A new study reports that the U.S health system is the most expensive in the world, yet its quality among the industrialized world's worst.
The report, the second national scorecard from this influential health policy research group, shows that the United States spends more than twice as much on each person for health care as most other industrialized countries. But it has fallen to last place among those countries in preventing deaths through use of timely and effective medical care, according to the report by the Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit research group in New York.
The report highlights how inefficient the U.S. system of private medical insurance is documenting that administrative costs are much higher at about 7.5 percent, than in other countries.
Bringing those administrative costs down to the level of 5 percent or so as in Germany and Switzerland, where private insurers still play a significant role, would save an estimated $50 billion a year in the United States.
Read more here.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Summerfest attendance falls-C.C. Sabathia meets the substitution effect
Last week the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that attendance was up at Miller Park, but down at Summerfest.
MJS reporter Don Walker wrote that more than 400,000 fans, a record, visited Miller Park during the Brewers' ten-day homestand, noting the team was "well on track to hit 3 million in attendance, a franchise record."
The poor economy and high gasoline prices, he wrote, didn't seem to be hurting sales.
On the very same day, another MJS reporter, Tom Held, blamed the poor economy for much of the decline in Summerfest's attendance: "The hosts of Milwaukee’s Summerfest learned this year how tough it can be to throw an outdoor party in rainy weather and a slumping economy."
Attendance at the 11-day music festival on the lakefront slumped to 831,024, the smallest crowd since 1993. Revenue from ticket, food and beverage sales also feel by roughly 4% below the previous year.
So according to the MJS, rising gasoline and foods prices and the weak economy didn't hurt attendance and hurt attendance. Hmmmmmmmmmmm!
History tells us that rising joblessness, inflation and declining real wages reduce discretionary income and expenditures. Since entertainment is a discretionary expenditure, it is among the first causalities of a slumping economy.
But if the weak economy was causing entertainment expenditures to decline, it should have effected the consumption of similar products like Summerfest and Brewers baseball similarly.
Perhaps there is a different, more coherent explanation for this contradictory experience. Call it C.C. Sabathia meets the "substitution effect."
Most economists agree that professional sports don't increase a community's aggregate entertainment spending; it simply redistributes it from one form of entertainment to another.
Brewers' fans have relatively inflexible and limited entertainment budgets. The money they spend on a attending a game is a substitute for other entertainment such as the movies or Summerfest. So when the Brewers are hot, fielding a competitive team, and management is making aggressive moves to improve the team by trading for Cy Young winner C.C. Sabathia, consumers in the Milwaukee area will spend more on baseball and less on other forms of entertainment like Summerfest.
This analysis received an unexpected endorsement recently from none other than the Seattle, or should I say, Oklahoma City Supersonics.
That's right, the Supersonics who are leaving Seattle for the greener pastures of Oklahoma City argued in U.S. District Court that the team's departure would not hurt the city's economy because there is no net economic gain from professional sports.
"The financial issue is simple, and the city's analysts agree, there will be no net economic loss if the Sonics leave Seattle. Entertainment dollars not spent on the Sonics will be spent on Seattle's many other sports and entertainment options. Seattleites will not reduce their entertainment budget simply because the Sonics leave," the Sonics said in the court brief.
This is, of course, exactly the opposite of what the Sonics had claimed when asking for taxpayer help to build a new arena. And it conflicts with what boosters in Oklahoma City are saying in their attempt to pass a $100 million tax package to spruce up its six-year-old Ford Center and build a practice facility for the team.
But it concurs with what economists, other than those paid by major league franchises, have been arguing for years. And it certainly explains why Summerfest's attendance plummeted while the Brewer's attendance soared.
MJS reporter Don Walker wrote that more than 400,000 fans, a record, visited Miller Park during the Brewers' ten-day homestand, noting the team was "well on track to hit 3 million in attendance, a franchise record."
The poor economy and high gasoline prices, he wrote, didn't seem to be hurting sales.
On the very same day, another MJS reporter, Tom Held, blamed the poor economy for much of the decline in Summerfest's attendance: "The hosts of Milwaukee’s Summerfest learned this year how tough it can be to throw an outdoor party in rainy weather and a slumping economy."
Attendance at the 11-day music festival on the lakefront slumped to 831,024, the smallest crowd since 1993. Revenue from ticket, food and beverage sales also feel by roughly 4% below the previous year.
So according to the MJS, rising gasoline and foods prices and the weak economy didn't hurt attendance and hurt attendance. Hmmmmmmmmmmm!
History tells us that rising joblessness, inflation and declining real wages reduce discretionary income and expenditures. Since entertainment is a discretionary expenditure, it is among the first causalities of a slumping economy.
But if the weak economy was causing entertainment expenditures to decline, it should have effected the consumption of similar products like Summerfest and Brewers baseball similarly.
Perhaps there is a different, more coherent explanation for this contradictory experience. Call it C.C. Sabathia meets the "substitution effect."
Most economists agree that professional sports don't increase a community's aggregate entertainment spending; it simply redistributes it from one form of entertainment to another.
Brewers' fans have relatively inflexible and limited entertainment budgets. The money they spend on a attending a game is a substitute for other entertainment such as the movies or Summerfest. So when the Brewers are hot, fielding a competitive team, and management is making aggressive moves to improve the team by trading for Cy Young winner C.C. Sabathia, consumers in the Milwaukee area will spend more on baseball and less on other forms of entertainment like Summerfest.
This analysis received an unexpected endorsement recently from none other than the Seattle, or should I say, Oklahoma City Supersonics.
That's right, the Supersonics who are leaving Seattle for the greener pastures of Oklahoma City argued in U.S. District Court that the team's departure would not hurt the city's economy because there is no net economic gain from professional sports.
"The financial issue is simple, and the city's analysts agree, there will be no net economic loss if the Sonics leave Seattle. Entertainment dollars not spent on the Sonics will be spent on Seattle's many other sports and entertainment options. Seattleites will not reduce their entertainment budget simply because the Sonics leave," the Sonics said in the court brief.
This is, of course, exactly the opposite of what the Sonics had claimed when asking for taxpayer help to build a new arena. And it conflicts with what boosters in Oklahoma City are saying in their attempt to pass a $100 million tax package to spruce up its six-year-old Ford Center and build a practice facility for the team.
But it concurs with what economists, other than those paid by major league franchises, have been arguing for years. And it certainly explains why Summerfest's attendance plummeted while the Brewer's attendance soared.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Taxes play no role in MillerCoors decision to locate HQ in high cost Chicago
MillerCoors LLC has picked downtown Chicago, despite its higher costs and high corporate tax rates, as the location for its new corporate headquarters.
Metropolitan Milwaukee, already reeling from the loss of 1200 family supporting jobs at Delphi and Midwest's plans to eliminate another 1200 positions, will lose between 150 and 175 jobs as a result of this decision.
In explaining the decision, MillerCoors President Tom Long explained that Chicago was a more attractive location than either Milwaukee or Denver for the marketing talent that MillerCoors needs to be successful. He also sighted the importance of O'Hare International Airport, the world's second busiest airport which offers global air connections. Long said taxes were not a factor in MillerCoors decision!
The WMC and other free market extremists like Scott Walker who have reduced economic development strategy to a one note song of cutting taxes should take note. Access to skilled employees and a world class transportation infrastructure trumped lower cost real estate and taxes. Competitive advantage requires investing in the labor force and in the parks, amenities and communications and transportation systems that make an urban area attractive and functional.
As former Republican Secretary of Commerce and Alcoa CEO, Paul O'Neil told Congress when asked about the role tax cuts play in attracting investment:". ‘As a businessman I never made an investment decision based on the tax code. If you give money away I will take it, but good business people don’t do things because of inducements.”
Metropolitan Milwaukee, already reeling from the loss of 1200 family supporting jobs at Delphi and Midwest's plans to eliminate another 1200 positions, will lose between 150 and 175 jobs as a result of this decision.
In explaining the decision, MillerCoors President Tom Long explained that Chicago was a more attractive location than either Milwaukee or Denver for the marketing talent that MillerCoors needs to be successful. He also sighted the importance of O'Hare International Airport, the world's second busiest airport which offers global air connections. Long said taxes were not a factor in MillerCoors decision!
The WMC and other free market extremists like Scott Walker who have reduced economic development strategy to a one note song of cutting taxes should take note. Access to skilled employees and a world class transportation infrastructure trumped lower cost real estate and taxes. Competitive advantage requires investing in the labor force and in the parks, amenities and communications and transportation systems that make an urban area attractive and functional.
As former Republican Secretary of Commerce and Alcoa CEO, Paul O'Neil told Congress when asked about the role tax cuts play in attracting investment:". ‘As a businessman I never made an investment decision based on the tax code. If you give money away I will take it, but good business people don’t do things because of inducements.”
Monday, July 14, 2008
Straight talk on Iraq from Barack Obama
One of the main reasons that underdog, Barack Obama won the Democratic presidential primary was because he consistently opposed the war in Iraq.
Last week Republicans and their allies, like Senator Joe Lieberman, began to attack Obama, suggesting he had changed his position when he said that he would listen to the generals in Iraq about how to organize a U.S. withdrawal.
Would they have preferred that he not listen to the generals on the ground about how to sucessfully withdraw our troops?
Obama has been consistent on this issue-opposing the misguided war, arguing that it has diverted resources from the real fight against terrorism, overstretched our military, increased sympathy for terrorism throughout the middle east; squandered resources needed for domestic needs, and made us less safe.
In a clear editorial today Obama writes:
...on my first day in office, I would give the military a new mission: ending this war.
As I’ve said many times, we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 — two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began...
Ending the war is essential to meeting our broader strategic goals, starting in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the Taliban is resurgent and Al Qaeda has a safe haven. Iraq is not the central front in the war on terrorism, and it never has been. As Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently pointed out, we won’t have sufficient resources to finish the job in Afghanistan until we reduce our commitment to Iraq.
In this campaign, there are honest differences over Iraq, and we should discuss them with the thoroughness they deserve. Unlike Senator McCain, I would make it absolutely clear that we seek no presence in Iraq similar to our permanent bases in South Korea, and would redeploy our troops out of Iraq and focus on the broader security challenges that we face. But for far too long, those responsible for the greatest strategic blunder in the recent history of American foreign policy have ignored useful debate in favor of making false charges about flip-flops and surrender.
It’s not going to work this time. It’s time to end this war.
Despite what McCain may believe, the Iraq war which has claimed over 4000 American lives and left over 30,000 of our troops wounded, is not a figment of our imagination. And opposing this war is not whining!
No flip flop! No whining! Just straight talk from Barack Obama
Read the entire piece.
Last week Republicans and their allies, like Senator Joe Lieberman, began to attack Obama, suggesting he had changed his position when he said that he would listen to the generals in Iraq about how to organize a U.S. withdrawal.
Would they have preferred that he not listen to the generals on the ground about how to sucessfully withdraw our troops?
Obama has been consistent on this issue-opposing the misguided war, arguing that it has diverted resources from the real fight against terrorism, overstretched our military, increased sympathy for terrorism throughout the middle east; squandered resources needed for domestic needs, and made us less safe.
In a clear editorial today Obama writes:
...on my first day in office, I would give the military a new mission: ending this war.
As I’ve said many times, we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 — two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began...
Ending the war is essential to meeting our broader strategic goals, starting in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the Taliban is resurgent and Al Qaeda has a safe haven. Iraq is not the central front in the war on terrorism, and it never has been. As Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently pointed out, we won’t have sufficient resources to finish the job in Afghanistan until we reduce our commitment to Iraq.
In this campaign, there are honest differences over Iraq, and we should discuss them with the thoroughness they deserve. Unlike Senator McCain, I would make it absolutely clear that we seek no presence in Iraq similar to our permanent bases in South Korea, and would redeploy our troops out of Iraq and focus on the broader security challenges that we face. But for far too long, those responsible for the greatest strategic blunder in the recent history of American foreign policy have ignored useful debate in favor of making false charges about flip-flops and surrender.
It’s not going to work this time. It’s time to end this war.
Despite what McCain may believe, the Iraq war which has claimed over 4000 American lives and left over 30,000 of our troops wounded, is not a figment of our imagination. And opposing this war is not whining!
No flip flop! No whining! Just straight talk from Barack Obama
Read the entire piece.
Friday, July 11, 2008
McCain advisor: Americans are whiners who suffer from a psychological recesion!
Yesterday, life long Milwaukee resident and safety assistant with Milwaukee Public Schools, Travis Griffin, sized up the dismal state of the economy when he told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: "It's the blue-collar kind of thing...You need two or three jobs to make things work for yourself...But you just do it"
On the same day that Griffin was stoically commenting on how hard it has become to make ends meet, Phil Gramm, Republican presidential nominee John McCain's campaign co-chair and top economic advisor, denied the nation's growing economic problems, declaring that Americans suffered from a psychological recession, not a real one and that Americans like Griffin had become a nation of whiners.
Take a look at this video!
John McCain, who has acknowledged that he knows very little about economics, tried to dissociate himself from Gramm's tone deaf comments. But as this video shows McCain has argued repeatedly that the nation's economic problems are mainly psychological.
Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's response was that the nation's economic problems are real, not psychological. People who are losing their jobs, their healthcare and their homes, folks like Griffin, are struggling to fill their gas tanks, keep the lights on, pay their mortgage and piece together an income. They don't need therapy, they need help.
Who do you think has it right-John McCain and Phil Gramm or Travis Griffin and Barack Obama?
On the same day that Griffin was stoically commenting on how hard it has become to make ends meet, Phil Gramm, Republican presidential nominee John McCain's campaign co-chair and top economic advisor, denied the nation's growing economic problems, declaring that Americans suffered from a psychological recession, not a real one and that Americans like Griffin had become a nation of whiners.
Take a look at this video!
John McCain, who has acknowledged that he knows very little about economics, tried to dissociate himself from Gramm's tone deaf comments. But as this video shows McCain has argued repeatedly that the nation's economic problems are mainly psychological.
Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's response was that the nation's economic problems are real, not psychological. People who are losing their jobs, their healthcare and their homes, folks like Griffin, are struggling to fill their gas tanks, keep the lights on, pay their mortgage and piece together an income. They don't need therapy, they need help.
Who do you think has it right-John McCain and Phil Gramm or Travis Griffin and Barack Obama?
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
For sale signs popping up like dandelions in Oak Creek
Steve Jagler, executive editor of Small Business Times, reports that:
"...'for sale' signs are popping up like dandelions in front of condominiums throughout Oak Creek, as (Midwest) pilots and flight attendants prepare to lose their jobs or take pay cuts that would prevent them from staying in their homes."
The Midwest Airlines pilots who agreed to "deep concessions" to keep the Oak Creek-based company afloat in 2003 do not plan to even vote on company demands that would slash their pay by up to 65 percent.
Jay Schnedorf, a captain and chairman of the Midwest unit of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), told Jagler: "'There will be no vote on their proposal. It's unacceptable on its face. We are planning a counter-proposal to present back to the company … We've told them (company officials) their demands are unacceptable.'"
Jagler's article details the human costs of Midwest management's demands for concessions.
"...'for sale' signs are popping up like dandelions in front of condominiums throughout Oak Creek, as (Midwest) pilots and flight attendants prepare to lose their jobs or take pay cuts that would prevent them from staying in their homes."
The Midwest Airlines pilots who agreed to "deep concessions" to keep the Oak Creek-based company afloat in 2003 do not plan to even vote on company demands that would slash their pay by up to 65 percent.
Jay Schnedorf, a captain and chairman of the Midwest unit of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), told Jagler: "'There will be no vote on their proposal. It's unacceptable on its face. We are planning a counter-proposal to present back to the company … We've told them (company officials) their demands are unacceptable.'"
Jagler's article details the human costs of Midwest management's demands for concessions.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Will Midwest CEO return his $10 million windfall?
Last week Midwest Airgroup Inc. announced that it would seek pay cuts of 45% to 65% from its pilots, 34% to 56% from flight attendants and 10% and 5% for maintenance technicians and professional staff. Hundreds will be laid off.
A few days later, Midwest CEO Timothy Hoeksema declared that he would cut his own pay by 40%. Other senior vice presidents' pay would be cut by 25%.
Hoeksema's decision to reduce executive pay is designed to communicate that Midwest's management will share in the sacrifices required to keep the struggling airline company from going bankrupt.
If Midwest's top brass, who make at least ten times more (in total compensation) than their pilots and other employees, really want to share the pain, why aren't they taking bigger percentage pay cuts than their employees?
And why doesn't Hoeksema voluntarily return the $10.3 million windfall he received when Midwest was purchased less than a year ago? And demand that the senior vice presidents who received between $991,000 and $1.6 million do the same?
The $15 million in stock options that Hoeksema and the senior vice presidents cashed out when Midwest was sold to a private equity firm, TPG Capital LP, would buy an awful lot of jet fuel even at today's sky high (pardon the pun) prices.
The failure of Hoeksema and his lieutenants to match the pay cuts demanded from their employees, much less return their other worldly bonuses, makes it clear that their willingness to sacrifice is little more than a public relations ploy.
Despite management's posturing, its cookies for the executives and crumbs for Midwest's employees.
A few days later, Midwest CEO Timothy Hoeksema declared that he would cut his own pay by 40%. Other senior vice presidents' pay would be cut by 25%.
Hoeksema's decision to reduce executive pay is designed to communicate that Midwest's management will share in the sacrifices required to keep the struggling airline company from going bankrupt.
If Midwest's top brass, who make at least ten times more (in total compensation) than their pilots and other employees, really want to share the pain, why aren't they taking bigger percentage pay cuts than their employees?
And why doesn't Hoeksema voluntarily return the $10.3 million windfall he received when Midwest was purchased less than a year ago? And demand that the senior vice presidents who received between $991,000 and $1.6 million do the same?
The $15 million in stock options that Hoeksema and the senior vice presidents cashed out when Midwest was sold to a private equity firm, TPG Capital LP, would buy an awful lot of jet fuel even at today's sky high (pardon the pun) prices.
The failure of Hoeksema and his lieutenants to match the pay cuts demanded from their employees, much less return their other worldly bonuses, makes it clear that their willingness to sacrifice is little more than a public relations ploy.
Despite management's posturing, its cookies for the executives and crumbs for Midwest's employees.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)