Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Obamacare's real horror story

The real horror story is long term just like pretty much every large scale government program. Most of those who go through Obamacare will opt for Medicaid. However, at the same time, physicians are increasingly opting out of accepting Medicaid as they find they can't afford the government's repayment formula and delays. We're going to learn the hard way that health insurance doesn't equal health care.
In addition, people are taking high deductible health care plans. Just like subprime loans, this sounds great until people can't afford the payments. As the baby boomers retire en masse, this will build up in numbers affecting a large number of people at once.
There are still going to be many people who will choose not to buy insurance nor are they going to pay the penalty no matter how many bills the government sends. We have yet to see what happens with that. Are we going to criminalize not having health insurance?
These are just the tip of the unintentional consequences of Obamacare. The usual long run consequence of massive federal programs is to build up towards a large scale economic drop because the government is a very poor allocator of resources especially in the long run, it works in broad strokes often ignoring the needs of individuals, and it is too slow to micromanage such programs to adjust to changing environments.

Sunday, March 9, 2014

Great Depression II

The US government targets a straight line NGDP rate of growth always heading up though massive debt spending and loose monetary policies since the 1980s at least:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/jn3H-jlEAJAhENWSSZ7HRroSxaUKIONPnPd6ONUSsLgUw_rs8IiVmtad87WAZd2XXbzrzCA_yDH0BseJXhmPnhLQ2D0h_GQOgElgABugFsVUqw1-hJo4

Unfortunately, the rate of sustainable economic growth, this would the NGDP that would occur naturally without any short term dips or rises, has been flattening since the 1970s as the cost of energy sustains nominal rises primarily due to the rise in price of fossil fuels with no alternative being able to be as cheap as fossil fuels nominally were before the 1970s.

What this means is that there has been an increasing divergence between the two rates, and it is the reason why the Great Recession, which was basically an economic correction to bring the two rates closer together, was so large in amplitude. Because the government's reaction through its massive spending and continuing of loose monetary policies, we are basically put back where we were and set up for an even bigger economic correction in the future that will be bigger than the Great Recession and most likely will be bigger than the Great Depression in every way.

In order to prevent this Great Depression II, there are two basic paths. The first, and unfortunately not feasible, is to find an energy source that is at least as nominally cheap as fossil fuels were before the 1970s. All alternative and renewable sources of energy can only wait until fossil fuel prices rises to breakeven with them rather than being able to become cheaper. The second is for the government to target a flatter rate of NGDP growth by gradually pulling back on debt spending and tightening loose monetary policies so that the targeted NGDP rate growth is closer to the rate of sustainable economic growth. This is going to be unbelievably painful medicine because of how overleveraged we are. But it actually would be preferable to a Great Depression II.

Monday, February 24, 2014

Change in buying power since 2000

This is an effort to use the census HINC-05 tables to get an idea of how buying power has changed between the poor, middle class and rich. The following table shows the incomes at the division line between the five quintiles of the population:

Year Between First and Second Quintile Between Second and Middle Quintile Between Middle and Fourth Quintile Between Fourth and Highest Quintile
2000 17955 33005 52265 81960
2001 17960 33312 53000 83500
2002 17916 33377 53151 84016
2003 17984 34000 54440 86860
2004 18500 34738 55331 88030
2005 19178 36000 57658 91705
2006 20032 37771 60000 97030
2007 20300 39100 62000 100000
2008 20712 39000 62750 100250
2009 20450 38530 61800 100000
2010 20000 38040 61720 100065
2011 20260 38515 62434 101577
2012 20593 39736 64554 104086
2013 20900 40187 65502 105900
2014 21430 41167 68200 112254

The following table is the inflation adjusted version of the above table in year 2000 dollars:

Year Between First and Second Quintile Between Second and Middle Quintile Between Middle and Fourth Quintile Between Fourth and Highest Quintile
2000 17955 33005 52265 81960
2001 17677 32217 51257 82185
2002 17221 31771 50593 80755
2003 16964 31606 50606 81932
2004 16893 31689 50475 80383
2005 16936 31791 50917 80985
2006 17259 32259 51244 83598
2007 17013 32770 51962 83810
2008 16723 31489 50665 80943
2009 16578 31235 50099 81066
2010 15958 30353 49245 79841
2011 15710 29865 48412 78763
2012 15639 30178 49026 79049
2013 15638 30069 49010 79238
2014 15782 30317 50226 82669

The table below shows the above table in terms of delta from the year 2000 values:

Year Between First and Second Quintile Between Second and Middle Quintile Between Middle and Fourth Quintile Between Fourth and Highest Quintile
2000 0 0 0 0
2001 -278 -788 -1008 225
2002 -734 -1234 -1672 -1205
2003 -991 -1399 -1659 -28
2004 -1062 -1316 -1790 -1577
2005 -1019 -1214 -1348 -975
2006 -696 -746 -1021 1638
2007 -942 -235 -303 1850
2008 -1232 -1516 -1600 -1017
2009 -1377 -1770 -2166 -894
2010 -1997 -2652 -3020 -2119
2011 -2245 -3140 -3853 -3197
2012 -2316 -2827 -3239 -2911
2013 -2317 -2936 -3255 -2722
2014 -2173 -2688 -2039 709

Finally, the following link is the graph of the above table data:

http://i.imgur.com/SSNymgo.png

What we see is that compared to 2000, income The highest quintile is the only one to recover from the Great Recession. Despite all the legislation by the Democrats to help the poor, economically it has all ended up helping the richest of our population instead.