Why, you aren't going to change your mind based on what I say...

Seems to me like one man's research ought not be taken as the be all end all of reasons on a given topic. Right?

---

Seems to me like one man's research ought not be taken as the be all end all of reasons on a given topic. Right?

 

As long as that man is me I don't see what the problem is...

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

As long as that man is me I don't see what the problem is...

and he's so humble ladies  :teehee:

---

With your model, food stamps would have created a market where milk, bread, and cheese would also sky rocket in price... thank goodness we stopped subsidizing food, otherwise we'd be paying $1,000 a gallon for milk. Lol, are you paying that much for milk?

 

Medical insurance can only be used to treat illness, you can't swap out a colonoscopy for an appendectomy when the price of one increases more than the other. Food stamps can be used on lots of things, and a person will spend them to get the most bang for the buck. Still, most foods are more expensive than they were in 2008. Have you noticed the increase in the price of beef since food stamp handouts nearly doubled?

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Medical insurance can only be used to treat illness, you can't swap out a colonoscopy for an appendectomy when the price of one increases more than the other. Food stamps can be used on lots of things, and a person will spend them to get the most bang for the buck. Still, most foods are more expensive than they were in 2008. Have you noticed the increase in the price of beef since food stamp handouts nearly doubled?

I read that as beer and panicked.

---

I read that as beer and panicked.

 

Beer is up about $1.00 a sixer this year.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Medical insurance can only be used to treat illness, you can't swap out a colonoscopy for an appendectomy when the price of one increases more than the other. Food stamps can be used on lots of things, and a person will spend them to get the most bang for the buck. Still, most foods are more expensive than they were in 2008. Have you noticed the increase in the price of beef since food stamp handouts nearly doubled?

 

Medicare is also compulsory while food stamps are not. 

 

And the price of all foods is way up the last 40 years, also because of different forms of government subsidization.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

and he's so humble ladies  :teehee:

 

I'm humble enough to believe that people should be free to live their own lives free of government interference because I'm not smart enough to decide what you need. Not at all like those everywhere who think they're smart enough to decide what is best for you.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Beer is up about $1.00 a sixer this year.

6ers of Rolling Rock tall boys stay at 5.99 here, the hipster would revolt otherwise.

---

Medical insurance can only be used to treat illness, you can't swap out a colonoscopy for an appendectomy when the price of one increases more than the other. Food stamps can be used on lots of things, and a person will spend them to get the most bang for the buck. Still, most foods are more expensive than they were in 2008. Have you noticed the increase in the price of beef since food stamp handouts nearly doubled?

It's called supply and demand. It's called fixed costs. It's called inflation over time. It's called economics.


My point remains valid, and is why you cannot pinpoint rising price of healthcare to LBJ and government subsidies.


Just like food stamps, Medicare covers an overall package. Therefore, we should be seeing an exponential rise in food costs if your faulty logic based on a spurious correlation was correct. It's not. Subsidies, ie Medicare, is not the cause for the exponential rise in healthcare costs. It's more complicated than that. There are many variables that cause this rise.


I know it would fit the world view of evil subsidies from the bad federal government to be the culprit. But unfortunately for some, it does not work that way.


Beef has gone up in price because of increased demand, increased costs to produce beef--including land costs, labor costs, transportation costs, feed costs, water costs, inflation, etc, with supply opportunities that while are still good, are not keeping up with the demand.


To be fair, you can say food stamps increase the demand, sure. But the system isn't breaking down the way your model would describe. And that is because your hypotheses that government subsidies creates an artificial price bubble is incorrect.

---

It's called supply and demand. It's called fixed costs. It's called inflation over time. It's called economics.


My point remains valid, and is why you cannot pinpoint rising price of healthcare to LBJ and government subsidies.


Just like food stamps, Medicare covers an overall package. Therefore, we should be seeing an exponential rise in food costs if your faulty logic based on a spurious correlation was correct. It's not. Subsidies, ie Medicare, is not the cause for the exponential rise in healthcare costs. It's more complicated than that. There are many variables that cause this rise.


I know it would fit the world view of evil subsidies from the bad federal government to be the culprit. But unfortunately for some, it does not work that way.

Beef has gone up in price because of increased demand, increased costs to produce beef--including land costs, labor costs, transportation costs, feed costs, water costs, inflation, etc, with supply opportunities that while are still good, are not keeping up with the demand.


To be fair, you can say food stamps increase the demand, sure. But the system isn't breaking down the way your model would describe. And that is because your hypotheses that government subsidies creates an artificial price bubble is incorrect.

 

That's not the only reason that the price of beef is being driven up.  How about the over-regulation and the taxing of cow farts?  Farmers and ranchers pay huge sums of money to the imperial federal government for reasons such as global warming climate change.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

That's not the only reason that the price of beef is being driven up.  How about the over-regulation and the taxing of cow [BAD WORD REMOVED]?  Farmers and ranchers pay huge sums of money to the imperial federal government for reasons such as global warming climate change.

 

I think a major factor in beef prices is subsidies for the use of corn to make ethanol. That diverts corn from cattle feed, making it more expensive, as well as taking away grazing land to grow corn. Other major food grains have also increased in price because of land now used to make fuel.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

It's called supply and demand. It's called fixed costs. It's called inflation over time. It's called economics.


My point remains valid, and is why you cannot pinpoint rising price of healthcare to LBJ and government subsidies.


Just like food stamps, Medicare covers an overall package. Therefore, we should be seeing an exponential rise in food costs if your faulty logic based on a spurious correlation was correct. It's not. Subsidies, ie Medicare, is not the cause for the exponential rise in healthcare costs. It's more complicated than that. There are many variables that cause this rise.


I know it would fit the world view of evil subsidies from the bad federal government to be the culprit. But unfortunately for some, it does not work that way.


Beef has gone up in price because of increased demand, increased costs to produce beef--including land costs, labor costs, transportation costs, feed costs, water costs, inflation, etc, with supply opportunities that while are still good, are not keeping up with the demand.


To be fair, you can say food stamps increase the demand, sure. But the system isn't breaking down the way your model would describe. And that is because your hypotheses that government subsidies creates an artificial price bubble is incorrect.

 

Farm subsidies = higher prices

 

Energy subsidies = higher prices

 

Tuition subsidies = higher prices

 

Healthcare subsidies = higher prices

 

Government involvement in the free market = no free market

 

These are pretty basic and easily proven economic concepts, so simple that only very smart and highly educated leftists can't understand them. 

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Farm subsidies = higher prices

 

Energy subsidies = higher prices

 

Tuition subsidies = higher prices

 

Healthcare subsidies = higher prices

 

Government involvement in the free market = no free market

 

These are pretty basic and easily proven economic concepts, so simple that only very smart and highly educated leftists can't understand them. 

oil subsidies?

---

It's called supply and demand. It's called fixed costs. It's called inflation over time. It's called economics.


My point remains valid, and is why you cannot pinpoint rising price of healthcare to LBJ and government subsidies.


Just like food stamps, Medicare covers an overall package. Therefore, we should be seeing an exponential rise in food costs if your faulty logic based on a spurious correlation was correct. It's not. Subsidies, ie Medicare, is not the cause for the exponential rise in healthcare costs. It's more complicated than that. There are many variables that cause this rise.


I know it would fit the world view of evil subsidies from the bad federal government to be the culprit. But unfortunately for some, it does not work that way.


Beef has gone up in price because of increased demand, increased costs to produce beef--including land costs, labor costs, transportation costs, feed costs, water costs, inflation, etc, with supply opportunities that while are still good, are not keeping up with the demand.


To be fair, you can say food stamps increase the demand, sure. But the system isn't breaking down the way your model would describe. And that is because your hypotheses that government subsidies creates an artificial price bubble is incorrect.

 

Supply and demand are what was being discussed. If you give people a pile of money to spend on something, the demand goes up.


 

My point was that your food stamp analogy doesn't invalidate the claim that Medicare caused the price of medicine to skyrocket, because they are two different forms of subsidy. While food stamps may be a factor in the increased price of food, the requirement to choose between foods limits the effect. If Pepsi raises their prices some people will switch to Coke and use the savings to avoid not being able to afford Cheerios. Food stamps come in a limited amount each month. That's not the case with medical costs. You don't have to forego one procedure by paying the full price for another.


 

You may be right that Medicare wasn't to blame, or only partly to blame. 
But food prices vs. food stamps is not a valid comparison. I personally agree with Eric that insurance is the biggest factor. Health insurance may have been available before 1965, but employer-sponsored health insurance became standard about that time. The government giving tax breaks to employers but not to individuals amplified the problem.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Farm subsidies = higher prices


Energy subsidies = higher prices


Tuition subsidies = higher prices


Healthcare subsidies = higher prices


Government involvement in the free market = no free market


These are pretty basic and easily proven economic concepts, so simple that only very smart and highly educated leftists can't understand them.

Try thinking critically and on your own. You may come to an original thought. It's actually fun.


Just cuz u say subsidy and higher prices doesn't make that spurious correlation any more true. As my food stamp example had proven. :-)

---

Supply and demand are what was being discussed. If you give people a pile of money to spend on something, the demand goes up.


 

My point was that your food stamp analogy doesn't invalidate the claim that Medicare caused the price of medicine to skyrocket, because they are two different forms of subsidy. While food stamps may be a factor in the increased price of food, the requirement to choose between foods limits the effect. If Pepsi raises their prices some people will switch to Coke and use the savings to avoid not being able to afford Cheerios. Food stamps come in a limited amount each month. That's not the case with medical costs. You don't have to forego one procedure by paying the full price for another.


 

You may be right that Medicare wasn't to blame, or only partly to blame. 
But food prices vs. food stamps is not a valid comparison. I personally agree with Eric that insurance is the biggest factor. Health insurance may have been available before 1965, but employer-sponsored health insurance became standard about that time. The government giving tax breaks to employers but not to individuals amplified the problem.

I'm enjoying this conversation. I can make a bridge stand up and keep a hospital from falling but economics is lost on me. 

---

oil subsidies?

 

Don't buy the spin. Most of the 'subsidy' is from tax write offs for business expenses specific to the business. Most of the rest is to make heating oil affordable to poor people. Even including both as 'subsidies' it's insignificant per
 unit of energy compared to the subsidies for wind, solar, and ethanol.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Don't buy the spin. Most of the 'subsidy' is from tax write offs for business expenses specific to the business. Most of the rest is to make heating oil affordable to poor people. Even including both as 'subsidies' it's insignificant per
 unit of energy compared to the subsidies for wind, solar, and ethanol.

I am sure it would be lower as alternative sources are not nearly as efficient as oil. 

 

That aside I don't think businesses should get tax deductions. 

---

I am sure it would be lower as alternative sources are not nearly as efficient as oil. 

 

That aside I don't think businesses should get tax deductions. 

 

I'm not too concerned about tax deductions, since that's just the government taking less.


 

IMO, direct payment subsidies, price controls, and protective regulation are worse. See 'Big Sugar' for a prime example of government gone too far.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"