USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »

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

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

The House has drafted the official impeachment inquiry. A vote is expected by early next week.

The full document is basically your standard impeachment process stuff:

- Authority to hold people in contempt for refusing to testify.
- Legal authority for access to bank and tax records and authority to make some private documents public.
- The minority members of the committee can submit subpoena requests, but they have to be approved by the House Judiciary Chairman.
- More money for staff and investigations.

https://twitter.com/maxpcohen/status/1732780308699725897

# ? Dec 7, 2023 16:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 27, 2024 22:01

Barrel Cactaur: Oct 6, 2021

I think the x factor is people are not used to vetting macro-economic news the same way they vet other types of news, so pessimistic forcasts get a ton of undeserved traction even when it never materializes. It's not just that people have been expecting a recession, economic punditry has been projecting one might happen, and it not materializing despite all the charts in the world has left people going �wheres the earth shattering kaboom?". Most people know they don't understand the economy� or tracking it closely, their macro economic opinion is just a lagging indicator of whatever their news sources are saying. 6-9 months ago everyone thought the fed was going to blow up the economy to kill inflation and that banking risk would be systemic and then they managed a mostly soft landing and 4 bank casualties.

11 months from now people will have had a few more major milestones and a be taking about either a real event or what economic news looks like in 3-5 months.

E: I mean it even got me a bit, I was holding excessive amounts cash expecting a downturn and probably missed 500-600 bucks of gains last year. Though I would have rated my position as middling.

Barrel Cactaur fucked around with this message at 16:52 on Dec 7, 2023

# ? Dec 7, 2023 16:48

Gerund: Sep 12, 2007; He push a man

That "The Economy" and "Personal Finances" stopped being one-to-one in the mind of poll-answering Americans is a neat thing to note but trying to call the poll-answering Americans wrong about the state of the economy when everything is more expensive and the only way to not have been turbo-hosed is to have already bought a house and car two years ago is not going to convince people that the country is doing well.

"Everything is more expensive and less rewarding, so be happy that you have what you have" isn't a winning hearts-and-minds answer when people are spending more money to keep their only car and only home from falling down around them.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 16:54

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

Gerund posted:

That "The Economy" and "Personal Finances" stopped being one-to-one in the mind of poll-answering Americans is a neat thing to note but trying to call the poll-answering Americans wrong about the state of the economy when everything is more expensive and the only way to not have been turbo-hosed is to have already bought a house and car two years ago is not going to convince people that the country is doing well.

"Everything is more expensive and less rewarding, so be happy that you have what you have" isn't a winning hearts-and-minds answer when people are spending more money to keep their only car and only home from falling down around them.

And if overwhelming majorities of people self-reported their own economic situation as poor, this would be a compelling argument. But they don't, they say "I am doing fine, but the economy is bad". If most people say they are doing fine, than the economy cannot be bad.

Maybe everyone just has their own personal definition of what 'the economy" means.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 16:56

Aztec Galactus: Sep 12, 2002

zoux posted:

And if overwhelming majorities of people self-reported their own economic situation as poor, this would be a compelling argument. But they don't, they say "I am doing fine, but the economy is bad". If most people say they are doing fine, than the economy cannot be bad.

Maybe everyone just has their own personal definition of what 'the economy" means.

Everyone DOES have their own personal definition - its mostly a nonsense term.

But "I have more money than I've ever had before" and "there's no way I could afford a house" are not mutually exclusive

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:01

cr0y: Mar 24, 2005

Impeaching Biden for bad vibes. Like I know we are all very bias here but has anyone been able to conclusively point to anything shady that either Hunter or Joe were up to?

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:03

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

I think there is likely a lot of factors. The disconnect is the weirdest part from a sociological/economic/psychological perspective.

For all of modern history, people basically said, "If I am doing okay, then the economy is okay. If I am doing poorly, then the economy is doing poorly." Something broke that in 2022, but we don't really know why. The pandemic didn't break it, the great depression didn't break it, 18% mortgage rates in the 1970's and early 80's didn't break it, and the financial collapse of 2008 didn't break it.

18% mortgage rates in the 70s were not paired with a positive job market and wages that were improving in real terms.

The disconnect is that the job market is good because the pandemic put pressure on it and there's a labor shortage, but everything else is bad because inflation and interest rates. That's historically weird.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:07

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

cr0y posted:

Impeaching Biden for bad vibes. Like I know we are all very bias here but has anyone been able to conclusively point to anything shady that either Hunter or Joe were up to?

No, this is purely revenge for the Trump impeachments

They said as much when Biden won and I think also before the midterm that they would probably impeach if they won the House back

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:10

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

It's not just Republicans, though. The shift was dramatically larger among Republicans, but it happened with Democrats and independents to a sizable degree too.

This is sort of an example: One indisputably good thing the last few years is the very tight labor market for the first time in 30 years.

The unemployment rate is 3.9% and there were a record low number of layoffs. But, everyone, including Democrats and Independents to a degree, think it was a record year for most layoffs in history.

https://twitter.com/besttrousers/status/1732198320297107597

I suspect part of that is when there are big lay offs now from companies, you hear about them in the various news networks.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The House has drafted the official impeachment inquiry. A vote is expected by early next week.

The full document is basically your standard impeachment process stuff:

- Authority to hold people in contempt for refusing to testify.
- Legal authority for access to bank and tax records and authority to make some private documents public.
- The minority members of the committee can submit subpoena requests, but they have to be approved by the House Judiciary Chairman.
- More money for staff and investigations.

https://twitter.com/maxpcohen/status/1732780308699725897

Do they actually have anything? Because every time I see comer the excuses get dumber.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:18

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

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

This could be a major thing, but we have to see how it plays out.

The Biden administration is using a legal authority that has never been used before in an attempt to lower the price of prescription drugs.

The short version:

- Any commercial drug that was partially funded by the U.S. government has a provision granting "march-in rights" on the drug if the drug is not "accessible to the public."

This means that the U.S. government can license drugs that are under patent to people who do not hold the patent to produce them.

The intent of the law is for use in situations where a drug is developed with the government, but turns out to be unprofitable or not viable with current technology. If it becomes viable or there is a public need for the drug, then the government can license someone else to produce the drug, even if it is under patent.

- The Biden administration is using a different legal argument in an attempt to trigger march-in rights for some drugs.

Essentially, they are arguing that a drug being prohibitively expensive counts as "not being available to the general public" and can trigger legal authority to assert march-in rights.

This essentially requires companies with drugs under patent that were funded in part or in full by the U.S. government to lower their prices or allow other manufacturers to sell the drug.

https://twitter.com/MorePerfectUS/status/1732776786566488168

Other proposals that are included in this package:

- Launch a program to review hospital merger and acquisition rules to prevent anti-competitive practices or acquisitions.

- Review the "financialization" of the healthcare industry and the practices of providers being bought by private equity firms and implement new regulations if their patient outcomes or prices diverge from the average performance.

- Require Medicare Advantage plans to submit much more detailed data on patient outcomes, costs, ownership, network partnerships, and reimbursement rates. Using this data, they will complete a comprehensive review of the Medicare Advantage program and make adjustments to who is allowed to participate and what practices are allowed.

- Stop insurance brokers from being offered lavish commissions from insurance companies for directing people to their Medicare advantage plans over traditional Medicare or competitors' Medicare Advantage plans.

- Implement new advertising restrictions for Medicare Advantage plans.

Plans that advertise dental and other benefits must actually provide their customers with those benefits. If they advertise benefits, but don't make them available to 2% of their customers or more for any reason, such as difficult referral rules, network restrictions, or other things that make them practically difficult to provide, then they can no longer advertise those services.

- Establish a federal floor of staffing levels for nursing homes that get Medicaid dollars.

Additionally, place limits on how many nursing homes a private equity firm can own in a given region.

- Reform the organ transplant system.

Ending the rule that requires the government contract with a single private entity to provide a monopoly on managing the organ transplant system. Instead, allow other organizations and non-profits who produce better results to take over the contract in areas where the monopoly is underperforming.

Several other different payment and regulation reforms.

Full list and press announcement:

quote:

President Biden believes that health care should be a right, not a privilege. For too long, corporate special interests and trickle-down economics have allowed Big Pharma to make record profits, while millions of Americans struggle to afford health care and prescription drugs to treat common and chronic conditions. As part of the President�s Bidenomics agenda, the Biden-Harris Administration is cracking down on price gouging and taking on special interests to lower costs for consumers and ensure every American has access to high-quality, affordable health care.

Today, the Biden-Harris Administration is announcing new actions to promote competition in health care and support lowering prescription drug costs for American families, including the release of a proposed framework for agencies on the exercise of march-in rights on taxpayer-funded drugs and other inventions, which specifies that price can be a factor in considering whether a drug is accessible to the public. The Administration believes taxpayer-funded medications should be reasonably available and affordable. These actions build on the steps the Administration has already taken to lower health care costs, including capping the cost of insulin at $35 per product per month for seniors, finally allowing Medicare to negotiate lower prescription drug prices, requiring drug companies to pay rebates to Medicare if they raise prices faster than inflation, and locking in $800 per year in health insurance savings for 15 million Americans under President Biden�s Inflation Reduction Act.

Lowering Prescription Drug Costs

Currently the 25 largest pharmaceutical companies control around 70% of industry revenues. Other parts of the health care industry also face limited competition. Over 75% of Americans live in highly concentrated hospital markets, and just three or fewer issuers of individual health insurance control 80% of the market in 44 states. In addition, five insurers control over 70% of the Medicare Advantage market. This consolidation contributes to higher costs for taxpayers, lower wages for health care workers, and worse quality of care for patients.

New research released by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) finds that a lack of competition in drug markets is highly correlated with higher prices. Among the highest priced drugs (i.e., those in the top 10% of price per prescription), 89% of small molecule drugs and 100% of biological products had only one manufacturer. Meanwhile, nearly three in ten individuals struggle to pay for the drugs they need.

Today, the Biden-Harris Administration announced a new action to support lowering prescription drug costs and increase Americans� access to life-saving medications:

� Promoting equitable access to lower-priced taxpayer-funded drugs. Taxpayers have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on research catalyzing the discovery and development of new prescription drugs. The Biden-Harris Administration believes taxpayer-funded drugs and other taxpayer-funded inventions should be available and affordable to the public. When an invention is made using taxpayer funds, under certain circumstances march-in authority under the Bayh-Dole Act enables the federal government to license the invention to another party. The prior Administration proposed a rule preventing the government from exercising this authority on the basis of high price alone. The Biden-Harris Administration decided not to finalize that proposal earlier this year, consistent with President Biden�s Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. Today, the Department of Commerce (DOC) and HHS released a proposed framework for agencies on the exercise of march-in rights that specifies for the first time that price can be a factor in determining that a drug or other taxpayer-funded invention is not accessible to the public. DOC and HHS invite public input on how this framework can promote access to taxpayer-funded inventions, including treatments for patients, while promoting innovation.

Scrutinizing Anticompetitive Acquisitions and Anticompetitive Practices

Consolidation in health care markets has accelerated in recent decades, too often leading to higher costs, worse quality, and less access to care�particularly in rural areas. For example, a review of hospital merger studies finds that mergers in concentrated markets led to price increases often exceeding 20%. Consolidation has also led to a rapid decline in independent physician practices, with research finding that patients of hospital-owned practices pay nearly $300 more for similar care than at independent physician practices. At the same time, private-equity ownership in the health care industry has ballooned, with approximately $750 billion in deals between 2010 and 2020�in sectors including, but not limited to, physician practices,nursing homes, hospices, home care, autism treatment, and travel nursing. Too often, aggressive profiteering by private equity-owned practices can lead to higher patient costs and lower quality care.

Today, the Biden-Harris Administration announced new efforts to stop anticompetitive mergers and anticompetitive practices by dominant corporations in health care markets:

� Launching a cross-government public inquiry into corporate greed in health care. The Biden-Harris Administration believes that the health care system should serve patients, not corporate profiteers. The Administration is concerned that our health care system is increasingly being financialized, with corporate owners like private-equity firms and others maximizing their profits at the expense of patients� health and safety, while increasing costs for patients and taxpayers alike. The Department of Justice (DOJ), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and HHS will issue a joint Request for Information to seek input about how private equity and other corporations� increasing power and control of our health care is affecting Americans. The agencies will use this joint Request for Information to identify areas for future regulation and enforcement prioritization, and they will continue to work together on case referrals, reciprocal training programs, data-sharing, and further development of additional health care competition policy initiatives. As part of this effort, HHS will appoint a Chief Competition Officer and DOJ�s Antitrust Division and FTC will name Counsels for Health Care to lead these efforts.

� Identifying anticompetitive �roll ups� that currently evade antitrust review. Businesses, including private equity firms, health insurers, and health systems sometimes use a �roll up� strategy, in which a series of relatively small acquisitions can lead to the consolidation of a market and contribute to worse patient outcomes while increasing taxpayer costs. These serial acquisitions may violate the antitrust laws. However, each individual acquisition may fall below the size thresholds for reporting the prospective deal to the antitrust enforcement agencies before consummating the acquisition�making it more challenging for the enforcement agencies to identify anticompetitive transactions at the outset. Today, HHS, DOJ, and FTC announced that they will, to the maximum extent possible, engage in data sharing to help the antitrust enforcers identify potentially anticompetitive transactions that might otherwise evade ready review by antitrust enforcers.

� Increasing ownership transparency. HHS, through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), has taken unprecedented action to shed light on ownership trends in health care. The Biden-Harris Administration is the first to make ownership data on hospitals, nursing homes, hospice providers, and home health agencies publicly available, and today, CMS is releasing, for the first time, ownership data on Federal Qualified Health Centers and Rural Health Clinics on data.cms.gov. Making ownership information transparent allows for identification of common owners with histories of poor performance, analysis of trends on how market consolidation impacts consumers, and evaluation of the relationships between ownership and changes in health care costs and outcomes.

� Increasing Medicare Advantage transparency. Currently, about 50% of Medicare enrollment is in Medicare Advantage and the government is expected to spend over $7 trillion on Medicare Advantage over the next decade. The Biden-Harris Administration is committed to ensuring Medicare Advantage insurance plans best meet the needs of people with Medicare, there is timely access to care, and the market has healthy competition. To support this work, CMS must have comprehensive and high-quality Medicare Advantage programmatic data, including understanding the effects of market shifts on consumers and care outcomes. CMS has taken steps to improve Medicare Advantage data transparency and today, it is announcing a new phase of this work, which will start with soliciting information from the public early next year to strengthen CMS� data capabilities and Medicare Advantage transparency efforts.
Building on Past Actions to Increase Health Care Competition and Lower Prescription Drug Costs

Today�s announcements build on steps the Administration has already taken to lower health care costs, increase competition, and improve the quality and availability of care across the health care industry. These include:

� Negotiating and lowering drug prices. Thanks to President Biden�s Inflation Reduction Act, the Administration has announced 10 prescription drugs for which Medicare will negotiate prices directly with participating manufacturers. These drugs cost people with Medicare $3.4 billion out of pocket in 2022. This builds on other progress to lower prescription drug costs. Individuals with Medicare can now receive certain vaccines for free under the President�s lower cost prescription drug law, which previously would have cost an average of $70 in out-of-pocket costs. The Inflation Reduction Act also capped the cost of insulin at $35 per product per month for almost four million seniors and others on Medicare with diabetes, which can lead to hundreds of dollars in savings for a month�s supply.

� Stopping Big Pharma tactics that raise prices for working families. In September, the FTC issued an enforcement policy statement explaining that Big Pharma companies may face legal action if they delay entry of generic competitors with improper patent listings in the Food and Drug Administration�s (FDA�s) publication �Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,� commonly known as the �Orange Book.� When a brand pharmaceutical company improperly lists a patent in the Orange Book, it may lead to a 30-month statutory stay that blocks the approval of competing drug products, including lower-cost generic alternatives. Such improper listings may delay competition and raise prices for life-saving products like asthma inhalers. FTC and FDA are working to address such improper listings, with FTC announcing last month that it is using FDA�s regulatory Orange Book patent listing dispute process to challenge more than 100 patents listed for brand-name asthma inhalers, epinephrine autoinjectors, and other drug products.

� Cracking down on anticompetitive and anti-consumer practices in Medicare Advantage. Medicare Advantage�which serves over 30 million American seniors and people with disabilities�is increasingly dominated by just a few large national plans. Last month, HHS announced new steps to stop predatory marketing and steering of patients to Medicare Advantage plans that may not best meet their needs. HHS, through CMS, proposed a rule that would, if finalized as proposed, stop large insurance plans from offering brokers and agents lavish compensation�such as cash bonuses, volume bonuses, and perks�and working with marketing middlemen who are more likely to contract with larger insurers, leading to steerage of patients to plans based on compensation to the broker or agent, rather than based on the patients� best interests. The agency also proposed new steps to ensure seniors and people with disabilities can actually access supplemental benefits like hearing and dental coverage that these large plans market and help drive up Medicare costs�so that they aren�t merely marketing ploys. In addition, CMS will continue to implement updates to Medicare Advantage payment that improve payment accuracy, address gaming, and recover overpayments. Addressing overpayment in Medicare Advantage will help to make the market more competitive between Medicare Advantage plans and create a more level playing field between Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare.

� Making hearing aids available over the counter. To lower the price of hearing aids and expand access, President Biden�s Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy called on the FDA to act promptly to make hearing aids available over the counter, without a prescription. That is now a reality. Under a final rule issued by the FDA, hearing aids are now on store shelves across the country�for thousands of dollars less than before. The rule is also spurring competition among providers, leading to new features and models.

� Cracking down on nursing homes that endanger resident safety. In recent years, there has been a disturbing trend towards private equity firms and other large corporate owners purchasing nursing homes and slashing levels of staff to maximize profits. The Biden-Harris Administration has taken numerous steps to crack down on nursing homes that put the well-being of their residents at risk, including proposing a rule that, if finalized as proposed, would establish a federal floor for safe staffing levels. In addition, last month CMS finalized a rule that will provide the public with more information about who owns a nursing home�including whether facilities are owned by a private equity company or a real estate investment trust�so that families can make more informed decisions about where to seek nursing home care for their loved ones.

� Reforming the organ transplant system. President Biden recently signed a bipartisan law, the Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Act, to break up the monopoly that has controlled the organ transplant system for its entire nearly four decade history. HHS will harness competition with the intent to make multiple awards to different entities to benefit from best-in-class vendors and provide a more efficient system that strengthens oversight and improves patient safety.

� Addressing anticompetitive misuse of the patent system. The FDA and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office are working together on a robust set of initiatives aimed at protecting and promoting U.S. innovation while advancing marketplace competition that can lower drug prices and expand access.

� Banning non-compete agreements that trap health care workers and others. The FTC proposed a rule to ban employers from using non-compete clauses. The estimated 18% of workers covered by non-compete clauses include many across the health care industry such as doctors and nurses, who will have more employment opportunities if the rule is finalized.

� Promoting competition in eyeglasses. Bundling eye exams with the purchase of eyeglasses reduces competition in the market for eyeglasses�raising prices and reducing options for consumers. The FTC proposed an update to its Eyeglass Rule to make sure that eye doctors give patients their prescriptions immediately after their eye exam�facilitating consumers� ability to choose where to get their eyeglass prescriptions filled.

� Developing new payment models for doctors including supporting independent doctors. Succeeding in value-based care can be challenging for small, independent physician practices. Beginning July 1, 2024, the CMS Innovation Center�s Making Care Primary Model will provide a pathway for primary care clinicians to gradually adopt prospective, population-based payments that support the delivery of advanced primary care.

� Improving transparency of hospital charges. CMS hospital price transparency regulations lay the foundation for a patient-driven health care system by making hospitals� standard charges� data available to the public. Last month, CMS strengthened these regulations to require hospitals to make charges available in a more standardized manner to streamline enforcement capabilities. This will help the public learn how much an insurance company pays for a particular hospital service, for third parties to develop consumer-friendly materials, for hospitals to comply, and for CMS to enforce the regulations.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Dec 7, 2023

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:21

Gerund: Sep 12, 2007; He push a man

zoux posted:

And if overwhelming majorities of people self-reported their own economic situation as poor, this would be a compelling argument. But they don't, they say "I am doing fine, but the economy is bad". If most people say they are doing fine, than the economy cannot be bad.

Maybe everyone just has their own personal definition of what 'the economy" means.

I do not accept as refutation the argument that admits that there may be a difference between personal finances and what people conceive "the economy" as.

Perhaps poll-answering Americans have more empathy for the poor, the marginalized, the people being crushed by the whims of capital- especially in a country with a fraying social safety net- there but for the grace of God?

Perhaps poll-answering Americans have a level of expectations from decades of Zero Inflation business practices and are upset at the business's shift to profit-maximization- when your lifestyle was happy to be captured by monopolists.

Perhaps poll-answering Americans are talking about how it isn't fun to spend the money they have- that quality goods no longer get offered at a reasonable price and services are reduced and inconvenient.

Perhaps poll-answering Americans can't afford a second house or to retire at 60 or to go vacationing three times a year to sunny climates- so while they aren't going broke, a life with occasional luxuries and routes to being well-off are no longer reasonable fantasies.

"I'm doing fine, but the world is poo poo" is a hint to study more and ask better questions, not to declare the issue solved because people said they were doing fine. Its the logic of those shocked at their friend's suicide when "they said they were living the dream yesterday!"

Gerund fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Dec 7, 2023

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:24

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

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

cr0y posted:

Impeaching Biden for bad vibes. Like I know we are all very bias here but has anyone been able to conclusively point to anything shady that either Hunter or Joe were up to?

Hunter absolutely got jobs he wouldn't have otherwise gotten and had people sucking up to him because he was related to someone famous.

Khloe Kardashian is a billionaire for the same reason. That is pretty shady and distasteful.

But, no, they haven't found anything actually involving the government, corruption, Joe Biden, illegal actions, or China/Kazakhstan/Russia changing U.S. policies through bribes to Joe Biden.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:26

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Hunter absolutely got jobs he wouldn't have otherwise gotten and had people sucking up to him because he was related to someone famous.

Khloe Kardashian is a billionaire for the same reason. That is pretty shady and distasteful.

But, no, they haven't found anything actually involving the government, corruption, Joe Biden, illegal actions, or China/Kazakhstan/Russia changing U.S. policies through bribes to Joe Biden.

It continues to drive me loving insane that Biden is getting targeted for his son getting jobs when Trump had like half of his family in the White House for four years, often without security clearances

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:28

Shakespearean Beef: Jul 12, 2008; Ask me all about how I proudly marched alongside literal NEO-NAZIS to protest against the GOVERNMENT taking away our FREEDOMS because of nothing mote that the common FLU!!! I'm holding aloft the TORCH of FREEDOM!!

Gerund posted:

Perhaps poll-answering Americans have more empathy for the poor, the marginalized, the people being crushed by the whims of capital

lol

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:30

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

People in the bottom 50th percentile of incomes have a roughly 2.4% increased real income compared to 2019 right now.

51st to 75th percentile has a roughly -2% change in real income compared to 2019 right now.

76th to 100th percentile have a roughly -2.5% change in real income compared to 2019 right now.

That means the median American (and mostly everyone making less than $33k) has seen their real wages go up.

That third quartile figure means probably another 5 to 10% also saw real wage gains.

So, roughly 55% to 60% of Americans have a higher real income now than they did in 2019 (concentrated overwhelmingly among people making less than $50k).

40% to 45% have a lower real income now than they did in 2019 (concentrated overwhelmingly among people making more than $50k).

The median is right at no change in income and has been affected by inflation. The income 20-22 income change inflection point is basically right at the 50th percentile.

No the median American has not seen their wages go up unless one lumps them in with everyone less than median to make it look that way!

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:31

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

Shakespearean Beef posted:

lol

Also, all this unusual concern from poll-answering Americans didn�t exist prior to 2021, when personal sentiment matched actual economic indicators

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:33

Angry_Ed: Mar 30, 2010; Grimey Drawer

FlamingLiberal posted:

It continues to drive me loving insane that Biden is getting targeted for his son getting jobs when Trump had like half of his family in the White House for four years, often without security clearances

and being allowed to correct their forms for said clearances despite multiple errors and omissions.

Also the reason they're targeting Biden over Hunter getting jobs is because they think that if they can prove something illegal (or at least "illegal" in the court of public opinion), then every reason for Trump being impeached and indicted goes away, because this all started, in their minds, with Trump's first impeachment over trying to blackmail Ukraine.

EDIT: Of course there's also the usual tactic of Republicans using the tools of government poorly in order to convince people that government doesn't work/Republicans being impeached (or indicted or expelled) is just your usual witch hunt.

Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Dec 7, 2023

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:37

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

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Bar Ran Dun posted:

The median is right at no change in income and has been affected by inflation. The income 20-22 income change inflection point is basically right at the 50th percentile.

No the median American has not seen their wages go up unless one lumps them in with everyone less than median to make it look that way!

FRED says the median explicitly has gone up since 2019.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA646N

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:41

Young Freud: Nov 26, 2006

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The House has drafted the official impeachment inquiry. A vote is expected by early next week.

The full document is basically your standard impeachment process stuff:

- Authority to hold people in contempt for refusing to testify.
- Legal authority for access to bank and tax records and authority to make some private documents public.
- The minority members of the committee can submit subpoena requests, but they have to be approved by the House Judiciary Chairman.
- More money for staff and investigations.

https://twitter.com/maxpcohen/status/1732780308699725897

Representative government is a mistake.

We should remove impeachment power from Congress and just allow recall votes for federal elected offices.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:46

Roadie: Jun 30, 2013

Re: economy talk, it feels obvious to me that the "I am fine but the economy is doing bad" sentiment comes from interest rate changes taking homes from merely crushingly expensive to literally impossible to afford for a huge number of people.

Of course, that has to do more with decades of NIMBYism than anything else, but Americans are terminally brokebrained about housing and many will unironically argue that building more housing increases housing prices.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:54

predicto: Jul 22, 2004; THE DEM DEFENDER HAS LOGGED ON

zoux posted:

Also, all this unusual concern from poll-answering Americans didn�t exist prior to 2021, when personal sentiment matched actual economic indicators

This point keeps getting ignored in this thread. As does the fact that this disconnect doesn�t exist in any other country.

I swear, this thread is a microcosm of the problem. Just like other Americans, goons decide what they believe, dig in, and double down. And they resent it if someone points out facts that are difficult to fit into their beliefs.

predicto fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Dec 7, 2023

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:56

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

zoux posted:

Maybe everyone just has their own personal definition of what 'the economy" means.

Can I and other people around me get what I want or need?

Is a different question than :

What is the state of my household finances?

Metrics never capture the full reality of what they measure. Look at the problem this way. If one uses USDA�s metrics there is a huge deeply concerning spike in good insecurity that starts with the pandemic.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/charts/80069/trends.png?v=4132.7

If one takes many agencies and a few academic sources and averages them.

https://fortune.com/2023/01/19/how-bad-inflation-groceries-food-insecurity-rate-unchanged-poverty/

It doesn�t look like food security increased. So how does one figure what reality is actually doing when metrics are hosed like that. One goes and looks, and asks the folks directly involved (food banks) and it becomes clear that yes food insecurity has actually risen.

There is a larger systematic problem with the way a lot of economists analyze and how economists analyze is currently the primary way society looks it�s problems.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:56

FLIPADELPHIA: Apr 27, 2007; Heavy Shit; Grimey Drawer

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The unemployment rate is 3.9% and there were a record low number of layoffs. But, everyone, including Democrats and Independents to a degree, think it was a record year for most layoffs in history.

I wonder how much of this can be attributed to social media and LinkedIn. "Company X lays off 10,000 employees" didn't used to be something you'd really read about in the newspaper or hear on the news, but with LinkedIn and other SM, we heard about every layoff of note. This is especially true in tech.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:57

Pantaloon Pontiff: Jun 25, 2023

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

FRED says the median explicitly has gone up since 2019.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA646N

But that's raw income, not real income. From the same site, real median income is down from 2019
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N
and real household median income is further down.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

I don't think it's unreasonable for people to think 'my personal finances are not bad, but the economy is terrible' when real income is dropping but not drastically, and very visible prices like food have skyrocketed, and the outlook for major purchases like houses are worse. That doesn't seem 'irrational' to me, that seems like "I'm OK even though I'm a little behind, but this economy is out of control". For the bottom 50% who have seen a 2.5% raise in real wages, it makes even more sense - they've seen a slight rise in wages, but things like food prices are a larger chunk of their income, so "I'm not having trouble with my finances since I'm making more, but it's just keeping pace with this crazy economy, this economy is terrible"

FLIPADELPHIA posted:

I wonder how much of this can be attributed to social media and LinkedIn. "Company X lays off 10,000 employees" didn't used to be something you'd really read about in the newspaper or hear on the news, but with LinkedIn and other SM, we heard about every layoff of note. This is especially true in tech.

I don't think that's the case, I distinctly remember hearing about corporate layoffs in the news in the 1990s (including tech companies like IBM). There were prominent stories in larger papers about big companies, and local news would cover smaller layoffs. There was also a lot of general talk about whether there would be layoffs at any particular company if you were working at or near one.

I found this old article while googling about 90s layoffs just to double-check my memory, and stories like it were not uncommon:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1991-08-04-9103250589-story.html

Pantaloon Pontiff fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Dec 7, 2023

# ? Dec 7, 2023 17:59

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

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Pantaloon Pontiff posted:

But that's raw income, not real income. From the same site, real median income is down from 2019
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N
and real household median income is further down.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

The timeline only goes up to January 2022. Almost 2 years ago.

As of October 2023, real median personal income was up.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/realer.nr0.htm

Real disposable personal income was also up over 2019 as of October 2023.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DSPIC96

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:02

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

FLIPADELPHIA posted:

I wonder how much of this can be attributed to social media and LinkedIn. "Company X lays off 10,000 employees" didn't used to be something you'd really read about in the newspaper or hear on the news, but with LinkedIn and other SM, we heard about every layoff of note. This is especially true in tech.

Compounding it is a lot of times these huge layoffs are in news media companies. Yahoo just had a huge round of layoffs yesterday. If you are a journalist, than you are experiencing the apocalypic economy other Americans claim they, well not they, but other people, are experiencing. There's just no way to keep that sentiment out of reporting.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:02

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

There have also been huge waves of layoffs in the video game industry, which certain demographics and forum populations probably pay disproportionate attention to

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:05

Boris Galerkin: Dec 17, 2011; I don't understand why I can't harass people online. Seriously, somebody please explain why I shouldn't be allowed to stalk others on social media!

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

FRED says the median explicitly has gone up since 2019.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA646N

They also have data showing that people are saving less than they used to.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT

Pre pandemic it was above 5%. During pandemic it rocketed up to 20% and higher. Now it�s back down to below pre pandemic levels.

So what is personal saving?

quote:

Personal saving as a percentage of disposable personal income (DPI), frequently referred to as "the personal saving rate," is calculated as the ratio of personal saving to DPI.

Personal saving is equal to personal income less personal outlays and personal taxes

So I�m not sure if this counts pre-taxed savings (401k etc) where the person doing the savings never actually sees that money to begin with, or if it�s only counting post tax, ie what hits the bank account. I am assuming it counts only the latter though unless I find out otherwise. This is an important point because this type of post-tax savings represents most Americans.

So� the median wage is going up, cool. But the personal saving rate is in fact going down. This means people take home more cash, but they also spend more of it. It kinda cancels each other out.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:05

BougieBitch: Oct 2, 2013; Basic as hell

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

FRED says the median explicitly has gone up since 2019.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA646N

That's not inflation adjusted, though fair enough that bar ran dun said they got "hit by inflation" implying a loss of real wages rather than net neutral. Practically speaking, by my eyeballing I think the number linked basically amounts to a 0% change in real wages though assuming 4.7% and 8.0% (the average YoY inflation according to the fed). Technically I think it's a small loss, as I got 40549 when multiplying the 2020 number by the rates for 2021 and 2022 while the reported median is 40480, but I don't know what month I'm comparing to and I'm not going to take the time to use a real methodology.

You are definitely wrong if you measure from 2019 though, as the averaged YoY for 2020 is 1.2 and the median went down from 2019 to 2020, so including that span makes BRD right and you wrong on the main point of contention (is the median earner better off than before) so far as I can tell.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:05

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

FRED says the median explicitly has gone up since 2019.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA646N

Interesting because that�s also very much not what that Roosevelt center paper / graph I posted a couple days ago said. That�s pretty clear on that Fred graph. But I think this gets at the point I�m making. Some thing weird is going on and I think there is a metrics vs reality problem here.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:07

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

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

BougieBitch posted:

That's not inflation adjusted, though fair enough that bar ran dun said they got "hit by inflation" implying a loss of real wages rather than net neutral. Practically speaking, by my eyeballing I think the number linked basically amounts to a 0% change in real wages though assuming 4.7% and 8.0% (the average YoY inflation according to the fed). Technically I think it's a small loss, as I got 40549 when multiplying the 2020 number by the rates for 2021 and 2022 while the reported median is 40480, but I don't know what month I'm comparing to and I'm not going to take the time to use a real methodology.

You are definitely wrong if you measure from 2019 though, as the averaged YoY for 2020 is 1.2 and the median went down from 2019 to 2020, so including that span makes BRD right and you wrong on the main point of contention (is the median earner better off than before) so far as I can tell.

I posted the non-inflation adjusted link initially, but the correct one shows that real median personal income and real median disposable income as defined by FRED and the BEA are both up since 2019.

https://www.bea.gov/data/income-saving/personal-income

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DSPIC96

quote:

2023-10-01 16848.7
2019-10-01 15718.1

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 18:19 on Dec 7, 2023

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:11

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

haveblue posted:

There have also been huge waves of layoffs in the video game industry, which certain demographics and forum populations probably pay disproportionate attention to

Tech in general has done a lot of layoffs this year.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:12

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

Boris Galerkin posted:

So� the median wage is going up, cool. But the personal saving rate is in fact going down. This means people take home more cash, but they also spend more of it. It kinda cancels each other out.

People spend less and save more if they think the economy is bad. Another revealed preference that contradicts the polling data.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:16

Byzantine: Sep 1, 2007

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

For the 50% of Americans making less than $33k per year [pay is rising faster than inflation]

Definitely does not feel like it.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:20

Kagrenak: Sep 8, 2010

Bar Ran Dun posted:

Interesting because that’s also very much not what that Roosevelt center paper / graph I posted a couple days ago said. That’s pretty clear on that Fred graph. But I think this gets at the point I’m making. Some thing weird is going on and I think there is a metrics vs reality problem here.

I went back and looked and It's because those graphs also only went to Jan/Feb 2022.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:21

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

https://twitter.com/metzgov/status/1732791096491577616

Former middle school principal will have this on his permanent record.

I still think it was an accident but whatever.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:25

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.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

This could be a major thing, but we have to see how it plays out.

The Biden administration is using a legal authority that has never been used before in an attempt to lower the price of prescription drugs.

The short version:

- Any commercial drug that was partially funded by the U.S. government has a provision granting "march-in rights" on the drug if the drug is not "accessible to the public."

This means that the U.S. government can license drugs that are under patent to people who do not hold the patent to produce them.

The intent of the law is for use in situations where a drug is developed with the government, but turns out to be unprofitable or not viable with current technology. If it becomes viable or there is a public need for the drug, then the government can license someone else to produce the drug, even if it is under patent.

- The Biden administration is using a different legal argument in an attempt to trigger march-in rights for some drugs.

Essentially, they are arguing that a drug being prohibitively expensive counts as "not being available to the general public" and can trigger legal authority to assert march-in rights.

This essentially requires companies with drugs under patent that were funded in part or in full by the U.S. government to lower their prices or allow other manufacturers to sell the drug.

https://twitter.com/MorePerfectUS/status/1732776786566488168

Other proposals that are included in this package:

- Launch a program to review hospital merger and acquisition rules to prevent anti-competitive practices or acquisitions.

- Review the "financialization" of the healthcare industry and the practices of providers being bought by private equity firms and implement new regulations if their patient outcomes or prices diverge from the average performance.

- Require Medicare Advantage plans to submit much more detailed data on patient outcomes, costs, ownership, network partnerships, and reimbursement rates. Using this data, they will complete a comprehensive review of the Medicare Advantage program and make adjustments to who is allowed to participate and what practices are allowed.

- Stop insurance brokers from being offered lavish commissions from insurance companies for directing people to their Medicare advantage plans over traditional Medicare or competitors' Medicare Advantage plans.

- Implement new advertising restrictions for Medicare Advantage plans.

Plans that advertise dental and other benefits must actually provide their customers with those benefits. If they advertise benefits, but don't make them available to 2% of their customers or more for any reason, such as difficult referral rules, network restrictions, or other things that make them practically difficult to provide, then they can no longer advertise those services.

- Establish a federal floor of staffing levels for nursing homes that get Medicaid dollars.

Additionally, place limits on how many nursing homes a private equity firm can own in a given region.

- Reform the organ transplant system.

Ending the rule that requires the government contract with a single private entity to provide a monopoly on managing the organ transplant system. Instead, allow other organizations and non-profits who produce better results to take over the contract in areas where the monopoly is underperforming.

Several other different payment and regulation reforms.

Full list and press announcement:

Several of these are fantastic, and radical on a level I'd never thought I'd see the government pursue. The Bayh-Dole act stuff, which has apparently been in development for some time to reach this point, was something I'd talked up in academia years ago, but it was regarded as implausibly extreme.

I'm a lot less sanguine about the hearing aids and organ donation deregulatory actions, but I need more context on those.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:27

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Byzantine posted:

Definitely does not feel like it.

Because it isn't accurate for an individual. Nobody is getting raises to match inflation at. To get that benefit you have to get a new job with more pay, which means nobody making minimum wage saw any raise in wages and just got to enjoy getting kicked in the balls by inflation. But just because they have the opportunity to have a wage increase everything is just fine according to the experts.

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:28

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

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Byzantine posted:

Definitely does not feel like it.

It's overall, so not everyone under median income will be in there, but most of them are. It's also since 2019/pre-pandemic. The back half of 2021 and almost all of 2022 legitimately were worse for the vast majority of people. The first half of 2021 was a significant boost in real income due to the Biden stimulus bill and the December 2020 stimulus bill, so there is probably also a "coming down" effect from that high.

Also, I'm jealous if you can remember what 2019 was like. Feels like there has been a time compression of the last 10 years into 2020 through 2023.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Dec 7, 2023

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 27, 2024 22:01

BougieBitch: Oct 2, 2013; Basic as hell

I had a somewhat horrifying thought that makes perfect goddamn sense: the reason this is happening could easily be because people paid down a huge amount of debt during the pandemic.

This isn't an authoritative source, but I think it should at least be true in terms of directions and magnitude: the average American now has $8,000 less (non-mortgage) debt than they did in 2019: https://www.google.com/amp/s/money.com/average-american-personal-debt-amount/%3famp=true

I did some kicking around government sources and it seems likely this might be bourne out by the data at least - mortgages seem to be the largest component of increase, followed by car loans. Meanwhile "revolving loans" which I assume to mean payday-loan-style debt, shrunk enormously starting in 2020.

People are probably pretty likely to correlate their debt burden to their personal financial situation, especially debts that have short repayment windows, and a lot of people are doing much better by that metric. This is the part of "your financial situation" that people have the most agency or sense of responsibility about, even beyond income/wages or whatever.

It doesn't inherently explain the decoupling from "my situation" to "the economy as a whole", but it does provide at least one factor that could explain personal optimism but bad economy vibes. If you were on the payday loan treadmill but got off it as a result of pandemic assistance and now don't have that source of precarity, it is easy to see how you might consider your personal economic situation to be much improved. At the same time, since that change wasn't the result of career advancement or wage improvement, it may be that people don't think of that as "the economy", and it would also explain consumer spending increases to some degree.

Heck Yes! Loam! posted:

Because it isn't accurate for an individual. Nobody is getting raises to match inflation at. To get that benefit you have to get a new job with more pay, which means nobody making minimum wage saw any raise in wages and just got to enjoy getting kicked in the balls by inflation. But just because they have the opportunity to have a wage increase everything is just fine according to the experts.

This is just wrong: if you work minimum wage you almost certain have changed jobs since 2020, you probably got fired or hours cut during the pandemic and had every opportunity to switch jobs as a result. There's a reason those are the sectors that have since huge nominal increases and decent real increases in wages. It's nonsense to try to say that service workers are the ones kicked in the balls on wages when the data shows that it mostly is the income range for salaried workers that got hosed.

Hourly work is exceptionally easy to quit and start elsewhere - that's probably a big reason why the wage increases are concentrated there! Groups that change jobs infrequently are much more likely to be impacted - if you have to wait until annual review for any pay changes and you don't feel like quitting after one year of bad raises, then you are gonna lose income compared to people that are working part-time and are fine to just pick a different job to work.

In the long-run the rich will figure out how to get richer, but it seems like for now at least the sudden spike in inflation has caught higher earners off guard because we had such a long period of ~1% inflation. People may take a minute to figure out how to say "no" to a 2% pay bump, but hourly workers are entertaining job offers every time they walk into a store with a "now hiring" sign, and in my experience all of those have the starting pay printed right on them - good loving luck doing the same for salaries.

If you want to make an argument about people losing out, the class of people to focus on is probably tipped workers and/or undocumented workers - those people have no real relationship to the minimum wage though, and bringing it up is a red herring

BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Dec 7, 2023

# ? Dec 7, 2023 18:31

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »