USCE Summer 2022: You can't change the crisis settings.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE Summer 2022: You can't change the crisis settings.

«‹›279 »

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Scuffy_1989 posted:

The murder rate was already on the rise prior to the 2004 expiration of the assault weapons ban.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/191134/reported-murder-and-nonnegligent-manslaughter-cases-in-the-us-since-1990/

And they jumped even more rapidly once it ended. The mass shooting graph from your own link also shows that (with the exception of the year Columbine skyrocketed the amount of people killed) mass shootings fell right after it went into effect and rose sharply right after it expired.

Strong correlation between the two, but no proven causation.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 21:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 23:43

MooselanderII: Feb 18, 2004

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

They actually got Sinema to agree to a new revenue raiser.

One of the provisions in the Trump tax bill allowed people with passthrough income to get a 20% reduction on their income taxes for that income. Passthrough income is essentially when you own or co-own the business or entity that pays your salary and you generate income that you take personally, but not as salary. This would eliminate that provision and is effectively a 3.8% increase in taxes on passthrough income for people above $400k.

It is part of the new planned reconciliation package and will raise $200 billion, but all of it is going into the Medicare trust. So, that doesn't mean $200 billion in additional new spending for the bill.

It would keep Medicare fully solvent through 2031.

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1545099324748595202

The article actually doesn't mention anything about the 20% deduction for pass-through entities, it relates to the Net Investment Income Tax, an obamacare era surcharge on certain investment income that is already designated to shore up various federal health accounts. I don't know where you got the idea that it was the 199A isue, but it's not.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 21:19

Mulva: Sep 13, 2011; It's about time for my once per decade ban for being a consistently terrible poster.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The mass shooting graph from your own link also shows that (with the exception of the year Columbine skyrocketed the amount of people killed) mass shootings fell right after it went into effect and rose sharply right after it expired.

And yours does exactly the opposite for mass shootings. It shows that it fell rapidly shortly before it went into effect, and rose slightly afterwards until it spiked for obvious reasons in 1999 [At least I'm assuming that's Columbine, the math would seem to hold up], then it started to drop rapidly. Like graphs aren't that complicated, and that one is color coded for ease of use. There's the line going down before it, and the line starting to go up during it. The first half of the AWB is a complete wash as far as mass shootings go, as the average low wasn't lower than the last few decades and the high was higher. It's only in the later half of the bill that things really drop. Before that the lowest point in 6 years was directly before the bill happened.

Which is not quite irrelevant, but certainly niche. Mass shootings of the sort that chart is tracking are as important as any deaths, but the majority of homicides committed with guns aren't going to be on that list. Tracking the effectiveness of any given law strictly by it's impact on that chart is neither fair nor useful. I'd say the evidence is that the AWB meant gently caress all to mass shootings, on account of all the mass shootings that happened with pistols even after it was gone. Virginia Tech is still the third deadliest shooting in US history. It's only in the last decade or so that it's been rifles used in a lot of these things, and that's well after the AWB was over.

If that's all you care about, then I don't think there's particularly strong evidence the AWB helped.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 21:55

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Mulva posted:

And yours does exactly the opposite for mass shootings.

It doesn't. If you actually run a regression on the data, you can see that the relationship between the period it was in effect has a strong correlation to reduced gun deaths.

The 1994 to 2004 period saw lower average annual rates of both mass shootings and deaths resulting from such incidents than before the ban's inception.

The average number of annualized deaths during mass shootings (according to the FBI counts) was 5.3 during the ban, 7.2 prior to the ban, and 25.0 after the ban expired.

The CRC and FBI released a study that showed the same thing:

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R44126.pdf

Other studies found the same thing:

https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2022/06/15/did-the-assault-weapons-ban-of-1994-bring-down-mass-shootings-heres-what-the-data-tells-us/

Mulva posted:

If that's all you care about, then I don't think there's particularly strong evidence the AWB helped.

Again, I was not saying the AWB caused it.

I repeated several times:

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Strong correlation between the two, but no proven causation.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Jul 7, 2022

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:09

Keyser_Soze: May 5, 2009; Pillbug

Didn't most of the 8 billion companies making AR's and nerdy bits for them not start until like 2005?

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:11

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The argument that crime in general dropped because it was a period of economic growth and stability seemed like a tried and tested truth, but after 2009 we had the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and crime kept going down for years. Then, when the average savings of the bottom 50% of Americans tripled in the back half of 2020 and first half of 2021, we had the highest percentage increase in violent crime alongside a small decrease in property crime.

You've already been called out by others on a couple of your claims, but I wanted to address the bolded part above.

Given that, prior to the Trump/Biden pandemic relief, around 63 percent of Americans said they were unable to handle a $500 emergency car repair or a $1000 emergency-room bill, I'm not sure that "the average savings of the bottom 50% of Americans tripled" is a very valuable stat in context of pandemic-era violent crime.

I realize that link is from a 2016 study, and I'm sure that Americans were helped by the $1800 they got under Trump & the additional $1200 they got under Biden (I know I was!), but it's not as if $3k was life-changing on a permanent basis.

I also think it'd be a mistake to handwave off the incredible emotional effects of the pandemic, especially for those who lived alone or were otherwise isolated, and the ensuing mental-health crises for which studies are only now emerging. (The notable recent ones had to do with the effects on teens, and they've been pretty sobering.)

Your 2009 factoid would be a more solid foundation for your contention that violent crime doesn't correlate with financial stability (or, more specifically, mass shootings don't have that correlation).

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:12

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Willa Rogers posted:

You've already been called out by others on a couple of your claims, but I wanted to address the bolded part above.

Given that, prior to the Trump/Biden pandemic relief, around 63 percent of Americans said they were unable to handle a $500 emergency car repair or a $1000 emergency-room bill, I'm not sure that "the average savings of the bottom 50% of Americans tripled" is a very valuable stat in context of pandemic-era violent crime.

I realize that link is from a 2016 study, and I'm sure that Americans were helped by the $1800 they got under Trump & the additional $1200 they got under Biden (I know I was!), but it's not as if $3k was life-changing on a permanent basis.

I also think it'd be a mistake to handwave off the incredible emotional effects of the pandemic, especially for those who lived alone or were otherwise isolated, and the ensuing mental-health crises for which studies are only now emerging. (The notable recent ones had to do with the effects on teens, and they've been pretty sobering.)

Your 2009 factoid would be a more solid foundation for your contention that violent crime doesn't correlate with financial stability (or, more specifically, mass shootings don't have that correlation).

What are you disagreeing with?

You are agreeing that everything I said is a fact, but pointing out that there are outside factors - which I don't disagree with?

It's not "hand waiving away the incredible emotional effects of the pandemic." That was the point of the comparison. That economic change has not had a 1:1 correlation with crime since 2008.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:17

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

Here's a factcheck.org answer about the Assault Weapons Ban & its effects:

quote:

President Joe Biden claims the 10-year assault weapons ban that he helped shepherd through the Senate as part of the 1994 crime bill �brought down these mass killings.� But the raw numbers, when adjusted for population and other factors, aren�t so clear on that.

There is, however, growing evidence that bans on large-capacity magazines, in particular, might reduce the number of those killed and injured in mass public shootings.

***

�We can ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines in this country, once again,� Biden said. �I got that done when I was a senator. It passed. It was a law for the longest time and it brought down these mass killings. We should do it again.�

Biden is referring to his work as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee when he sponsored and largely shepherded the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act into law in 1994. That law, among other things, included an �assault weapons� ban, which prohibited the sale of certain semiautomatic firearms and large-capacity magazines that could accommodate 10 rounds or more. (Existing weapons on the banned list were �grandfathered,� meaning people could keep them.) A sunset provision, however, meant that the ban expired in 10 years, in 2004.

We wrote about this issue eight years ago, when the gun debate was again raging in Congress. At the time, we found that a three-part study funded by the Department of Justice concluded that the ban�s success in reducing crimes committed with banned guns was �mixed.�

We wrote:

quote:
FactCheck.org, Feb. 1, 2013: The final report concluded the ban�s success in reducing crimes committed with banned guns was �mixed.� Gun crimes involving assault weapons declined. However, that decline was �offset throughout at least the late 1990s by steady or rising use of other guns equipped with [large-capacity magazines].�

Ultimately, the research concluded that it was �premature to make definitive assessments of the ban�s impact on gun crime,� largely because the law�s grandfathering of millions of pre-ban assault weapons and large-capacity magazines �ensured that the effects of the law would occur only gradually� and were �still unfolding� when the ban expired in 2004.

Recent Research

Some things haven�t changed much since then. A RAND review of gun studies, updated in 2020, concluded there is �inconclusive evidence for the effect of assault weapon bans on mass shootings.�

�We don�t think there are great studies available yet to state the effectiveness of assault weapons bans,� Andrew Morral, a RAND senior behavioral scientist who led the project, told FactCheck.org in a phone interview. �That�s not to say they aren�t effective. The research we reviewed doesn�t provide compelling evidence one way or the other.�

There has, however, been emerging research about post-ban trends that may provide information that could be useful to evaluating what worked and what didn�t in the 1994 assault weapons ban.

For example, research published in 2019 in Criminology & Public Policy by Grant Duwe, director of research and evaluation for the Minnesota Department of Corrections, found that after controlling for population growth, the assault weapons ban did not appear to have much of an effect on the number of mass public shootings, comparing a pre-ban period with the 10 years the ban was in effect. But he found that the incidence and severity of mass public shootings, meaning the number killed and injured, has increased over the last decade, after the ban had expired.

Duwe, author of �Mass Murder in the United States: A History,� documented 158 mass public shootings in the U.S. between 1976 and 2018, which included shootings that �occur in the absence of other criminal activity (e.g., robberies, drug deals, and gang �turf wars�) in which a gun was used to kill four or more victims at a public location within a 24-hour period.�

Duwe also looked at three-, five- and 10-year moving averages to flatten out some of the extreme spikes and dips in individual years.

Duwe found that the lowest 10-year average in mass shooting rates was between 1996-2005, which roughly corresponds with the ban period. But Duwe notes that that �aligns with broader trends observed for crime and violence in the United States.� In other words, it�s hard to know how much the assault weapons ban may have affected mass shootings during that time.

While the incidence rate was higher pre-ban than post-ban, the number of victims killed and shot � the severity of mass public shootings � has increased dramatically in the post-ban period, after 2004, Duwe found.

�The growing number of highly lethal mass public shootings raises several important questions,� Duwe wrote. �Perhaps most notably, why have they become more deadly since the mid-2000s? Is this effect a result of the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban in 2004? Or is it a result of other changes in gun policy?�

Although he poses these questions, Duwe does not offer a definitive conclusion about the impact of the assault weapons ban.

Duwe noted that the relative infrequency with which mass public shootings occur �makes it challenging to predict with accuracy who will commit a mass public shooting or to develop policies designed to reduce their incidence or severity.� And so, he said, it �may be unrealistic to assume that policy proposals targeting mass shootings in particular would, individually or collectively, prevent a catastrophic attack from ever taking place in the future.�

Research published in Criminology & Public Policy in January 2020 concluded that assault weapons bans �do not seem to be associated with the incidence of fatal mass shootings.� However, state laws requiring handgun purchasers to obtain a license and state bans of large-capacity magazines did appear to be �associated with reductions in fatal mass shootings.�

�It�s worth noting that state bans of LCMs were shown to be associated with reductions in fatal mass shootings and state bans of assault weapons were associated with fewer fatal mass shootings, however, the relationship was not statistically significant,� Daniel Webster, one of the authors of the study and director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, told us via email.

�It�s clear that there is an association between weapon features, most notably ammunition capacity, and how many people are shot in these incidents,� Webster added. �Shooters select weapons and ammunition feeding devices that will allow them to shoot as many people as possible. It is a separate question whether bans will reduce casualties from mass shootings or how long they need to be in place in order for the effects to be realized.�

In separate research also published in Criminology & Public Policy in January 2020, Christopher S. Koper, principal fellow of George Mason University�s Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy and the author of the Department of Justice review of the 1994 assault weapons ban, focused on the role of large-capacity magazines (as opposed to assault weapons) in mass shootings.

�Crimes with AWs [assault weapons] began to decline shortly after the ban�s passage, likely in part because of the interest of collectors and speculators in these weapons, which helped to drive their prices higher through the end of the 1990s (thus making them less accessible and affordable to criminal users),� Koper wrote. �Criminal use of other semiautomatics equipped with LCMs [large-capacity magazines], however, appeared to climb or remain steady through the late 1990s and into the early 2000s, adjusting for overall trends in gun crime. Available evidence suggests that criminal LCM use eventually declined below pre-ban levels but only near the ban�s expiration in 2004. As noted, crimes with LCM firearms have since increased.�

Koper argues that the ��most important provisions of assault weapons law� are restrictions on large-capacity magazines, because �they can produce broader reductions in the overall use of high-capacity semiautomatics that facilitate high-volume gunfire attacks.�

�This rise in LCM use would arguably have not happened, or at least not to the same degree, had Congress extended the ban in 2004,� Koper states. �Considering that mass shootings with high-capacity semiautomatics are considerably more lethal and injurious than other mass shootings, it is reasonable to argue that the federal ban could have prevented some of the recent increase in persons killed and injured in mass shootings had it remained in place.�

Specifically, Koper concluded, �Data on mass shooting incidents suggest these magazine restrictions can potentially reduce mass shooting deaths by 11% to 15% and total victims shot in these incidents by one quarter, likely as upper bounds.�

The success of any ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, Koper said, may depend on how the law is implemented, especially with regard to treatment of pre-ban weapons.

Koper argues that �exemptions and loopholes� in the 1994 assault weapons ban likely blunted the short-term effects of the law. Millions of existing weapons and magazines were �grandfathered,� making them legal to own, and importers were able to import tens of millions of large-capacity magazines manufactured before the ban took effect.

During the campaign, Biden vowed that a new assault weapons ban would be �designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans.�

�For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don�t limit the weapon�s lethality,� according to Biden�s campaign website. �While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons.�

Biden also proposed requiring citizens who own assault weapons to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, as those who currently possess machine guns must do. Machine guns have been banned since 1986, though grandfathered weapons can be transferred from one registered owner to another registered owner.

And finally, Biden said he would institute a voluntary buyback program for existing assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Those who do not sell their weapons to the government would have to register them.

Although there is broad public support for banning assault-style weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines (including from about half of Republicans), the proposal does not appear to have the 60 votes needed in the Senate to overcome a potential filibuster.

During a press conference on March 25, Biden did not commit to a timeline for when gun control legislation such as an assault weapons ban might come to the forefront in Congress, saying only that it was �a matter of timing.� Biden said his next big legislative push will be for infrastructure.

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/03/factchecking-bidens-claim-that-assault-weapons-ban-worked/

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:18

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

I don't know that the broad statistics around where American median and lower are really show the whole picture.

It is astonishingly expensive to live in the US in so many ways, and with so much fewer benefits.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:19

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

What are you disagreeing with?

That the economic boon of the pandemic stimuli proves that violent crimes doesn't correlate with economic well-being, if I interpreted your post correctly, and in context of the post you were answering.

this:

quote:

The argument that crime in general dropped because it was a period of economic growth and stability seemed like a tried and tested truth, but after 2009 we had the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and crime kept going down for years. Then, when the average savings of the bottom 50% of Americans tripled in the back half of 2020 and first half of 2021, we had the highest percentage increase in violent crime alongside a small decrease in property crime.

As I said, you were on surer footing using 2009 as an example than the recent pandemic relief.

Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Jul 7, 2022

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:22

DeadlyMuffin: Jul 3, 2007

Willa Rogers posted:

I also think it'd be a mistake to handwave off the incredible emotional effects of the pandemic, especially for those who lived alone or were otherwise isolated, and the ensuing mental-health crises for which studies are only now emerging. (The notable recent ones had to do with the effects on teens, and they've been pretty sobering.)

Do you have these handy? I haven't read anything about it yet and am very curious.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:23

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

DeadlyMuffin posted:

Do you have these handy? I haven't read anything about it yet and am very curious.

This is the most recent one I recall:

quote:

In the survey, more than half � 55 percent � of high school students said they experienced emotional abuse from an adult in their home. In addition, 11 percent saying they experienced physical abuse.

The study reported that 37 percent of high schoolers experienced poor mental health during the pandemic and 44 percent said they felt persistently sad or hopeless the past year.

Another 29 percent said a parent or another adult in their home lost a job during that time.

�These data echo a cry for help,� said Dr. Debra HouryTrusted Source, the acting principal deputy director at the CDC, in a statement. �The COVID-19 pandemic has created traumatic stressors that have the potential to further erode students� mental wellbeing. Our research shows that surrounding youth with the proper support can reverse these trends and help our youth now and in the future.�

Lesbian, gay, bisexual youth, and female youth reported greater levels of poor mental health as well as emotional abuse by a parent or caregiver, the CDC reported. These groups also attempted suicide at a higher rate.

More than a third (36 percent) of students said they experienced racism before or during the COVID-19 pandemic. The highest levels were reported among Asian students (64 percent) and Black students and students of multiple races (both 55 percent).

I recall another recent survey in which something like 50-60 percent of teens said they'd thought of suicide or self-harm, but I'll have to go digging for it.

Here's a KFF survey analysis on the effects of the pandemic on adults, including young adults.

Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Jul 7, 2022

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:27

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Willa Rogers posted:

That the economic boon of the pandemic stimuli proves that violent crimes doesn't correlate with economic well-being, if I interpreted your post correctly, and in context of the post you were answering.

this:

As I said, you were on surer footing using 2009 as an example than the recent pandemic relief.

That was the point of the comparison.

I never said it didn't correlate. It does correlate. If it was a 1:1 direct correlation with no influence from outside factors, then an immediate short term change for 12 months should have correlated with the 12 month crime rate. Prior to 2009, it was assumed to be an almost direct correlation. Since 2009, the data has shown that it is an important factor, but not the sole decisive factor and that other factors (like the social ones from the pandemic) can have a large enough impact to disrupt the correlation.

A direct correlation, strong correlation, weak correlation, and inverse correlation are all correlational relationships, but not the same thing. Prior to 2009, it was assumed (and backed up largely by the data) that it was a direct correlation. Since 2009, the data has shown a correlation between violent crime, but not a direct one.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Jul 7, 2022

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:30

eviltastic: Feb 8, 2004; Fan of Britches

Willa Rogers posted:

I recall another recent survey in which something like 50-60 percent of teens said they'd thought of suicide or self-harm, but I'll have to go digging for it.

Might be these periodic studies from Harvard; I'm pretty sure I remember you being the one to bring them to the attention of one of these threads. I know I found the mental health numbers there pretty jarring the first time I saw them.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:34

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

Do Americans Know What a Massive Ripoff American Life Really Is?

https://eand.co/do-americans-know-what-a-massive-ripoff-american-life-really-is-8804aa6b65fa

quote:

I�ve recently moved to the States � shudder � for a year or two. And I�m shocked at how expensive just life is. For no good reason at all.

When I put my economist hat on, a fact becomes clear to me. American life is a gigantic rip-off, one of the world�s biggest, and that�s why America is now effectively a country of poor people, and that makes it a nation of angry, cruel, and selfish ones, too.

But I�m getting ahead of myself. Let me start over. American life is the biggest ripoff in the world. Or at least one of the biggest, in the top five, certainly. Just�existing. It costs way, way more than it should. So much so that America cannot ever move forward as a society. So, trapped in a cycle, which economists call a �poverty trap,� Americans now stay poor.

Americans don�t quite get this, though. Why would they? They�ve never lived anywhere else. So let me give you a few examples which, especially if you�re American, might be illuminating. We�ll begin with basic bills, and then zoom out from there.

How much do I pay for internet and TV in Europe? About thirty dollars, give or take. How much do I pay in America? $150. That�s five times as much. And what I get in America is way, way worse. At least half of the junk on TV is ads, I don�t get the wonderful and illuminating and sparkling stuff that European TV makes on a regular basis, from good coverage of global affairs to politics to economics to ground-breaking shows and movies. I�m getting massively, massively ripped off. Why? Let me answer, with another example.

Let�s take utility bills. They�re astronomical in America compared to the rest of the rich world, and even much of the rest of the world period. Heating, electricity, gas, water? These things can easily add up to $500 to $1000 dollars per month. That�s not even factoring in property taxes and maintenance costs and whatnot. Americans have no idea, but in Europe I�d pay maybe � maybe � half that, if even that much.

Why are these sets of bills so much bigger? Because of gigantic private monopolies. Internet and TV are monopolies in most of the country. Utilities in most states have similarly been privatized. What happens when you create private monopolies? They profiteer.

That�s a theme that runs through American life � which only gets more expensive from here.

How much does it cost to just�have a place to live? The average American rental is about $1200. That�s for an apartment. Again, that�s a particularly high figure. It doesn�t cost that much to rent in Europe. In France, the the average house rental costs less than that � it�s about 800 euros, or maybe $1000 dollars.

It�s true that rents are high in cities like Paris and London, sure � but we�re talking about averages across society.

Now we�re going to pause and look at how just the bills above already mean the average American is going to be effectively poor. Not might be, not could be, but �is,� in the sense of �inescapable, iron-clad, destiny.�

The average American income is about $35K per year. That�s about $2400 a month, if you�re lucky, after taxes. What bills are we up to? $1200 for a crappy apartment. A few hundreds, let�s call it two or three, for connectivity. And another $500 or so for basic utilities. That leaves you with about $400 for the month, or just $100 dollars a week.

That�s American life. That�s why Americans feel so poor. Because they are. American life is a gigantic rip-offf.

The average American � after subtracting basic bills of shelter and utilities � has just $100 to spend on food, clothing, kids, medicine, all the other necessities.

Do you think you could do it? Think it�d be easy? Think it�s just some matter of �personal responsibility?�

The sad truth is that nobody can afford to live that way, at least not in a modern society. We know that because the average American doesn�t. They go into debt. Deeply into debt. So deep that the average American now dies underwater to the tune of about $60,000. They�ve spent a lifetime paying off debts that they can never fully make good on � precisely because the system is rigged against them. In what sense?

Well, we�re already at just $100 a week left after shelter and utilities for the average person. But the bills hardly stop there.

Now you need healthcare. In Europe and Canada and even Australia, with its crazy climate change denying PM, that�s free. In America? Take a deep breath, and shudder. The average annual healthcare cost is about $7500. Bang. You just went from having a $100 a week to try and live on � to being deeply, deeply financially underwater. $7500 a year is about $600 a month.

Now you�re $200 in the hole, every single month. That is how much you owe, because you cannot afford to live on what you make.

Maybe you�re lucky enough to have healthcare through your job, like most Americans. Phew. You don�t have to pay this massive expense. No, you just have to pay a�slightly smaller one. �Co-pays.� That means that even if you have �health insurance,� you still have to �co-pay� with the company which is supposed to be �covering� you. How much is that? �A routine visit to a doctor�s office, in network, ranges from $15 to $25; for a specialist, $30-$50; for urgent care, $75�100; and for treatment in an emergency room, $200-$300.�

You�d better hope you don�t get sick � at all. Because if you need the slightest, slightest bit of healthcare? Bang. You�re underwater all over again. Need to see a doctor? There goes one quarter of your monthly disposable income. Need to go to the ER because you broke a finger or got food poisoning? Boom. You�re underwater for three months, three months worth of average disposable income gone.

So what do Americans do to cope with this? If they can�t live on what they earn�then how do they live? We all know the answer to that. Credit. Credit cards, to be precise. Only those charge more than 10% interest. Profits are being made � huge ones � on the fact that Americans can�t make ends meet, so they have to go into debt. Have to. The system really is rigged against them, because of course if you have to go into debt because you don�t earn enough to live on, and that debt is compounding interest, then of course you can never pay it off. Which is just where most Americans are.

How deep in credit card debt are Americans? The industry itself will tell you that the average American owes about $6500 or so, though other sources report that the average American is in debt for almost $30K, excluding mortgages � and the majority of that is credit card debt. And maybe even $6500 doesn�t sound like a lot, until you realise that for a family of four, that�s more than $25,000.

How much �interest,� by the way, does that amount to as a society? Somewhere on the order of $100 billion dollars a year. That�s more than the entire federal education budget. Over ten years? That�s a trillion dollars. Which is more than enough to, say, give every kid in America as much education or healthcare or entrepreunerial investment they�d ever need.

By now, you should be angry. The credit card industry � aka Wall St � is making $100 billion dollars a year by profiteering on the backs of Americans because they don�t earn enough to live on. But that money is more than enough to fix the problem it deliberately doesn�t solve, or go a long way to fixing it.

What is that problem? Well, why is European life so much more affordable? Because Europeans enjoy generous public goods. Healthcare? Public. Media? Public. Education, retirement, utilities? All public. They don�t get by huge, massive bills for any of those things, which are then recycled into profits, by gigantic private monopolies, that then only enrich a tiny few, and keep the rest of society effectively � deliberately � too poor to live a decent life, so they have to into debt, and the whole dumb, rotten, grotesque machine just keeps on remaking itself. No, Europeans and Canadians? They�re the lucky ones. Their lives aren�t a rip-off.

Meanwhile, in America, because profiteering means that the problem of not having enough to go around affordably never gets fixed, because of course profiteers are hardly likely to fund public goods. If that doesn�t make sense, let me spell it out. Wall St alone is making a trillion dollars every ten years off credit card debt alone. One industry, one product. That money isn�t being invested in the things Americans need � healthcare, education, retirement. One effect is, yes, it goes into billionaires� pockets. But another, more pernicious one, is that Americans never get public goods and systems � and they stay poor because they get exploited and preyed on by private monopolies.

Americans think that Europeans pay higher �taxes.� In some overly technical sense, that�s true. But Americans pay taxes, too � only if we expand the definition to include mega-monopolies, Americans pay a far, far higher tax rate than Europeans do.

In Europe, your taxes go to fund utilities and universities and hospitals and so forth. Now just flip it: imagine that the costs Americans pay for all those things reflect the true American �tax� rate. What is it?

It�s more than Americans earn. Americans have a true �tax� rate of more than 100%, at least if we take �taxes� to mean �the costs of stuff you need to live a basically decent life, like healthcare and education and utilities and a place to live.� That is why Americans are effectively poor.

I keep using the words �effectively poor.� What do I mean? Well, that Americans are forced to live like poor people. Hand to mouth. No savings. Little disposable income. Exploited and abused, taken advantage of at their most vulnerable moments, like being charged a million dollars (LOL) for an operation. It sucks to live that way. It changes you. How? Why?

Americans are notoriously angry, hostile, aggressive, selfish people. Sorry if you don�t want to hear that � but the rest of the world will tell you it�s true. What makes them that way, though? Well, they�ve fallen into poverty. They�ve become effectively poor. And poverty will make anyone rightly angry, desperate, and afraid.

America�s descent into becoming a country of poor people goes hand in hand with its plunge into becoming a nation of idiots, fascists, theocrats, and assorted other kinds of fanatics. Poverty makes people fanatics and extremists. Maybe your church gives you a bit of money and a place to leave your kids � the price is you come to believe you�re the chosen ones. Maybe you come to hate everyone who�s not true of faith or pure of blood like you � bang, the classic Weimar descent into fascism. Maybe you just get driven crazy and begin believing whatever crazy conspiracy theory explains your woes in the way that�s the most fantastical and easiest to believe.

America becoming a poor country isn�t just an economic problem. It�s ripped America�s social fabric and cultural values and norms apart. Americans don�t like each other, trust each other. They hate and despise each other. Aggression and hostility are now norms � nobody expects anyone to be kind or gentle or nice, the way Canadians and Europeans are. Social bonds? If you�re so busy trying to make ends meet, what room is left over friendship, relationships, ties? Bang. America�s collapse into stupidity, hate, despair, and rage has everything to do with it�s decline into poverty for the average person.

American life is one of the world�s most gigantic rip-offs. It�s eminently clear if you�ve lived elsewhere � and then you live in America for a while. The sad fact though is that�s never going to be true for most Americans. They have a sense, maybe, some of them, that they�re getting ripped off. But as a whole, American society and culture has no idea. How much of a rip-off American life really is.

Words fail. When a nation is paying enough every decade in credit card interest alone to have funded good healthcare and education and retirement for everyone�forever�over and over again�what adjective can possibly suffice?

Colossal, titanic, epic? All these seem like only giant understatement to describe the utterly mind-boggling scale of this cycle of folly, violence, stupidity, ruin.

So let me say it again, so that you get it this time. I haven�t even covered mortgage debt and medical debt and so forth. I don�t need to. How much of a rip-off is American life?

America is paying enough in credit card interest alone�every decade�.over and over again�to have built a functioning, modern society for everyone, forever.

You go ahead and tell me the right adjective to describe that level of grinding, mindless death machine.

That should change, but�it won�t, and it�s not. Because in America, there�s no better business than ripping someone off with one hand, while you promise them the moon and stars with the other, and, incredibly, they cheer you on for making them poor.

Sadly, Americans still believe, more or less, whole-heartedly in the very systems and institutions which rip them off and laugh all the way to the bank � the average American still won�t support public systems and institutions like healthcare or media or education, and will choose the weird, idiotic system of private monopolies and billionaires over it, the very one which keeps them poor every time � and so the average Americans stands there, left holding the crumpled empty bag that held all their possibilities, dazed, bewildered wondering: hey, what happened to my life?

Gets a bit opiniony but the links to sources are in the original post.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:36

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

Thanks, eviltastic; that was the study!

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

That was the point of the comparison.

I never said it didn't correlate. It does correlate. If it was a 1:1 direct correlation with no influence from outside factors, then an immediate short term change for 12 months should have correlated with the 12 month crime rate. Prior to 2009, it was assumed to be an almost direct correlation. Since 2009, the data has shown that it is an important factor, but not the sole decisive factor and that other factors (like the social ones from the pandemic) can have a large enough impact to disrupt the correlation.

Thanks for the explanation.

The way you phrased the pandemic relief was what caused a raised eyebrow, as if the $3000 one-offs & "tripling" the savings of those who couldn't afford a $500 emergency bill prior to the pandemic somehow proved that violent crime doesn't correlate with economic hardship.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:37

HonorableTB: Dec 22, 2006

E: nvm, not worth it

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:43

Tiny Timbs: Sep 6, 2008

Jaxyon posted:

Do Americans Know What a Massive Ripoff American Life Really Is?

https://eand.co/do-americans-know-what-a-massive-ripoff-american-life-really-is-8804aa6b65fa

Gets a bit opiniony but the links to sources are in the original post.

They really shouldn't have started this bragging about European TV

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:48

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

Jaxyon posted:

Do Americans Know What a Massive Ripoff American Life Really Is?

https://eand.co/do-americans-know-what-a-massive-ripoff-american-life-really-is-8804aa6b65fa

Gets a bit opiniony but the links to sources are in the original post.

Wow, this is a great, if depressing, response to the claims that Americans are better off than citizens of most other countries.

It's also something I've notice change gradually (and not so gradually) over the past few decades, as neoliberalism & its ensuing austerity took hold over various sectors of our economy. It's especially notable with social programs like Medicare, which have increasingly privatized & enriched its profiteers at the expense of Americans.

It's also notable in the extent to which government services have been farmed out to consultants & NGOs, which became apparent during the pandemic with everything from fubar'd unemployment-comp systems in states to the rent relief to landlords & tenants.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:48

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Jaxyon posted:

Do Americans Know What a Massive Ripoff American Life Really Is?

https://eand.co/do-americans-know-what-a-massive-ripoff-american-life-really-is-8804aa6b65fa

Gets a bit opiniony but the links to sources are in the original post.

Lots of his overall points about things being a ripoff are right, but he is completely wrong on many many claims. Sometimes, wildly wildly off.

#1 He's confusing rental costs by just converting the currency difference and not factoring in the income difference or purchasing price parity.

#2 As someone who lived in the U.K. for a while, the idea that there are far fewer channels in the U.S. than Europe and that the TV quality/value is much better is an insane claim.

#3 He thinks that people are regularly paying more than $1,000 a month in electric and utility bills in the U.S. That is insane. The average is about 2k per year ($166 per month).

#4 He thinks that the U.S. is the only country with TV provider monopolies.

#5 He thinks the average American has less than $100 for food, childcare, medicine, and recreation per week.

#6 He is calculating total American healthcare costs per capita and assuming it is the out of pocket cost average. The average American isn't spending $7.5k to $12k per year out of pocket on healthcare.

#7 Weirdly, after making some ridiculously high assumptions about American bills, he actually dramatically underestimates the average credit card interest rate and thinks it is about half of what it actually is. He guesses it is around 10%, but it is closer to 23%. He also thinks hedge funds and credit card companies are the same thing.

#8 He says that since the average non-mortage debt load is around $6.5k per person, that the average family of 4 must have close to 25k in debt. Which is assuming that two children are going to have $6.5k in credit card debt.

#9 He's making some completely wild claims like, "Americans have a true tax rate of more than 100%" because of the existence of healthcare co-pays and college tuition.

I agree with many of his overall points, but he is ridiculously off on his estimates and using very bad math. Not to mention the wild opinion stuff about how all Americans crave blood and churches use bake sales and babysitting to brainwash people into violent barbarians.

Or stuff like:

quote:

Aggression and hostility are now norms � nobody expects anyone to be kind or gentle or nice, the way Canadians and Europeans are.

Edit:

Tiny Timbs posted:

They really shouldn't have started this bragging about European TV

You beat me to it. But, I also found that immediately hilarious.

Willa Rogers posted:

Wow, this is a great, if depressing, response to the claims that Americans are better off than citizens of most other countries.

I really hope you didn't read the whole thing. I'm not sure how anyone can somehow read through the claims that using a church daycare is "how Weimar fascism started," that American children have $6.5k in credit card debt, and that many people pay over $1,000 per month in electric bills without pausing.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Jul 7, 2022

# ? Jul 7, 2022 22:57

Herstory Begins Now: Aug 5, 2003; SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

what do you even have to do to hit a 1k utility bill?

are you running an aluminum recycling operation in your back yard?

# ? Jul 7, 2022 23:13

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Herstory Begins Now posted:

what do you even have to do to hit a 1k utility bill?

are you running an aluminum recycling operation in your back yard?

Crypto.

# ? Jul 7, 2022 23:15

Crows Turn Off: Jan 7, 2008

Mulva posted:

And yours does exactly the opposite for mass shootings.

You are able to see the graph, yes? Not sure you actually understand the data points and trends here.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Jul 7, 2022 23:20

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

If UK TV is so bad why does America keep ripping it off?

:smugbert:

# ? Jul 7, 2022 23:53

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

I really hope you didn't read the whole thing. I'm not sure how anyone can somehow read through the claims that using a church daycare is "how Weimar fascism started," that American children have $6.5k in credit card debt, and that many people pay over $1,000 per month in electric bills without pausing.

He doesn't say $1000 in electric bills, he says 500-1000 for all utilities, and depending on where you are and if you own vs rent, that can be true.

I have a smaller ($1300sq ft) house in LA and with not very serious usage and including all my utilities(internet, tv streaming, water electric gas garbage sewage), I'd say $500 is about right.

In cold parts of the country you can break $500 for heating alone during winter.

I don't agree with everything in that blog, but I do think the larger argument that the US is quite a bit more expensive to live in than we give it credit for is correct.

Average household consumer debt in the US around $90k

Jaxyon fucked around with this message at 00:05 on Jul 8, 2022

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:01

mawarannahr: May 21, 2019

Jaxyon posted:

Do Americans Know What a Massive Ripoff American Life Really Is?

https://eand.co/do-americans-know-what-a-massive-ripoff-american-life-really-is-8804aa6b65fa

Gets a bit opiniony but the links to sources are in the original post.

Nice opinions indeed.

quote:

Let�s take utility bills. They�re astronomical in America compared to the rest of the rich world, and even much of the rest of the world period. Heating, electricity, gas, water? These things can easily add up to $500 to $1000 dollars per month.

Electricity in Seattle is $0.1056-$0.1307 per kwh today:

https://www.seattle.gov/city-light/residential-services/billing-information/rates

At the end of December 2021, statista reported:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/263492/electricity-prices-in-selected-countries/ posted:

Denmark and Germany had one of the highest electricity prices worldwide, as of September 2021. At the time, Danish households were charged around 0.36 U.S. dollars per kilowatt hour, while in Germany the price stood at 0.35 dollars per kWh. By comparison, in neighboring Poland, residents paid about half as much, while households in the United States were charged even less.

I can�t find a good source in English for more recent consumer electricity prices in Germany right away, but this source from July 2022 reports an average of USD 0.39:

https://www.electricrate.com/data-center/electricity-prices-by-country/#Countries_With_Most_Expensive_Electricity_Prices

The USA is not even in the top 20 countries for electricity prices, of which 11 are in Europe.

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:05

Tiny Timbs: Sep 6, 2008

Jaxyon posted:

He doesn't say $1000 in electric bills, he says 500-1000 for all utilities, and depending on where you are and if you own vs rent, that can be true.

I have a smaller ($1300sq ft) house in LA and with not very serious usage and including all my utilities(internet, tv streaming, water electric gas garbage sewage), I'd say $500 is about right.

In cold parts of the country you can break $500 for heating alone during winter.

I don't agree with everything in that blog, but I do think the larger argument that the US is quite a bit more expensive to live in than we give it credit for is correct.

Average household consumer debt in the US around $90k

He specifies that utilities means water, gas and electric. TV and internet are covered as another cost.

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:09

Herstory Begins Now: Aug 5, 2003; SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

I remain unconvinced that people are regularly (or even almost ever) hitting 1000/mo utility bills while living on minimum wage livelihoods.

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:13

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

mawarannahr posted:

Nice opinions indeed.

Electricity in Seattle is $0.1056-$0.1307 per kwh today:

https://www.seattle.gov/city-light/residential-services/billing-information/rates

At the end of December 2021, statista reported:

I can�t find a good source in English for more recent consumer electricity prices in Germany right away, but this source from July 2022 reports an average of USD 0.39:

https://www.electricrate.com/data-center/electricity-prices-by-country/#Countries_With_Most_Expensive_Electricity_Prices

The USA is not even in the top 20 countries for electricity prices, of which 11 are in Europe.

In general Germany has higher per kwh costs than the US, but lower actual utility bills.

I'm not sure how the current energy crisis has changed that.

Also Los Angeles metro has twice as many people as the entire state of Washington and also is at 0.25/kwh

Herstory Begins Now posted:

I remain unconvinced that people are regularly (or even almost ever) hitting 1000/mo utility bills while living on minimum wage livelihoods.

I agree

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:14

Crows Turn Off: Jan 7, 2008

Herstory Begins Now posted:

I remain unconvinced that people are regularly (or even almost ever) hitting 1000/mo utility bills while living on minimum wage livelihoods.

Yeah, it is bullshit for sure.

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:18

HonorableTB: Dec 22, 2006

mawarannahr posted:

Nice opinions indeed.

Electricity in Seattle is $0.1056-$0.1307 per kwh today:

https://www.seattle.gov/city-light/residential-services/billing-information/rates

At the end of December 2021, statista reported:

I can’t find a good source in English for more recent consumer electricity prices in Germany right away, but this source from July 2022 reports an average of USD 0.39:

https://www.electricrate.com/data-center/electricity-prices-by-country/#Countries_With_Most_Expensive_Electricity_Prices

The USA is not even in the top 20 countries for electricity prices, of which 11 are in Europe.

You're comparing Seattle City Light, a taxpayer subsidized municipal utility, with privatized electric. Look up the rates for Georgia Power and get back to me.

I am a Seattleite, I know how this works. SCL is billed bimonthly and routinely 50-60% less than the average cost of a non-municipal utility. More Americans are served by private electric utilities than aren't. SCL specifically receives taxpayer and state funding subsidies to keep costs of utilities low for those who are covered under it. SCL also ONLY covers Seattle city limits, which covers less than half of the Seattle-Tacoma metro population. Much more is covered by Puget Sound Energy than not, which is substantially more expensive than SCL.

HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 00:23 on Jul 8, 2022

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:21

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Jaxyon posted:

He doesn't say $1000 in electric bills, he says 500-1000 for all utilities, and depending on where you are and if you own vs rent, that can be true.

I have a smaller ($1300sq ft) house in LA and with not very serious usage and including all my utilities(internet, tv streaming, water electric gas garbage sewage), I'd say $500 is about right.

In cold parts of the country you can break $500 for heating alone during winter.

I don't agree with everything in that blog, but I do think the larger argument that the US is quite a bit more expensive to live in than we give it credit for is correct.

Average household consumer debt in the US around $90k

As mentioned, he specifies that the $500 to $1,000 figure is for water and power and says many people "easily" pay $1k per month. I tried to use a calculator to find some way to pay $1k in water and power anywhere in the U.S. and the closest I could find was to be in Hawaii, with a larger than average house, running central air 24/7, with above average electrical appliance use and I could only get to around $600.

That consumer debt count includes mortgages. It's around $6k when you exclude those. And that number is skewed by a few people with very large debts. More than half of Americans have between $0 and $2,000 of credit card debt.

He is grossly overestimating utility costs in the U.S. and underestimating them in Europe.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Jul 8, 2022

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:21

Dopilsya: Apr 3, 2010

Jaxyon posted:

He doesn't say $1000 in electric bills, he says 500-1000 for all utilities, and depending on where you are and if you own vs rent, that can be true.

I have a smaller ($1300sq ft) house in LA and with not very serious usage and including all my utilities(internet, tv streaming, water electric gas garbage sewage), I'd say $500 is about right.

In cold parts of the country you can break $500 for heating alone during winter.

I don't agree with everything in that blog, but I do think the larger argument that the US is quite a bit more expensive to live in than we give it credit for is correct.

Average household consumer debt in the US around $90k

As far as the utilities go, he's counting internet and tv streaming as separate from utilities; the article has it at $150 on those then a further $500 - $1000 per month on water/electric/gas/sewer/garbage, so you're still below his claimed utility bills. I don't know what average utility costs are like in other places, but I've had a larger house than 1300 sq ft in a much colder part of the USA than Louisiana and my utilities in the winter got to about $250 at most. I'm just a single data point, but unless he's got a source for that, it sounds very off.

His overall point I think stands, but it stands on the ridiculously insane costs of certain things like healthcare and education. Most of the rest of that doesn't seem to be harder to get here than anywhere else. Except of course for the incredible European tv shows that everyone raves about so much.

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:24

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

HonorableTB posted:

You're comparing Seattle City Light, a taxpayer subsidized municipal utility, with privatized electric. Look up the rates for Georgia Power and get back to me.

I am a Seattleite, I know how this works. SCL is billed bimonthly and routinely 50-60% less than the average cost of a non-municipal utility. More Americans are served by private electric utilities than aren't.

Electric rates in Germany are almost 3x the kw/h of the U.S. The U.K. has about 2x.

The E.U. has fairly high electric and gas prices.

Canada is the only OECD country with cheaper electricity than the U.S.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 00:29 on Jul 8, 2022

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:25

Mulva: Sep 13, 2011; It's about time for my once per decade ban for being a consistently terrible poster.

Crows Turn Off posted:

You are able to see the graph, yes? Not sure you actually understand the data points and trends here.

Oh by all means go off, I'm sure this isn't going to blow up in your face at all. I also deleted a much longer post about how his CRS report link was sappy bullshit that also didn't show what he said it did because I am frankly tired of running in this circle, and also more interesting discussions were happening, but if you want to call me out we can go.

e: I'd rather you didn't, it's not an interesting conversation and there's nothing meaningful to say about it. But again, if you want to....

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Mulva fucked around with this message at 00:30 on Jul 8, 2022

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:27

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

That consumer debt count includes mortgages. It's around $6k when you exclude those. And that number is skewed by a few people with very large debts. More than half of Americans have between $0 and $2,000 of credit card debt.

When you include mortgages, the worst country in Europe is Switzerland with 50k to the US's 90k.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1073009/debt-per-adult-europe-by-country/

Dopilsya posted:

Except of course for the incredible European tv shows that everyone raves about so much.

To be fair, you can't praise the US version of The Office without someone teleporting into the room and saying "But the UK version was so much better!"

Jaxyon fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Jul 8, 2022

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:30

Tiny Timbs: Sep 6, 2008

Why would you include mortgages? If you're making an argument for how poor Americans are versus those in other countries you'd use unsecured debt.

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:31

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Jaxyon posted:

When you include mortgages, the worst country in Europe is Switzerland with 50k to the US's 90k.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1073009/debt-per-adult-europe-by-country/

The mortgage is tied to an asset, though.

If someone has $50k in credit card debt and another person has a $150k mortgage, the person with $150k in debt is not the person with bigger financial problems.

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:33

Dopilsya: Apr 3, 2010

HonorableTB posted:

You're comparing Seattle City Light, a taxpayer subsidized municipal utility, with privatized electric. Look up the rates for Georgia Power and get back to me.

I am a Seattleite, I know how this works. SCL is billed bimonthly and routinely 50-60% less than the average cost of a non-municipal utility. More Americans are served by private electric utilities than aren't. SCL specifically receives taxpayer and state funding subsidies to keep costs of utilities low for those who are covered under it. SCL also ONLY covers Seattle city limits, which covers less than half of the Seattle-Tacoma metro population. Much more is covered by Puget Sound Energy than not, which is substantially more expensive than SCL.

https://www.georgiapower.com/residential/billing-and-rate-plans/pricing-and-rate-plans/residential-service.html

According to Georgia Power's website, electricity costs are cheaper there than the quoted costs in Seattle.

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 23:43

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/what-german-households-pay-power

Most sources i've found say that despite a much higher price/kwh in Germany, for instance, the actual utility bill tends to be less than US$100, while the average US monthly bill is about 20% higher than that.

I'm sure the current increases have blown both of those numbers up.

# ? Jul 8, 2022 00:41

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE Summer 2022: You can't change the crisis settings.

«‹›279 »