the North Carolina state legislature removed $664,000 from the state budget for maintaining and improving the state's election system. That $664,000 would have triggered receipt of $4 million from the federal government under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).
Much of the money would have been shared by the state with counties. The funds are very important for small counties like Pamlico.
But the legislature can't find seven cents per resident to protect elections.
Much of the money would have been shared by the state with counties. The funds are very important for small counties like Pamlico.
But the legislature can't find seven cents per resident to protect elections.
Monday, June 25, 2012
More Sea Level Rise
Today's News and Observer reports the latest US Geological Survey report that sea level on the North Carolina coast is rising even faster than earlier predicted. No matter. Those brilliant scientists in the state legislature will pass a law. That'll fix it.
Golden Rule Reaffirmed
This morning, by a five to four vote, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) reaffirmed the Golden Rule - He Who Has the Gold, Rules. In states as well as the federal government. In a Montana case, SCOTUS ruled that the decision in the Citizens United case in 2010 applies to state
campaign finance laws and guarantees corporate and labor union interests
the right to spend freely to advocate for or against candidates for
state and local offices.
Government of the wealthy, by the wealthy and for the wealthy.
Government of the wealthy, by the wealthy and for the wealthy.
Roads And Conveyances
I've been thinking about the ferry toll issue. Why is it so hard for some people to think of a ferry as an integral element of a transportation system, properly funded out of the system budget?
One reason, I believe, is that people have been accustomed to thinking of the road as one thing and a conveyance as another.
But not always. What would have happened to major cities if elevators were viewed as a conveyance rather than a component of the building? And concluded we have to charge for using the conveyance? We would still be walking up stairs and skyscrapers would never have happened.
One reason, I believe, is that people have been accustomed to thinking of the road as one thing and a conveyance as another.
But not always. What would have happened to major cities if elevators were viewed as a conveyance rather than a component of the building? And concluded we have to charge for using the conveyance? We would still be walking up stairs and skyscrapers would never have happened.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
